content
stringlengths 1
15.9M
|
|---|
\section{Introduction.}
Let $\moduli$ be the moduli space of algebraic curves of genus $g$. In the early 1980s Harris and Mumford
(\cite{MR664324}) proved that $\moduli$ is of general type for $g\geq24$. They used in a crucial way the
compactification of $\moduli$ proposed by Deligne and Mumford at the end of the 1960s
(\cite{MR0262240}). This compactification is the moduli space $\barmoduli$ of
stable algebraic curves of arithmetic genus $g$.
More recently, the moduli space of nonzero holomorphic differentials
$\omoduli$ and its
projectivisation $\pomoduli$ have gained great interest, coming in particular from the theory of
dynamical systems (see \cite{MR2261104}).
The moduli space $\omoduli$ has a natural stratification given by the orders of the zeros of the
differentials.
For a given tuple
$(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$ of positive numbers such that $\sum k_{i} = 2g-2$, we define the stratum
$$\omoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}):=\left\{ (\X,\omega): \X\in\moduli, \quad
\divisor{\omega}=\sum_{i=1}^{n} k_{i}Z_{i}
\right\},$$
and their images in $\pomoduli$ are denoted by
$\pomoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$.
In analogy with~$\moduli$, it is likely that a good compactification of
$\pomoduli$ should help us to compute the Kodaira dimension of the strata of $\pomoduli$.
In this paper, we first introduce and study two compactifications of the strata of the moduli space of Abelian
differentials. This allows us to compute the Kodaira dimension of some of these strata. The last sections are
devoted to the study of the hyperelliptic minimal strata and the non hyperelliptic minimal stratum in genus
three.
\subsection{The {incidence variety compactification}.}
The notion of Abelian differentials can be generalised to the case of stable curves by the
notion of stable differentials. Therefore, we
can prolong $\omoduli$ above $\barmoduli$ simply by looking at the moduli space of stable differentials
$\obarmoduli$. The
closure of the strata inside $\obarmoduli$ are called the {\em Deligne-Mumford compactifications} of these
strata. The main drawback of this method is the loss of information. Indeed, a non vanishing stable
differential may vanish on some irreducible components of the stable curve, losing completely the information
on this component.
In order to keep track of more information, we introduce in Section~\ref{section:CompactDesStrates} another
compactification for the strata. Let us define the closure of the {\em ordered closed incidence variety}
${\mathbb P}\obarmoduliinc{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}}$ inside the moduli space of marked (semi) stable
differentials by
$$\overline{\left\{(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n}) :
\left(\X,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n}\right)\in\modulin,\quad \sum_{i=1}^{n}
k_{i}Z_{i} = \divisor{\omega} \right\}}.$$
Now there is an action of a subgroup $\mathfrak{S}$ of $\permGroup$ permuting the zeros of same order. The {\em
{incidence
variety compactification}} of $\omoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$ is given by
$${\mathbb P}\obarmoduliincp{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}}:={\mathbb P}\obarmoduliinc{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}}/S.$$
The interior of the {incidence variety compactification} is isomorphic to the
strata $\pomoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$. But we show that its closure
contains in general much more information than $\pobarmoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$. The following theorem
illustrates this
point in the case of the principal stratum (see Theorem~\ref{theoreme:CompStratePrincDansVarIncEtNormal}).
Let us denote the projection from the {incidence variety compactification} to the Deligne-Mumford
compactification of the principal stratum by $$\pi:{\mathbb P}\obarmoduliincp[g,\lbrace 2g-2
\rbrace]{1,\cdots,1}\to\pobarmoduli(1,\cdots,1).$$
\begin{theorem}
The fibre of
$\pi$ is positive dimensional above the locus of differentials $(\X,\omega)$, where $\X$ is a reducible stable curve of
genus $g\geq 2$ with two irreducible components connected by one node
and $\omega$ vanishes on one component.
\end{theorem}
\paragraph{}
In order to study the {incidence variety compactification}, we introduce some tools.
In Section~\ref{section:PlomberieCylindrique}, we develop the theory of {\em limit differentials}, which has
a flavour of limit linear series. More precisely, we associate to a family of differentials a limiting object
consisting of a collection of meromorphic differentials parametrised by the irreducible components of the
special curve. For a given component $\X_{i}$, the differential is obtained by rescaling the family in such a
way that it converges on $\X_{i}$ (see Definition~\ref{definiton:diffLimite}).
To construct examples of limit differentials, we extend the classical plumbing cylinder construction of
curves to the case of differentials (see Lemma~\ref{lemme:PlomberieCylindriqueOk}). In particular, this allows
us to give necessary and sufficient conditions to be a limit differential for an important case (see
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:PlomberieCylindriqueSansResidu}). However, they are not sufficient in full generality
and it remains unclear how to characterise general limit differentials (see nevertheless
Lemma~\ref{lemme:PlomberieCylindriqueAvecResidu} and Lemma~\ref{lemme:noeudsPolaireAvecResiduFaible}).
The second main ingredients are the notions of {\em spin structure} on (semi) stable curves and of {\em Arf
invariant}. They allow us to generalise the notion of parity of smooth differential to some stable
differentials in Section~\ref{section:Spin}.
In the case of curves of compact type, we associate a canonical spin
structure to a stable pointed differential (see
Definition~\ref{definition:spinStructureSurCourbeTypeCompact}).
Using this notion, we show that the
parity of the spin structure above the curves of compact type is invariant by deformations (see
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:BordDesStratesDansSpin}).
\begin{theorem}\label{theoreme:BordDesStratesDansSpinIntro}
Let $n\geq3$ and $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ be a differential in the closure of the stratum
$\omoduliincp{2l_{1},\cdots,2l_{n}}$. Then the parity of the spin structure~$\mathcal{L}_{\omega}$ associated
to $\omega$ is $\epsilon$ if and only if $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ is in the closure of
$\omoduliincp{2l_{1},\cdots,2l_{n}}^{\epsilon}$.
\end{theorem}
The notion of spin structure does not seems to be the right one for the irreducible pointed differentials.
However, in
this case, we show that the Arf invariant can be generalised (see
Definition~\ref{definition:extensionInvariantArf}) in such a way that it stays constant by
deformation (see Theorem~\ref{theoreme:InvDeArfGene}).
It would be very interesting to extend this invariant to the whole boundary of the {incidence variety
compactifications}. But we show that, unfortunately, this invariant cannot be extend to the whole {incidence
variety compactification} of the strata (see
Corollary~\ref{corollaire:intersectHypOddGenreTroisIntro}).
\subsection{The Kodaira dimension of strata.}
One of the main motivation for a good compactification of the strata of the moduli space of Abelian
differentials
is the computation of their Kodaira dimensions.
In recent works Farkas and Verra computed the Kodaira dimension of the moduli space of spin structures
and Bini, Fontonari and Viviani computed the Kodaira dimension of the universal Picard
variety. They followed the path opened by Harris and Mumford for the moduli space of curves. In
particular, they used in an essential way a nice compactification of these spaces constructed by Cornalba in
the first case and Caporaso in the second.
A second way to compute the Kodaira dimension of algebraic spaces is to use the theory initiated by Iitaka.
We can obtain information about the Kodaira dimension of the total space of an algebraic bundle using
knowledge about the Kodaira dimension of the base and of a generic fibre.
Using these methods, we want to compute the Kodaira dimension of the strata $S$ of the
moduli space of Abelian differentials for which the forgetful map $\pi:S\to\moduli$ is generically surjective.
We give a complete description of these strata and, more precisely, the dimension of the image
of every connected component of each stratum.
\begin{theorem}\label{theoreme:DimensionProjectionStratesIntro}
Let $g\geq2$ and $S$ be a connected component of the stratum $\omoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$. The
dimension of the
projection of $S$ by the forgetful map $\pi:\omoduli\to\moduli$ is
\begin{equation*}
\dim\left(\pi( S) \right) =
\begin{cases}
2g-1 & \text{if } S=\omoduli(2d,2d)^{{\rm hyp}} \\
3g-4 & \text{if } S=\omoduli(2,\cdots,2)^{{\rm even}} \\
2g-2+n & \text{if } n< g-1 \text{ and }S\neq\omoduli(2d,2d)^{{\rm hyp}} \\
3g-3 & \text{if } n\geq g-1 \text{ and the parity of $S$ is not even}
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
Using this theorem and the fact that the Kodaira dimension of a finite cover is not smaller
than the Kodaira dimension of the base, we deduce the Kodaira dimension of the strata of projective dimension
$3g-3$, when $\moduli$ is of
general type (see Corollary~\ref{corollaire:dimKodairaStratesProjFini}).
\begin{theorem}
The connected strata $\pomoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{g-1})$ are
of general type for $g=22$ and $g\geq 24$.
\end{theorem}
Moreover, for a fibre space $f:X\to Y$ there is the well known inequality
$\kappa(X)\leq\dim(Y)+\kappa(X_{y})$ for a
generic fibre $X_{y}$ of $f$. This gives the Kodaira dimension of the strata which impose few conditions.
Indeed, by showing that a generic fibre of the forgetful map has negative Kodaira dimension, we obtain the
following result (see Theorem~\ref{theoreme:DimKodairaStraPeutConditions}).
\begin{theorem}
For any $g\geq2$, let $(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$ be a tuple of positive numbers of the form
$(k_{1},\cdots,k_{l},1,\cdots,1)$ with $k_{i}\geq 2$ for $i\leq l$ such that
$$\sum_{i=1}^{n}k_{i}=2g-2 \text{ and } \sum_{i=1}^{l}k_{i}\leq g-2.$$
Then the Kodaira dimension of the stratum $\pomoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$ is $-\infty$.
\end{theorem}
The Iitaka conjecture has been proved by Eckart Viehweg for the fibre spaces $f:X\to Y$, where $Y$ is of
general
type.
So, a similar method could be used to determine the Kodaira dimension of the strata for which the forgetful
map is generically
surjective to $\moduli$, when $\moduli$ is of general type. However, this method is more subtle for the
remaining strata and we can only prove that the strata
$\pomoduli(g-1,1,\cdots,1)$ are of general type when $\moduli$ is of general type (see
Proposition~\ref{proposition:DimKodaira(g-1,1)}).
To conclude, we compute the Kodaira dimension of both odd (Corollary~\ref{corollaire:dimKodairaOddDeux}) and
even (Proposition~\ref{proposition:dimKodairaEvenDeux}) components of the strata
$\pomoduli(2,\cdots,2)$ and of the hyperelliptic component of $\pomoduli(g-1,g-1)$
(Proposition~\ref{proposition:dimKodairaHypNeg}).
\subsection{Examples.}
We conclude this work by the explicit description of the {incidence variety compactification} of some strata.
We focus on the minimal strata $\pomoduli(2g-2)$. In genus two, there is only one stratum
$\pomoduli[2](2)$ and this stratum has many interpretations. For example, it can be seen as the
Weierstrass divisor in $\moduli[2,1]$ or the moduli space of even spin
structures.
More generally, the hyperelliptic strata $\pomoduli^{{\rm hyp}}(2g-2)$ are very special and
can be studied with specific tools. They are studied in Section~\ref{section:hyperelliptique} and the
main result is Theorem~\ref{theoreme:isoEntreHypEtWeier} where we show that the fibres of the forgetful map
from the {incidence variety compactification} of $\omoduli^{{\rm hyp}}(2g-2)$ to the Weierstrass locus of
hyperelliptic curves inside $\moduli[g,1]$ are projective spaces.
To be more concrete, let us describe an important locus in the {incidence variety compactification} of the
hyperelliptic
minimal strata (see Theorem~\ref{theoreme:bordHypCasIrr}).
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:bordHypCasIrrIntro}
Let $\X$ be the union of a smooth curve $\tilde\X$ of genus $g-1$ and a projective line attached to $\tilde\X$
at the points $N_{1}$ and $N_{2}$.
Then $(\X,\omega,Z)$ is in the {incidence variety compactification} of the minimal hyperelliptic stratum
$\omoduliincp[g,1]{2g-2}^{{\rm hyp}}$ if and only if the point $Z$ is in the
exceptional divisor coming from the blow-up, and the differential $\omega$ is the stable differential
with a zero of
order $g-2$ at both $N_{1}$ and $N_{2}$.
\end{theorem}
The first non hyperelliptic minimal stratum is $\pomoduli[3]^{{\rm odd}}(4)$.
The description of
the boundary of this stratum gives us the opportunity to illustrate most of the tools developed in this paper.
Let us define a {\em generic curve in the divisor $\delta_{i}$} to be a curve in the divisor
$\delta_{i}$ with a single node.
The description of the boundary of $\pomoduli[3]^{{\rm odd}}(4)$ above the set of curves stably equivalent to
generic curves in $\delta_{0}$
and $\delta_{1}$
is given in Corollary~\ref{corollaire:stabDiffgTroisIrr} and
Corollary~\ref{corollaire:stabDiffgTroisRed}. For example, the pointed stable differentials in the boundary
of
$\pomoduli[3,1]^{{\rm odd}}(4)$ such
that the projection to $\barmoduli[3]$ is stably equivalent to a generic curve of the divisor $\delta_{0}$ is
given by the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}\label{theoreme:bordZeroOrdre4IrrbisIntro}
Let $(\X,\omega,Z)$ be a stable pointed differential in ${\mathbb P}\obarmoduliinc[3,1]{4}^{{\rm odd}}$ such that
$\X$ is the
union of a smooth curve $\tilde\X$ of genus two and a projective line which meet at two distinct points
$N_{1}$ and $N_{2}$.
Then $(\X,\omega,Z)$ satisfies that $Z\in {\mathbb P}^{1}$, the restriction of $\omega$ to ${\mathbb P}^{1}$ vanishes and the
restriction of $\omega$ to $\tilde\X$ is of one of the following two forms.
\begin{itemize}
\item The restriction of $\omega$ to $\tilde\X$ is an
holomorphic differential with a zero of order two at $N_{1}$.
\item The restriction of $\omega$ to $\tilde\X$ is an
holomorphic differential with two simple zeros at $N_{1}$ and $N_{2}$.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
This theorem together with Theorem~\ref{theorem:bordHypCasIrrIntro} implies that the {incidence variety
compactifications} of the hyperelliptic and odd
connected components
of $\pomoduli[3,1](4)$ intersect each other (see Corollary~\ref{corollaire:intersectHypOddGenreTrois}).
\begin{cor}\label{corollaire:intersectHypOddGenreTroisIntro}
Let $\X$ be the union of a curve $\tilde{\X}$ of genus two and a projective line glue together at a pair of
points of $\tilde{\X}$ conjugated by the hyperelliptic involution. Let $Z\in E$ and $\omega$ be a
differential
which vanishes on $E$ and has two single zeros at the points which form the nodes on $\tilde{\X}$.
Then the pointed differential $(\X,\omega,Z)$ is in $\obarmoduliinc[3,1]{4}^{{\rm hyp}}$ and
$\obarmoduliinc[3,1]{4}^{{\rm odd}}$.
\end{cor}
\section{The {Incidence Variety Compactification} of the Strata of the Moduli Space of Differentials.}
\label{section:CompactDesStrates}
The projectivisation of the Hodge bundle over the moduli space of curves $\pomoduli$ has a natural
compactification given by the moduli space of stable differentials $\pobarmoduli$. The first idea in order to
compactify a stratum is to take its closure inside $\pobarmoduli$. This is called the {\em Deligne-Mumford
compactification } of the stratum. However, this compactification loses lots of information.
To keep track of more information we introduce in Definition~\ref{definition:VarieteeIncidence}
another compactification ${\mathbb P}\obarmoduliincp{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}}$ via the closure of the strata inside the
moduli space of marked differentials. This compactification of the strata will be called the {\em
{incidence variety compactification}} of the stratum. The end of this section is devoted to the study of the
spaces ${\mathbb P}\obarmoduliincp{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}}$. We show in
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:ExcesAuBordStratePrincipal} and
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:CompStratePrincDansVarIncEtNormal} that this compactification contains much more
information at the boundary than the one given by the closure inside $\pobarmoduli$.
In this section, all spaces we consider will be complex orbifolds.
\paragraph{Background on moduli spaces.}
We begin this section by recalling some basic facts and notations about various moduli spaces.
The {\em moduli space of curves of genus $g$}, denoted by $\moduli$, is the space of complex structures on a
curve of genus $g$. The {\em moduli space of $n$-pointed curves} is denoted by $\modulin$.
It is well known since Riemann (see for example \cite{MR1288523}) that the dimension of $\modulin$ is
$3g-3+n$.
A modular compactification of $\modulin$ is given by the
{\em moduli space $\barmoduli[g,n]$ of $n$-marked stable curves}. This compactification is called the {\em
Deligne-Mumford compactification} of the moduli space of $n$-marked curves.
Recall that a {\em stable curve} is a connected nodal curve for which each
irreducible component of the normalisation has not an Abelian fundamental
group.
The {\em dual graph} of a stable curve $\X$ of genus $g$, denoted by $\Gamma_{\rm dual}(\X)$, is the
weighted graph such that the vertices correspond to the irreducible components of
$\X$, the edges correspond to its nodes and the weight at a vertex is given by the geometric genus of
the corresponding component.
The {\em moduli space of nonzero holomorphic 1-forms $\omoduli$} or {\em Hodge bundle of~$\moduli$}
parameterises pairs $(\X,\omega)$, where $\X$ is a smooth curve of genus $g$
and~$\omega$ is a nonzero holomorphic 1-form on $\X$.
Remark that the space $\omoduli$ is sometimes denoted by $\zomoduli[g]$ in the literature (for example
\cite{MR2261104}, \cite{MR2010740},...). We will never use this notation due to the risk of confusion
with the notation of the hyperelliptic locus inside $\moduli$ (see Section~\ref{section:hyperelliptique}).
The space $\omoduli$ has a natural stratification by the multiplicities of zeros of $\omega$.
Let $(k_1,\cdots, k_n)$ be a $n$-tuple of strictly positive numbers such that $\sum_{i=1}^{n}k_i = 2g-2$. The
stratum $\omoduli(k_1,\cdots,k_n)$ is the subspace of
$\omoduli$ consisting of
equivalence pairs $(\X,\omega)$, where $\omega$ has $n$ distinct zeros of respective orders $(k_1,\cdots,
k_n)$.
In particular, for $g\geq2$ the following decomposition holds (see for example \cite{MR2261104}):
\begin{equation}\label{equation:Strate1}
\omoduli = \bigsqcup_{\substack{n\in\lbrace 1,\cdots,2g-2 \rbrace\\ 2g-2\geq k_1\geq\cdots\geq k_n\geq 1,\
\sum k_i=2g-2}}
\omoduli(k_1,\cdots,k_n).
\end{equation}
The notion of differentials extends to the case of (semi) stable curves in the following way.
A {\em stable differential} on a stable curve $\X$ is a meromorphic 1-form~$\omega$ on $\X$ which
is holomorphic outside of the nodes of $\X$ and has at worst simple poles at the
nodes and the two residues at a node are opposite.
Alternatively, the stable differentials could be defined as the global sections of the {\em dualizing sheaf}
$\dualsheave$ of $\X$ (see \cite{MR1631825}).
We can now extend the Hodge bundle $\obarmoduli$ above $\barmoduli$.
The space $\obarmoduli$ is the {\em moduli space of stable differentials} of genus $g$.
Since the definition of stable differential extends readily to the case of semi stable curves, we can extend
this notion to the case of stable marked curves.
\begin{defn}\label{definition:DiffMarquee}
A {\em marked stable differential $(\X,\omega,Q_{1},\cdots,Q_{n})$ of genus $g$} is the datum of a stable
$n$-marked curve $(\X,Q_{1},\cdots,Q_{n})$ in $\barmoduli[g,n]$ and a stable differential $\omega$ on
$\X$.
\end{defn}
The {\em moduli space of marked stable differentials} will be denoted by $\obarmoduli[g,n]$. It is the Hodge bundle
above the moduli space of marked curves $\barmoduli[g,n]$. Its restriction to the locus of smooth $n$-marked
curves is the {\em moduli space of $n$-marked Abelian differentials} and is denoted by $\omoduli[g,n]$.
There is a natural ${\mathbb C}^{\ast}$-action on the moduli space of Abelian differentials given by
\begin{equation}
{\mathbb C}^{\ast}\times\omoduli\to\omoduli:(\alpha,(\X,\omega))\mapsto(\X,\alpha\omega).
\end{equation}
The quotient of $\omoduli$ under this action is denoted by $\pomoduli$. Remark that this action preserves the
stratification of $\omoduli$ and the images of $\omoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$ inside $\pomoduli$
are well defined and are denoted by $\pomoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$.
Moreover, the group ${\mathbb C}^{\ast}$ acts in a similar way on $\omoduli[g,n]$ and we denote the quotient under
this action by $\pomoduli[g,n]$.
\paragraph{The {Incidence variety compactification} of the strata of $\omoduli$.}
In order to compactify the strata of $\omoduli$, we define the {\em ordered incidence variety}
${\mathbb P}\omoduliinc{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}}$ to be
the subspace of the moduli space of $n$-marked differentials given by
\begin{equation}
\left\{(\X, \omega, Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n}) :\
\divisor{\omega} = \sum_{i=1}^{n}k_{i}Z_{i} \right\}\subset {\mathbb P}\omodulin.
\end{equation}
Moreover, the {\em closed ordered incidence variety}, denoted by ${\mathbb P}\obarmoduliinc{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}}$,
is defined as the closure of the ordered incidence variety inside
$\pobarmoduli[g,n]$.
In general, there exists a subgroup of $\permGroup$ acting non-trivially on the closed ordered incidence
variety
${\mathbb P}\obarmoduliinc{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}}$.
Namely, if $k_{i}=k_{j}$ for $i\neq j$, then the transposition
$(i,j)$ acts on ${\mathbb P}\obarmoduliinc{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}}$ by permuting the points $Z_{i}$ and $Z_{j}$. Let
$\mathfrak{S}$
be the subgroup of $\permGroup$ generated by these transpositions. It is easy to see that
$\mathfrak{S}\cong\prod\permGroup[l_{i}]$, where $l_{i}:=\#\left\{j| k_{j}=i\right\}$ is the number of
indices $j$
such that the order $k_{j}$ is equal to $i$.
\begin{defn}\label{definition:VarieteeIncidence}
Let $\omoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$ be a stratum of $\omoduli$ and let $S$ be one of its connected components.
The {\em {incidence variety compactification} of $S$} is
\begin{equation}
{\mathbb P}\obarmoduliincp{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}}:={\mathbb P}\obarmoduliinc{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}}/\mathfrak{S}.
\end{equation}
A triple $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})\in{\mathbb P}\obarmoduliincp{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}}$ will be called a {\em
pointed
differential} or a {\em pointed flat surface}.
\end{defn}
Remark that the notions of pointed differentials and marked differentials (see
Definition~\ref{definition:DiffMarquee}) do not coincide.
Let us remark that the closed ordered incidence variety is a suborbifold of $\pobarmoduli[g,n]$.
Therefore the {incidence variety compactification} of every stratum is an orbifold as the quotient of an
orbifold by
a finite group.
\paragraph{The forgetful map.}
There is a natural {\em forgetful map} between the {incidence variety compactification} and the corresponding
stratum. Before
defining this map on the whole compactification, we restrict ourself to its restriction above the smooth
pointed differentials. This restriction is given by
\begin{align*}
\varphi:{\mathbb P}\omoduliincp{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}} &\to {\mathbb P}\omoduli[g](k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})\\
(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n}) & \mapsto (\X,\omega).
\end{align*}
This map turns out to be an isomorphism.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemme:IsoEntreIncEtStrate}
The forgetful map
\begin{equation}
\varphi:{\mathbb P}\omoduliincp{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}} \to {\mathbb P}\omoduli[g](k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})
\end{equation}
is an isomorphism of orbifolds.
\end{lemma}
In particular, this lemma clearly implies that the dimension of the {incidence variety compactification}
${\mathbb P}\obarmoduliincp{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}}$ is $2g-2+n$.
\begin{proof}
It suffices to show that there exists an inverse $\psi$ to $\varphi$. Let
$(\X,\omega)$ be a smooth differential with zeros of order
$(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$. We denote by $Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n}$ the corresponding
zeros.
Let us define the map
\begin{align*}
\tilde\psi:{\mathbb P}\omoduli[g](k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})&\to
{\mathbb P}\omoduliinc{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}}\\
(X,\omega)&\mapsto(X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n}).
\end{align*}
We define
$\psi$ by the composition of $\tilde\psi$ with the quotient by the action of $\mathfrak{S}$.
It is a routine to prove that both maps are inverse to each other.
\end{proof}
We extend the map $\varphi:{\mathbb P}\omoduliincp{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}} \to
{\mathbb P}\omoduli[g](k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$ at
the boundary of the strata.
Let $(\X',\omega',Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})\in{\mathbb P}\obarmoduliincp{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}}$ be a pointed differential. We
denote by $\X$ the image of $\X'$ by
the forgetful map $\pi:\barmoduli[g,n]\to\barmoduli[g]$. Moreover, for every irreducible component $\X_{i}$
of $\X$, the corresponding irreducible component of $\X'$ is denoted by $\X_{i}'$.
We obtain a differential $\omega$ on $\X$ in the following way. The restriction of $\omega$ on every
irreducible component $\X_{i}$ of $\X$ is the differential $\omega'|_{\X_{i}'}$.
This is clearly an extension of the forgetful map $\varphi$, and it remains to show that the image of this
extension lies in $\pobarmoduli$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemme:ProlongAppOubli}
The forgetful map
\begin{align*}
\varphi:{\mathbb P}\obarmoduliincp{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}}&\to{\mathbb P}\obarmoduli[g](k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})\\
(\X',\omega' , Z_ {1},\cdots,Z_{n})&\mapsto(\X,\omega)
\end{align*}
described in the preceding paragraph is well defined. More precisely, the pair $(\X,\omega)$ is a stable
differential.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The forgetful map $\barmoduli[g,n]\to\barmoduli$ is well defined. Hence it is enough to show that the
differential $\omega$ is stable.
Let $E$ be an exceptional component of $\X'$ and
$\X'_{E}$ be the curve obtained from $\X'$ by blowing down $E$. We denote by $\omega_{E}'$ the restriction of
the form $\omega'$ on $\X'_{E}$. We can suppose that the nodal points of $E$ are $0$ and $\infty$.
Then the restriction of the form $\omega'$ on $E$ is either zero or of the
differential~$\frac{a{\rm d}z}{z}$ for some $a\in{\mathbb C}^{\ast}$.
If the restriction is zero, then it is clear that $\omega_{E}'$ is
stable on $\X_{E}'$.
If the differential on $E$ is given $\frac{a{\rm d}z}{z}$. Since the residues of the differential at
the nodes have to sum up to zero, the residues at the points of the node are $-a$ and $a$. This implies
that $\omega'_{E}$ is still a stable differential on $\X'_{E}$.
If we take $E_{1}$ and $E_{2}$ two exceptional components, we can easily verify that
$\X'_{E_{1}E_{2}}=\X'_{E_{2}E_{1}}$ and $\omega_{E_{1}E_{2}}=\omega_{E_{2}E_{1}}$. So by
induction on the set of exceptional components, the limit $\omega$ is a well defined stable differential on
$\X$. And it is easy to check that this limit coincides with the form given by the map $\varphi$.
\end{proof}
\paragraph{Closure of the principal stratum.}
In this paragraph, we show that the {incidence variety compactification} contains much more
information than the Deligne-Mumford compactification at the boundary of the principal stratum. This part
uses the results of Section~\ref{section:PlomberieCylindrique} and in particular
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:PlomberieCylindriqueSansResidu}.
\begin{theorem}\label{theoreme:ExcesAuBordStratePrincipal}
Let $(\X,\omega)\in\pomoduli(2g-2)$ be a differential in the minimal stratum. This differential is in the
boundary of principal stratum
${\mathbb P}\omoduli(1,\cdots,1)$ and the
dimension of the fibre of the forgetful
map $$\pi:{\mathbb P}\obarmoduliinc[g,\left\{ 2g-2 \right\}]{1,\cdots1}\to{\mathbb P}\obarmoduli[g](1,\cdots,1)$$ above
$(\X,\omega)$ is
$\max(0,2g-4)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $(\X,\omega,Z)\in{\mathbb P}\omoduliinc[g,1]{2g-2}$ be a pointed differential of genus $g$ and
$({\mathbb P}^{1},Q_{1},\cdots,Q_{2g-2},P)$
be a marked rational curve. There exists a meromorphic differential with a single zero at all the $Q_{i}$ and
a pole of order $2g$ at $P$. Indeed, this differential is given up to scalar multiplication by
$$\eta:=\frac{\prod\limits_{i}(z-Q_{i})}{(z-P)^{2g}}{\rm d}z.$$
Let us glue the curve $\X$ with this rational curve via the identification of $Z$ with~$P$. It is easy to
verify that we can apply
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:PlomberieCylindriqueSansResidu} in order smooth this differential. The differential
that we obtain has $2g-2$ simple zeros. This shows that the pointed differential
$$\left(\X\cup{\mathbb P}^{1}/Z\sim
P,(\omega,0),Q_{1},\cdots,Q_{2g-2}\right)$$ is an element of ${\mathbb P}\obarmoduliincp[g,\left\{ 2g-2
\right\}]{1,\cdots,1}$ for any tuple
$(Q_{1},\cdots,Q_{2g-2},P)$. A simple dimension count concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
We now prove an analogous result for the absolute boundary of the stratum
${\mathbb P}\obarmoduliinc[g,\left\{ 2g-2 \right\}]{1,\cdots1}$ for curves in the divisor $\delta_{i}$, for $i\geq 2$.
\begin{theorem}\label{theoreme:CompStratePrincDansVarIncEtNormal}
The fibre of the forgetful map
$$\pi:{\mathbb P}\obarmoduliinc[g,\left\{2g-2\right\}]{1,\cdots1}\to{\mathbb P}\obarmoduli[g](1,\cdots,1)$$ is positive
dimensional
over a differential $(\X,\omega)$, where $\X$ is a generic curve in~$\delta_{i}$ for $i\geq 1$ and $\omega$
vanishes on one component of $\X$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $(\X:=\X_{1}\cup\X_{2}/N_{1}\sim N_{2},\omega)$ be a differential of genus $g\geq2$ in
$\pobarmoduli(1,\cdots,1)$ and suppose that $\omega|_{\X_{1}}=0$. Then, the component $\X_{1}$ contains more
than $2g_{1}-2$ marked points.
The map $h:\X_{1}^{(k)}\to\Jac[\X_{1}]$ from the symmetric product of $\X_{1}$ to the Jacobian of $\X_{1}$
given by
$$ (Q_{1},\cdots,Q_{k})\mapsto \Ox[\X_{1}]\left(\sum_{i} Q_{i} -
(k-2g_{1}+2)N_{1}\right)$$
is surjective. Hence the dimension of the fibre of $\pi$ at $(\X,\omega)$ is at least $k-g_{1}$. Such divisors are canonical and
since there is no residue
at $N_{1}$, we apply Theorem~\ref{theoreme:PlomberieCylindriqueSansResidu} to conclude that every such
differential can be smoothed in $\pomoduli(1,\cdots,1)$.
\end{proof}
We are going to present some other results about the closure of the minimal hyperelliptic strata in
Section~\ref{section:hyperelliptique} and of the closure of $\pomoduli[3,1]^{{\rm odd}}(4)$ in
Section~\ref{section:omoduli3,4,odd}.
\section{Limit Differentials and Plumbing Cylinders.}\label{section:PlomberieCylindrique}
In order to remedy the disadvantage of stable differentials that may vanish on some components, we
introduce the notion of {\em limit differential}. It is, in a sense, similar to the notion of limit linear
series, but for families of pointed differentials in a stratum (see Definition~\ref{definiton:diffLimite}).
In particular, a limit
differential is a collection of differentials parametrised by the set of irreducible components of a marked
curve (such collection will be called {\em candidate differential}). None differential of this collection
identically vanish, but the price to pay is to allow some poles of order greater than one
at the nodes.
This notion is interesting only if the following conditions are satisfied. First, this notion should be manageable, at least
for important cases.
In particular, we should be able to exhibit limit differentials. To produce examples, we
extend the classical
plumbing cylinder construction from the case of curves to the case of
differentials (see Lemma~\ref{lemme:PlomberieCylindriqueOk}). This allows us to give necessary and
sufficient conditions for being a limit differential in an important case (see
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:PlomberieCylindriqueSansResidu}).
Two of these conditions are easily stated:
a limit differential $(\X,\omega)$ must satisfy the {\em compatibility
condition} at
every node $N_{i}$ of $\X$
\begin{equation*}
\ord_{N_{i,1}}(\omega)+ \ord_{N_{i,2}}(\omega) =-2,
\end{equation*}
and the {\em residue condition} at every node where $\omega$ has simple poles
\begin{equation*}
{\rm Res}_{N_{i,1}}(\omega)+{\rm Res}_{N_{i,2}}(\omega) = 0.
\end{equation*}
We refer to Theorem~\ref{theoreme:PlomberieCylindriqueSansResidu} for the other conditions.
The general case is much more complicated, and we show
that the above conditions are not sufficient. However, see Lemma~\ref{lemme:noeudsPolaireAvecResiduFaible} for
a necessary condition and Lemma~\ref{lemme:PlomberieCylindriqueAvecResidu} for a sufficient one (both of them
being non-optimal).
Second, it should be possible to deduce information on the {incidence variety compactification} of the strata
of $\omoduli$ from the limit differentials. We connect the two notions for important cases in
Proposition~\ref{proposition:relationPlumStable}. We will use this relationship intensively in
Section~\ref{section:hyperelliptique} and Section~\ref{section:omoduli3,4,odd}.
\paragraph{Limit Differentials.}
Before defining the notion of limit differential, we prove a preliminary result about families of pointed
differentials. This allows us to introduce the notion of {\em scaling}.
\begin{lemma}
Let $$\left(f:\famcurv\to\Delta^{\ast},
\famomega:\Delta^{\ast}\to\dualsheave[\famcurv/\Delta^{\ast}],\seczero_{1},\cdots,\seczero_{n}:\Delta^{\ast}
\to\famcurv \right)$$ be a family of pointed differentials inside the stratum
$\obarmoduliinc{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}}$ and let $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ be its
stable limit. Then, for every irreducible component $\X_{i}$ of
$\X$ there exists a unique $r_{i}\in\ZZ$ such that for a generic section $s:\Delta^{\ast}\to\famcurv$ with
$\bar{s}(0)\in\X_{i}$ we have
\begin{equation}
\lim_{t\to 0} t^{r_{i}}\famomega\left(t,s(t)\right) \neq 0.
\end{equation}
Moreover, every map $\alpha_{i}:\Delta\to{\mathbb C}$ satisfying this property is given by
$$t^{r_{i}}(1+t{\mathbb C}\left[t\right]).$$
The map $t^{r_{i}}$ is called the {\em scaling} of the component $\X_{i}$ for this family.
The stable limit of the family of differentials is given by $$\lim_{t\to 0}
\left(\alpha(t)\famomega\left(t\right)\right),$$
where $\alpha$ is a scaling such that for every scaling $\alpha_{i}$ the quotient $\alpha/\alpha_{i}$ is
bounded at the origin.
\end{lemma}
Let $\X$ be a (semi) stable curve, we denote by $\Irr(\X)$ the set of irreducible components of $\X$.
\begin{proof}
Let us define the meromorphic map
$$h:\famcurv\to{\mathbb C},(t,x)\mapsto \famomega(t,x),$$
where $\famomega$ is seen as a section of $\Ox[\famcurv]\left( \sum k_{i}\seczero_{i} \right)$. In
particular, the map $h$ is of the form $h(x,t)=h(t)$, where $h$ is never vanishing.
Let us denote its meromorphic continuation on $\bar\famcurv$ by $\bar h$. The divisor of $\bar h$ is of the
form $$\divisor{\bar h} = \sum_{\X_{i}\in\Irr(\X)}l_{i}\X_{i},$$
where $l_{i}\in\ZZ$.
This implies that $\alpha_{i}:=t^{-l_{i}}$ is a scaling for $\X_{i}$.
The uniqueness and the general description of the map $\alpha_{i}$ having this property clearly follows from
this description.
Now, let $\alpha$ be a map such that $\lim\limits_{t\to 0}
\left(\alpha(t)\famomega(t)\right)$ is a non vanishing stable differential and $\alpha_{i}$ be the scaling of
any component of $\X$.
By definition $\alpha$ is the scaling of some component of $\X$.
Let us show that the quotient $\frac{\alpha}{\alpha_{i}}$ is
bounded in a neighbourhood of $0$. For any section $s:\Delta^{\ast}\to\famcurv$ we have the
equality $$\alpha(x)\famomega(t,s(t))=\frac{\alpha (t)}{\alpha_{i}(t)}\alpha_{i}(t)\famomega(t,s(t)).$$
Hence, if $\frac{\alpha}{\alpha_{i}}$ is not bounded at the origin, then the limit is not bounded on the
smooth
locus of
$\X_{i}$. In particular, the limit is not a stable differential.
\end{proof}
Now we introduce the notion of limit differential of a family of pointed differentials.
\begin{defn}\label{definiton:diffLimite}
A {\em limit differential $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ of type $(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$} is a tuple
such that there exists
a family of pointed differentials $$\left(f:\famcurv\to\Delta^{\ast},
\famomega:\Delta^{\ast}\to\dualsheave[\famcurv/\Delta^{\ast}],\seczero_{1},\cdots,\seczero_{n}:\Delta^{\ast}
\to\famcurv \right)$$ inside $\omoduliincp{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}}$ which satisfies the two following properties.
First, the marked curve $(\X,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ is the stable
limit of the family
$\left(\famcurv,\seczero_{1},\cdots,\seczero_{n}\right)$.
Second, for every irreducible component $\X_{i}$
of the curve $\X$ and for every section $s:\Delta^{\ast}\to\famcurv$, we have $$\lim_{t\to 0}
\alpha_{i}(t)\famomega(t,s(t)) =
\omega(\bar{s}(0)),$$
where $\alpha_{i}$ is the scaling of $\X_{i}$.
The set of limit differentials of type $(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$ modulo the usual action of the group
$\mathfrak{S}\subset\permGroup$ (see Section~\ref{section:CompactDesStrates})
is denoted by $\kbarmodulilim(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$.
\end{defn}
A limit differential is a collection of never identically zero meromorphic differentials
parametrised by the set of irreducible components of
a stable marked curve. Moreover, the sum of the smooth parts of the divisors of these differentials is given
by $\sum k_{i}Z_{i}$.
In order to avoid confusion with the stable pointed differentials, we call
such objects {\em candidate differentials} of type $(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$.
We now give necessary conditions for a candidate differential to be a limit differential.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemme:CondCompPlomberieCyl}
Let $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ be a limit differential and $N_{1}\sim N_{2}$ be a node of the curve
$\X$. Then the differential $\omega$
satisfies the {\em Compatibility Condition}
\begin{equation}\label{equation:conditionDeCompatibiliteGeneral}
\ord_{N_{1}}(\omega)+ \ord_{N_{2}}(\omega)=-2.
\end{equation}
Moreover, if the orders of $\omega$ at $N_{1}$ and $N_{2}$ are $-1$, then the differential $\omega$ satisfies
the {\em Residue Condition}
\begin{equation}\label{equation:conditionDeCompatibiliteGeneral2}
{\rm Res}_{N_{1}}(\omega)+ {\rm Res}_{N_{2}}(\omega)=0.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $(f:\famcurv\to\Delta^{\ast},\famomega,\seczero_{1},\cdots,\seczero_{n})$ be a family of
pointed differentials which
converges to the limit differential $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$. Let $U$ be a neighbourhood of the node
$N_{1}\sim N_{2}$ in $\bar\famcurv$.
Without loss of generality, we can assume that $U$ satisfies the following properties. First, the
intersections
$\seczero_{i}\cap U$ are empty for every $i\in\lbrace 1,\cdots,n \rbrace$. In particular, the only possible
zeros and
poles of $\famomega|_{U}$ are contained in $\X|_{U}$. Second, there exists a coordinate system
$(x,y,t)$ of an open subset of $\Delta^{3}$ containing the origin such that
\begin{equation}\label{equation:noeudGeneral}
U:=\left\{ xy= t^{a}\right\},
\end{equation}
where $a\geq1$. Moreover, we can suppose
that $\X|_{U}$ is given by the equation $\lbrace xy=0 \rbrace$. In the rest of the proof, we denote by
$\X_{x}$,
$\X_{y}$ and $\X_{U}$ the subset of~$U$ of respective equations $\left\{y=0\right\}$, $\left\{x=0\right\}$
and $\left\{xy=0\right\}$.
We pick a differential $\eta$
that generates $\holoneform[U] / f^{\ast}(\holoneform[\Delta])$ and that vanishes
nowhere on $U$, for example
$$\eta:=\frac{x{\rm d}x-y{\rm d}y}{x^{2}+y^{2}}.$$ For
$t\neq 0$, its restriction to the curve $\famcurv_{t}$ is a differential without zeros or poles.
For $t=0$, its restriction to the component $\X_{x}$ (resp. $\X_{y}$) has a unique
simple pole at $N_{1}$ (resp. $N_{2}$) with residue $1$ (resp. $-1$).
Since $\eta$ generates $\holoneform[U] / f^{\ast}(\holoneform[\Delta])$, the family of
differentials $\famomega|_{U\setminus\X_{U}}$ is given by
\[\famomega=h\cdot\eta,\]
where $h$ is a meromorphic function with neither poles nor zeros in $U\setminus\X_{U}$. By multiplying
the function $h$ by a power of $t^{a}$, we obtain a new family of differentials proportional to
$\famomega$
on $U\setminus\X_{U}$. In particular, we can suppose that $h$ is holomorphic on $U$ and vanishes
on at most one component of $\X_{U}$. This new family will still be denoted by $\famomega$ and the
holomorphic function by $h$.
We have two cases to consider. The first one is the case where $h$ is invertible on $U$. In this case the
limit
differential of $\famomega$ on $\X_{U}$ is simply a scaling of the restriction of $\eta$ on $\X_{U}$. Hence
the residues of $\omega$ at $N_{1}$ and $N_{2}$ are respectively~$h(0)$ and $-h(0)$. In particular, in this
case, both the compatibility and the residue conditions are satisfied.
The second case is where $h$ vanishes on one component. Without loss of generality, we can suppose that
$h|_{\X_{y}}\equiv 0$ and $h|_{\X_{x}}\not\equiv0$. By the Weierstrass preparation
theorem, the function $h$ can be written as
\begin{equation}
h(x,y)=\left(x^{d} + h_{1}(y)x^{d-1}+\cdots + h_{d}(y)\right)\tilde{h}(x,y),
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{h}$ is invertible and the $h_{i}$ are holomorphic maps vanishing at the origin.
Moreover, since by hypothesis the divisor of $h$ is a multiple of $\X_{y}$, we deduce that the
functions $h_{i}$ are identically zero. Hence the function $h$ is of the form
\begin{equation}\label{equation:formeLocaleFamilleDeDiffAuxNoeuds}
h(x,y)=x^{d}\cdot \tilde{h}(x,y).
\end{equation}
This implies that restriction $\omega_{x}$ of $\omega$ to the component $\X_{x}$ is given by
\[
\left.\left( x^{d}\cdot \tilde{h}(x,y)\cdot\frac{x{\rm d}x-y{\rm d}y}{x^{2}+y^{2}}\right)\right|_{\X_{x}}
=x^{d}\cdot\tilde{h}(x,0)\frac{{\rm d}x}{x}.
\] By rescaling the family of differentials $\famomega$ by the function $(t^{a})^{-d}$, we find
that the restriction $\omega_{y}$ of $\omega$ to the component $\X_{y}$ is given by
\[y^{-d}\cdot\tilde{h}(0,y)\frac{-{\rm d}y}{y}. \]
In particular, since $\tilde{h}(0,0)\in{\mathbb C}^{\ast}$, the sum of the orders of $\omega_{x}$ and $\omega_{y}$ at
the
origin is $-2$.
\end{proof}
It is convenient to formulate a byproduct of our proof as a
separate lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemme:relationScaleAuNoeud}
Let $(\famcurv,\famomega,\seczero_{1},\cdots,\seczero_{n})$ be a family of pointed differentials which
converges to the limit differential $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$. Let $N$ be a node between the
irreducible components $\X_{i}$ and $\X_{j}$ (which may coincide), and suppose that the equation of
$\famcurv$ around $N$ is $xy=t^{a}$ for some $a\geq 1$.
If $\ord_{N}(\omega|_{\X_{i}})=k\geq
-1$, then the scaling $\alpha_{i}$ and $\alpha_{j}$ of $\X_{i}$ and $\X_{j}$ satisfy the equality
\begin{equation}\label{equation:relationScaleAuNoeud}
\frac{\alpha_{i}}{\alpha_{j}}=(t^{a})^{k+1}.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
As an application we can prove that a limit differential $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ is uniquely
determined up to multiplicative constants by $(\X,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$.
\begin{cor}\label{corollaire:uniciteLimDiffSurTypeCompacte}
Let $(\X,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ be a marked curve in the image of the
{incidence variety compactification} $\obarmoduliincp{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}}$ by the forgetful map. Then there
exists a limit differential on $(\X,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ of type
$(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$. Moreover for any
two of such limit differentials $\omega$ and $\omega'$ there exist constants $c_{i}\in{\mathbb C}^{\ast}$ such that
$$\left.\frac{\omega}{\omega'}\right|_{\X_{i}}=c_{i},$$
for every irreducible component $\X_{i}$ of $\X$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Let $\X_{i}$ be an irreducible component of $\X$ which corresponds to a leaf of the dual graph of $\X$. Let
$Z_{i,1},\cdots,Z_{i,n_{i}}$ be the marked points in $\X_{i}$. Then the restriction of $\omega$ to $\X_{i}$
has zeros of order $k_{i,j}$ at $Z_{i,j}$ and at most one other zero or a unique pole which has to be located
at the
node of $\X_{1}$. Moreover, the order at the node is imposed by the fact that the degree of $\omega|_{\X_{i}}$
is $2g_{i}-2$. Hence~$\omega|_{\X_{i}}$ is uniquely determined up to a multiplicative constant.
Now we continue this process on the irreducible components adjacent to the preceding components. The order at
the nodes with the previous components are determined by the
compatibility condition~\eqref{equation:conditionDeCompatibiliteGeneral} and the order at the marked
points $Z_{l}$ are $k_{l}$. Hence it follows that the order at the last node is imposed by the condition on
the
degree of $\omega$.
Iterating this process we show that there is at most one limit differential (up to multiplication) on
$(\X,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$. And since $(\X,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ lies in the projection of
$\obarmoduliincp{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}}$, there exists at least one limit differential on this curve.
\end{proof}
There is a global obstruction to smooth a candidate differential which satisfies the compatibility condition
and the residue condition.Let us
look first at a very simple example.
\begin{ex}\label{exemple:ObstructionPlomberie1}
Let $\X$ be irreducible with one node and the differential $\omega$ has a zero of
order $k$ and a pole of order $k+2$ at the node. It follows from
Lemma~\ref{lemme:relationScaleAuNoeud} that the differential cannot be smoothed. Indeed, the scaling of an
irreducible component is unique for a given family of differentials. But in this case, by
Lemma~\ref{lemme:relationScaleAuNoeud}, the scaling $\alpha$ of $\X$ satisfies
$\frac{\alpha}{\alpha}=(t^{a})^{k+1}$ for an $a\geq1$, which is absurd.
\end{ex}
Let us now introduce some definitions.
\begin{defn}\label{definition:ordreNoeds}
Let $(\X,\omega)$ be a candidate differential and $N$ a node of $\X$. The {\em order} of $N$ relatively to
$\omega$ is
$$\ord(N):=\underset{i=1,2}{\max}(\ord_{N_{i}}(\omega)).$$
\end{defn}
\begin{defn}\label{definition:GrapheDualDiffLimites}
Let $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ be a candidate differential.
The {\em dual graph} $\Gamma_{\omega}$ of $(\X,\omega)$ is the partially directed weighted graph given by the
following data.
\begin{itemize}
\item The graph coincides with the dual graph of $\X$.
\item An edge is directed from the component with the zero to the component with the pole
of $\omega$ and no orientation in the case of simple poles.
\item The weight $w(e)$ of an edge $e$ is one greater than the order of the corresponding node (see
Definition~\ref{definition:ordreNoeds}).
\end{itemize}
\end{defn}
\begin{ex}
The graphs of the curves of Example~\ref{exemple:ObstructionPlomberie1} and
Example~\ref{exemple:ObstructionPlomberie2} are drawn in Figure~\ref{figure:exempleGrapheDualPlomberie}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[shorten >=1pt,auto,node distance=2cm,]
\node(A) at (1,0)[circle,draw]{$g-1$};
\node(B) at (3.5,0)[circle,draw]{$1$};
\node(C) at (5.5,1.5)[circle,draw]{$0$};
\node(D) at (7.5,0)[circle,draw]{$1$};
\draw[loop](A) to node[above]{$k+1\geq 1$} (A) ;
\draw[->](B) to node[]{$1$} (C);
\draw[->](D) to node[above]{$1$} (C);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{}
\label{figure:exempleGrapheDualPlomberie}
\end{figure}
\end{ex}
\begin{defn}
Let $\Gamma$ be an partially oriented graph. A {\em path} $\gamma$ is a finite continuous sequence of pairs
$\left\{(e_{i},\alpha_{i})\right\}_{i\in\left\{1,\cdots,l\right\}}$, where $e_{i}$ is an edge of $\Gamma$ and
$\alpha_{i}\in\left\{0,\pm 1\right\}$ is $0$ if the edge has no orientation, $1$ if the direction coincide
with the orientation of $e_{i}$ and $-1$
otherwise. Such path $\gamma$ will be denoted by $$\gamma:=\sum_{i=1}^{l}\alpha_{i}e_{i}.$$
\end{defn}
We now give another property which is satisfied by the limit differentials. Let us recall that $\nodeSet$
denotes the set of nodes of a curve $\X$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemme:ConditionPlomberieCheminsFermer}
Let $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ be a limit differential.
There exists a tuple
$(\epsilon_{1},\cdots,\epsilon_{r})\in(\Delta^{\ast})^{\nodeSet}$ such that for every closed path
$\gamma=\sum_{i=1}^{l}\alpha_{i}e_{i}$ in the dual graph of $(\X,\omega)$
the equation
\begin{equation}\label{equation:paramCylindrique}
\prod_{i=1}^{l}\epsilon_{j_{i}}^{\alpha_{i}w(e_{i})}=1
\end{equation}
is satisfied, where the node corresponding to $e_{i}$ is $N_{j_{i}}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $(\famcurv,\famomega,\seczero_{1},\cdots,\seczero_{n})$ be a family converging to the limit differential
$(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$. Let $\gamma=\sum_{i=1}^{l}\alpha_{i}e_{i}$ be a closed path in the dual
graph
$\Gamma_{\omega}$ of the limit
differential $(\X,\omega)$, starting at
the vertex $v_{1}$ and ending at the
vertex $v_{l+1}=v_{1}$. We denote the node corresponding to $e_{i}$ by $N_{i}$. We suppose that the local
equation of $\bar\famcurv$ around $N_{i}$ is given by $xy=t^{a_{N_{i}}}$.
We denote by $\omega_{V_{j}}$ the restriction of $\omega$ to the irreducible component $\X_{V_{j}}$ of $\X$
corresponding to~$V_{j}$. We can suppose (maybe after rescaling) that the family of differentials $\famomega$
converges to $\omega_{V_{1}}$ on $\X_{V_{1}}$. It follows from Lemma~\ref{lemme:relationScaleAuNoeud} that the
scaling of $\X_{V_{2}}$ for $\famomega$ is $ \left(t^{a_{N_{1}}}\right)^{\alpha_{1}w(e_{1})}$.
Therefore the family of
differentials
\[ \left(t^{a_{N_{1}}}\right)^{\alpha_{1}w(e_{1})}\famomega \]
converges to $\omega_{V_{2}}$. Looking at the node $N_{2}$, the family
\[ \left(t^{a_{N_{2}}}\right)^{\alpha_{2}w(e_{2})} \left(t^{a_{N_{1}}}\right)^{\alpha_{1}w(e_{1})}\famomega
\]
converges to $\omega_{V_{3}}$.
We iterate this process until $i=l$ and we obtain that the family of differentials
\begin{equation}
\prod_{i=1}^{l}(t^{a_{N_{i}}})^{\alpha_{i}w(e_{i})}\famomega
\end{equation}
converges to $\omega_{V_{1}}$. By uniqueness of the scaling for a given irreducible component, the following
equation is satisfied
\begin{equation}
\prod_{i=1}^{l}(t^{a_{N_{i}}})^{\alpha_{i}w(e_{i})}=1.
\end{equation}
In particular, the tuple $(t^{a_{N_{1}}},\cdots,t^{a_{N_{r}}})\in(\Delta^{\ast})^{\nodeSet}$ satisfies
Equation~\eqref{equation:paramCylindrique} for every closed path $\gamma$ in the dual graph of $(\X,\omega)$.
\end{proof}
\paragraph{Plumbing Cylinder Construction.}
We develop the theory of plumbing cylinders in two steps. First, we introduce the {\em plumbing cylinder
construction} at a single node. Second, we use it to smooth
some limit differentials which will be called {\em plumbable differentials}.
Before extending the plumbing cylinder construction to the case of differentials, let us recall this
classical result known since (at least) Klein. For a simple proof of the
polar case, which extends to the
holomorphic case, see \cite[Encadr\'e~III.2]{MR2768303}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemme:formeLocalDesFormesDiff}
Let $\omega$ be a differential on a Riemann surface $\X$ and $Q\in\X$. Let~$k$ be the order
and $a_{-1}$ be the residue of $\omega$ at $Q$.
There exists an open neighbourhood $U$ of $Q$ and a coordinate $z$ on $U$ such that $z(Q)=0$ and:
\begin{itemize}
\item[If $k\leq-2$,] the differential $\omega|_{U}$ is given by the equation $
\left(z^{k}+\frac{a_{-1}}{z}\right){\rm d}z$.
\item[If $k=-1$,]the differential $\omega|_{U}$ is given by the equation
$\frac{a_{-1}}{z}{\rm d}z$.
\item[If $k\geq0$,]the differential $\omega|_{U}$ is given by the equation
$z^{k}{\rm d}z$.
\end{itemize}
These equations are called the {\em local normal form} of $\omega$ at $Q$.
\end{lemma}
We can now describe the Plumbing cylinder construction.
\begin{lemma}[Plumbing cylinder construction.]\label{lemme:PlomberieCylindriqueOk}
Let $V:=\left\{z\in{\mathbb C}: |z|<1\right\}$ and $W:=\left\{w\in{\mathbb C}: |w|<1\right\}$ be two discs in ${\mathbb C}$
and $U=V\cup W$ identified at their origins.
Let $(a,b,k)\in{\mathbb C}^{2}\times \ZZ$ be a triple of the form $(0,0,-1)$ or $(1,-1,k)$ for $k\neq -1$ and let
$a_{-1}$ be a complex
number. We define the differential $\omega$ on $U\setminus 0$ by
$$\omega|_{V}=az^{k}{\rm d}z+\frac{a_{-1}}{z}{\rm d}z \text{, and }
\omega|_{W}=\frac{b}{w^{(k+2)}}{\rm d}w-\frac{a_{-1}}{w}{\rm d}w.$$
Then there exists a differential form $\eta$ on the cylinder of parameter $\epsilon$
\begin{equation}\label{equation:cylindreDeParamEpsilon}
A_{\epsilon}:=\left\{(x,y)\in{\mathbb C}^{2}: xy=\epsilon,|x|<1,|y|<1\right\},
\end{equation}
and a biholomorphism
\begin{equation}
\varphi:U\setminus B(0,\sqrt{|\epsilon|})\to A_{\epsilon}\setminus\left\{(x,y)\in
A_{\epsilon}: |x|=|y|\right\},
\end{equation}
satisfying the following two properties.
\begin{itemize}
\item[i)] The pair $(A_{\epsilon},\eta)$ is a flat cylinder (i.e., $\eta$ has no zeros or poles in
$A_{\epsilon}$).
\item[ii)] The restrictions of the pull back of $\eta$ by $\varphi$ are
\begin{equation}
\varphi^{\ast}(\eta)|_{V\setminus B(0,\sqrt{|\epsilon|})}=az^{k}{\rm d}z+\epsilon^{k+1}\frac{a_{-1}}{z}{\rm d}z
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\varphi^{\ast}(\eta)|_{W\setminus B(0,\sqrt{|\epsilon|})}=\epsilon^{k+1}\omega|_{W\setminus
B(0,\sqrt{|\epsilon|})}.
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, we prove the result in the cases $k=-1$ and $a_{-1}=0$.
Let $\epsilon\in\Delta^{\ast}$ and define the following spaces:
\begin{equation*}
A_{\epsilon}=\left\{(x,y)\in{\mathbb C}^{2}; |x|<1, |y|<1, xy=\epsilon \right\},
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
A_{\epsilon}'=A_{\epsilon}\setminus \left\{(x,y)\in A_{\epsilon}; |x|=|y|\right\},
\end{equation*}
and
\begin{eqnarray*}
B_{\epsilon}' &=& B_{V,\epsilon}'\cup B_{W,\epsilon}'\\
&=& \left\{ z\in V; |z|>\sqrt{|\epsilon|} \right\} \cup \left\{ w\in W; |w|>\sqrt{|\epsilon|} \right\}.
\end{eqnarray*}
The biholomorphism $\varphi$ is given by the two following restrictions (see
Figure~\ref{figure:tuillauterieCylindrique}):
\begin{eqnarray*}
\varphi_{V,\epsilon} &:&B_{V,\epsilon}' \to A_{\epsilon}',\quad z\mapsto\left(z,\frac{\epsilon}{z}\right),\\
\varphi_{W,\epsilon} &:&B_{W,\epsilon}' \to A_{\epsilon}',\quad w\mapsto\left(\frac{\epsilon}{w},w\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\shorthandoff{:}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[samples=100,scale=2.7]
\draw[->] (-.1,0) -- (2.2,0) node[right] {$x$} ;
\draw[->] (0,-.1) -- (0,2.2) node[above] {$y$} ;
\draw[domain=.5:2] plot ({\x},{1/\x}) node[right] {$A_{\epsilon}\subset xy = \epsilon$};
\draw[domain=0:2] plot ({\x},{\x}) node[right] {$|x|=|y|$};
\draw[red,thick] (1,0) -- (1.8,0);
\draw[blue,thick] (0,1) -- (0,1.8) ;
\draw[red,domain=1:1.8] plot ({\x},{1/\x});
\draw[blue,domain=5/9:1] plot ({\x},{1/\x});
\draw[red,dotted] (1,0) -- (1,1);
\draw[red,dotted] (1.8,0) -- (1.8,5/9);
\draw[blue,dotted] (0,1) -- (1,1);
\draw[blue,dotted] (0,1.8) -- (5/9,1.8);
\node[below,red] at (1.4,0) {$ B_{V,\epsilon}'$};
\node[left,blue] at (0,1.4) {$ B_{W,\epsilon}'$};
\draw[->,red] (1.4,.1) -- (1.4,.5); \node[right,red] at (1.4,.3) {$\varphi_{V,\epsilon}$} ;
\draw[->,blue] (.1,1.4) -- (.5,1.4); \node[above,blue] at (.3,1.4) {$\varphi_{W,\epsilon}$} ;
\node[below] at (1,0) {$\sqrt{|\epsilon|}$};
\node[below] at (1.8,0) {$1$};
\node[left] at (0,1) {$\sqrt{|\epsilon|}$};
\node[left] at (0,1.8) {$1$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The maps $\varphi_{V,\epsilon}$ and $\varphi_{W,\epsilon}$.}
\label{figure:tuillauterieCylindrique}
\end{figure}
Let us now define the differential form $\eta$ on $A_{\epsilon}$ to be the restriction of the
differential of ${\mathbb C}^{2}$ of equation
\begin{equation}
\frac{x^{k+1}}{x^{2}+y^{2}}\left( x{\rm d}x - y{\rm d}y \right).
\end{equation}
It is clear that $\eta$ does not vanishes on $A_{\epsilon}$. Therefore $(A_{\epsilon},\eta)$ is a flat
cylinder.
It remains to compute the pull backs of $\eta$ by $\varphi_{V,\epsilon}$ and $\varphi_{W,\epsilon}$.
It is easily verified that the push forward of $\partder{z}$ via $\varphi_{V,\epsilon}$ and $\partder{w}$ via
$\varphi_{W,\epsilon}$ are respectively
$$\partder{x}-\frac{y}{x}\partder{y}, \text{ and }
-\frac{x}{y}\partder{x}+\partder{y}.$$
Hence the pull backs by $\varphi$ of $\eta$ on $B_{V,\epsilon}'$ and $B_{W,\epsilon}'$ are:
\begin{eqnarray}
\varphi_{V,\epsilon}^{\ast}\left(\eta\right) &=& z^{k}{\rm d}z, \\
\varphi_{W,\epsilon}^{\ast}\left(\eta\right) &=& -\frac{\epsilon^{k+1}}{w^{k+2}}{\rm d}w.
\end{eqnarray}
In the case $k=-1$, it suffices to multiply this $\eta$ by $a_{-1}$ to obtain all the residues.
Now we prove the general result: let us suppose that $k\neq -1$ and $a_{-1}\neq 0$. The biholomorphism
$\varphi$ is of
course given by the same formula. One can easily verify that the differential $\eta$ is the restriction to
$A_{\epsilon}$ of the differential
\begin{equation}
\frac{x^{k+1}-\epsilon^{k+1}a_{-1}}{x^{2}+y^{2}}\left( x{\rm d}x - y{\rm d}y \right).
\end{equation}
\end{proof}
Let us now define the subset of the set of limit differentials which can be obtained by plumbing the nodes.
\begin{defn}\label{definiton:diffPlombable}
We say that a limit differential $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ is {\em plumbable} if there exists a family
of pointed limit differentials
$$\left(f::\famcurv\to\Delta^{\ast},
\famomega:\Delta^{\ast}\to\dualsheave[\famcurv/\Delta^{\ast}],\seczero_{1},\cdots,\seczero_{n}:\Delta^{\ast}
\to\famcurv \right),$$
satisfying the following conditions.
\begin{itemize}
\item The tuple $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ is the limit differential of this family.
\item For every node $N_{i}$, there exists a neighbourhood $\mathcal{U}_{i}$ of $N_{i}$ not containing any
other node or marked point $Z_{i}$ satisfying the following properties:
the complement of the union of the $\mathcal{U}_{i}$ is
$$\famcurv\setminus\bigcup_{i}\mathcal{U}_{i}=\left(\X\setminus\bigcup_{i} U_{i}\right) \times \Delta ,$$
where $U_{i}$ denotes the restriction of $\mathcal{U}_{i}$ on $\X$;
the sections $\seczero_{i}$ are given by $Z_{i}\times \Delta$; and
the differentials
$(\mathcal{U}_{i,t},\famomega(t)|_{\mathcal{U}_{i}})$ are given by the plumbing cylinder construction at
$N_{i}$ with a parameter $\epsilon_{i}(t)$.
\end{itemize}
The set of pointed plumbable differentials of type $(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$ modulo the action of
$\mathfrak{S}\subset\permGroup$ (see Section~\ref{section:CompactDesStrates})
is denoted by $\kbarmoduliplum(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$.
\end{defn}
We now prove that the conditions given in Lemma~\ref{lemme:CondCompPlomberieCyl} and
Lemma~\ref{lemme:ConditionPlomberieCheminsFermer} characterise limit differentials without poles of order
$\geq 2$ with a nonzero residue. Let us recall that for a curve $\X$, we denote by $\nodeSet$ the set of
nodes of $\X$. Moreover, let $e_{i}$ be an edge in the dual graph of $(\X,\omega)$ (see
Definition~\ref{definition:GrapheDualDiffLimites}), we denote by $w(e_{i})$ the weight of $e_{i}$ (which is
one greater than the order of the corresponding node).
\begin{theorem}\label{theoreme:PlomberieCylindriqueSansResidu}
Let $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ be a candidate differential which has no residue at the poles of
order $k\geq 2$.
If $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ satisfies the three conditions,
\begin{itemize}
\item[i)] The Compatibility
Condition $($Equation~\eqref{equation:conditionDeCompatibiliteGeneral}$)$
\[
\ord_{N_{1}}(\omega)+ \ord_{N_{2}}(\omega)=-2,
\]
at every node $N_{1}\sim N_{2}$ of $\X$.
\item[ii)] The Residue Condition $($Equation~\eqref{equation:conditionDeCompatibiliteGeneral2}$)$
\[
{\rm Res}_{N_{1}}(\omega)+ {\rm Res}_{N_{2}}(\omega)=0,
\]
at every node $N_{1}\sim N_{2}$ of $\X$.
\item[iii)]There exists a tuple
$(\epsilon_{1},\cdots,\epsilon_{r})\in(\Delta^{\ast})^{\nodeSet}$ satisfying
Equation~\eqref{equation:paramCylindrique}, i.e.
\[
\prod_{i=1}^{l}\epsilon_{j_{i}}^{\alpha_{i}w(e_{i})}=1
\]
for every closed path $\gamma:=\sum_{i=1}^{l}\alpha_{i}e_{i}$ in the
dual graph of $(\X,\omega)$.
\end{itemize}
then $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ is a plumbable differential.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ be a candidate differential which has no residue at the poles of order
$k\geq 0$ and
let $N_{1},\cdots,N_{m}\in\nodeSet$ be the
nodes of $\X$.
It is easily verified that if the parameters $(\epsilon_{1},\cdots,\epsilon_{r})$ satisfy
Equation~\eqref{equation:paramCylindrique} for any closed path, then the same holds for
$(\epsilon_{1}^{1/t},\cdots,\epsilon_{r}^{1/t})$ for any $t\in\Delta^{\ast}$.
Hence it suffices to show that $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ can be plumbed using the parameters
$(\epsilon_{1},\cdots,\epsilon_{r})$ of Theorem~\ref{theoreme:PlomberieCylindriqueSansResidu}.
According to \cite[page~184]{MR2807457}, there exist neighbourhoods $U_{i}$ of $N_{i}$ which contains neither
any other node nor any point $Z_{i}$. They may be chosen as the unions of the discs
$V_{i}=\left\{z_{i}\in{\mathbb C};|z_{i}|<1\right\}$ and
$W_{i}=\left\{w_{i}\in{\mathbb C};|w_{i}|<1\right\}$, identified at their origins. Moreover, since the
compatibility
condition and the residue condition are satisfied, we can suppose that the
respective
restrictions
of $\omega$ to $V_{i}$ and $W_{i}$ are of the form $a_{i}z_{i}^{k_{i}}{\rm d}z_{i}$ and
$b_{i}w_{i}^{-(k_{i}+2)}{\rm d}w_{i}$, where $a_{i}$ and $b_{i}$ are not zero and $a_{i}=-b_{i}$ if $k_{i}=-1$.
We define for each node $N_{i}$ the following spaces:
\begin{equation*}
A_{i}=\left\{(x_{i},y_{i})\in{\mathbb C}^{2}; |x_{i}|<1, |y_{i}|<1, x_{i}y_{i}=\epsilon_{i} \right\},
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
A_{i}'=A_{i}\setminus \left\{(x_{i},y_{i})\in A_{i}; |x_{i}|=|y_{i}|\right\},
\end{equation*}
and
\begin{equation*}
B=\left(\X\setminus \underset{i}{\bigcup} U_{i}\right) \bigcup \left(\underset{i}{\bigcup}
B_{i}'\right),
\end{equation*}
where
\begin{eqnarray*}
B_{i}' &=& B_{V_{i}}'\cup B_{W_{i}}'\\
&=& \left\{ z_{i}\in V_{i}; |z_{i}|>\sqrt{|\epsilon_{i}|} \right\} \cup \left\{ w_{i}\in W_{i};
|w_{i}|>\sqrt{|\epsilon_{i}|} \right\}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Now the curve $\X'$ is the union of $B$ and $\underset{i}{\bigcup}A_{i}$ with the space
$\underset{i}{\bigcup} B'_{i}$ and
$\underset{i}{\bigcup}A'_{i}$ identified via the embeddings:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\varphi_{V_{i}} :B_{V_{i}}'\to A_{i},&
z_{i}\mapsto\left(z_{i},\frac{\epsilon_{i}}{z_{i}}\right)\\
\varphi_{W_{i}} :B_{V_{i}}'\to A_{i},&
w_{i}\mapsto\left(\frac{\epsilon_{i}}{w_{i}},w_{i}\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
We denote the image of $\varphi_{V_{i}}$ by $A_{i}^{V}$ and the image of
$\varphi_{W_{i}}$ by $A_{i}^{W}$.
Let us remark that the connected components of $\X\setminus
\underset{i}{\bigcup} U_{i}$ and $\X'\setminus\underset{i}{\bigcup}A_{i}$ are canonically biholomorphic. We
denote these connected components by $\tilde\X_{j}$ and the corresponding irreducible components of $\X$ by
$\X_{j}$. Moreover, the set of cylinders $A_{i}^{V}$ and
$A_{i}^{W}$ which are at the boundary of $\tilde\X_{j}$ is denoted by $\mathcal{C}(\tilde\X_{j})$.
According to Lemma~\ref{lemme:PlomberieCylindriqueOk}, there exist differentials
$\omega_{1}',\cdots,\omega_{r}'$ on the cylinders $A_{1},\cdots,A_{r}$ which are proportional to $\omega$ on
$A_{i}^{V}$ and $A_{i}^{W}$. More precisely, if $\omega_{i}'=\alpha_{i}\omega$ for an
$\alpha_{i}\in{\mathbb C}^{\ast}$ on $A_{i}^{V}$, then $\omega_{i}'=\alpha_{i}\epsilon_{i}^{\pm (k_{i}+1)}\omega$
on $A_{i}^{W}$. The fact that the constants of proportionality are distinct is the key point in the rest of
the proof.
To complete the proof, it suffices to show that we can extend the differentials~$\omega_{i}'$ by a
differential $\omega'$ on $\X'$ which is proportional to $\omega$ on every
component~$\tilde\X_{i}$. Observe that such a differential exists if and only if for every
component~$\tilde\X_{j}$ there exists a common constant of
proportionality between $\omega_{i}'$ and $\omega$ for every cylinder $A_{i}$ in $\mathcal{C}(\tilde\X_{j})$.
Let us construct the constants of proportionality in the following way. Let~$\X_{1}$ be an irreducible
component of $\X$ and $a_{1}\in{\mathbb C}^{\ast}$. We impose that on every
cylinder of $\mathcal{C}(\tilde\X_{1})$ the relation between $\omega$ and $\omega'_{i}$ is given by
$\omega_{i}'=a_{1}\omega$.
Let $\X_{k}$ be another irreducible component of $\X$. For every path
$$\gamma_{1,k}=\sum_{i=1}^{l_{k}}\alpha^{k}_{i}e^{k}_{i}$$ from $\X_{1}$ to $\X_{k}$ in the dual
graph of $(\X,\omega)$ we assign the following number
\begin{equation}\label{equation:constanteCheminGraphe}
a_{k}^{\gamma}:= a_{1}\prod_{i=1}^{l_{k}}\epsilon_{j_{i}}^{\alpha^{k}_{i}w(e^{k}_{i})},
\end{equation}
where $w(e^{k}_{i})$ one greater than the order of the node corresponding to
$e_{i}^{k}$.
It suffices to prove that under the third condition of
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:PlomberieCylindriqueSansResidu} the $a^{\gamma}_{k}$ do not
depend on the choice of the path $\gamma$. Indeed, if this is the case there exists a differential $\omega'$
on
$\X'$ which coincides with $a_{k}\omega$ on $\tilde\X_{k}$.
Let $\gamma_{1}$ and $\gamma_{2}$ be two paths from $\X_{1}$ to $\X_{2}$ in the dual graph of $(\X,\omega)$.
Then the number associated by Equation~\eqref{equation:constanteCheminGraphe} to the concatenation
$\gamma_{1}\circ\gamma_{2}^{-1}$ is
$a_{k}^{\gamma_{1}}(a_{k}^{\gamma_{2}})^{-1}$. Hence it suffices to show that
$a_{k}^{\gamma_{1}}(a_{k}^{\gamma_{2}})^{-1}=a_{1}$ to conclude the proof. Let us denote the path
$\gamma_{1}\circ\gamma_{2}^{-1}$
by $\sum_{i=1}^{l}\alpha_{i}e_{i}$. Then by definition
\begin{equation*}
a_{1}^{\gamma}=a_{1}\prod_{i=1}^{l}\epsilon_{j_{i}}^{\alpha_{i}w(e_{i})}.
\end{equation*}
Since the parameters $\epsilon_{i}$ satisfy Equation~\eqref{equation:paramCylindrique}, this quantity is
precisely $a_{1}$.
\end{proof}
As an easy application of this theorem, we have the following remark.
\begin{rem}
Let $(\X,\omega)$ be a holomorphic differential with at least one zero $Z$ of order $k\geq2$.
Moreover,
let $({\mathbb P}^{1},0,1,\infty)$ be a rational curve with three marked points and define the differential
$\eta_{i}:=z^{i}(z-1)^{k-i}{\rm d}z$ on ${\mathbb P}^{1}$. Attaching $\X$ to ${\mathbb P}^{1}$ via the identification of $Z$ with
$\infty$ and using the plumbing cylinder construction of Lemma~\ref{lemme:PlomberieCylindriqueOk}, we obtain
the
construction of \cite{MR2010740} for breaking up a zero of a differential into a pair of zeros.
An advantage of this construction is that it can be easily generalised to the case of breaking up a zero into
more zeros. We use such a generalisation in the proof of
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:ExcesAuBordStratePrincipal}.
\end{rem}
As shown in Lemma~\ref{lemme:formeLocalDesFormesDiff}, there exist differentials which have a pole of order
$k\geq2$ and a nonzero residue. If our candidate differential has such local behaviour at a node, then the
conditions of Theorem~\ref{theoreme:PlomberieCylindriqueSansResidu} are not sufficient to be smoothable.
\begin{ex}\label{exemple:ObstructionPlomberie2}
Let $(\X,\omega,Z)$ be a candidate differential of genus two such that
$\X:=\X_{1}\cup {\mathbb P}^{1} \cup \X_{2}$, where $(\X_{1},\omega|_{\X_{1}})$ and $(\X_{2},\omega|_{\X_{2}})$ are
two
flat tori and the projective line has coordinate $z$ such that it is attached to $\X_{1}$ at $0$
and
to $\X_{2}$ at $\infty$. Finally, the restriction of $\omega$ to ${\mathbb P}^{1}$ is
$\omega_{0}:=\frac{(z-1)^{2}}{z^{2}}{\rm d}z$.
The differential $(\X,\omega,Z)$ is not a limit differential. Otherwise, the differential~$\famomega(t)$ of
the
family $\left(f:\famcurv\to\Delta^{\ast},
\famomega:\Delta^{\ast}\to\dualsheave[\famcurv/\Delta^{\ast}],\seczero:\Delta^{\ast}\to\famcurv \right)$ would
have a
zero of order two at $\seczero(t)$. Therefore, the point $\seczero(t)$ would be a Weierstrass point
of~$\famcurv(t)$. Since the limiting position of the Weierstrass points are the $2$-torsion points of both
elliptic curves, the curve $\famcurv(t)$ would have seven Weierstrass points
(see Theorem~\ref{theoreme:limitDesPtsDeWeiCasHyp}), a contradiction.
\end{ex}
We do not give a complet characterisation of the limit differentials having poles of order greater or equal to
$2$ with a nonzero
residue. However, the following lemma gives a necessary condition.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemme:noeudsPolaireAvecResiduFaible}
Let $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ be a limit differential. Let $N$ be a node between the irreducible
components $\X_{1}$ and $\X_{2}$ such that the local normal form at $N$ of $\omega|_{\X_{1}}$ is $z^{k}{\rm d}z$
and the one of $\omega|_{\X_{2}}$ is $z^{-k-2}+\alpha z^{-1}{\rm d}z$.
Then, there exists a differential $\eta$ on $\X_{1}$ with a pole of order $-1$ and residue $-\alpha$ at $N$
which
has no poles on the smooth locus of $\X_{1}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $N$ be a node where the restriction of $\omega$ to one branch of the node has a pole of
order $d+1\geq 2$ with a nonzero residue. Let $\left(\famcurv,
\famomega,\seczero_{1},\cdots,\seczero_{n}\right)$ be a family of pointed differentials which converges to
$(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$.
Let~$U$ be a neighbourhood of $N$ in $\bar\famcurv$ given inside $\Delta^{3}$ by the equation
$$xy=t^{a},$$
with $a\geq 1$.
Let us suppose that the equation of the branch of $N$ with the pole is $\left\{ x=0 \right\}$ (denoted by
$\X_{y}$) and the restriction on it is
$$\omega_{y}=\frac{1}{y^{d}}(1+\alpha y^{d})\frac{-{\rm d}y}{y}$$ and that the family $\famomega$ converges to
$\omega_{y}$ on $\X_{y}$. We denote by $\eta$ the differential $\frac{x{\rm d}x-y{\rm d}y}{x^{2}+y^{2}}$ on $U$. Observe
that the family of
differentials $\famomega$ is given by
\[\famomega=g\cdot\eta,\]
where $g$ is a meromorphic function with no poles or zeros in $U\setminus\X|_{U}$. The limit of
$(t^{a})^{d}\famomega$ to
$\left\{ y=0 \right\}$ (denoted by
$\X_{y}$) is $$\omega_{x}=x^{d}\frac{{\rm d}x}{x}.$$ The limit
of the family
\[ \left(f-\frac{x^{d}}{(t^{a})^{d}}\right)\cdot\eta\]
on $\X_{x}$ is $\alpha\frac{-{\rm d}x}{x}$. This form can be prolonged on the whole component $\X_{1}$ containing
$\X_{x}$ to a
meromorphic form $\omega_{1}$.
It remains to show that the poles of $\omega_{1}$ cannot be located in the smooth locus
of $\X_{1}$. Let us denote the family which prolongs respectively $
\left(g-\frac{x^{d}}{(t^{a})^{d}}\right)\eta$ and $\frac{x^{d}}{(t^{a})^{d}}\eta$ on $\famcurv$ by
$\famomega_{1}$ and $\famomega_{2}$. It follows from the fact that $\famomega_{1}$ converges to a meromorphic
differential on $\X_{1}$ and the equality
$$ t^{ad}\famomega=t^{ad}\left(\famomega_{1}+\famomega_{2}\right),$$
that the limit of $t^{ad}\famomega_{2}$ on $\X_{1}$ is $\omega|_{\X_{1}}$. And it follows by
addition that the differential $\omega_{1}$ has no poles on the smooth locus of $\X_{1}$.
\end{proof}
An interesting application is the fact that the zero of a differential
in the strata $\omoduli(2g-2)$ cannot
converge to the node of a compact curve with two components.
\begin{cor}\label{corollaire:zeroJamaisSurLePontFaible}
Let $(\X,\omega,Z)\in\kbarmodulilim[g](2g-2)$ be a limit pointed differential with a single zero. Then
$(\X,Z)$ is not the union of two components attached by a pointed projective line.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
If it was the case, then the
restriction
of the form $\omega$ to the projective line would be $$\frac{(z-1)^{2g-2}}{z^{2g_{1}}}{\rm d}z$$ in a
coordinate $z$, where the nodes are $z=0$ and $z=\infty$. This form has always a nonzero residue at the
nodes. Let $\X_{1}$ be another irreducible component.
This would implies that $\X_{1}$ has a differential with a single pole, which is of order one.
\end{proof}
We now give conditions which are sufficient to smooth a candidate differential having poles of order $\geq2$
with nonzero residue. They are too
strong to be necessary.
Recall that for an irreducible component $\X_{\alpha}$ of $\X$ we denote by $\nodeSet[\X_{\alpha}]$ the set
of nodes of $\X$ meeting $\X_{\alpha}$. And if $N$ is a node between $\X_{\alpha}$ and $\X_{\beta}$, we
denote by $N_{\alpha}$ the point of $N$ belonging to $\X_{\alpha}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemme:PlomberieCylindriqueAvecResidu}
If $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ is a candidate differential
which satisfies the following properties, then it is plumbable.
The Compatibility Condition~\eqref{equation:conditionDeCompatibiliteGeneral}
\[
\ord_{N_{1}}(\omega)+ \ord_{N_{2}}(\omega)=-2
\]
holds at every node of $\X$.
The Residue Condition~\eqref{equation:conditionDeCompatibiliteGeneral2}
\[
{\rm Res}_{N_{1}}(\omega)+ {\rm Res}_{N_{2}}(\omega)=0,
\]
holds at every node of $\X$ with a simple pole of $\omega$.
There exists
$(\epsilon_{1},\cdots,\epsilon_{n})\in(\Delta^{\ast})^{\nodeSet}$
satisfying Equation~\eqref{equation:paramCylindrique} for every closed path $\gamma$ in the dual graph of
$(\X,\omega)$.
There exists a differential form $\eta_{\alpha}$ and a constant $c_{\alpha}\in{\mathbb C}^{\ast}$ on every irreducible
component $\X_{\alpha}$ of
$\X$ satisfying the following properties. The differential~$\eta_{\alpha}$ has simple poles with residue
$-a_{i}$ at every node $N_{i}\in\nodeSet[\X_{\alpha}]$ where $\omega|_{\X_{\beta}}$ has a pole of order $k\geq
0$ with residue $a_{i}\neq0$. At
every other point $Q$ in $\X_{\alpha}$, the residue of $\eta_{\alpha}$ is zero and
$$\ord_{Q}(\eta_{\alpha}) \geq \ord_{Q}(\omega).$$
At every simple pole $N$ of $\eta_{\alpha}$, the parameter $\epsilon_{N}$
satisfies $$\epsilon_{N}^{k_{N}+1}=c_{\alpha}.$$
\end{lemma}
We will prove that on the open set corresponding to $\X_{\alpha}$, the smoothed differential is proportional
to $\omega+c_{\alpha}\eta_{\alpha}$.
\begin{proof}
Let us first remark that if the parameters $\epsilon_{i}$ are small enough, then the orders of
$\omega_{\alpha}$
and $\omega_{\alpha}+c_{\alpha}\eta_{\alpha}$ coincide at every node of $\X$. By replacing the $\epsilon_{i}$
by~$\epsilon_{i}^{r}$, for
some $r>1$, we can
suppose that this is the case.
Let $N$ be a node of~$\X$ between the components $\X_{\alpha}$ and $\X_{\beta}$. First suppose that the
pole of $\omega$ at $N$ has no residue. Then by plumbing the node $N$, we can
find a
differential which coincide with $$\omega_{\alpha}+c_{\alpha}\eta_{\alpha}$$ on the part of the cylinder
meting $\X_{\alpha}$ and with
$$\epsilon_{N}^{\pm(k_{N}+1)} \left( \omega_{\beta}+c_{\beta}\eta_{\beta}\right)$$
on the other part of the cylinder.
Now suppose that $\omega_{\beta}$ has a pole of order $k\geq 2$ with a nonzero residue. Then the plumbing
cylinder construction gives a differential which coincide with
$$\omega_{\alpha}+\epsilon_{N}^{k_{N}+1}\eta_{\alpha}$$ on the part of the cylinder
meting $\X_{\alpha}$ and with
$$\epsilon_{N}^{k_{N}+1} \left( \omega_{\beta}+c_{\beta}\eta_{\beta}\right)$$ on the other part.
Since by hypothesis $\epsilon_{N}^{k_{N}+1}=c_{\alpha}$, we can prolong this differential on the component
$\X_{\alpha}$.
Finally, it follows from the fact that the parameters satisfy Equation~\eqref{equation:paramCylindrique}
that the constants of proportionality are globally well defined (see the proof of
Lemma~\ref{lemme:ConditionPlomberieCheminsFermer} for details).
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
As said before, the hypotheses of this lemma are to strong. A way to generalise it is to
allow many differentials $(\eta_{\alpha,1},\cdots,\eta_{\alpha,r})$ on a component~$\X_{\alpha}$ with distinct
constants $c_{\alpha,i}$. We do not write the precise condition, because it becomes very technical and messy.
Let us remark that a necessary condition for the existence of the differentials~$\eta_{\alpha}$ is that the
following equation is satisfied
\begin{equation}\label{equation:sommeResidusNoeudsExterieur}
\sum_{N_{i}\in\nodeSet[\X_{\alpha}]}{\rm Res}_{N_{i,\beta_{i}}}(\omega)=0,
\end{equation}
where $N_{i}$ is a node between $\X_{\alpha}$ and a distinct component $\X_{\beta_{i}}$.
This condition should be necessary for every limit differentials, but we have no proof of it.
\end{rem}
\paragraph{Relationship with the {incidence variety compactification}.}
To conclude this section, we show how to obtain a stable pointed differential from a limit differential
without any pole of order $k\geq2$ with a nonzero residue. We even prove that this map extends
to the case of plumbable differentials satisfying the hypotheses of
Lemma~\ref{lemme:PlomberieCylindriqueAvecResidu}.
\begin{defn}\label{definition:composentesPolairesConnectees}
Let $(\X,\omega)$ be a limit or stable differential. Let $\X_{1}$ and $\X_{2}$ be two irreducible components
of $\X$. We say that $\X_{1}$ and $\X_{2}$ are {\em polarly related by $\omega$} if $\X_{1}=\X_{2}$ or the
differential $\omega$ has simple poles at the
nodes between $\X_{1}$ and $\X_{2}$.
The equivalence classes of this relation are the {\em polarly related components} of~$(\X,\omega)$.
\end{defn}
There is a map from the set of limit differentials to the space of marked stable differentials
$$\varphi:\kbarmodulilim[g,n](k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})\to\obarmoduli[g,n],$$
which is given by forgetting the differentials on the polarly related components which contain a pole of order
$\geq 2$.
\begin{prop}\label{proposition:relationPlumStable}
Let $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ be a plumbable differential satisfying the hypotheses of
Lemma~\ref{lemme:PlomberieCylindriqueAvecResidu}.
The marked differential $\varphi \left(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n}\right)$ is contained in
$\obarmoduliinc{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}}$.
\end{prop}
The point is to show that we do not have to forget the differentials more irreducible components of $\X$.
\begin{proof}
Let $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ be a plumbable differential in the closure of the stratum
$\omoduliincp{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}}$.
Let us first remark that we can suppose that the polarly related components are the irreducible components of
$\X$. Otherwise, we use the plumbing cylinder construction at the nodes with poles of order one. The resulting
differential is still a plumbable differential satisfying the hypotheses of
Lemma~\ref{lemme:PlomberieCylindriqueAvecResidu} and which lies in the closure of the stratum
$\omoduliincp{k_{1},\cdots,k_{n}}$ if and only if the previous differential lay in its closure.
Let $(\epsilon_{1}:\Delta^{\ast}\to\Delta^{\ast},\cdots,\epsilon_{n}:\Delta^{\ast}\to\Delta^{\ast})$ be
parameters at the nodes of $\X$ which satisfy Equation~\eqref{equation:paramCylindrique}. Let $c_{i}(t)$ and
$\eta_{i}(t)$ be the constants and differentials satisfying the hypotheses of
Lemma~\ref{lemme:PlomberieCylindriqueAvecResidu}. The family of
differentials which
is obtained by
plumbing the nodes with these parameters and such that the limit is a nonzero stable differential
$\tilde\omega$ is denoted
by $(\famcurv,\famomega,\seczero_{1},\cdots,\seczero_{n})$.
Let $\X_{i}$ be an irreducible component of $\X$ such that $\omega|_{\X_{i}}$ is holomorphic, but the
differential $\tilde\omega|_{\X_{i}}$ is identically zero. Let $V_{i}$ be the subset of $\X_{i}$ which is the
complement of $\X_{i}\setminus\bigcup\limits_{j}(U_{j}\cap\X_{i})$, where the $U_{j}$ are the neighbourhoods
of the nodes in which the plumbing take place. In $V_{i}\times
\Delta$, the differential satisfies
$$\famomega|_{V_{i}\times \Delta}= h(t)\left(\omega|_{V_{i}}+c_{i}(t)\eta_{i}(t)\right),$$
where $h$ is a function vanishing at the origin.
For every node $N_{i,j}$ of $\X_{i}$, we replace the parameter $\epsilon_{N_{i,j}}$ by
$$h(t)^{1/(k_{N_{i,j}}+1)}\cdot\epsilon_{N_{i,j}}(t),$$ where $k_{N_{i,j}}$ is the order of the zero of
$\omega$
at $N_{i,j}$. The parameters remain unchanged at the other nodes of $\X$.
Let us show that these new parameters satisfy the conditions given by
Equation~\eqref{equation:paramCylindrique}. Let $\gamma$ be a closed path in the dual graph of
$(\X,\omega)$. Let us denote the vertex corresponding to $\X_{i}$ in the dual graph of $(\X,\omega)$ by
$V_{i}$. Since $\gamma$ is closed, it has the same number of edges which point to~$V_{i}$ as edges which come
from~$V_{i}$.
Using the fact that the component $\X_{i}$ has only holomorphic nodes for $\omega$, we deduce that an incoming
edge and an outgoing edge of
$\gamma$ contribute together to Equation~\eqref{equation:paramCylindrique} by
$$\left(h(t)^{1/(k_{N_{i,j}}+1)}\epsilon_{N_{i,j}}\right)^{(k_{N_{i,j}}+1)} \cdot
\left(h(t)^{1/(k_{N_{i,k}}+1)}
\epsilon_{N_{i,k}}\right)^{-(k_{N_{i,k}}+1)},$$
which is clearly equal to
$$(\epsilon_{N_{i,j}})^{(k_{N_{i,j}}+1)}\cdot(\epsilon_{N_{i,k}})^{-(k_{N_{i,k}}+1)}.$$
So the contribution to Equation~\eqref{equation:paramCylindrique} of the new parameters at the nodes
of~$\X_{i}$ is the same as the contribution with the old ones. This implies that this equation remains
satisfied
by the new parameters.
It is direct to check that the constants~$c_{j}$ coincide with the previous ones when $j\neq i$ and~$c_{i}$ is
replaced by new constants $c_{i}'$. It is easily verified that we may keep
the same differentials~$\eta_{i}$.
According to Lemma~\ref{lemme:PlomberieCylindriqueAvecResidu}, we can smooth the limit differential
$\omega$ using these new parameters. We scale the family of differentials in such a way that the new one
coincides with the old one on $V_{j}\times \Delta$, for every irreducible component
$\X_{j}$ different
from $\X_{i}$. On the other hand, we claim that in a
neighbourhood of $V_{i}$, we have
$$\famomega_{{\rm new}}|_{V_{i}\times \Delta}= \omega|_{V_{i}}+c_{i}'\eta_{i},$$
for the family with the new parameters.
Indeed, let $\X_{k}$ be an irreducible component which meets $\X_{i}$ at $N_{l}$. Let $h_{j}:\Delta\to\Delta$
denotes the
function such that $$\famomega_{{\rm new}}|_{V_{j}\times \Delta}= h_{j}(t)
(\omega|_{V_{j}}+c_{j}'\eta_{j}).$$
Since for every irreducible component $\X_{j}$ distinct from $\X_{i}$, this equation holds for the family
$\famomega$, it follows from Lemma~\ref{lemme:PlomberieCylindriqueOk} that
$$\frac{h_{j}}{h}=(\epsilon_{N_{l}})^{(k_{N_{l}}+1)} \text{ and }
\frac{h_{j}}{h_{i}}=h\cdot (\epsilon_{N_{l}})^{(k_{N_{l}}+1)}.$$
It follows from these two equation that $c_{i}=1$ as claimed.
This implies that the stable limit of this family restricts to $\omega$ on $\X_{i}$ and to $\tilde\omega$ on
the
other
irreducible components of $\X$.
The Proposition follows by doing this procedure at every component of $\X$ where $\omega'$ vanishes but
$\omega$ restricts
to a holomorphic differential.
\end{proof}
\section{Parity at the Boundary of the Strata.}\label{section:Spin}
The notion of theta characteristic is an essential tool for the description of the connected components of the
strata of $\omoduli$. Indeed, every stratum of the form $\omoduli(2l_{1},\cdots,2l_{n})$ has at least two
connected components distinguished by the parity of the theta characteristic associated to the differential.
It would be nice to show that this invariant can be extended for all limit
differentials in the closure of such strata.
However, we will show (see Corollary~\ref{corollaire:intersectHypOddGenreTrois})
that such extension is not possible in general. Indeed, the {incidence variety
compactifications} of the even and the odd components of $\pomoduli[3,1](4)$ meet each other.
In this section, we will nevertheless extend this invariant to two important cases. In the first part, we
treat the case of limit differentials above curves of compact
type (see Theorem~\ref{theoreme:BordDesStratesDansSpin}). This uses the theory of spin structures introduced
by Cornalba, which we will recall at the beginning of this section. In the second part, we extend this
invariant to the
case of irreducible stable pointed differentials (see Theorem~\ref{theoreme:InvDeArfGene}). For this purpose,
we generalise the Arf invariant to such differentials
(see Definition~\ref{definition:ArfGen}).
\subsection{Differentials of Compact Type.}
Let us begin this section by some preliminary paragraphs about line bundles on (semi) stable curves
and Cornalba theory of spin structures.
\paragraph{Some basic facts about line bundles on stable curves.}
The material of this paragraph comes mostly from \cite{MR2807457} and \cite{MR1631825}. Let us recall
that the
normalisation of a (semi) stable curve $\X$ is denoted by $\nu:\tilde{\X}\to\X$. We denote by
$\Irr(\X) := \left\{
\X_{i}
\right\}$ the set of irreducible components of $\X$ and by $\nu_{i}:\tilde{\X_{i}}\to\X_{i}$ the restriction
of the normalisation to $\X_{i}$. The set of nodes~$\nodeSet$ of~$\X$ is of cardinality $\mathfrak{n}$ and for
each node $N_{i}$
of
$\X$, its preimage by $\nu$ is~$\lbrace N_{i,1},N_{i,2} \rbrace$.
The key to describe the Picard group of $\X$ is the exact sequence
\begin{equation}\label{equation:suiteExCourteFibDroiteNodal}
1\to\Ox^{\ast}\to\nu_{\ast}\Ox[\tilde{\X}]^{\ast}\xrightarrow{e}
\prod_{N\in\nodeSet}{\mathbb C}_{N}^{\ast}\to 1,
\end{equation}
where the map $e$ is defined in the following way. For every $h\in\nu_{\ast}\Ox[\tilde{\X}]^{\ast}$, the
${\mathbb C}_{N_{i}}^{\ast}$-component of $e(h)$ is $\frac{h(N_{i,1})}{h(N_{i,2})}$. The long exact
sequence associated to the short exact sequence \eqref{equation:suiteExCourteFibDroiteNodal} is
\begin{equation}\label{equation:suiteExLongFibDroiteNodal}
1\to{\mathbb C}^{\ast}\to({\mathbb C}^{\ast})^{|\Irr(\X)|}\to ({\mathbb C}^{\ast})^{\mathfrak{n}}\to
\Pic(\X)\xrightarrow{\alpha^{\ast}} \Pic(\tilde{\X}) \to 1 .
\end{equation}
The interpretation, from the right to the left, of this sequence is the following.
\begin{itemize}
\item[i)] To describe a line bundle $L$ on $\X$ it suffices to give a line bundle $\tilde{L}$ on $\tilde{\X}$
and an identification $\varphi_{N_{i}}:\tilde{L}_{N_{i,1}}\to\tilde{L}_{N_{i,2}}$ of the
fibres above the preimages of each node $N_{i}\in\nodeSet$. The second part of the data are usually called the
{\em descent data} of $L$. Let us remark that the descent data can be interpreted as a condition for a section
of
$L$ to be a lift of a section of $\tilde{L}$.
\item[ii)] If $\tilde{L}$ is trivial, a choice of trivialisation identifies each $\varphi_{N}$ with a well
defined non-zero complex number. So, two line bundles $L_{1}$ and $L_{2}$ such that
$\tilde{L_{1}}=\tilde{L_{2}}$ differ only by a tuple of $\mathfrak{n}$ nonzero complex numbers.
\item[iii)] Let $\tilde{L}$ be a line bundle on $\tilde{\X}$. If two $\mathfrak{n}$-tuple describe in ii)
differ only by
multiplicative constants on each irreducible component, then the line bundles associated to $\tilde{L}$ and
these descent data
are the same.
\item[iv)] The descent data are well defined up to a global multiplicative constant.
\end{itemize}
Let us discuss two examples in which we will be particularly interested.
\begin{ex}
If the curve $\X$ is of compact type, then the sequence \eqref{equation:suiteExLongFibDroiteNodal} implies
that the Picard groups of $\X$ and $\tilde\X$ are isomorphic. Therefore in this case, we will define line
bundles
by specifying their restrictions on every irreducible components of $\X$.
\end{ex}
\begin{ex}
Let us now suppose that the curve $\X$ is an irreducible nodal curve with $r$ nodes. Then the sequence
\eqref{equation:suiteExLongFibDroiteNodal} gives the sequence
\begin{equation*}
1\to ({\mathbb C}^{\ast})^{r}\to
\Pic(\X)\xrightarrow{\alpha^{\ast}} \Pic(\tilde{\X}) \to 1 .
\end{equation*}
Hence in this case a line bundle on $\X$ is described by a line bundle on $\tilde\X$ and a $r$-tuple of non
zero
complex
numbers.
\end{ex}
We now give a description of the limit of a line bundle over a smooth family of generically smooth curves such
that the special fibre is of compact type. The proof is given at
the beginning of \cite[Section~5.C]{MR1631825}.
\begin{theorem}\label{theoreme:ProlongFibreEnDroite}
Let $f:\famcurv\to\Delta$ be a smooth family such that for every $t\neq 0$, the curve
$\famcurv(t)$ is a
smooth curve of genus $g$ and $\famcurv(0)$ is a reduced curve of compact type.
Let $\mathscr{L}$ be a line bundle of relative degree $d$ on $\famcurv\setminus\famcurv(0)$ and
$$\alpha:\Irr(\famcurv(0))\to\ZZ^{|\Irr(\famcurv(0))|}$$ be any map such that
$$\sum_{\X_{i}\in\Irr(\famcurv(0))}\alpha(\X_{i})=d.$$
Then there exists a unique extension $\mathscr{L}_{\alpha}$ of~$\mathscr{L}$ to
$\famcurv$ such that
$$\deg(\mathscr{L}_{\alpha}\otimes\Ox[\X_{i}])=\alpha(\X_{i})$$
on every irreducible components $\X_{i}$ of $\famcurv(0)$.
Moreover, if $N$ is a node between two irreducible components $\X_{i}$ and $\X_{j}$, and $\beta$ is
obtained from $\alpha$ by adding $1$ to $\alpha(\X_{i})$ and subtracting $1$ from $\alpha(\X_{j})$, then
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathscr{L}_{\beta}\otimes\Ox[\X_{i}]=\mathscr{L}_{\alpha}\otimes\Ox[\X_{i}](N),
\label{equation:TenseurFibreDroiteCourbeSpecial1} \\
\mathscr{L}_{\beta}\otimes\Ox[\X_{j}]=\mathscr{L}_{\alpha}\otimes\Ox[\X_{j}](-N).
\label{equation:TenseurFibreDroiteCourbeSpecial2}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{theorem}
If the special fibre is not of compact type, there is not such a precise description. However, the idea at the
beginning of \cite[Section~5.C]{MR1631825} remains true for families of curves with more general special
fibre.
\begin{theorem}
\label{theoreme:ProlongFibreEnDroiteGen}
Let $f:\famcurv\to\Delta$ be a smooth family such that for every $t\neq 0$, the curve
$\famcurv(t)$ is a
smooth curve of genus $g$ and $\famcurv(0)$ is a (semi) stable curve.
Let $\mathscr{L}$ be a line bundle of relative degree $d$ on $\famcurv$ such that the restriction
of~$\mathscr{L}$ to $\famcurv(0)$ is a line bundle.
Let $\X_{i}$ be an irreducible
component and let~$\lbrace N_{j,k} \rbrace_{k}$ be the set of nodes between $\X_{i}$ and $\X_{j}$.
Then, we have the relations
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathscr{L}\otimes\Ox[\famcurv](\X_{i})|_{\X_{i}}=\mathscr{L}|_{\X_{i}}\otimes\Ox[\X_{i}]\left(\sum_{j,k}-N_{
j,k}\right), \label{equation:TenseurFibreDroiteCourbeSpecialGen1} \\
\mathscr{L}\otimes\Ox[\famcurv](\X_{i})|_{\X_{j}}=\mathscr{L}|_{\X_{j}}\otimes\Ox[\X_{j}]\left(\sum_{k}N_{j,k}
\right).
\label{equation:TenseurFibreDroiteCourbeSpecialGen2}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{theorem}
\paragraph{Abstract spin stable curves.}
Following the article of Cornalba \cite{MR1082361}, we now extend the notion of spin structure to the case of
stable curves. Recall that a spin structure is a pair $(\X,\mathcal{L})$, where $\X$ is a
smooth curve and $\mathcal{L}$ is a theta characteristic on $\X$.
The following curves are the base of the construction.
\begin{defn}
Let $\bar\X$ be a semi stable curve and $\X$ its stable model. A {\em exceptional component} of $\X$ is an
irreducible component which is contracted by the map $\pi:\bar{\X}\to \X$. The non-exceptional components of
$\bar\X$ are called the {\em stable components}.
A {\em decent curve} is a semi stable curve in which every exceptional component meets precisely two other
irreducible components such that two exceptional curves are not allowed to meet. In particular, the
exceptional
components have no self intersection.
\end{defn}
We can think of decent curves as stable curves with some of its nodes blowed up.
Now we can define the notion of spin structure on decent curves.
\begin{defn}\label{definition:spinCurveb}
A {\em spin curve} is a triple $(\X,\mathcal{L},\alpha)$, where $\X$ is a decent curve,
$\mathcal{L}$ is a line bundle of degree $g-1$ on $\X$ and $\alpha$ is a map from $\mathcal{L}^{\otimes 2}$
to the dual sheave $\dualsheave$, which satisfies the following two properties.
\begin{itemize}
\item [i)] The line bundle $\mathcal{L}$ has degree $1$ on every exceptional component of $\X$.
\item [ii)] The map $\alpha$ is not zero at a general point of every stable component of $\X$.
\end{itemize}
\end{defn}
Now we explain why this is the right generalisation of the notion of smooth spin curves.
First of all it is easy to verify that for smooth curves,
this definition coincide with the usual one, since $\alpha$ is uniquely determined by $\mathcal{L}$.
Let $\X$ be a curve of compact type and $\mathcal{L}$ a spin structure on it. It follows easily from the
definition of spin structures that the restriction of $\mathcal{L}$ to every irreducible component $\X_{i}$ of
$\X$ of genus $g\geq 1$ is a theta-characteristic
on $\X_{i}$. But the sum of the degrees of these restrictions is the genus of
$\X$ minus the number of irreducible components of $\X$.
To have a line bundle of degree $g-1$, the curve $\X$ has to be a decent curve with a projective line at
every node.
An expected property of the notion of spin structure is that there exist $2^{2g}$ isomorphism classes of spin
structures on a given
decent curve.
However, there exist in general infinitely many non isomorphic line bundles $\mathcal{L}$ satisfying the
first
part of Definition~\ref{definition:spinCurveb} (this follows from the exact sequence
\eqref{equation:suiteExLongFibDroiteNodal}). The morphism~$\alpha$ rigidify this notion and the
following proposition shows that it gives the right number of spin structure on a decent curve.
\begin{prop}\label{proposition:nbrThetaChar}(\cite[Paragraph~6]{MR1082361})
Let $\X$ be a stable curve, then the number of non isomorphic spin structures on (the set of decent curves
stably equivalent to) $\X$ is $2^{2g}$. Moreover, the number of even ones is $2^{g-1}(2^{g}+1)$ and the number
of odd ones is $2^{g-1}(2^{g}-1)$.
\end{prop}
Before recalling that all these properties are well behaved in families, we discuss a basic but typical
example.
\begin{ex}\label{exemple:spin1}
Let $\X$ be a curve of genus $g$, which is the union of $\X_{1}$ and $\X_{2}$ of genus
$i$ and $g-i$ meeting at a unique point $N$.
Let us blow up $\X$ at $N$ and denote by $E$ the exceptional component. Let~$\mathcal{L}$ be a line bundle on
$\bar{\X}$ such that $\mathcal{L}|_{\X_{1}}$ and $\mathcal{L}|_{\X_{2}}$ are theta characteristics on~$\X_{1}$
and $\X_{2}$ respectively, and $\mathcal{L}|_{E}=\Ox[E](1)$.
The degree of $\mathcal{L}$ is $g-1$ on $\bar\X$. The morphism
$\alpha:\mathcal{L}^{2}\to\dualsheave[\bar{X}]$ vanishes on $E$ and is the
isomorphism between $\mathcal{L}_{i}^{2}$ and~$\dualsheave[\X_{i}]$ on $\X_{i}$.
Moreover, the spin structure $\mathcal{L}$ is odd if the parities of $\mathcal{L}|_{\X_{1}}$ and
$\mathcal{L}|_{\X_{2}}$ are distinct, and even otherwise.
\end{ex}
Let $\barspin$ be the {\em moduli space of stable spin curves}. It is a natural compactification which
projects to
$\barmoduli$. Let us recall some important properties of $\barspin$.
\begin{prop}\label{proposition:Cor5.2}(\cite[Proposition~5.2]{MR1082361})
The variety $\barspin$ is normal, projective and is the disjoint union of the even part $\barspin^{+}$ and
the odd part $\barspin^{-}$. Moreover the forgetful map $\pi:\barspin\to\barmoduli$ is a finite map.
\end{prop}
In the rest of this section, we will not precise the morphism $\alpha$ and we will suppose that our spin
structures are square roots of the canonical bundle.
\paragraph{Spin structure associated to limit differentials on curves of compact type.}
In this paragraph we compute the spin structure associated to a limit differential (see
Definition~\ref{definiton:diffLimite}) on a curve of compact type
which has only zeros and poles of even orders. But a limit differential of type $(2l_{1},\cdots,2l_{n})$
on a stable marked curve of compact type is determined, up to
multiplication by constants, by the marked curve (see
Corollary~\ref{corollaire:uniciteLimDiffSurTypeCompacte}). Hence the invariant that we will construct will
only depends on the marked curve, and be well defined for the limit pointed differentials of compact type.
On a smooth curve $\X$, we can associate a spin structure to an Abelian differential
with only even orders of zeros by
\begin{equation} \label{fonction:StrateGeneraleVersSpin}
\varphi:\omoduli[g](2l_{1},\cdots,2l_{n})\to\spin;\quad \left(\X,\omega \right)\mapsto
\left(\X,\mathcal{L}_{\omega}:=\Ox\left(\frac{1}{2}\divisor{\omega}\right)\right).
\end{equation}
We extend this definition to the case of limit differentials on curves of compact type.
\begin{defn}\label{definition:spinStructureSurCourbeTypeCompact}
Let $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ be a limit differential in the closure of the stratum
$\omoduliincp{2l_{1},\cdots,2l_{n}}$. Let $\pi:\bar\X\to\X$ be the blow-up of $\X$ at every node of $\X$. Then
the {\em spin structure $\mathcal{L}_{\omega}$ associated to $\omega$} is defined by the following
restrictions on $\bar\X$.
\begin{itemize}
\item If $E$ is an exceptional component of $\bar\X$, then $\mathcal{L}_{\omega}|_{E}=\Ox[E](1)$.
\item If $\X_{i}$ is an irreducible component of $\X$, then
$\mathcal{L}_{\omega}|_{\X_{i}}=\Ox[\X_{i}]\left(\frac{1}{2}\divisor{\omega}\right)$.
\end{itemize}
\end{defn}
We now verify that the line bundle $\mathcal{L}_{\omega}$ associated to $\omega$ is indeed a spin structure
in the sense of Definition~\ref{definition:spinCurveb}.
\begin{proof}
Let $\X_{i}$ be an irreducible component of $\X$. The line bundle $\mathcal{L}_{\omega}|_{\X_{i}}$ is by
definition a square root
of the canonical bundle of $\X_{i}$. It remains to check that the degree of $\mathcal{L}_{\omega}$ is $g-1$.
We denote by $\nodeSet[e]\subset\nodeSet$ the subset of nodes of $\X$ which have been blown up to give the
decent
curve. At each node $N_{1}\sim N_{2}$, the compatibility
condition~\eqref{equation:conditionDeCompatibiliteGeneral}
$\deg_{N_{1}}(\omega)+\deg_{N_{2}}(\omega)=-2$ implies that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\deg(\mathcal{L}_{\omega}) &= \sum_{\X_{i}\in\Irr(\X)} \deg(\mathcal{L}_{\omega}|_{\X_{i}}) +
\#\nodeSet[e] \\
&= g-1-\#\nodeSet +\# \nodeSet[e].
\end{eqnarray*}
It follows from this equation that $\deg(\mathcal{L}_{\omega})=g-1$ if and only if every node of~$\X$ is blown
up.
\end{proof}
Of course, this notion could be useful only if it behaves well in families. This is the content of the
following lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemme:spinEnFamille}
Let $(f:\famcurv\to\Delta^{\ast},\famomega,\seczero_{1},\cdots,
\seczero_{n})$ be a family of pointed
differentials in $\omoduliincp{2l_{1},\cdots,2l_{n}}$. Let
$(f:\famcurv\to\Delta^{\ast},\mathcal{L}_{\famomega}\to\famcurv)$ be the associated family of theta
characteristics inside $\spin$.
If the stable limit of $\famcurv$ is of compact type, then the spin
structure associated to the pointed limit differentials of this family coincides
with the restriction to the special curve of the completion of $\mathcal{L}_{\famomega}$ inside $\barspin$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $ \left(\famcurv,\famomega,\seczero_{1},\cdots,\seczero_{n})\right)$ be a family inside
$\omoduliincp{2l_{1},\cdots,2l_{n}}^{\epsilon}$, and $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ be its limit
differential.
Above $\Delta^{\ast}$, the associated theta characteristics are given by the bundle
$\Ox[\famcurv](\frac{1}{2}\divisor{\famomega})$. Let us remark that according to
Proposition~\ref{proposition:Cor5.2}, there exists an extension of $\mathcal{L}$ above the decent curve
$\bar\X$ in such
a way that $\mathcal{L}|_{\bar\X}$ is a spin structure on $\bar\X$. By
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:ProlongFibreEnDroite}, there exists only one such extension.
Since the line bundle defined in
Definition~\ref{definition:spinStructureSurCourbeTypeCompact} is such extension, this concludes the proof .
\end{proof}
A direct application of this result, is the fact that the {incidence variety compactifications} of the even
and odd components of $\omoduliincp{2l_{1},\cdots,2l_{n}}$ remain disjunct above the set of curves of
compact type.
\begin{theorem}\label{theoreme:BordDesStratesDansSpin}
Let $n\geq3$ and $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ be a stable differential of compact type in
$\obarmoduliincp{2l_{1},\cdots,2l_{n}}$. Then the parity of the spin structure~$\mathcal{L}_{\omega}$
associated
to $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ is $\epsilon$ if and only if $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ is in
$\obarmoduliincp{2l_{1},\cdots,2l_{n}}^{\epsilon}$.
\end{theorem}
Let us remark that Theorem~\ref{theoreme:BordDesStratesDansSpin} remains true with minor modifications even
for $n\leq 2$ zeros. But the fact that in these cases
the strata contain three connected components complicates the statement.
\begin{proof}
By Corollary~\ref{corollaire:uniciteLimDiffSurTypeCompacte}, we can associated a unique (up to multiplicative
constants) limit differential to $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$. By Lemma~\ref{lemme:spinEnFamille}, this
limit differential has parity $\epsilon$ if and only if it lies in the
closure of $\omoduliincp{2l_{1},\cdots,2l_{n}}^{\epsilon}$
\end{proof}
Let us conclude this paragraph by describing the spin structures associated to the limit differentials
of
the minimal strata above the generic curves of $\delta_{i}$ for~$i\geq1$.
\begin{prop}\label{proposition:BordStratesMinimalDansSpin}
Let $\X:=\X_{1}\cup\X_{2}/N_{1}\sim N_{2}$ be a curve in $\delta_{i}$ and let
$\bar\X:=\X_{1}\cup E\cup\X_{2}$ the blow-up of $\X$ at the node.
The spin structure $\mathcal{L}$ associated to the limit differential $(\X,\omega,Z)$ in the
boundary of the minimal stratum is given by
\begin{equation}\label{equation:LimitSpinMinimalCasZeroLisse}
\mathcal{L}|_{\X_{i}}=\Ox[\X_{i}]((g-1)Z-g_{j}N_{i}),\quad
\mathcal{L}|_{\X_{j}}=\Ox[\X_{j}]((g_{j}-1)N_{j}),\quad
\mathcal{L}|_{E}=\Ox[E](1),
\end{equation}
where $(i,j)=(1,2)$ or $(i,j)=(2,1)$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
The fact that the point $Z$ is not contained in $E$ has been proved in
Corollary~\ref{corollaire:zeroJamaisSurLePontFaible}. So we can suppose that $Z\in\X_{1}$. Then
$\omega$ is a limit differential with a zero of order $2g-2$ at $Z$, if it has a pole of order $2g_{2}$ at
$N_{1}$. But by Theorem~\ref{theoreme:PlomberieCylindriqueSansResidu} the form $\omega$ has a zero of order
$2g_{2}-2$ at
$N_{2}$. The description of the restrictions of $\mathcal{L}$ is now given in
Definition~\ref{definition:spinStructureSurCourbeTypeCompact}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Irreducible Pointed Differentials.}\label{section:InvariantDeArf}
The main purpose of this paragraph is to extend the Arf invariant to the set of irreducible marked
curves(see
Definition~\ref{definition:ArfGen}). This implies that the {incidence variety
compactifications} of the
even and odd connected components of every strata remain disjoint above this locus of curves (see Theorem~\ref{theoreme:InvDeArfGene}).
We first recall some basic facts about the Arf invariant of Abelian differentials. It was first
investigated in \cite{MR588283} (see also \cite{MR2261104}).
Through this paragraph, we will use the following notations. The pair $(\X,\omega)$ denotes an Abelian
differential
or an irreducible stable differential with only meromorphic
nodes. For a smooth simple closed path
$\gamma:\left[0,1 \right]\to \X,$
we denote by
$$G(\gamma):\left[0,1 \right]\to S^{1}$$
the {\em Gauss map} associated to $\gamma$ by the differential $\omega$ and by
$$\ind(\gamma):=\deg(G(\gamma)) \mod 2$$
the {\em index} of $\gamma$.
\begin{defn}
Let $(\X,\omega)$ be an Abelian differential of genus $g$ and let
$\left(a_{1},\cdots,a_{g},b_{1},\cdots,b_{g}\right)$
be a symplectic basis of $H_{1}(\X,\ZZ)$ composed by smooth and simple curves which miss the zeros of
$\omega$. The {\em Arf invariant} of
$(\X,\omega)$ is
\begin{equation}
\Arf(\X,\omega):=\sum_{i=1}^{g}(\ind(a_{i})+1)(\ind(b_{i})+1) \mod 2.
\end{equation}
\end{defn}
Johnson has shown that for every differential in $\omoduli(2l_{1},\cdots,2l_{n})$, the
Arf invariant is independent of the choice of the symplectic basis. Moreover, he
showed that the Arf invariant coincides with the parity of the theta characteristic associated to
the differential $\omega$ (see Equation~\eqref{fonction:StrateGeneraleVersSpin}).
We now generalise the Arf invariant in the case of irreducible pointed stable
differentials. Note that such differentials have only poles of order one at every node.
First we define the set of curves which generalises the symplectic basis.
Let us recall that the normalisation of a nodal curve $\X$ is denoted by $\nu:\tilde{\X}\to\X$ and the
preimages of a node $N_{i}$ by $\nu$ are denoted by $N_{i,1}$ and $N_{i,2}$.
\begin{defn}
Let $\X$ be an irreducible stable curve of genus $g$ with $k$ nodes $N_{1},\cdots,N_{k}$.
An {\em admissible symplectic system of curves} $(a_{1},\cdots,a_{g},b_{1},\cdots,b_{g})$ on $\X$ is
an ordered set of simple smooth curves on $\X$ satisfying the three following properties.
\begin{itemize}
\item[i)] The curves $(\nu^{\ast}a_{k+1},\cdots,\nu^{\ast}a_{g},\nu^{\ast}b_{k+1},\cdots,\nu^{\ast}b_{g})$
form a basis of $H_{1}(\tilde{\X},\ZZ)$.
\item[ii)] For every $i,j\in\left\{1,\cdots,g\right\}$ we have
$$a_{i}\cdot b_{j}=\delta_{ij},\quad a_{i}\cdot a_{j}=0, \text{ and }b_{i}\cdot b_{j}=0.$$
\item[iii)] For $i\leq k$, we have $\nu^{\ast}a_{i}(0)=N_{i,1}$, $\nu^{\ast}a_{i}(1)=N_{i,2}$ and the limits
$$\lim_{t=0}\frac{\partial\nu^{\ast}a_{i}}{\partial t}(t) \text{ and }
\lim_{t=1}\frac{\partial\nu^{\ast}a_{i}}{\partial t}(t)$$ exist.
\end{itemize}
The curve $a_{i}$ is called an {\em admissible path of the node $N_{i}$}.
\end{defn}
Note that an admissible symplectic system of curves on a smooth curve $\X$ is a symplectic basis of
$H_{1}(\X,\ZZ)$.
We now describe the behaviour of the Gauss map of the admissible paths.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemme:AppGaussAuxNoeuds}
Let $(\X,\omega)$ be an irreducible stable differential with only meromorphic nodes, let $N_{0}$ be a node of
$\X$ and
let $\gamma$ be an admissible path for $N_{0}$.
Then, the limits $$\lim_{t\to 0}G(\gamma)(t) \text{ and }\lim_{t\to 1}G(\gamma)(t)$$ exist and coincide with
the
direction of the flat cylinder associated to $N_{0}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since the Gauss map of a smooth path is continuous, there exist limits of $G(\gamma)(t)$ for $t\to 0$ and
$t\to 1$. Since the tangent vector of $\gamma$ has a limit, the path cannot turn around the node
infinitely many times. This implies that the limit for the Gauss map is the direction of the flat cylinder
associated to this node.
\end{proof}
Lemma~\ref{lemme:AppGaussAuxNoeuds} allows us to define the index of the paths intersecting the nodes in an
admissible system of curves.
\begin{defn}\label{definition:ArfGen}
Let $(\X,\omega)$ be an irreducible differential with meromorphic nodes, $N_{0}$ be a node of $\X$ and
$\gamma$
be an admissible path for $N_{0}$.
The {\em index} of $\gamma$ is $$\ind(\gamma):=\deg(G(\gamma)) \mod 2.$$
\end{defn}
We can now extend the notion of Arf invariant.
\begin{defn}\label{definition:extensionInvariantArf}
Let $(\X,\omega)$ be a stable differential such that $\X$ is irreducible and $\omega$ has a simple pole at every node of $\X$.
Let $\left(a_{1},\cdots,a_{g},b_{1},\cdots,b_{g}\right)$ be an admissible symplectic system of curves for $(\X,\omega)$.
The {\em generalised Arf invariant} of $(\X,\omega)$ is
\begin{equation}
\Arf(\X,\omega):=\sum_{i=1}^{g}(\ind(a_{i})+1)(\ind(b_{i})+1) \mod 2.
\end{equation}
\end{defn}
We show that the generalised Arf invariant does not depend on the choice of the
admissible system.
\begin{theorem}\label{theoreme:InvDeArfGene}
Let $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})\in\obarmoduliincp{2d_{1},\cdots,2d_{n}}$ be a stable differential such
that $\X$ is irreducible with $k$ nodes $N_{1},\cdots,N_{k}$.
Then the generalised Arf invariant only depends on $(\X,\omega)$ and $\Arf(\X,\omega)=\epsilon$ if and only if
$(\X,\omega)$ is in the closure of a component of
$\omoduli(2d_{1},\cdots,2d_{n})$ with associated spin structure of parity $\epsilon$.
\end{theorem}
We prove the result by recurrence on the number of nodes. The main tool for the recurrence step is the
Plumbing cylinder construction of Section~\ref{section:PlomberieCylindrique} (see in particular
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:PlomberieCylindriqueSansResidu}).
\begin{proof}
If $\X$ has no nodes, then the generalised Arf invariant of $\X$ coincides with the usual Arf invariant. This
implies the result for a smooth differential.
Let us suppose that Theorem~\ref{theoreme:InvDeArfGene} has been proved in the case of $k-1$
nodes and let $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ be a
differential with $k$ nodes satisfying the hypothesis of Theorem~\ref{theoreme:InvDeArfGene}. Let
$\left(a_{1},\cdots,a_{g},b_{1},\cdots,b_{g}\right)$ be an admissible symplectic system for $(\X,\omega)$.
Let $V$ and $W$ be neighbourhoods of $N_{k,1}$ and $N_{k,2}$ respectively, such that $U:=V\cup W$ and
$\omega|_{U}$ satisfy the
hypothesis of Lemma~\ref{lemme:PlomberieCylindriqueOk}. Without loss of generality, we can suppose that $U\cap
a_{i}=\emptyset$ for all $i\neq k$ and $U\cap b_{j}=\emptyset$ for all~$i\in\lbrace 1,\cdots, g\rbrace$.
Moreover,
let $\theta_{k}$
be the direction of the cylinders associated to~$\omega$ at $N_{k}$. We can suppose that
$G(a_{k})(t)\in\left]\theta_{k}-\frac{\pi}{4},\theta_{k}+\frac{\pi}{4}\right[$ for every $t$ such that
$a_{k}(t)\in
U$. In particular, the path~$a_{k}$ meets only one time the
boundaries of $V$ and $W$.
Since $(\X,\omega,Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{n})$ verifies the hypotheses of Lemma~\ref{lemme:PlomberieCylindriqueOk},
we can smooth this differential. In particular, the set $U$ is replaced by a
flat cylinder~$U'$ and $a_{k}$
by any simple closed smooth curve which coincide with $a_{k}$ outside of~$U'$.
By induction, the generalised Arf invariant is well defined on this curve. In particular, it does not depend
on the chose of $a_{k}$.
Hence it remains to show that the
index of every curve in the new admissible symplectic system coincide with the index of the corresponding
curve in the old admissible system. The indices of every
curve distinct from $a_{k}$ are clearly invariant under the plumbing cylinder construction. It remains to
show that the index of $a_{k}$ and $\tilde{a_{k}}$ coincide. But we can choose $\tilde{a_{k}}$ such that in
$U'$ the Gauss map satisfies $G(\tilde{a_{k}})(t)\in\left]\theta-\frac{\pi}{2},\theta+\frac{\pi}{2}\right[$.
In particular, it is clear that the index of $\tilde{a_{k}}$ coincide with the index of $a_{k}$.
This shows that the generalised Arf invariant is a well defined invariant of~$(\X,\omega)$ and coincide with
the Arf invariant of any partial smoothing of $(\X,\omega)$ at a node. By induction these smoothings are in
the closure of a component of $\omoduli(2d_{1},\cdots,2d_{n})$ with associated theta characteristic of parity
$\epsilon$.
\end{proof}
\section{Kodaira Dimension of Some Strata of $\pomoduli$.}
In this section, we compute the Kodaira dimension of some strata of $\pomoduli$. We show in
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:DimKodairaStraPeutConditions} that the
strata which
`impose few conditions on the differentials' (see the theorem loc. cit. for a
precise definition) have negative Kodaira dimension.
In Theorem~\ref{theoreme:DimensionProjectionStrates}, we compute the dimension of the
projection of every connected component of every stratum of $\omoduli$ to $\moduli$. This result implies that
the strata $\pomoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{g-1})$ different from $\pomoduli^{{\rm even}}(2,\cdots,2)$ are of general
type
when $\moduli$ is of general type (see Theorem~\ref{theoreme:DimKodairaRevetementFini}).
The end of this section is devoted to the computation of the Kodaira dimension of other strata. In
Proposition~\ref{proposition:DimKodaira(g-1,1)}, we show that $\pomoduli(g-1,1,\cdots,1)$ is of general type
when $\moduli$ is of general type. We give the Kodaira dimension of $\pomoduli^{{\rm hyp}}(g-1,g-1)$ in
Proposition~\ref{proposition:dimKodairaHypNeg}.
Moreover, we give the Kodaira dimension of every odd (see Corollary~\ref{corollaire:dimKodairaOddDeux}) and
every even (see Proposition~\ref{proposition:dimKodairaEvenDeux}) component of $\pomoduli(2,\cdots,2)$.
\paragraph{Generalities.}
We first recall the definition of the Kodaira dimension of complex varieties $Y$ following \cite{MR0506253}.
The (complex) dimension of
$Y$ will be denoted by $\dim Y$.
\begin{defn}
Let $Y$ be a smooth irreducible compact complex variety. The {\em Kodaira dimension $\kappa(Y)$ of $Y$} is
\begin{equation}
\kappa(Y) =\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
-\infty, \text{if } H^{0}(Y,mK_{Y})=0 \text{ for all $m\geq0$}\\
\min \left\{n\in\NN\cup\lbrace0\rbrace :\frac{h^{0}(Y,mK_{Y})}{m^{n}} \text{ is bounded} \right\},
\text{ otherwise.}
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
The variety $Y$ is of {\em general type} if $\kappa(Y)=\dim(Y)$.
\end{defn}
Since we will be mainly interested in singular non-compact varieties, we extend the notion of Kodaira
dimension to
singular and non-compact varieties.
If $Y$ is a singular compact complex variety, then its {\em Kodaira dimension $\kappa(Y)$} is the
Kodaira dimension of any non-singular model of $Y$.
If $Y$ is a non-compact complex variety, then its {\em Kodaira dimension $\kappa(Y)$} is the Kodaira
dimension of any non singular model of any compactification of $Y$.
Let us remark that, as the Kodaira dimension is a birational invariant, the two preceding definitions make
sense.
The Kodaira dimension of a given complex variety $Y$ is in general difficult to compute. On the other
hand it is easily proved that $\kappa(Y_{1}\times Y_{2})=\kappa(Y_{1})+\kappa(Y_{2})$. One could hope that a
similar statement holds for more general fibre spaces and for maps $\pi:Y\to Z$ which behave like bundle maps.
This
is what we explain now.
The first important notion is the one of {\em fibre space} of complex varieties. This is a proper and
surjective morphism $\pi:Y\to Z$ of reduced analytic spaces such that the general fibre of $\pi$ is connected.
Moreover, a meromorphic mapping $\varphi:Y\to Z$ is {\em generically surjective} if the projection
$\pi_{\varphi}:G_{\varphi}\to Z$ of the graph of $\varphi$ to $Z$ induced by the projection of $Y\times Z$ to
$Z$ is surjective.
Let us recall, that a fibre space $\pi:Y\to Z$ is {\em uniruled} if a generic fibre $Y_{z}$ of $\pi$ is a
projective line. If a space is uniruled, then its Kodaira dimension is negative.
Let us recall that the Kodaira dimension of a fibre space can not be larger than the Kodaira
dimension of the base plus the Kodaira dimension of a generic fibre (see \cite[Theorem~6.12]{MR0506253}).
\begin{theorem}\label{theoreme:SousAdditiviteKodaria}
Let $\pi:Y\to Z$ be a fibre space of complex varieties. There exists an open dense set $V\subset Z$ such that
for any point $z\in V$ the inequality
\begin{equation}
\kappa(Y) \leq \dim (Z) + \kappa(\pi^{-1}(z))
\end{equation}
holds.
\end{theorem}
In particular, if the Kodaira dimension of a generic fibre or of the basis of a fibre space is
negative, then the total space has negative Kodaira dimension.
A very important open problem is to determine determine the best lower bound in the preceding settings.
\begin{conj}[Iitaka conjecture or $C_{n}$ conjecture.]
Let $\pi: Y\to Z$ be a fibre space of an $n$-dimensional
algebraic manifold $Y$ over an algebraic manifold $Z$. Then we have
\begin{equation}\label{equation:ConjectureIitaka}
\kappa(Y) \geq \kappa (Z) + \kappa(Y_{z}),
\end{equation}
for a generic fibre $Y_{z}:=\pi^{-1}(z)$.
\end{conj}
Even if the conjecture is known to be false in general (see \cite[Remark~15.3]{MR0506253}), it holds in very
important cases. The first one is when $\pi:Y\to Z$ is a generically surjective map of complex varieties of
the same dimension (see \cite[Theorem~6.10]{MR0506253}).
\begin{theorem}\label{theoreme:DimKodairaRevetementFini}
Let $\pi:Y\to Z$ be a generically surjective meromorphic mapping of complex varieties such that $\dim Y =\dim
Z$.
Then we have the inequality
\begin{equation}
\kappa(Y)\geq \kappa (Z).
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
The second important case of this conjecture has been proved by Viehweg. He proved that the
Iitaka conjecture holds as soon as $Z$ is of general type.
\begin{theorem}[\cite{MR641815}]\label{theoreme:KodairaViehweg}
Let $\pi:Y\to Z$ be a generically surjective meromorphic mapping of complex varieties such that $\kappa(Z)
=\dim Z$.
Then we have the inequality
\begin{equation}
\kappa(Y) \geq \kappa (Z) + \kappa(Y_{z}),
\end{equation}
for a generic fibre $Y_{z}:=\pi^{-1}(z)$
\end{theorem}
\paragraph{The strata of $\pomoduli$.}
The rest of this section is devoted to the computation of the Kodaira dimension of several strata of the
moduli
space of Abelian differentials.
Let us first remark that the Kodaira dimension of the principal stratum follows directly from
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:SousAdditiviteKodaria}.
\begin{prop}
The Kodaira dimension of the moduli spaces $\pomoduli$ and the principal strata $\pomoduli(1,\cdots,1)$ is
$-\infty$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Since $\pobarmoduli\to\barmoduli$ is a bundle with fibre ${\mathbb P}^{g-1}$, the result follows from
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:SousAdditiviteKodaria}. Since the closure of the principal stratum is $\pobarmoduli$,
this implies the result for the principal stratum.
\end{proof}
In order to apply the Theorem of Iitaka-Viehweg, we have to determine for which strata the forgetful map
$\pi:\omoduli\to\moduli$ is generically surjective. In fact, we compute the dimension of the image of
every connected
component of the strata of $\omoduli$ via the forgetful map.
This theorem greatly generalises a previous result of Chen (see \cite[Proposition~4.1]{MR2746470}).
\begin{theorem}\label{theoreme:DimensionProjectionStrates}
Let $g\geq2$ and $S$ be a connected component of the stratum $\omoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$. The
dimension $d_{\pi(S)}$ of the
projection of $S$ by the forgetful map $\pi:\omoduli\to\moduli$ is
\begin{equation}\label{equation:DimensionProjectionStrates}
d_{\pi(S)} =
\begin{cases}
2g-1, & \text{if } S=\omoduli(2d,2d)^{{\rm hyp}} \\
3g-4, & \text{if } S=\omoduli(2,\cdots,2)^{{\rm even}} \\
2g-2+n, & \text{if } n< g-1 \text{ and }S\neq\omoduli(2d,2d)^{{\rm hyp}} \\
3g-3, & \text{if } n\geq g-1 \text{ and the parity of $S$ is not even.}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
This theorem is proved by degeneration.
The main ingredients are the plumbing cylinder construction of Section~\ref{section:PlomberieCylindrique}, the
explicit description of the spin structures
on the curves of compact type (see Section~\ref{section:Spin}) and the local parametrisation of $\barmoduli$
given by \cite[Theorem~3.17]{MR2807457}.
Before proving the theorem let us introduce the main type of stable curve that we use in the proof.
\begin{defn}
Let $(\X_{1},N_{1,1})$ and $(\X_{g},N_{g-1,2})$ be $2$ one-marked elliptic curves and let
$(\X_{2},N_{1,2},N_{2,1}),\cdots,(\X_{g-1},N_{g-2,2},N_{g-1,1})$ be $g-2$ two-marked elliptic curves.
The {\em snake curve} $\X$ defined by these elliptic curves (see~Figure~\ref{figure:CourbeSerpent}) is
$$\X := \left(\bigcup_{i=1}^{g} \X_{i}\right)/\left(N_{i,1}\sim N_{i,2}\right).$$
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[>=stealth',shorten >=1pt,auto,node distance=2.8cm]
\foreach \i in {1,3,...,5}
\node(A\i) at (\i-.2,0){};
\foreach \i in {1,3,...,5}
\node[above,right](B\i) at (\i+1.2,1.5){};
\draw(A1) edge node[below]{$\X_{2}$} (B1);
\draw[dotted] (A3) to (B3);
\draw (A5) edge node[right]{$\X_{g}$} (B5);
\foreach \i in {0,2,...,4}
\node(C\i) at (\i-.2,1.5){};
\foreach \i in {0,2,...,4}
\node[below,right](D\i) at (\i+1.2,0){};
\draw (C0) edge node[above]{$\X_{1}$} (D0);
\draw (C2) edge node[above]{$\X_{3}$} (D2);
\draw (C4) edge node[right]{$\X_{g-1}$} (D4);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The snake curve $\X$.}
\label{figure:CourbeSerpent}
\end{figure}
\end{defn}
\begin{proof} We begin the proof by treating the case of the hyperelliptic strata $\hyperell$.
\paragraph{The hyperelliptic strata.}
The hyperelliptic locus $\hyperell\subset\moduli$ of genus $g$ has dimension $2g-1$. Since the projections
of each of the hyperelliptic strata $\omoduli(2g-2)^{{\rm hyp}}$ and
$\omoduli(2d,2d)^{{\rm hyp}}$ to $\moduli$ are $\hyperell$, they have dimension $2g-1$.
\paragraph{}
From now on, $S$ will be a an non
hyperelliptic connected component of the stratum $\omoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$.
\paragraph{The strata $\omoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$ with $n\geq g$.}
Let us remark that if $n\geq g$, then the stratum $S':=\omoduli(k_{1}+k_{n},\cdots,k_{n-1})$
lies in the boundary of $S$. So if the dimension of the projection of $S$ is $d$, the dimension of the
projection of $S'$ is at least $d$. This implies that it suffices to prove the theorem for the strata with at
most $g-1$ zeros.
From now on, we suppose that $n\leq g-1$.
\paragraph{The connected strata $\omoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$.}
Let $\X$ be the snake curve from above where the points
$N_{i-1,2}$ are points of $2(g-i)$-torsion of $(\X_{i},N_{i,1})$.
Let $\omega$ be the differential on $\X$
defined by the following restrictions.
\begin{itemize}
\item For $i=1$, let $\omega|_{\X_{1}}$ be a differential on $\X_{1}$ with a pole of order $k_{1}$ at
$N_{1,1}$ and
a zero
$Z_{1}$ of order $k_{1}$.
\item For $i\in\left\{ 2,\cdots,n\right\}$, let $\omega|_{\X_{i}}$ be a differential such that the divisor is
$$\divisor{\omega_{i}}=k_{i}Z_{i}+\left(\sum_{j<i}k_{j}-2(i-1)\right)N_{i-1,2} -\left(\sum_{j\leq
i}k_{j}-2(i-1)\right)N_{i,1},$$
where $Z_{i}\in\X_{i}\setminus\left\{N_{i-1,2},N_{i,1}\right\}$.
\item For $i\in\left\{ n+1,\cdots,g-1\right\}$, the differential $\omega|_{\X_{i}}$ is the differential with
divisor
$$\divisor{\omega_{i}}=2(g-i)N_{i-1,2} -2(g-i)N_{i,1}.$$
\item For $i=g$, the differential $\omega_{g}$ is simply the holomorphic differential of $\X_{g}$.
\end{itemize}
Let us remark that the differentials $\omega|_{\X_{i}}$ exist and satisfy the Compatibility
Condition~\eqref{equation:conditionDeCompatibiliteGeneral}, that is
$\ord_{N_{i,1}}(\omega|_{\X_{i}})=\ord_{N_{i,2}}(\omega|_{\X_{i+1}})=-2$ for every node~$N_{i,1}\sim
N_{i,2}$.
Moreover, the differentials $\omega_{i}$ have no residues, so according
to Theorem~\ref{theoreme:PlomberieCylindriqueSansResidu}, they form a limit differential $\omega$
which can be smoothed in the stratum $\omoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$.
We now construct a neighbourhood of $\X$ of dimension $2g-2+n$ such that every curve in
this neighbourhood possesses a limit differential of type $(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$.
Let us first give a parametrisation of a small neighbourhood $U$ of $\X$ in $\barmoduli$ (see
\cite[Theorem~3.17]{MR2807457}). Let $(t_{1},\cdots,t_{3g-3})\in\Delta^{3g-3}$ be a
parametrisation of $U$
such that the coordinates of $\X$ are $(0,\cdots,0)$ and satisfying the following properties.
\begin{itemize}
\item The first $g$ variables $t_{1},\cdots,t_{g}$ parametrise the deformations of the elliptic curves
$(\X_{1},N_{1,1}),\cdots,(\X_{g},N_{g,1})$.
\item The $g-2$ variables $t_{g+1},\cdots,t_{2g-2}$ parametrise the deformations of the nodes
$N_{1},\cdots,N_{g-1}$. Alternatively, they parametrise the deformations of $(\X_{i},N_{i-1,2},N_{i,1})$
which leave the curve $\X_{i}$ fixed.
\item The $g-1$ last parameters $t_{2g-1},\cdots,t_{3g-3}$ parametrise the smoothings of the nodes of $\X$.
\end{itemize}
Observe that the existence of a limit differential as previously defined does not depend on the normalisation
of the elliptic curves. Therefore, we can deform the differential $\omega$ above the curves of parameter
equal to $(t_{1},\cdots,t_{g},0,\cdots,0)$ in such a way that it remains a limit differential of type
$(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$.
Now let us remark that for $i\in
\left\{n+1,\cdots,g-1\right\}$, the points
$N_{i-1,2}$ have to be points of $2(g-i)$-torsion of $(\X_{i},N_{i,1})$. On the other hand, the
points~$N_{i,2}$ and $N_{i+1,1}$ can move freely on $\X_{i}$ for $i\in
\left\{1,\cdots,n\right\}$.
Hence, using the second characterisation
of the
deformations of the nodes, this means that only the deformations of the $n-1$ first nodes of $\X$ are allowed.
It follows from Theorem~\ref{theoreme:PlomberieCylindriqueSansResidu}, that the smoothings
of the nodes at the limit differential $(\X',\omega')$ of parameter $(t_{1},\cdots,t_{g+n-1},0,\cdots,0)$
is a differential in $S$.
Summarising this discussion, we have shown, that every curve with coordinates
$(t_{1},\cdots,t_{g+n-1},0,\cdots,0,t_{2g-1},\cdots,t_{3g-3})\subset\Delta^{3g-3}$ has a limit differential
in the closure of $S$. Since this neighbourhood of $\X$ has dimension $2g-2+n$, this proves
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:DimensionProjectionStrates} in the case of connected strata.
\paragraph{The non-connected strata.}
Next, we deal with the non-connected strata of $\omoduli$ determined in \cite{MR2000471}. The problem of the
last
argument is that we do not know a priori in the
boundary of which connected component is the limit differential $(\X,\omega)$ that we have constructed.
Recall from Definition~\ref{definition:spinStructureSurCourbeTypeCompact} that on a curve of compact type
$\X$, a spin structure is
determined by its restrictions on every irreducible component of $\X$. More precisely, if $\omega$ is a limit
differential on $\X$ with only zeros and poles of even orders, then the
theta characteristic on an irreducible component $\X_{i}$ of $\X$ is $\Ox[\X_{i}]\left(
\frac{1}{2}\divisor{\omega|_{\X_{i}}}\right)$. Moreover, we have shown in
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:BordDesStratesDansSpin} that the parity of a spin
structure is given by the sum of the parities of these restrictions and is invariant under deformation.
\paragraph{The components of the strata $\omoduli(2,\cdots,2)$.}
We first prove that the dimension of the image of $\omoduli^{{\rm odd}}(2,\cdots,2)$ under the forgetful map is
$3g-3$. The construction of the differential on the snake curve in the case of connected strata can be
performed in the case of the strata $\omoduli(2,\cdots,2)$. Hence it suffices to
show that this differential has odd parity to prove this case. On the $g-1$ first curves
$\X_{1},\cdots,\X_{g-1}$, the theta characteristics are given by the line bundles
$\Ox[\X_{i}](Z_{i}-N_{i,1})$. In particular,
they have even parity. On the other hand, the theta characteristic on the curve $\X_{g}$ is $\Ox[\X_{g}]$,
which has odd parity. Since the parity of $\omega$ is given by the sum of the parities, it has odd parity.
We now deal with the case of the component $\omoduli^{{\rm even}}(2,\cdots,2)$.
Let us remark that the dimension of the projection of this component is at most
$3g-4$. Indeed, let
$(\X,\omega)\in\omoduli^{{\rm even}}(2,\cdots,2)$. Then clearly, $\omega\in H^{0}(\X,\frac{1}{2}\divisor{\omega})$.
This implies that $h^{0}(\X,\frac{1}{2}\divisor{\omega})\geq 2$. The locus of curves having such theta
characteristic is a divisor of $\moduli$ according to \cite{MR937985}. So it remains to show that
$\dim(\pi(\omoduli^{{\rm even}}(2,\cdots,2)))\geq 3g-4$. We prove this by induction on the genus of the curve.
In genus $3$, the even stratum $\omoduli[3]^{{\rm even}}(2,2)$ coincides with the hyperelliptic stratum
$\omoduli[3]^{{\rm hyp}}(2,2)$. So the claim follows from the description of the hyperelliptic strata.
Let us do the induction step.
Let $\tilde\X$ be generic curve in the image of $\omoduli[g-1]^{{\rm even}}(2,\cdots,2)$ under the forgetful map.
Let
$\tilde{N}\in\tilde{\X}$ be a generic point of $\tilde{\X}$. Let
$(\X_{1},N_{1})$ be an elliptic curve. We define the genus $g$ curve $\X$ by
$$\X:=(\tilde{\X}\cup\X_{1})/(\tilde{N}\sim N_{1}).$$
We now construct a limit differential $(\X,\omega)$ in the closure of the connected component
$\omoduli^{{\rm even}}(2,\cdots,2)$. Let $(\tilde\X,\tilde\omega)$ be a differential in the connected
component $\omoduli[g-1]^{{\rm even}}(2,\cdots,2)$. Let $\omega_{1}$ be a meromorphic differential on $\X_{1}$
which has a pole of order $2$ at
$N_{1}$ and a zero of order two. The differential $\omega$ is given by the differential $\tilde\omega$ on
$\tilde\X$ and the differential $\omega_{1}$ on $\X_{1}$. Since $\tilde{N}$ is a general point, it is not a
zero of $\tilde\omega$. This implies that $\omega$ verifies the compatibility
condition~\eqref{equation:conditionDeCompatibiliteGeneral}. Hence $\omega$ is a limit differential in
the closure of the connected component $\omoduli^{{\rm even}}(2,\cdots,2)$.
The end of the proof is similar to the case of connected strata. We can parametrise a neighbourhood of
$\X$ by $(t_{1},\cdots,t_{3g-3})\in\Delta^{3g-3}$ such that the locus of nodal curves is given by
$t_{3g-3}=0$. Only the deformations of $\X_{g-1}$ which
stay inside the projection of $\omoduli[g-1]^{{\rm even}}(2,\cdots,2)$ are allowed. The dimension of such
deformations is $3(g-1)-1$ by the induction hypothesis.
To conclude, we use
a similar deformation-smoothing argument as in the case of connected strata. We can deform the point of
attachment on $\X_{g-1}$, the elliptic curve~$(\X_{1},N_{1})$ and the node. Thus we deduce by induction, that
the dimension of
the projection of the component $\omoduli^{{\rm even}}(2,\cdots,2)$ is $3g-4$.
\paragraph{The components of the strata $\omoduli(2l_{1},\cdots,2l_{n})$ for $2\leq n\leq g-2$ and
$(2l_{1},2l_{2})\neq
(g-1,g-1)$.}
Observe that these strata have only two connected components
which are determined by the parity of the associated theta characteristics.
Let $\X$ be the snake curve defined in the case of connected strata. We show that we can choose a limit
differential in two ways, such that one is in the boundary of the odd component and the other in the even
component of $\omoduli(2l_{1},\cdots,2l_{n})$. Choose a limit differential $\omega$ on $\X$, and
denote by $\omega_{1}$ its restriction on
$\X_{1}$. The divisor of the differential $\omega_{1}$ is $\divisor{\omega_{1}}=2l_{1}Z_{1}-2l_{1}N_{1,1}$. So
the associated theta characteristic is $\mathcal{L}_{\omega_{1}}:=\Ox[\X_{1}](l_{1}Z_{1}-l_{1}N_{1,1})$.
There are two cases to consider: the first one is when $l_{1}=2$ and the second one when $l_{1}\geq3$. If
$l_{1}=2$, the
theta characteristic $\mathcal{L}_{\omega_{1}}$ is odd if $Z_{1}$ is a $2$-torsion of $(\X_{1},N_{1,1})$ and
even
if $Z_{1}$ is a primitive $4$-torsion of $(\X_{1},N_{1,1})$.
If $l_{i}\geq 3$, the
theta characteristic $\mathcal{L}_{\omega_{1}}$ is even if $Z_{1}$ is a $2$-torsion of $(\X_{1},N_{1,1})$ and
odd if $Z_{1}$ is a primitive $l_{1}$-torsion of $(\X_{1},N_{1,1})$.
The parity of $\omega$ is the sum of the parities of the restrictions $\omega|_{\X_{i}}$ on every
irreducible curve $\X_{i}$ of $\X$. This implies that fixing $\omega$ on the $g-1$ components~$\X_{i}$ for
$i\geq 2$, we can define a differential $\omega$ in the boundary of both components of
$\omoduli(2l_{1},\cdots,2l_{n})$ by changing the parity of $\omega_{1}$.
The deformation-smoothing argument of the connected strata now implies the claim.
\paragraph{The non-hyperelliptic components of $\omoduli(g-1,g-1)$.}
Since we have already dealt with the hyperelliptic case, it remains the case of the other connected
component if $g$ is even or the two other components if $g$ is odd.
Let $(\X_{g-1},\omega_{g-1},Z_{g-1},N_{g-1})$ be a generic pointed differential in the stratum
$\omoduli[g-1](g-1,g-3)$ and $(\X_{1},\omega_{1},Z_{1},N_{1})$ be an elliptic curve with a
differential~$\omega_{1}$ such that $\divisor{\omega_{1}}=(g-1)Z_{1}-(g-1)N_{1}$. Then the pointed
differential
$(\X,\omega,Z_{1},Z_{g-1})$ is a limit differential on the boundary of $\omoduli(g-1,g-1)$.
Let us remark that the curve $\X_{g-1}$ is not hyperelliptic, because the
dimension of the projection of $\omoduli[g-1](g-1,g-3)=2(g-1)$ is strictly larger
than the dimension of the hyperelliptic locus $\hyperell[g-1]$. In particular, the limit differential
$(\X,\omega,Z_{1},Z_{g-1})$ is not in the
boundary of the hyperelliptic component of these strata.
Moreover, if $g-1$ is
even, then this pointed differential is either in the boundary of the even or in the boundary of the odd
strata according to the parity
of $\omega_{g-1}$.
The conclusion of this case uses the same deformation-smoothing argument as previously in this proof.
\paragraph{The non-hyperelliptic minimal strata.}
The zero of a differential $(\X,\omega)$ in the strata $\omoduli(2g-2)$ is Weierstrass point. Since
there exists only finitely many Weierstrass points on a curve, the projection from every component
of $\pomoduli(2g-2)$ to $\moduli$ is finite. It is known that the dimension of $\pomoduli(2g-2)$ is $2g-2$,
so the dimension of its projection has dimension $2g-2$ too.
This concludes the proof of Theorem~\ref{theoreme:DimensionProjectionStrates}.
\end{proof}
As a corollary of Theorem~\ref{theoreme:DimensionProjectionStrates} we obtain the Kodaira dimension of all the
strata $\omoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{g-1})$ different from $\pomoduli^{{\rm even}}(2,\cdots,2)$ when $\moduli$ is of
general type.
\begin{cor}\label{corollaire:dimKodairaStratesProjFini}
The strata of the form $\pomoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{g-1})$ different from $\pomoduli^{{\rm even}}(2,\cdots,2)$ are
of general type for $g=22$ and $g\geq 24$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
It has been proved that $\moduli$ is of general type for $g\geq 24$ by Harris and Mumford and for $g=22$ by
Farkas. According to Theorem~\ref{theoreme:DimensionProjectionStrates} and
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:DimKodairaRevetementFini} we have
$$\kappa(\moduli)\leq\kappa(\pomoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{g-1}))\leq\dim \pomoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{g-1}) .$$
Since the left and the right term of this inequality are equal to $3g-3$, the inequalities are equalities and
the corollary follows.
\end{proof}
Using the subadditivity of the Kodaira dimension (see Theorem~\ref{theoreme:SousAdditiviteKodaria}), we can
determine the Kodaira dimension of the strata which impose few conditions on the differential.
\begin{theorem}\label{theoreme:DimKodairaStraPeutConditions}
For any $g\geq2$, let $(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$ be a tuple of positive numbers of the form
$(k_{1},\cdots,k_{l},1,\cdots,1)$ with $k_{i}\geq 2$ for $i\leq l$ such that
$$\sum_{i=1}^{n}k_{i}=2g-2 \text{ and } \sum_{i=1}^{l}k_{i}\leq g-2.$$
Then the Kodaira dimension of the stratum $\pomoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$ is $-\infty$.
\end{theorem}
The proof make an essential use of the following space.
\begin{defn}\label{definition:incidenceAnulation}
Let $\X$ be a curve of genus $g$ and $i=(i_{1},\cdots,i_{l})\in\NN^{l}$ be a $l$-tuple of positive
numbers. The {\em vanishing incidence of order $i$ of $\X$} is
$$I_{i}(\X):=\left\{((Q_{1},\cdots,Q_{l}),\omega)\in\X^{l}\times{\mathbb P}
H^{0}(\X,\holoneform):\ord_{Q_{j}}(\omega)\geq i_{j}
\right\}.$$
\end{defn}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{theoreme:DimKodairaStraPeutConditions}.]
Let $\X$ be a generic curve of genus $g$. We show that the fibre $\pi^{-1}(\X)$ over $\X$ by the
forgetful map $\pi:\pomoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})\to\moduli$ is connected and has Kodaira dimension $-\infty$.
The theorem follows readily from
this fact combined with Theorem~\ref{theoreme:SousAdditiviteKodaria}.
Recall that by hypothesis the $n$-tuple $(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})=(k_{1},\cdots,k_{l},1,\cdots,1)$, with
$k_{i}\geq2$ for $i\leq l$.
Let us denote $k:=(k_{1},\cdots,k_{l})$ and let $r:=\sum_{i=1}^{l}k_{i}$ be the sum of these
orders.
We show that the vanishing incidence of order $k$ is an algebraic fibre space with generic fibre
${\mathbb P}^{g-r}$. Indeed, it follows from Riemann-Roch that for any $l$-tuple of points
$(Z_{1},\cdots,Z_{l})\in\X^{l}$,
the vector space $$H^{0}\left(\X,\holoneform\left(-\sum_{i=1}^{l}(k_{i}Z_{i})\right)\right)$$ is of dimension
at least $g-r$.
Since $\X$ is generic, the space corresponding to differentials having order exactly $k_{i}$ at $Z_{i}$ and
one otherwise is an open subset of this space. This implies the claim that the vanishing incidence variety
of order~$k$ is an algebraic fibre space with generic fibre isomorphic to ${\mathbb P}^{g-r-1}$.
Now, the second projection of the vanishing incidence variety of order $k$ to~${\mathbb P}^{g-1}$ is clearly
surjective on the
closure of $\pi^{-1}(\X)$ inside $\pobarmoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$. Moreover, this map does not factorise
through the first projection. This implies that the generic fibre of
$\pi:\pomoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})\to\moduli$ is uniruled. Therefore, its Kodaira dimension is $-\infty$.
\end{proof}
\paragraph{Some other strata.}
We determine the Kodaira dimension of some other strata. Let us remark that if $\moduli$ is of general type
and $n\geq g$, it
suffices to determine the Kodaira dimension of a generic fibre of the map from the stratum
$S:=\pomoduli(k_{1},\cdots,k_{n})$ to $\moduli$ in order to compute the Kodaira dimension of~$S$. However,
this seems to be a quite subtle problem in general.
\paragraph{The strata $\pomoduli(g-1,1,\cdots,1)$, when $\moduli$ is of general type.}
According to
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:DimensionProjectionStrates}, the generic fibres of the forgetful map
$$\pi:\pomoduli(g-1,1,\cdots,1)\to\moduli$$ are curves. Let us determine these curves.
\begin{lemma}
Let $\X$ be a generic curve of genus $g\geq 3$. If $g\geq 4$, the closure of the fibre at $\X$ by $\pi$ is a
curve isomorphic to $\X$.
If $g=3$, then the closure of the fibre at $\X$ by $\pi$ is a singular curve such that $\X$ is its stable
model.
\end{lemma}
The proof uses the vanishing incidence of order $g-1$ of $\X$ that we introduce in
Definition~\ref{definition:incidenceAnulation}. Let us recall that we denote the set of Weierstrass points of
an algebraic curve $\X$ by ${\mathcal{W}\mathcal{P}}(\X)$.
\begin{proof}
Let $\X$ be a generic curve in $\moduli$. The preimage of $\X$ by the forgetful map
$\pi:\pomoduli(g-1,1,\cdots,1)\to\moduli$ is
isomorphic to an open subset of the image of the projection of $I_{g-1}(\X\setminus{\mathcal{W}\mathcal{P}}(\X))$ into
${\mathbb P}^{g-1}$. The closure of this locus is isomorphic to
the projection in ${\mathbb P}^{g-1}$ of the closure of $I_{g-1}(\X\setminus{\mathcal{W}\mathcal{P}}(\X))$.
Let $\X$ be a generic curve of genus $3$. Then the fibre of the forgetful map
$\pi:\pomoduli[3](2,1,1)\to\moduli[3]$ above $\X$ is isomorphic to an open subset $U$ of $\X$. The closure of
$U$ has $24$ cusps (at the Weierstrass points of $\X$) and
$28$ nodes (at the double tangents of order $(2,2)$).
Let $\X$ be a generic curve of genus $g\geq 4$. The fibre of the forgetful map
$\pi:\pomoduli(g-1,1,\cdots,1)\to\moduli$ at $\X$ is an open subset $U$ of $\X$. The points of $\X\setminus U$
is the union of the Weierstrass points of $\X$
together with the points~$Q\in\X$ such that there exist $\omega\in H^{0}(\X,K_{\X})$ and $R\in\X$ such that
$$\divisor{\omega}\geq (g-1)Q + 2R.$$ The closure of $U$ in ${\mathbb P}^{g-1}$ is also a curve birationally
equivalent
to $\X$.
\end{proof}
It follows that the generic fibres of the forgetful map $\pi$ are of
general type. Therefore, Theorem~\ref{theoreme:KodairaViehweg} implies that $\pomoduli(g-1,1,\cdots,1)$ is
of
general type when $\moduli$ is of general type:
\begin{prop}\label{proposition:DimKodaira(g-1,1)}
The strata $\pomoduli(g-1,1,\cdots,1)$ are of general type for $g\geq 24$ or $g=22$.
\end{prop}
\paragraph{The hyperelliptic strata $\pomoduli(g-1,g-1)$.}
We show that the hyperelliptic components of the strata $\pomoduli(g-1,g-1)$ are uniruled.
\begin{prop} \label{proposition:dimKodairaHypNeg}
The connected component $\pomoduli^{{\rm hyp}}(2d,2d)$ is uniruled for every genus $g\geq 2$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
The fibre of the morphism $\pomoduli^{{\rm hyp}}(2d,2d)\to\hyperell$ is a projective line without $2g+2$ points
(corresponding to the Weierstrass points). So the closure of the generic fibre is a projective line. The
Kodaira dimension of the component $\pomoduli^{{\rm hyp}}(2d,2d)$ follows from
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:SousAdditiviteKodaria}.
\end{proof}
\paragraph{The even connected component of $\pomoduli(2,\cdots,2)$.}
\begin{prop} \label{proposition:dimKodairaEvenDeux}
The connected component $\pomoduli^{{\rm even}}(2,\cdots,2)$ is uniruled for every genus $g\geq 2$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let $X$ be a generic curve in the projection of $\pomoduli^{{\rm even}}(2,\cdots,2)$ and $\omega$ an even
differential on $\X$. By definition, we have $h^{0}(\X,\frac{1}{2}\divisor{\omega})=2$. In particular, the
fibre of $\pomoduli^{{\rm even}}(2,\cdots,2)\to\moduli$ at $\X$ is a projective line. This proves the proposition.
\end{proof}
\paragraph{The odd connected component of $\pomoduli(2,\cdots,2)$.}
We show that the strata $\pomoduli^{{\rm odd}}(2,\cdots,2)$ are birationally equivalent to the moduli space of odd
spin structures $\spin^{-}$. This allows
us to deduce the Kodaira dimensions of these strata using the work of Farkas and Verra \cite{MR2984107}.
\begin{prop}\label{proposition:isoOdd}
There exists a birational morphism
\begin{align*}
\varphi:
\pomoduli^{{\rm odd}}(2,\cdots ,2)&\to\spin^{-}\\
(\X,\omega)&\mapsto\left(\X,\Ox\left(\frac{1}{2}\divisor{\omega}\right)\right).
\end{align*}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
It is clear that the map $\varphi$ is well defined.
To prove the proposition, we construct a birational inverse for $\varphi$.
Let $\X$ be a curve in $\moduli$ such that the preimage of the forgetful map $\pi:\pomoduli^{{\rm odd}}(2,\cdots
,2)\to\moduli$ is finite, and has no differential in the connected components
$\omoduli^{{\rm odd}}(2l_{1},\cdots,2l_{n})$ for $n\leq g-2$ or in any even component
$\omoduli^{{\rm even}}(2l_{1},\cdots,2l_{n})$. Moreover, we suppose that every theta characteristic $\mathcal{L}$
on $\X$ satisfies $h^{0}(\X,\mathcal{L})=1$. According to Theorem~\ref{theoreme:DimensionProjectionStrates},
this set is an open dense set inside $\moduli$. Hence it suffices to give an inverse to $\varphi$ above this
set
of curves.
Let $(\X,\mathcal{L})$ be an odd theta characteristic on $\X$. It suffices to show
that there exists a unique $(g-1)$-tuple $(Q_{1},\cdots,Q_{g-1})$ such that
$$ 2\sum_{i=1}^{g-1} Q_{i}\sim K_{\X} \text{, and } \mathcal{L}\sim\Ox\left(\sum_{i=1}^{g-1} Q_{i}\right).$$
The inverse of $\varphi$ would then be
given by
$$\varphi^{-1}(\X,\mathcal{L})=(\X,\omega),$$
where $\omega$ is the differential with divisor $\divisor{\omega}=\sum 2Q_{i}$. Indeed, by hypothesis on $\X$,
the differential $\omega$ is not in a connected component of the form
$\omoduli^{{\rm even}}(2l_{1},\cdots,2l_{n})$ or $\omoduli^{{\rm odd}}(2l_{1},\cdots,2l_{n})$ for $n\leq g-2$. Thus the
differential $\omega$ is in the stratum $\omoduli^{{\rm odd}}(2,\cdots,2)$.
Let us remark that since by definition $h^{0}(\X,\mathcal{L})\geq 1$, the line bundle $\mathcal{L}$ is
effective.
Moreover, every effective line bundle of degree $g-1$ on $\X$ can be represented by $\Ox\left(\sum
Q_{i}\right)$ for $Q_{i}\in\X$. Since by definition
$\mathcal{L}^{\otimes 2}= \Ox(K_{\X})$
the divisor $2\left(\sum Q_{i}\right)$ is linearly equivalent to $K_{\X}$.
To conclude the proof, it suffices to show that this $(g-1)$-tuple is unique up to permutation.
Let $(R_{1},\cdots,R_{g-1})\in\X^{g-1}$ such that $2\left(\sum R_{i}\right)\sim K_{\X}$ and
$\mathcal{L}=\Ox\left(\sum R_{i}\right)$.
Since $\mathcal{L}=\Ox(\sum Q_{i})=\Ox(\sum R_{i})$, the line bundle $\Ox(\sum Q_{i}-\sum R_{i})$ is the
trivial bundle $\Ox$.
Applying the Theorem of Riemann-Roch to this line bundle gives:
$$h^{0}\left(\sum Q_{i}-\sum R_{i}\right)-h^{0}\left(K_{\X}-\sum Q_{i}+\sum R_{i}\right)=1-g.$$
Now it follows from the linear equivalence $2\left(\sum Q_{i}\right)\sim K_{\X}$ that
$$1-h^{0}\left(\sum Q_{i} + \sum R_{i}\right)=1-g.$$
More explicitly, we have the equation
$$h^{0}\left(\sum Q_{i} + \sum R_{i}\right)=g.$$
In particular, $\Ox(\sum Q_{i} + \sum R_{i})$ is a $\grd{g-1}{2g-2}$ on $\X$, so is the canonical line bundle
of $\X$. But since $\Ox\left(K_{\X}-\sum Q_{i}\right)$ is a theta characteristic, the dimension of its space
of section is by hypothesis
$$h^{0}\left(K_{\X}-\sum Q_{i}\right)=1.$$
In particular, any differential which vanishes at the $Q_{i}$ is proportional to $\omega$. In
particular, the points $R_{1},\cdots,R_{g-1}$ coincide with the points $Q_{1},\cdots,Q_{g-1}$.
\end{proof}
Therefore, we can deduce the Kodaira dimension of these connected components from the work of Farkas and
Verra
(see \cite{MR2984107}).
\begin{cor}\label{corollaire:dimKodairaOddDeux}
The stratum $\pomoduli(2,\cdots,2)^{{\rm odd}}$ is uniruled if $g\leq 11$ and is of general type for $g\geq 12$.
\end{cor}
\section{Hyperelliptic Minimal Strata ${\mathbb P}\obarmoduliinc[g,1]{2g-2}^{{\rm hyp}}$.}
\label{section:hyperelliptique}
The main result of this section is Theorem~\ref{theoreme:isoEntreHypEtWeier}, where we relate the
{incidence variety compactification}
${\mathbb P}\obarmoduliinc[g,1]{2g-2}^{{\rm hyp}}$ of the
hyperelliptic minimal strata with the locus $\overline{{\mathcal{W}\mathcal{P}}(\hyperell)}$ of Weierstrass points of
hyperelliptic
curves. We show that the fibres of the forgetful map
$\pi:{\mathbb P}\obarmoduliinc[g,1]{2g-2}^{{\rm hyp}}\to\overline{{\mathcal{W}\mathcal{P}}(\hyperell)}$ are projective spaces.
For sake of concreteness, we describe the hyperelliptic curves with one node in
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:locusHyperell} and the closure of the locus of Weierstrass points of hyperelliptic
curves in $\barmoduli[g,1]$ in Theorem~\ref{theoreme:limitDesPtsDeWeiCasHyp}.
Moreover, we describe the pointed differential in
the {incidence variety compactification} of the hyperelliptic minimal strata in the most simple cases in
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:bordHypAvec2Courbes} and Theorem~\ref{theoreme:bordHypCasIrr}.
\paragraph{Admissible covers.}
The key tool to study hyperelliptic curves is the theory of admissible covers. Let us quickly recall its
definition and relationship with hyperelliptic curves. For more details see \cite[Section~3.G]{MR1631825}.
\begin{defn}
Let $(B;Q_{1},\cdots,Q_{n})$ be a stable $n$-pointed curve of arithmetic genus zero and $N_{1},\cdots,N_{k}$
the nodes
of the curve $B$. An {\em admissible cover of the curve $B$} is a nodal curve $\X$ and a regular map
$\pi:\X\to B$ such that the following two conditions hold.
\begin{itemize}
\item[i)] The preimage of the smooth locus of $B$ is the smooth locus of $\X$ and the restriction of the map
$\pi$ to this open set is simply branched over the points~$Q_{i}$ and otherwise unramified.
\item[ii)] The preimage of the singular locus of $B$ is the singular locus of $\X$ and for every node $N$ of
$B$ and every node $\tilde N$ of $\X$ lying over it, the two branches of $\X$ near $\tilde N$ map to the
branches of $B$ near $N$ with the same ramification index.
\end{itemize}
\end{defn}
This notion is particularly adapted to describe the closure of the loci of $k$-gonal curves inside
$\barmoduli$.
\begin{defn}
Let $\X$ be a stable curve. We say that $\X$ is $k$-gonal if and only if it is a limit of smooth $k$-gonal
curves.
\end{defn}
The following theorem allows us to characterise the $k$-gonal curves (see \cite[Theorem~3.160]{MR1631825}).
\begin{theorem}\label{theoreme:limitDeCourbekGonale}
A stable curve $\X$ is $k$-gonal if and only if
there exists a $k$-sheeted admissible cover $\X'\to B$ of a stable pointed curve of genus $0$ which is stably
equivalent to $\X$.
\end{theorem}
In particular, since the smooth hyperelliptic curves are exactly the smooth $2$-gonal curves, the stable
hyperelliptic curves will by given by the $2$-sheeted admissible covers.
\paragraph{The hyperelliptic locus $\barhyperell$ in $\barmoduli$.}
A hyperelliptic curve with one node is described in the
following theorem.
\begin{theorem}\label{theoreme:locusHyperell}
Let $\X\in\barhyperell$ be a hyperelliptic curve of genus $g$ with one node.
\begin{itemize}
\item If $\X$ is irreducible, the normalisation $\tilde\X$ of $\X$ is hyperelliptic and
the preimage of the node is a pair of points conjugated by the hyperelliptic involution.
\item If $\X$ is of compact type, the curve $\X$ is given by $\X_{1}\cup\X_{2}/(N_{1}\sim N_{2})$, where
the $\X_{j}$
are
hyperelliptic and $N_{j}$ are Weierstrass points of $\X_{j}$ respectively.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
Let us recall that the {\em Weierstrass locus} inside $\moduli[g,1]$ is defined by $${\mathcal{W}\mathcal{P}}(\moduli):=\left\{
(\X,W)|\ W \text{ is a Weierstrass point of $\X$} \right\}.$$
The {\em hyperelliptic Weierstrass locus} is simply the restriction of this locus above the hyperelliptic
locus of $\moduli$:
\begin{equation*}
{\mathcal{W}\mathcal{P}}(\hyperell):=\left\{ (\X,W)\in{\mathcal{W}\mathcal{P}}(\moduli)|\ \X \text{ is hyperelliptic} \right\}.
\end{equation*}
We describe now the marked curves in the closure of ${\mathcal{W}\mathcal{P}}(\hyperell)$ which are generic in $\delta_{i}$.
\begin{theorem}\label{theoreme:limitDesPtsDeWeiCasHyp}
Let $(\X,W)\in\overline{{\mathcal{W}\mathcal{P}}(\hyperell)}\subset\barmoduli[g,1]$ be a marked curve in the closure of the
hyperelliptic Weierstrass locus, such that $\X$ is stably equivalent to a generic curve in $\delta_{i}$.
The pair $(\X,W)$ is of one of the following form.
\begin{itemize}
\item The curve $\X$ is stably equivalent to a curve in $\delta_{0}$. Then $X$ is either irreducible and
$W$
is in
${\mathcal{W}\mathcal{P}}(\X)$, or $\X$ is the blow-up at the node of an irreducible curve and
$W$ is in the exceptional component.
\item The curve $\X$ is generic in the divisor $\delta_{1}$ and the point $W$ is one of the $2g-1$
smooth Weierstrass points of the curve of genus $g-1$ (or
a $2$-torsion point if $g=2$) or a $2$-torsion point of the elliptic curve.
\item The curve $\X$ is generic in the divisor $\delta_{i}$ for $i\geq 2$ and the points $W$ are smooth
Weierstrass points of the irreducible components of $\X$.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
These two theorems are consequences of the theory of admissible covers and in particular, we will use
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:limitDeCourbekGonale} in a crucial way.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{theoreme:locusHyperell} and
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:limitDesPtsDeWeiCasHyp}.] Let us first suppose that $1\leq i\leq
\left[\frac{g}{2}\right]$ and let $\X$ be a hyperelliptic curve in $\delta_{i}$ as given in the theorem. By
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:limitDeCourbekGonale}, the curve $\X$ is stably equivalent to
an admissible cover $\pi:\X'\to B$ of degree two above a stable marked curve of
genus zero $(B;x_{1},\cdots,x_{2g+2})$. Let $B_{0}$ be an irreducible
component of $B$ which meets only one other component and denote $\X_{0}:=\pi^{-1}(B_{0})$.
Remark that there exists such a $B_{0}$ since $B$ is of compact type.
Since $(B;x_{1},\cdots,x_{2g+2})$ is a stable marked curve, at least two marked points lie on $B_{0}$.
Moreover the cardinality of the preimage
of the node is one because otherwise $\X$ would have a nonseparating node.
Let us call this point~$N_{0}$. It is a ramification point of the map to $B_{0}$, so
by Riemann-Hurwitz the curve~$\X_{0}$ has genus at least $1$. And since $\X$ is generic in $\delta_{i}$, the
component~$\X_{0}$ has genus $i$ or $g-i$. We will suppose that $\X_{0}$ has genus $i$. Then the curve~$B_{0}$
has $2i+1$ marked points and the preimages of these points together with $N_{0}$ are the
Weierstrass points of $\X_{0}$. Now there is at least one other extremal component and the same argument show
that it has genus $g-i$. This concludes the proof of both theorems in the case $1\leq i\leq
\left[\frac{g}{2}\right]$.
The case $i=0$ is similar. Let $\pi:\X'\to B$ be an admissible cover of degree two stably equivalent to $\X$.
This time, for every irreducible component $B_{0}$ of $B$ which meets one other component of $B$, the
preimage of the node contains two distinct points.
As in the previous case, the curve $B$ has only two components: one of them contains two
marked points
and
the other the $2g$ reminding ones. The curve $\X$ is obtained from $\X'$ by blowing down the preimage of the
projective line which contains only two marked points. The restriction of the projection to this second
component implies that the
two
preimages of the node are conjugated by the hyperelliptic involution.
Since the Weierstrass points are the ramification points of the map to ${\mathbb P}^{1}$,
their limits are the ramification points of the smooth locus of the admissible cover.
\end{proof}
Let us conclude this paragraph by describing the ramification locus of the forgetful map
$\pi:{\mathcal{W}\mathcal{P}}(\barhyperell)\to\barhyperell$ from the hyperelliptic Weierstrass locus to the hyperelliptic locus.
This is a direct application of Theorem~\ref{theoreme:limitDesPtsDeWeiCasHyp}.
\begin{cor}\label{corollaire:RamWeiLocusHyperell}
The map $\pi:{\mathcal{W}\mathcal{P}}(\barhyperell)\to\barhyperell$ is unramified above the generic locus of the divisors
$\delta_{i}$ for $i\geq1$. On the other hand, above an irreducible curve~$\X$ with $k$
nodes there are $2g-2-2k$ unramified points and $k$ ramification points of order two.
\end{cor}
\paragraph{The relationship between the hyperelliptic Weierstrass locus and the hyperelliptic minimal
strata.}
We now describe the {incidence variety compactification}
of the hyperelliptic minimal
strata. We will describe precisely its relationship with the hyperelliptic Weierstrass locus. Before, let
us recall that
two irreducible components $\X_{1}$ and $\X_{2}$
of $\X$ are {\em polarly related} by a differential~$\omega$ if $\X_{1}=\X_{2}$ or~$\omega$ has simple
poles at the nodes between $\X_{1}$ and $\X_{2}$ (see
Definition~\ref{definition:composentesPolairesConnectees}).
\begin{theorem}\label{theoreme:isoEntreHypEtWeier}
Let $(\X,Z)\in\overline{{\mathcal{W}\mathcal{P}}(\hyperell)}\subset\barmoduli[g,1]$ be a pair consisting of a hyperelliptic curve
$\X$ together with a Weierstrass point $Z$.
Then there exists a stable differential $\omega$ on $\X$, such that for every pointed stable differential
$(\X,\omega',Z)$ in ${\mathbb P}\obarmoduliinc[g,1]{2g-2}^{{\rm hyp}}$ we have the following two properties.
\begin{itemize}
\item If $\omega\equiv 0$ on an irreducible component $\X_{i}$, then $\omega'\equiv 0$ on $\X_{i}$.
\item There exists
$(\alpha_{1},\cdots,\alpha_{r})\in{\mathbb P}^{r-1}$ such that
$$\omega|_{\tilde{\X_{i}}}=\alpha_{i}\omega'|_{\tilde{\X_{i}}},$$
where $\left\{ \tilde{\X_{i}} \right\}_{i=1,\cdots,r}$ is the set of polarly related
components of the differential $(\X,\omega)$ such that $\omega|_{\tilde\X_{i}}\not\equiv 0$.
\end{itemize}
In particular, the fibres of the forgetful map
\begin{align*}
\pi:{\mathbb P}\obarmoduliinc[g,1]{2g-2}^{{\rm hyp}} &\to \overline{{\mathcal{W}\mathcal{P}}(\hyperell)}\\
(\X,\omega,Z)&\mapsto\left(\X,Z \right).
\end{align*}
are isomorphic to ${\mathbb P}^{r-1}$.
\end{theorem}
The proof is similar to the one of corollary~\ref{corollaire:uniciteLimDiffSurTypeCompacte}, where we show a
related result for curves of compact type. In fact, since hyperelliptic curves are covers of degree two above
a curve of compact type, many ideas will work in this case.
\begin{proof}
Let $(\X,Z)$ be a hyperelliptic curve together with a Weierstrass point of~$\X$. There exists a family
$(\famcurv,\seczero)$ of hyperelliptic curves with a Weierstrass section which converges to $(\X,\omega)$.
Let
$\famomega$ be a family of differentials on $\famcurv$ such that $\famomega(t)$ has a zero of order $2g-2$ at
$\seczero(t)$. It turns out that the limit differential of this family only depends on $(\X,Z)$ as we show in
the following.
According to
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:limitDeCourbekGonale}, there exists a semi stable curve $\bar\X$ stably equivalent to
$\X$ such that $\pi:\bar\X\to B$ is an admissible cover of degree two. Moreover, the point $Z$ is a
ramification point of the map $\pi$.
We will now define a differential on $\bar\X$ unique up to scaling on the components of $\bar\X$ such that by
contracting the exceptional components we can associate a limit differential on
$\X$.
Since $B$ is of compact type, the set of irreducible components of $B$ which meet one other component is not
empty. Let us denote this set of irreducible components by $\Irr_{1}(B)$. The irreducible
components of $\bar\X$ which map to $\Irr_{1}(B)$ are denoted by $\Irr_{1}(\bar\X)$. By definition, the
irreducible components in $\Irr_{1}(\bar\X)$ have at most two nodes. If a component has one node, then it is a
Weierstrass point of this component.
Otherwise, the two nodes are conjugated by the hyperelliptic involution.
Let $\X_{1}$ be an irreducible component of genus $g_{1}$ in $\Irr_{1}(\X)$. If $\X_{1}$ is an exceptional
component, then we associate the differential with two simple poles at the nodes and which is holomorphic
outside of the nodes. If $\X_{1}$ is not an exceptional component, there is a unique way (up to scaling) to
associate a
differential which can be the
restriction of a limit differential according to these four cases.
\begin{itemize}
\item[i)] If $\X_{1}$ contains the point $Z$ and has a unique node. Then the differential on~$\X_{1}$ is
the differential with a zero of order $2g-2$ at $Z$ and a pole of order $2(g-g_{1})$ at the node.
\item[ii)] If $\X_{1}$ contains the point $Z$ and has two nodes. Then the differential on~$\X_{1}$ is the
differential with a zero of order $2g-2$ at $Z$ and two
poles of order $(g-g_{1})$ at both nodes.
\item[iii)] If $\X_{1}$ does not contain the point $Z$ and has a unique node. Then the differential on
$\X_{1}$ is the differential with a zero of order $2g_{1}-2$ at the node.
\item[iv)] If $\X_{1}$ does not contain the point $Z$ and has two nodes. Then the differential on $\X_{1}$ is
the
differential with two zeros of order $g_{1}-1$ at both nodes.
\end{itemize}
Indeed, the only zeros and poles of the differentials are contained in the marked locus. Moreover, the fact
that the differential is anti-invariant under the hyperelliptic involution implies that the orders of the
differentials
have to coincide at a pair of points conjugated by the hyperelliptic involution.
Now we can continue this process in the following way. We remove to the dual graph $\Gamma_{B}$ of $B$ the
vertices corresponding to $\Irr_{1}(B)$ and the edges pointing to them. This new graph is denoted by
$\Gamma_{B}^{1}$. Either $\Gamma_{B}^{1}$ is empty and we have achieved the construction of the differential.
Or
$\Gamma_{B}^{1}$ is a non empty
tree. In this case the set of irreducible components $\Irr_{2}(B)$ of $B$ corresponding to the leafs
of~$\Gamma_{B}^{1}$ is not empty. The irreducible components of $\bar\X$ mapping to the components of
$\Irr_{2}(B)$ are denoted by $\Irr_{2}(\bar\X)$.
The
description
of the differential on these components is similar to the previous one. To be more precise, because of the
compatibility condition \eqref{equation:conditionDeCompatibiliteGeneral}, the sum of the degrees of the
differentials at the nodes
with the components
of $\Irr_{1}(\bar\X)$ is $-2$. The only other zeros or poles allowed on an irreducible component are at the
marked
points and the orders have to be invariant by the hyperelliptic involution.
We continue this process and eventually obtain a differential on the curve $\bar\X$.
Then we can associate a differential $\tilde\omega$ on $(\X,Z)$ by contracting the exceptional components of
$(\bar\X,Z)$.
Let us remark that at every pair of points conjugated by the hyperelliptic involution, the
residues of $\tilde\omega$ at these points are opposite. This has two consequences. The first one is that
nodes
corresponding to loops on the dual graph of $\X$ satisfy the residue condition.
The second consequence is that we can multiply the restrictions on the irreducible components of the form
$\tilde\omega$ by
constants in such a way that the residue condition is satisfied at every node.
Hence we obtain a unique differential up to
multiplicative constants on
each polarly related component of $(\X,\tilde\omega,Z)$.
To conclude, we obtained a stable differential $\omega$ by imposing $$\omega|_{\tilde\X_{i}}=0$$ when
$\tilde\omega|_{\tilde\X_{i}}$ has a meromorphic node of degree greater or equal to $2$ in the polarly
component $\tilde\X_{i}$ of $(\X,\tilde\omega)$, and otherwise $$\omega|_{\X_{i}}=\tilde\omega|_{\X_{i}}.$$
By an argument similar to the one in Proposition~\ref{proposition:relationPlumStable}, we can deduce that
there exists a family in $\omoduliinc[g,1]{2g-2}^{{\rm hyp}}$ which has $(\X,\omega,Z)$ as stable limit.
Moreover, every other stable differential on $(\X,Z)$ in the closure of the
connected component $\omoduliinc[g,1]{2g-2}^{{\rm hyp}}$
differs only by multiplicative constants on the polarly related components of $(\X,\omega)$.
\end{proof}
For sake of concreteness, let us describe explicitly the stable differentials inside
$\obarmoduliinc[g,1]{2g-2} ol^{{\rm hyp}}$ when the curve
has at most two irreducible components. First we look at
differentials such that the underlying curve is
in $\delta_{i}$ for~$i\geq 1$.
\begin{theorem}\label{theoreme:bordHypAvec2Courbes}
Let $(\X,\omega,Z)$ be a stable differential in ${\mathbb P}\obarmoduliinc[g,1]{2g-2}^{{\rm hyp}}$ such that
$\X:=\X_{1}\cup\X_{2}/(N_{1}\sim N_{2})$ is in the divisor $\delta_{i}$. We suppose without
lose of generality that $Z\in \X_{1}$.
Then $(\X,\omega,Z)$ is characterised by the following three properties.
\begin{itemize}
\item[i)] The curves $\X_{j}$ are hyperelliptic and the points $N_{1}$ and $N_{2}$ are Weierstrass points of
$\X_{1}$ and $\X_{2}$ respectively.
\item[ii)] The point $Z$ is a Weierstrass point of $\X_{1}$.
\item[iii)] The differential $\omega$ is identically zero on the component of $\X$ that contains~$Z$
and is the holomorphic differential with a zero of order $2g_{2}-2$ at~$N_{2}$ on the component $\X_{2}$.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
Now we look at differentials such that the underlying curve is stably equivalent to a curve in $\delta_{0}$.
\begin{theorem}\label{theoreme:bordHypCasIrr}
Let $\X$ be either an irreducible curve or an irreducible curve blown up at a node.
Then $(\X,\omega,Z)$ is in the {incidence variety compactification} of the connected component
$\pomoduli[g,1]^{{\rm hyp}}(2g-2)$ if
and only if it is of one of the following two forms.
\begin{itemize}
\item The point $Z$ is in the smooth locus of the irreducible curve $\X$ and the
differential $\omega$ is a section of $\dualsheave$ which vanishes at $Z$ with order $2g+2$.
\item The point $Z$ is in the exceptional divisor coming from the blow-up of a
node $N_{1}\sim N_{2}$, and the differential $\omega$ is the stable differential with a zero of
order $g-2$ at both $N_{1}$ and $N_{2}$.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
We omit the proofs of both theorems. They are relatively similar to the proof of
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:isoEntreHypEtWeier}, and the reader can look at the proofs of the main theorems of
Section~\ref{section:omoduli3,4,odd} for similar computations.
\section{The Boundary of ${\mathbb P}\obarmoduliinc[3,1]{4}^{{\rm odd}}$.}\label{section:omoduli3,4,odd}
In this section, we give a precise description of the geometry of the pointed differentials which lie in the
boundary of the {incidence variety compactification} of $\pomoduli[3,1]^{{\rm odd}}(4)$. Since this description
depends in an essential way on the dual graph of the underlying curve, we will restrict ourself to the
most simple cases.
We define a {\em generic curve in the divisor $\delta_{i}$} to be a curve
in the divisor $\delta_{i}$ with a single node.
For a generic curve in $\delta_{1}$, the description of the limit differentials in the boundary of
$\pomoduli[3,1]^{{\rm odd}}(4)$ is given in Theorem~\ref{theoreme:linEqOfLimit} and the stable differentials in
Corollary~\ref{corollaire:stabDiffgTroisRed}. This description implies (see
Corollary~\ref{corollaire:compactGenreTroisDeltaZero}) that the
{incidence variety compactification} of the connected component $\pomoduli[3,1]^{{\rm odd}}(4)$ is better than
the Deligne-Mumford
compactification $\obarmoduli[3](4)$.
For a curve stably equivalent to a generic curve in $\delta_{0}$, the description of the limit differentials
in the boundary of
$\pomoduli[3,1]^{{\rm odd}}(4)$ is given in Theorem~\ref{theoreme:bordZeroOrdre4Irr} and
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:bordZeroOrdre4Irrbis} and the stable differentials in Theorem~\ref{theoreme:bordZeroOrdre4Irr} and in
Corollary~\ref{corollaire:stabDiffgTroisIrr}. In the first theorem we investigate the case where the
underlying curve is stable, and in the second only semi stable.
To conclude, we give two examples of families in $\obarmoduliinc[3,1]{4}$. In the first example, the
underlying
curve is given by a quartic in the projective plane. In the second, we deform the polygonal representation of
differentials belonging to~$\obarmoduli[3](4)$.
\subsection{The underlying curve is generic in $\delta_{1}$.}
In order to describe the limit differential of $\pomoduli[3,1]^{{\rm odd}}(4)$, let us introduce the following
definition.
\begin{defn}
Let $(\X,Q)$ be an elliptic curve, $k\geq 2$ be an integer and $l$ be a non-trivial divisor of $k$. The
points
of $\X\setminus Q$ which are $k$-torsion but not $l$-torsion of $(\X,Q)$ are {\em primitive $k$-torsion} of
$(\X,Q)$.
\end{defn}
Moreover, let us give the definition of what we mean with a {\em generic curve in a divisor}.
\begin{defn} Let $\delta_{i}$ be a divisor of $\barmoduli$.
A {\em generic curve in $\delta_{i}$} is a curve in the divisor $\delta_{i}$ with a single
node.
\end{defn}
In this section $\X$ will denote a generic curve in $\delta_{1}$ and will be given by the union of a curve
$\X_{1}$ of genus one and a curve $\X_{2}$ of genus two
meeting together at $N_{1}\in\X_{1}$ and $N_{2}\in\X_{2}$.
We now give a precise description of the limit differentials in the boundary of the connected component
$\omoduliinc[3,1]{4}^{{\rm odd}}$ such
that the projection to $\moduli[3]$ is a generic curve of the divisor~$\delta_{1}$.
\begin{theorem}\label{theoreme:linEqOfLimit}
Let $(\X,\omega,Z)$ be a limit differential at the boundary of the odd component of the stratum
$\omoduli[3,1](4)$.
If the curve $\X$
is stably-equivalent to a generic curve
in the divisor $\delta_{1}$, then the curve $\X$ is a generic curve in $\delta_{1}$ and $(\X,\omega,Z)$ is of
one of the following two forms.
\begin{itemize}
\item The point $Z$ is a primitive $4$-torsion point of $(\X_{1},N_{1})$ and the point of attachment
$N_{2}\in\X_{2}$ is a Weierstrass point of $\X_{2}$.
The restriction of $\omega$ to $\X_{1}$ is the meromorphic
differential with a zero of order $4$ at $Z$ and a pole of order $4$ at $N_{1}$. The restriction of $\omega$
to $\X_{2}$ is the Abelian differential with a zero of order $2$ at $N_{2}$.
\item
The point $Z$ is not a Weierstrass
point of
$\X_{2}$ and the pair $(Z,N_{2})$ satisfies the relation
\begin{equation}\label{equation:LimitDesZerosGenre3}
4Z-2N_{2}\sim K_{\X_{2}}.
\end{equation}
The restriction of $\omega$ to $\X_{1}$ is an Abelian differential. The restriction of $\omega$
to $\X_{2}$ is the meromorphic differential with a zero of order $4$ at $Z$ and a pole of order $2$ at
$N_{2}$.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
The main tools of the proof consist of the theory of limits differentials and the spin structure on stable
curves.
\begin{proof}
Since $\X$ is stably-equivalent to a generic curve in $\delta_{1}$, the marked curve $(\X,Z)$ must be of one
of the following three forms, where the genus of $\X_{i}$ is $i$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[>=stealth',shorten >=1pt,auto,node distance=2.8cm]
\node(E1) at (-6,.2){$\X_{1}$};
\node(E2) at (-5.2,1.8){};
\node(F1) at (-4.8,1.8){};
\node(F2) at (-4,.2){$\X_{2}$};
\draw(E1) edge node[left]{} (F1);
\draw(E2) edge node[right]{} (F2);
\node[right](Z2) at (-4.6,1){$Z$}; \fill (-4.6,1) circle (1pt);
\node(C1) at (-3,.2){$\X_{1}$};
\node(C2) at (-2.2,1.8){};
\node(D1) at (-1.8,1.8){};
\node(D2) at (-1,.2){$\X_{2}$};
\draw(C1) edge node[left]{} (D1);
\draw(C2) edge node[right]{} (D2);
\node[left](Z1) at (-2.4,1){$Z$}; \fill (-2.4,1) circle (1pt);
\node(A1) at (0,.2){$\X_{1}$};
\node(A2) at (.5,1.5){};
\node(A3) at (2,1.8){};
\node(B1) at (1,1.8){};
\node[right](B2) at (2.4,1.5){${\mathbb P}^{1}$};
\node(B3) at (3,.2){$\X_{2}$};
\draw(A1) edge node[left]{} (B1);
\draw(A2) edge (B2);
\draw(A3) edge node[right]{} (B3);
\node[below](Z) at (1.5,1.5){$Z$}; \fill (1.5,1.5) circle (1pt);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{figure}
The third case does not occur according to
Corollary~\ref{corollaire:zeroJamaisSurLePontFaible}.
Let us remark that since $\omega|_{\X_{i}}$ has at most one pole, this pole cannot have a residue. Therefore,
the
limit differentials on the curve $\X$ are characterised in
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:PlomberieCylindriqueSansResidu}. In the case at hand, observe that the only relevant
condition of Theorem~\ref{theoreme:PlomberieCylindriqueSansResidu} is the Compatibility
Condition~\eqref{equation:conditionDeCompatibiliteGeneral}
$$\ord_{N_{1}}(\omega)+ \ord_{N_{2}}(\omega) =-2,$$
at the node of $\X$.
Let us now treat the case where $Z\in\X_{1}$. Since $Z$ is a limit differential in the boundary of
$\omoduliinc[3,1]{4}$ the restriction of $\omega$ to $\X_{1}$ has a zero of order $4$ at $Z$ and a pole
of the same order at $N_{1}$. It follows from the Compatibility
Condition~\eqref{equation:conditionDeCompatibiliteGeneral} that
the order of $\omega|_{\X_{2}}$ at $N_{2}$ is
$2$. Thus $N_{2}$ is a Weierstrass point of $\X_{2}$.
It remains to show that $Z$ is a primitive $4$-torsion point of $(\X_{1},N_{1})$. By the continuity of the
parity of the spin structure (see Theorem~\ref{theoreme:BordDesStratesDansSpin}) the parity of the spin
structure associated to $\omega$ has to be odd. But since the parity of~$\omega|_{\X_{2}}$ is odd, the parity
of $\omega|_{\X_{1}}$ has to be even. This concludes the first case by
observing that for a $4$-torsion $Z$, we have $h^{0}(\X_{1},\Ox[\X_{1}](2Z-2N_{1}))=0$ if $Z$ is primitive
and $h^{0}(\X_{1},\Ox[\X_{1}](2Z-2N_{1}))=1$ otherwise.
The case where $Z\in\X_{2}$ is very similar, hence we do not write every detail. Since $\omega$ has
a zero of order $4$ at $Z$, it has to have a pole of order
$2$ at $N_{2}$. Therefore the points $Z$ and $N_{2}$ satisfy Equation~\eqref{equation:LimitDesZerosGenre3}.
Let us now show that the
point $Z$ cannot be a Weierstrass point. First let us remark that in this case, the point $N_{2}$ would be a
Weierstrass point too. Indeed Equation~\eqref{equation:LimitDesZerosGenre3} would be equivalent to
$$2Z\sim 2N_{2} \sim K_{\X_{2}},$$
which clearly implies that $N_{2}$ is a Weierstrass point.
Now the claim follows again from the continuity of the spin structure.
Since in this case the restriction of $\omega$ to $\X_{1}$ is odd, the restriction $\omega|_{\X_{2}}$ has to
be even. Since the associated theta characteristic is $\Ox[\X_{2}](2Z-N_{2})$, it would have exactly one
section if $Z$ (and therefore $N_{2}$) were a Weierstrass point, contradicting
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:BordDesStratesDansSpin}.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
An interesting fact is that there are only a finite number of points in $\X_{1}$ which are in the closure of
the zero of
order $4$ of $\omoduliinc[3,1]{4}$. This has to be compared with \cite[Theorem~5.45]{MR1631825}
which tells us that when $N_{2}$ is a Weierstrass
point, then every point of $\X_{1}$ is in the closure
of the Weierstrass locus.
\end{rem}
We can characterise the pointed differentials in this case from Theorem~\ref{theoreme:linEqOfLimit}
and
Proposition~\ref{proposition:relationPlumStable}.
\begin{cor}\label{corollaire:stabDiffgTroisRed}
Let $(\X,\omega,Z)$ be a stable pointed differential in $\obarmoduliinc[3,1]{4}^{{\rm odd}}$.
If the curve $\X$
is stably-equivalent to a generic curve
in the divisor $\delta_{1}$, then~$\X$ is a stable curve in $\delta_{1}$ and $(\X,\omega,Z)$ is of one of the
following two forms.
\begin{itemize}
\item
The point $Z$ is a primitive $4$-torsion point of $(\X_{1},N_{1})$ and $N_{2}$ is a Weierstrass point of
$\X_{2}$.
The restriction of $\omega$ to $\X_{1}$ vanishes identically. The restriction of $\omega$
to~$\X_{2}$ is the Abelian differential with a zero of order $2$ at $N_{2}$.
\item
The point $Z$ is not a Weierstrass
point of
$\X_{2}$ and the pair $(Z,N_{2})$ satisfies the relation
$ 4Z-2N_{2}\sim K_{\X_{2}}$.
The restriction of $\omega$ to $\X_{1}$ is an holomorphic differential. The restriction of $\omega$
to $\X_{2}$ vanishes identically.
\end{itemize}
\end{cor}
These properties illustrate that the {incidence variety compactification} of the connected component
$\omoduli[3]^{{\rm odd}}(4)$ is
better than its
Deligne-Mumford compactification.
\begin{cor}\label{corollaire:compactGenreTroisDeltaZero}
Let $\X$ be a generic curve in $\delta_{1}$ such that the nodal point of the curve of genus two is a
Weierstrass point. Let $(\X,\omega)$ be a differential in $\obarmoduli[3](4)$ where $\omega$ is of one of the
following two kinds.
\begin{itemize}
\item[i)] The restriction of $\omega$ is identically zero on $\X_{1}$ and is a holomorphic
differential with a zero of order two at $N_{2}$ on $\X_{2}$.
\item[ii)] The restriction of $\omega$ is identically zero on $\X_{2}$ and is
holomorphic on $\X_{1}$.
\end{itemize}
Then the stable differential $(\X,\omega)$ lies in the boundary of
both connected components of the minimal strata in $\obarmoduli[3]$.
However, the closure of the two connected components of $\obarmoduliinc[3,1]{4}$ are disjoint over the generic
locus of
$\delta_{1}$.
\end{cor}
This corollary follows readily from Theorem~\ref{theoreme:linEqOfLimit} and the description of the boundary of
the closure of the hyperelliptic minimal strata as given in Theorem~\ref{theoreme:isoEntreHypEtWeier}.
\subsection{The underlying curve is generic in $\delta_{0}$.}
In this section we denote a generic curve in $\delta_{0}$ by $\tilde\X/(N_{1}\sim N_{2})$, where $\tilde\X$
is a smooth curve of genus and $N_{1}$, $N_{2}$ are distinct points of $\tilde\X$.
The following two theorems give the description of the limit differentials which lie in the {incidence
variety compactification} ${\mathbb P}\obarmoduliinc[3,1]{4}^{{\rm odd}}$ such
that the underlying curve is generic in $\delta_{0}$.
First we give the case
where the zero of the differential lies in the smooth part. Observe that in this case the limit differentials
in the closure of $\omoduliinc[3,1]{4}^{{\rm odd}}$ coincide with the stable differentials in
$\obarmoduliinc[3,1]{4}^{{\rm odd}}$.
In the following theorem, we denote by $\X$ the
curve $\tilde\X/(N_{1}\sim N_{2})$.
\begin{theorem}\label{theoreme:bordZeroOrdre4Irr}
Let $Z$ be anon Weierstrass point of $\tilde\X$. There exists a unique pair of distinct points
$(N_{1},N_{2})\in\tilde{\X}^{2}$ and a unique differential $\omega\in
H^{0}(\X,\dualsheave)$ with a zero of order $4$ at $Z$ and a simple pole at $N_{1}$ and $N_{2}$ such that the
triple $(\X,\omega,Z)$ is in ${\mathbb P}\obarmoduliinc[3,1]{4}^{{\rm odd}}$.
The set of triples $$C:=\left\{(N_{1},N_{2},Z): (\X,Z)\in\pi\left(\obarmoduliinc[3,1]{4}^{{\rm odd}}\right)\right\}$$
is a curve in $\tilde\X^{3}$.
Moreover,
for a given pair among the three points $N_{1}$, $N_{2}$ and~$Z$ from the curve $C$, there
exists exactly one point of
$\tilde\X$ such that the triple lies in $C$.
\end{theorem}
Now we describe the case where the zero of the differential lies on a bridge joining the two points of the
node.
\begin{theorem}\label{theoreme:bordZeroOrdre4Irrbis}
Let $(\X,\omega,Z)$ be a limit differential at the boundary of the stratum $\omoduli[3,1]^{{\rm odd}}(4)$ such that $\X$ is the
union of a smooth curve $\tilde\X$ of genus two and a projective line ${\mathbb P}^{1}$ which meet at two distinct
points
$N_{1}$ and $N_{2}$.
Then the point $Z$ is in the projective line ${\mathbb P}^{1}$, and $(\X,\omega,Z)$ is of one of the following two
forms.
\begin{itemize}
\item
The restriction of $\omega$ on ${\mathbb P}^{1}$
has a zero of order~$4$ at $Z$, a pole of order~$4$ at $N_{1}$ and a pole of order $2$ at $N_{2}$. The
restriction of $\omega$ to $\tilde\X$ is an
holomorphic differential with a zero of order two at $N_{1}$. In particular, $N_{1}$ is a Weierstrass point
of $\tilde\X$.
\item The restriction of $\omega$ on
${\mathbb P}^{1}$ has a zero of order $4$ at $Z$ and two poles of order $3$ at $N_{1}$ and $N_{2}$. The restriction
of $\omega$ to $\tilde\X$ is a
holomorphic differential with two simple zeros at $N_{1}$ and $N_{2}$. In particular, $N_{1}$ and $N_{2}$ are
conjugated by the hyperelliptic involution of $\tilde\X$.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
We can easily deduce the form of the pointed differentials in this case from
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:bordZeroOrdre4Irrbis} and
Proposition~\ref{proposition:relationPlumStable}.
\begin{cor}\label{corollaire:stabDiffgTroisIrr}
Let $(\X,\omega,Z)$ be a stable differential in $\obarmoduliinc[3,1]{4}^{{\rm odd}}$ such that the curve $\X$ is
the
union of a smooth curve $\tilde\X$ of genus two and a projective line~${\mathbb P}^{1}$ which meet at two distinct
points
$N_{1}$ and $N_{2}$.
Then the point $Z$ is in the projective line ${\mathbb P}^{1}$. The restriction of $\omega$ on ${\mathbb P}^{1}$ vanishes
everywhere.
Either $N_{1}$ is a Weierstrass point of $\tilde\X$ and the restriction of $\omega$ to $\tilde\X$ is an
holomorphic differential with a zero of order two at $N_{1}$
or the points $N_{1}$ and $N_{2}$ are conjugated by the hyperelliptic involution of $\tilde\X$ and the
restriction of $\omega$ to $\tilde\X$ is a
holomorphic differential with two simple zeros at $N_{1}$ and $N_{2}$.
\end{cor}
The proofs of Theorem~\ref{theoreme:bordZeroOrdre4Irr} and
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:bordZeroOrdre4Irrbis} are relatively similar. In particular, the main steps will be the
following. The first one is to determine all the possible candidates as triples at the boundary. Then we show
that we can smooth them using the plumbing
cylinder construction of Section~\ref{section:PlomberieCylindrique}. The last step consists of
determining the
cases such that the
smoothing occurs in the odd component and the ones where the smoothing occurs in the hyperelliptic one.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{theoreme:bordZeroOrdre4Irr}]
Let $(\X,Z)$ be an irreducible marked curve of genus two. Then the pointed differentials $(\X,\omega,Z)$ which could
appear in the boundary of the stratum ${\mathbb P}\obarmoduliinc[3,1]{4}$ are stable differentials $\omega$ with a
zero
of order $4$
at $Z$ and poles at the nodes of $\X$.
Let us now suppose that $Z$ is not a Weierstrass point of $\tilde\X$.
We want to show that there exists a pair $(N_{1},N_{2})$ on
$\tilde\X$ such that $h^{0}(K_{\tilde\X}+N_{1}+N_{2}-4Z)=1$ and moreover that this pair is unique.
Since $Z$ is not a Weierstrass point of~$\tilde\X$, the divisor $4Z-K_{\tilde\X}$ is not canonical. Indeed,
this
would be equivalent to the fact that
$2(Z-\iota Z)$ is principal, where $\iota$ is the hyperelliptic involution. But this would give the existence
of a
function with a pole of order two at $Z$,
contradicting the fact that $Z$ is not a Weierstrass point. Now
let us consider the locus $E$ inside~$\tilde\X^{(2)}$ consisting of pairs $(Q,\iota Q)$. Then the
Jacobian $\Jac[\tilde\X]$ of $\tilde\X$
is the quotient $\tilde\X^{(2)}/E$. And since $4Z-K_{\tilde\X}$ is not canonical, this implies that for
each point $Z\notin{\mathcal{W}\mathcal{P}}$ there is a unique pair $(N_{1},N_{2})$ such that
$$\Ox[\tilde\X](K_{\tilde\X}+N_{1}+N_{2}-4Z)=\Ox[\tilde\X].$$
It remains to show that the projection of the set of triples $(N_{1},N_{2},Z)$ to the first coordinate is
finite. Since $\tilde\X$ is a curve, it is enough to
show that there are no pairs $(Q_{1},Q_{2})\in\tilde{\X}$ such that for an open set of $Q\in\tilde\X$ the
equality $K_{\tilde\X}+Q_{1}+Q_{2}-4Q\sim 0$ holds. But this is clearly the case, because the map of
$\tilde\X\to\Jac[\tilde\X]$ is nondegenerate and the pairs are never conjugated by the hyperelliptic
involution.
Now using the plumbing cylinder construction of Theorem~\ref{theoreme:PlomberieCylindriqueSansResidu}, we can
smooth every of these differentials, preserving the zero of order four.
Moreover, the curves that we obtain are clearly not hyperelliptic since the special fibre is not hyperelliptic.
Suppose now that $Z$ is a Weierstrass point of $\tilde\X$.
We have to show that every smoothing of such a curve which preserves the zero of order $4$ is hyperelliptic.
An
analogous using the Riemann-Roch Theorem implies that the points~$N_{1}$ and~$N_{2}$ are conjugated by the
hyperelliptic involution. But then the continuity of the parity of the generalised Arf invariant proved in
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:InvDeArfGene} concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
We now prove Theorem~\ref{theoreme:bordZeroOrdre4Irrbis} following a similar scheme.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{theoreme:bordZeroOrdre4Irrbis}.]
First we prove that it is necessary that the differentials are of the form given in Theorem~\ref{theoreme:bordZeroOrdre4Irrbis}.
It is clear that the point $Z$ is on the bridge between $N_{1}$ and $N_{2}$ since otherwise $(\X,Z)$ would
not be stable. Moreover, the points which form the node are conjugated by the hyperelliptic
involution or one of them is a Weierstrass point. Otherwise, the differential would have a zero at a smooth
point of $\tilde\X$. But this zero would be preserved by any
deformation, contradicting the fact that the differential is in the boundary of $\pomoduli[3,1](4)$ and that $Z\notin\tilde\X$.
Let us suppose that we are in the first case: the restriction of $\omega$ to $\tilde\X$ has a zero of order
two at $N_{1}$. Let us take a coordinate $z$ on ${\mathbb P}^{1}$ such that $0$ is identified to $N_{2}$ and $\infty$
to
$N_{1}$. We define the differential form $\eta:=\frac{(z-1)^{4}}{z^{2}}{\rm d}z$.
We want to use the plumbing cylinder construction with parameters $(\epsilon_{1},\epsilon_{2})$ at the nodes.
By Lemma~\ref{lemme:ConditionPlomberieCheminsFermer}, they have to satisfy $\epsilon_{1}=\epsilon_{2}^{3}=:c$.
We can find a differential $\eta$ on~$\tilde\X$ with simple poles at $N_{1}$ and $N_{2}$ and holomorphic
otherwise.
By Lemma~\ref{lemme:PlomberieCylindriqueAvecResidu}, we can plumb the differential and obtain an
holomorphic differential with a zero of order $4$. Moreover, this
differential is not hyperelliptic since the special fibre is not hyperelliptic.
This proves the first point.
Let us now suppose that the differential has a single zero at both $N_{1}$ and~$N_{2}$. We can still use
Lemma~\ref{lemme:PlomberieCylindriqueAvecResidu} to plumb this differential. But this
time, there are two distinct ways (up to isomorphisms) to plumb the nodes.
Let $\epsilon_{1}$ be the
parameter of the cylinder at the node $N_{1}$, then according to
Lemma~\ref{lemme:ConditionPlomberieCheminsFermer}, the
parameter of the cylinder at $N_{2}$ has to be of the form $\epsilon_{2}=\pm\epsilon_{1}$.
To conclude the proof, it suffices to show that the case $\epsilon_{1}=\epsilon_{2}$ leads to a hyperelliptic
curve and that the case $\epsilon_{1}=-\epsilon_{2}$ leads to a non hyperelliptic curve.
From now on, we will use the notations of Lemma~\ref{lemme:PlomberieCylindriqueOk}.
The hyperelliptic involution $\iota$ on $\X$ restricts to the hyperelliptic involution on $\tilde\X$ and to
the involution which fixes $Z$ and permutes $N_{1}$ and $N_{2}$ on
the component ${\mathbb P}^{1}$. Hence we can suppose that
the two open sets $U_{1}$ and $U_{2}$ and the
coordinates $z_{1}$, $w_{1}$ on $U_{1}$ and $z_{2}$, $w_{2}$ on $U_{2}$ are chosen such that
$\iota(z_{i})=z_{j}$ and
$\iota(w_{i})=w_{j}$ for $i\neq j$.
Let us suppose that the cylinder plumbed at the node $N_{1}$ is given by the equation
$x_{1}y_{1}=\epsilon_{1}$ and at the node $N_{2}$ it is given by
$x_{2}y_{2}=\pm\epsilon_{1}$. Then on the cylinders, the hyperelliptic involution has to be
of the form $\iota(x_{1})=x_{2}$ and
$\iota(y_{1})=\pm y_{2}$ in order to coincide with the hyperelliptic involution on the part of the smoothed
curve coming from $\tilde\X$. But it is easy to verify that this map can be prolonged to a holomorphic map
on the whole smoothed curve if and only if the sign is positive. Moreover, in this case one can easily
verify that this map is the hyperelliptic involution of the smoothed curve. And in the other case, the
uniqueness of the hyperelliptic involution implies that the smoothed curve cannot be hyperelliptic.
\end{proof}
We can deduce from Theorem~\ref{theoreme:bordZeroOrdre4Irrbis} the surprising fact that the odd and
hyperelliptic components of the {incidence variety compactifications} of $\pomoduli[3,1](4)$ meet at their
boundaries.
\begin{cor}\label{corollaire:intersectHypOddGenreTrois}
Let $\X$ be the union of a curve $\tilde{\X}$ of genus two and a projective line glue together at a pair of
points of $\tilde{\X}$ conjugated by the hyperelliptic involution. Let $Z\in {\mathbb P}^{1}$ and $\omega$ be a
differential
which vanishes on ${\mathbb P}^{1}$ and has two single zeros at the points which form the nodes on $\tilde{\X}$.
Then the pointed differential $(\X,\omega,Z)$ is in $\obarmoduliinc[3,1]{4}^{{\rm hyp}}$ and
$\obarmoduliinc[3,1]{4}^{{\rm odd}}$.
\end{cor}
\paragraph{Examples.}
We
give two examples of concrete families in
$\omoduli[3,1]^{{\rm odd}}(4)$ which degenerates to a curve stably equivalent to an irreducible curve with one
node.
The first one is given as family of curves in ${\mathbb P}^{2}$ with a hyperflex. The second is a family of flat
surfaces given as a family of polygons with identifications.
\begin{ex}\label{exemple:FamilleCourbesPlanesVersDelta0}
We define in ${\mathbb P}^{2}\times\Delta$ the family of curves given by:
$$P(x,y,z;t):= xyz^{2}+y^{4}+x^{3}z+tz^{4}.$$
Each curve has a hyperflex of order 4 at $(1,0,0;t)$, thus the differential corresponding to the line at
infinity has a
zero of order 4 at this point. The special curve is irreducible with only one node as singularity. Moreover
the
differential associated to the tangent has a simple pole at the node. Now the Weierstrass form of the
normalisation
is $y^{2}+4x^{5}-1$ and the preimages of the node are over~$x=0$ and $x=\infty$. In particular, the point
which is over $x=\infty$ is a Weierstrass point. We can show that the Igusa invariant of this curve is
zero.
More generally, let us consider the family
$$\left\{ xyz^{2}+y^4+a_{1}x^3z+a_{2}x^2yz+a_{3}xy^2z+a_{4}y^3z+tz^4=0 \right\}\subset{\mathbb P}^{2}\times \{t\},$$
where the $a_{i},\ i=1,\cdots,4$ are complex numbers. This gives us examples where the special curve has any
given Igusa invariants.
Let us now take a look at the family given by the equation
$$P(x,y,z;t):= x^2yz+y^{4}-x^{3}z+tz^{4}.$$
Moreover, the differential associated to the line at infinity has a zero of order~$4$ at $(1,0,0;t)$.
The singularity of the special curve is a cusp meeting a smooth
branch. It follows from the classification of Kang
\cite[Corollary~2.5]{MR1760371} and the fact that the family is smooth, that the stable limit of this
family is an irreducible curve with one node. The limit of the zeros of order $4$ is in the node. The limit
stable differential has a zero of order two at one of the
preimages of the node, which is also a Weierstrass point. In this example, the other preimage of the node is
a
Weierstrass point of the normalisation.
\end{ex}
Let us now give examples using the polygonal representation of the flat surfaces. Since a complete
classification of the cylinder decompositions of the flat surfaces in $\pomoduli[3,1](4)$ is given in
\cite[Proposition~3.1]{arXiv5879A}, these examples could lead to another proof of
Theorem~\ref{theoreme:bordZeroOrdre4Irrbis} using degeneration of these diagrams.
\begin{ex}\label{exemple:SurfacesPlattesVersDelta0}
First we give in Figure~\ref{figure:BordOM3(4)IrrWP} an example of a curve such that a zero of order two is
identified with another point of the curve. In this figure and in the following one, the vertical segment are
identified by an horizontal translation.
In this example, it is not difficult to see that the second point which forms the node is a Weierstrass point
of the curve. However, it is not difficult to construct examples where this point is not a Weierstrass
point.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1.2]
\draw (0,0) coordinate (a1) -- node [below] {$1$} (1,0) coordinate (a2) --node [below] {$2$} (2,0)
coordinate (a3) --node [below] {$x$} (3,0) coordinate (a4) --node [below] {$3$} (4,0) coordinate (a5) -- (4,1)
coordinate (a6) --node [above] {$x$} (3,1) coordinate (a7) --node [above] {$3$} (2,1) coordinate (a8) -- (2,2)
coordinate (a9) --node [above] {$2$} (1,2) coordinate (a10) -- (1,1) coordinate (a11) --node [above] {$1$}
(0,1) coordinate (a12) -- cycle;
\foreach \i in {1,2,...,12}
\fill (a\i) circle (1pt);
\draw[->] (4.2,1) -- node [below] {$x\to 0$} (4.8,1);
\draw (5,0) coordinate (b1) -- node [below] {$1$} ++(1,0) coordinate (b2) -- node [below] {$2$} ++(1,0)
coordinate (b3) --node [below] {$3$} ++(1,0) coordinate (b4) -- ++(0,1) coordinate (b5) --node [above] {$3$}
++(-1,0) coordinate (b6) -- ++(0,1) coordinate (b7) --node [above] {$2$} ++(-1,0) coordinate (b8) -- ++(0,-1)
coordinate (b9) --node [above] {$1$} ++(-1,0) coordinate (b10) -- cycle;
\foreach \i in {1,4,5,10}
\fill (b\i) circle (1pt);
\foreach \i in {2,3,6,7,8,9}
\filldraw[fill=white,draw=black] (b\i) circle (1pt);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{A family of curve in $\obarmoduli[3](4)$ degenerating to an irreducible curve with one of the points
of the node a Weierstrass point.}
\label{figure:BordOM3(4)IrrWP}
\end{figure}
More interesting is the case where the special curve is irreducible and the nodal points are conjugated by
the hyperelliptic involution. In this case, we can produce a smoothing in both connected components of
$\omoduli[3,1](4)$. The Figure~\ref{figure:BordOM3(4)IrrConjug} shows such a smoothing. One can easily
verify
that the smoothing are in the correct stratum using the Arf invariant of these curves. A consequence of this
is that the Arf Invariant of the nodal curve depends on the choice of a basis of the homology.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1.1]
\draw (0,0) coordinate (a1) -- node [below] {$1$} ++(1,0) coordinate (a2) -- ++(0,-1) coordinate (a3) --
node [below] {$2$} ++(1,0) coordinate (a4) -- ++(0,1) coordinate (a5) -- ++(0,1) coordinate (a6) --node
[above] {$2$} ++(-1,0) coordinate (a7) -- ++(0,1) coordinate (a8) --node [above] {$1$} ++(-1,0) coordinate
(a9) -- ++(0,-1) coordinate (a10) -- cycle;
\foreach \i in {1,2,5,8,9}
\fill (a\i) circle (1pt);
\foreach \i in {3,4,6,7,10}
\filldraw[fill=white,draw=black] (a\i) circle (1pt);
\draw[->] (0.9,-1.2) -- node [below,sloped] {odd} ++(-1.5,-1);
\draw[->] (1.1,-1.2) -- node [below,sloped] {hyperelliptic} ++(1.5,-1);
\draw (-2,-3.5) coordinate (b1) -- node [below] {$1$} ++(1,0) coordinate (b2) -- node [below] {$x$}
++(.5,0) coordinate (b3) -- ++(0,-1) coordinate (b4) --node [below] {$2$} ++(1,0) coordinate (b5) -- ++(0,1)
coordinate (b6) -- ++(0,1) coordinate (b7) --node [above] {$2$} ++(-1,0) coordinate (b8) --node [above] {$x$}
++(-.5,0) coordinate (b9) -- ++(0,1) coordinate (b10) --node [above] {$1$} ++(-1,0)coordinate (b11) --
++(0,-1)coordinate (b12) -- cycle;
\foreach \i in {1,2,...,12}
\fill (b\i) circle (1pt);
\draw (3.3,-3.5) coordinate (c1) -- node [below] {$1$} ++(1,0) coordinate (c2) -- ++(0,-1) coordinate (c3)
-- node [below] {$2$} ++(1,0) coordinate (c4) -- ++(0,1) coordinate (c5) -- ++(0,1) coordinate (c6) --node
[above] {$2$} ++(-1,0) coordinate (c7) -- ++(0,1) coordinate (c8) --node [above] {$1$} ++(-1,0) coordinate
(c9) --node [above] {$x$} ++(-.5,0) coordinate (c10) -- ++(0,-1) coordinate (c11) --node [below] {$x$}
++(.5,0) coordinate (c12) -- cycle;
\foreach \i in {1,2,...,12}
\fill (c\i) circle (1pt);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Two smoothings of an irreducible curve with a node of conjugated points, one of them in
$\omoduli[3,1]^{{\rm odd}}(4)$ and the other in $\omoduli[3,1]^{{\rm hyp}}(4)$.}
\label{figure:BordOM3(4)IrrConjug}
\end{figure}
\end{ex}
\section*{Acknowledgements.}
This work consists of a part of my doctoral dissertation. I am grateful to Martin M\"oller for his
guidance. I would like to thank Sam Grushevsky for helpful suggestions. Dawei Chen has informed the author
that he has obtained some of the results in Sections \ref{section:Spin} and \ref{section:omoduli3,4,odd}
independently, the methods being in some case related, in some cases disjoint.
During
my PhD I have been supported by the ERC-StG 257137.
\addcontentsline{toc}{section}{References.}
\bibliographystyle{alpha}
|
\section{Introduction}
Deep learning has led to remarkable breakthroughs in automatically learning hierarchical representations from images. Models such as Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) \cite{lecun1995convolutional}, Restricted Boltzmann Machine-based generative models \cite{hinton2006fast,salakhutdinov2009deep}, and Auto-encoders \cite{bengio2009learning,vincent2010stacked} have been successfully applied to produce multiple layers of increasingly abstract visual representations. However, there is relatively little work on characterizing the optimal representation of the data. While Cohen {\em et al.} \cite{cohen2014learning} have considered this problem by proposing a theoretical framework to learn irreducible representations having both invariances and equivariances, coming up with the best representation for any given task is an open question.
Various work \cite{bengio2013representation,cohen2014learning,goodfellow2009measuring} has been done on the theory and practice of representation learning, and from this work a consistent set of desiderata for representations has emerged: invariance, meaningfulness of representations, abstraction, and disentanglement. In particular, Bengio {\em et al.} \cite{bengio2013representation} propose that a \textit{disentangled} representation is one for which changes in the encoded data are sparse over real-world transformations; that is, changes in only a few latents at a time should be able to represent sequences which are likely to happen in the real world.
The ``vision as inverse graphics'' model suggests a representation for images which provides these features. Computer graphics consists of a function to go from compact descriptions of scenes (the \textit{graphics code}) to images, and this graphics code is typically disentangled to allow for rendering scenes with fine-grained control over transformations such as object location, pose, lighting, texture, and shape. This encoding is designed to easily and interpretably represent sequences of real data so that common transformations may be compactly represented in software code; this criterion is almost identical to that of Bengio {\em et al.}, and graphics codes conveniently align with the properties of an ideal representation.
Recent work in inverse graphics \cite{jampani2014informed,mansinghka2013approximate,loper2014opendr,kulkarni2014inverse} follows a general strategy of defining a probabilistic or deterministic model with latent parameters, then using an inference or optimization algorithm to find the most appropriate set of latent parameters given the observations. Recently, Tieleman {\em et al.} \cite{tieleman2014optimizing} moved beyond this two-stage pipeline by using a generic encoder network and a domain-specific decoder network to approximate a 2D rendering function. However, none of these approaches have been shown to automatically produce a semantically-interpretable graphics code and to learn a 3D rendering engine to reproduce images.
In this paper, we present an approach for learning interpretable \textit{graphics codes} for complex transformations such as out-of-plane rotations and lighting variations. Given a set of images, we use a hybrid encoder-decoder model to learn a representation that is disentangled with respect to various transformations such as object out-of-plane rotations and lighting variations. To achieve this, we employ a deep directed graphical model with many layers of convolution and de-convolution operators that is trained using the Stochastic Gradient Variational Bayes (SGVB) algorithm \cite{kingma2013auto}.
We propose a training procedure to encourage each group of neurons in the \textit{graphics code} layer to distinctly represent a specific transformation. To learn a disentangled representation, we train using data where each mini-batch has a set of active and inactive transformations, but we do not provide target values as in supervised learning; the objective function remains reconstruction quality. For example, a nodding face would have the 3D elevation transformation active but its shape, texture and other affine transformations would be inactive. We exploit this type of training data to force chosen neurons in the \textit{graphics code} layer to specifically represent active transformations, thereby automatically creating a disentangled representation. Given a single face image, our model can re-generate the input image with a different pose and lighting. We present qualitative and quantitative results of the model's efficacy at learning a 3D rendering engine.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{media/overview.pdf}
\caption{\textbf{Model Architecture:} Deep Convolutional Inverse Graphics Network (DC-IGN) has an encoder and a decoder. We follow the variational autoencoder \cite{kingma2013auto} architecture with variations. The encoder consists of several layers of convolutions followed by max-pooling and the decoder has several layers of unpooling (upsampling using nearest neighbors) followed by convolution. (a) During training, data $x$ is passed through the encoder to produce the posterior approximation $Q(z_i|x)$, where $z_i$ consists of scene latent variables such as pose, light, texture or shape. In order to learn parameters in DC-IGN, gradients are back-propagated using stochastic gradient descent using the following variational object function: $-log(P(x|z_i)) + KL(Q(z_i|x)||P(z_i))$ for every $z_i$. We can force DC-IGN to learn a disentangled representation by showing mini-batches with a set of inactive and active transformations (e.g. face rotating, light sweeping in some direction etc). (b) During test, data $x$ can be passed through the encoder to get latents $z_i$. Images can be re-rendered to different viewpoints, lighting conditions, shape variations etc by just manipulating the appropriate graphics code group $(z_i)$, which is how one would manipulate an off-the-shelf 3D graphics engine.}
\label{fig:overview}
\end{figure*}
\section{Related Work}
As mentioned before, a number of generative models have been proposed in the literature to obtain abstract visual representations. Unlike most RBM-based models \cite{hinton2006fast,salakhutdinov2009deep,lee2009convolutional}, our approach is trained using back-propagation with objective function consisting of data reconstruction and the variational bound.
Relatively recently, Kingma {\em et al.} \cite{kingma2013auto} proposed the SGVB algorithm to learn generative models with continuous latent variables. In this work, a feed-forward neural network (encoder) is used to approximate the posterior distribution and a decoder network serves to enable stochastic reconstruction of observations. In order to handle fine-grained geometry of faces, we work with relatively large scale images ($150\times150$ pixels). Our approach extends and applies the SGVB algorithm to jointly train and utilize many layers of convolution and de-convolution operators for the encoder and decoder network respectively. The decoder network is a function that transform a compact \textit{graphics code} (~200 dimensions) to a $150\times150$ image. We propose using unpooling (nearest neighbor sampling) followed by convolution to handle the massive increase in dimensionality with a manageable number of parameters.
Recently, \cite{Dosovitskiy} proposed using CNNs to generate images given object-specific parameters in a supervised setting. As their approach requires ground-truth labels for the \textit{graphics code} layer, it cannot be directly applied to image interpretation tasks. Our work is similar to Ranzato {\em et al.} \cite{ranzato2007unsupervised}, whose work was amongst the first to use a generic encoder-decoder architecture for feature learning. However, in comparison to our proposal their model was trained layer-wise, the intermediate representations were not disentangled like a \textit{graphics code}, and their approach does not use the variational auto-encoder loss to approximate the posterior distribution. Our work is also similar in spirit to \cite{tang2012deep}, but in comparison our model does not assume a Lambertian reflectance model and implicitly constructs the 3D representations. Another piece of related work is Desjardins {\em et al.} \cite{desjardins2012disentangling}, who used a spike and slab prior to factorize representations in a generative deep network.
In comparison to existing approaches, it is important to note that our encoder network produces the interpretable and disentangled representations necessary to learn a meaningful 3D graphics engine. A number of inverse-graphics inspired methods have recently been proposed in the literature \cite{jampani2014informed,mansinghka2013approximate,loper2014opendr}. However, most such methods rely on hand-crafted rendering engines. The exception to this is work by Hinton {\em et al.} \cite{hinton2011transforming} and Tieleman \cite{tieleman2014optimizing} on \textit{transforming autoencoders} which use a domain-specific decoder to reconstruct input images. Our work is similar in spirit to these works but has some key differences: (a) It uses a very generic convolutional architecture in the encoder and decoder networks to enable efficient learning on large datasets and image sizes; (b) it can handle single static frames as opposed to pair of images required in \cite{hinton2011transforming}; and (c) it is generative.
\section{Model}
As shown in Figure \ref{fig:overview}, the basic structure of the Deep Convolutional Inverse Graphics Network (DC-IGN) consists of two parts: an encoder network which captures distribution over \textit{graphics codes} $Z$ given data $x$ and a decoder network which learns a conditional distribution to produce an approximation $\hat{x}$ given $Z$. $Z$ can be a disentangled representation containing a factored set of latent variables $z_i \in Z$ such as pose, light and shape. This is important in learning a meaningful approximation of a 3D graphics engine and helps tease apart the generalization capability of the model with respect to different types of transformations.
Let us denote the encoder output of DC-IGN to be $y_e = encoder(x)$. The encoder output is used to parametrize the variational approximation $Q(z_i|y_e)$, where $Q$ is chosen to be a multivariate normal distribution. There are two reasons for using this parametrization: (1) Gradients of samples with respect to parameters $\theta$ of $Q$ can be easily obtained using the reparametrization trick proposed in \cite{kingma2013auto}, and (2) Various statistical shape models trained on 3D scanner data such as faces have the same multivariate normal latent distribution \cite{bfm09}. Given that model parameters $W_e$ connect $y_e$ and $z_i$, the distribution parameters $\theta = (\mu_{z_i}, \Sigma_{z_i})$ and latents $Z$ can then be expressed as:
\begin{align}
\displaystyle
\mu_{z_i} &= W_e * y_e \\
\Sigma_{z_i} &= \text{diag}(\exp(W_e * y_e)) \\
\forall{i}, z_i &\sim \mathcal{N}(\mu_{z_i}, \Sigma_{z_i})
\end{align}
We present a novel training procedure which allows networks to be trained to have disentangled and interpretable representations.
\subsection{Training with Specific Transformations} \label{specifictransforms}
The main goal of this work is to learn a representation of the data which consists of disentangled and semantically interpretable latent variables. We would like only a small subset of the latent variables to change for sequences of inputs corresponding to real-world events.
One natural choice of target representation for information about scenes is that already designed for use in graphics engines. If we can deconstruct a face image by splitting it into variables for pose, light, and shape, we can trivially represent the same transformations that these variables are used for in graphics applications. Figure \ref{fig:latentslegend} depicts the representation which we will attempt to learn.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{media/latents_legend.pdf}
\caption{\textbf{Structure of the representation vector.} $\phi$ is the azimuth of the face, $\alpha$ is the elevation of the face with respect to the camera, and $\phi_L$ is the azimuth of the light source.
\label{fig:latentslegend}}
\end{figure}
To achieve this goal, we perform a training procedure which directly targets this definition of disentanglement. We organize our data into mini-batches corresponding to changes in only a single scene variable (azimuth angle, elevation angle, azimuth angle of the light source); these are transformations which might occur in the real world. We will term these the \textit{extrinsic} variables, and they are represented by the components $z_{1,2,3}$ of the encoding.
We also generate mini-batches in which the three extrinsic scene variables are held fixed but all other properties of the face change. That is, these batches consist of many different faces under the same viewing conditions and pose. These \textit{intrinsic} properties of the model, which describe identity, shape, expression, etc., are represented by the remainder of the latent variables $z_{[4,200]}$. These mini-batches varying intrinsic properties are interspersed stochastically with those varying the extrinsic properties.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{media/remastered_training_diagram.pdf}
\caption{\textbf{Training on a minibatch in which only $\phi$, the azimuth angle of the face, changes.} During the forward step, the output from each component $z_i \neq z_1$ of the encoder is altered to be the same for each sample in the batch. This reflects the fact that the generating variables of the image (e.g. the identity of the face) which correspond to the desired values of these latents are unchanged throughout the batch. By holding these outputs constant throughout the batch, the single neuron $z_1$ is forced to explain all the variance within the batch, i.e. the full range of changes to the image caused by changing $\phi$. During the backward step $z_1$ is the only neuron which receives a gradient signal from the attempted reconstruction, and all $z_i \neq z_1$ receive a signal which nudges them to be closer to their respective averages over the batch. During the complete training process, after this batch, another batch is selected at random; it likewise contains variations of only one of ${\phi, \alpha, \phi_L, intrinsic}$; all neurons which do not correspond to the selected latent are clamped; and the training proceeds.
\label{fig:selectivetraining}}
\end{figure*}
We train this representation using SGVB, but we make some key adjustments to the outputs of the encoder and the gradients which train it. The procedure (Figure \ref{fig:selectivetraining}) is as follows.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Select at random a latent variable $z_{train}$ which we wish to correspond to one of \{azimuth angle, elevation angle, azimuth of light source, intrinsic properties\}.
\item Select at random a mini-batch in which that only that variable changes.
\item Show the network each example in the minibatch and capture its latent representation for that example $z^k$.
\item Calculate the average of those representation vectors over the entire batch.
\item Before putting the encoder's output into the decoder, replace the values $z_i \neq z_{train}$ with their averages over the entire batch. These outputs are ``clamped''.
\item Calculate reconstruction error and backpropagate as per SGVB in the decoder.
\item Replace the gradients for the latents $z_i \neq z_{train}$ (the clamped neurons) with their difference from the mean (see Section \ref{targetedinvar}). The gradient at $z_{train}$ is passed through unchanged.
\item Continue backpropagation through the encoder using the modified gradient.
\end{enumerate}
Since the intrinsic representation is much higher-dimensional than the extrinsic ones, it requires more training. Accordingly we select the type of batch to use in a ratio of about 1:1:1:10, azimuth:elevation:lighting:intrinsic; we arrived at this ratio after extensive testing, and it works well for both of our datasets.
This training procedure works to train both the encoder and decoder to represent certain properties of the data in a specific neuron. By clamping the output of all but one of the neurons, we force the decoder to recreate all the variation in that batch using only the changes in that one neuron's value. By clamping the gradients, we train the encoder to put all the information about the variations in the batch into one output neuron.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
(a)\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{media/elvaried.pdf}
(b)\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{media/azvaried.pdf}
\caption{\textbf{Manipulating pose variables:} Qualitative results showing the generalization capability of the learned DC-IGN decoder to rerender a single input image with different pose directions. \textbf{(a)} We change the latent $z_{elevation}$ smoothly from -15 to 15, leaving all 199 other latents unchanged. \textbf{(b)} We change the latent $z_{azimuth}$ smoothly from -15 to 15, leaving all 199 other latents unchanged.}
\label{fig:pose}
\end{figure*}
This training method leads to networks whose latent variables have a strong \textit{equivariance} with the corresponding generating parameters, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:gen}. This allows the value of the true generating parameter (e.g. the true angle of the face) to be trivially extracted from the encoder.
\subsection{Invariance Targeting} \label{targetedinvar}
By training with only one transformation at a time, we are encouraging certain neurons to contain specific information; this is equivariance. But we also wish to explicitly \textit{discourage} them from having \textit{other} information; that is, we want them to be invariant to other transformations. Since our mini-batches of training data consist of only one transformation per batch, then this goal corresponds to having all but one of the output neurons of the encoder give the same output for every image in the batch.
To encourage this property of the DC-IGN, we train all the neurons which correspond to the inactive transformations with an error gradient equal to their difference from the mean. It is simplest to think about this gradient as acting on the set of subvectors $z_{inactive}$ from the encoder for each input in the batch. Each of these $z_{inactive}$'s will be pointing to a close-together but not identical point in a high-dimensional space; the invariance training signal will push them all closer together. We don't care where they are; the network can represent the face shown in this batch however it likes. We only care that the network always represents it as still being the same face, no matter which way it's facing. This regularizing force needs to be scaled to be much smaller than the true training signal, otherwise it can overwhelm the reconstruction goal. Empirically, a factor of $1/100$ works well.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
(a)\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{media/lightvaried.pdf} \;
(b)\;\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{media/entangled-disentangled-comparison.png}
\caption{(a) \textbf{Manipulating light variables:} Qualitative results showing the generalization capability of the learnt DC-IGN decoder to render original static image with different light directions. The latent neuron $z_{light}$ is changed to random values but all other latents are clamped. (b) \textbf{Entangled versus disentangled representations.}
\textbf{Top:} Original reconstruction (left) and transformed (right) using a normally-trained network.
\textbf{Bottom:} The same transformation using the DC-IGN.}
\label{fig:pose_and_entangledcomparison}
\end{figure*}
\section{Experiments} \label{experiments}
We trained our model on about 12,000 batches of faces generated from a 3D face model obtained from Paysan {\em et al.} \cite{bfm09}, where each batch consists of 20 faces with random variations on face identity variables (shape/texture), pose, or lighting. We used the \textit{rmsprop} \cite{rmsprop} learning algorithm during training and set the meta learning rate to be equal to $0.0005$, the momentum decay to be $0.1$ and weight decay to be $0.01$.
To ensure that these techniques work on other types of data, we also trained networks to perform reconstruction on images of widely varied 3D chairs from many perspectives derived from the Pascal Visual Object Classes dataset as extracted by Aubry {\em et al.} \cite{mottaghi2014role, aubry2014seeing}. This task tests the ability of the DC-IGN to learn a rendering function for a dataset with high variation between the elements of the set; the chairs vary from office chairs to wicker to modern designs, and viewpoints span 360 degrees and two elevations. These networks were trained with the same methods and parameters as the ones above.
\subsection{3D Face Dataset}
\label{sec:gen}
The decoder network learns an approximate rendering engine as shown in Figures (\ref{fig:pose},\ref{fig:pose_and_entangledcomparison}). Given a static test image, the encoder network produces the latents $Z$ depicting scene variables such as light, pose, shape etc. Similar to an off-the-shelf rendering engine, we can independently control these to generate new images with the decoder. For example, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:pose_and_entangledcomparison}, given the original test image, we can vary the lighting of an image by keeping all the other latents constant and varying $z_{light}$. It is perhaps surprising that the fully-trained decoder network is able to function as a 3D rendering engine.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
(a)\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{media/AZ_VARIED_scatter.pdf}
(b)\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{media/EL_VARIED_scatter.pdf}
(c)\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{media/LIGHT_AZ_VARIED_scatter.pdf}
\caption{\textbf{Generalization of decoder to render images in novel viewpoints and lighting conditions:} We generated several datasets by varying light, azimuth and elevation, and tested the invariance properties of DC-IGN's representation $Z$. We show quantitative performance on three network configurations as described in section~\ref{sec:gen}. (a,b,c) All DC-IGN encoder networks reasonably predicts transformations from static test images. Interestingly, as seen in (a), the encoder network seems to have learnt a \textit{switch} node to separately process azimuth on left and right profile side of the face.}
\label{fig:gen}
\end{figure*}
We also quantitatively illustrate the network's ability to represent pose and light on a smooth linear manifold as shown in Figure \ref{fig:gen}, which directly demonstrates our training algorithm's ability to disentangle complex transformations. In these plots, the inferred and ground-truth transformation values are plotted for a random subset of the test set. Interestingly, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:gen}(a), the encoder network's representation of azimuth has a discontinuity at $0^\circ$ (facing straight forward).
\subsubsection{Comparison with Entangled Representations}
To explore how much of a difference the DC-IGN training procedure makes, we compare the novel-view reconstruction performance of networks with entangled representations (baseline) versus disentangled representations (DC-IGN). The baseline network with entangled representations is identical in every way to the DC-IGN, but was trained with SGVB without using the training procedures we propose in this paper. As in Figure \ref{fig:pose}, we feed each network a single input image, then attempt to use the decoder to re-render this image at different azimuth angles. To do this, we first must figure out which latent of the entangled representation most closely corresponds to the azimuth. This we do rather simply. First, we encode all images in an azimuth-varied batch using the baseline's encoder. Then we calculate the variance of each of the latents over this batch. The latent with the largest variance is then the one most closely associated with the azimuth of the face, and we will call it $z_{azimuth}$. Once that is found, the latent $z_{azimuth}$ is varied for both the models to render a novel view of the face given a single image of that face. Figure \ref{fig:pose_and_entangledcomparison} shows that explicit disentanglement is critical for novel-view reconstruction.
\subsection{Chair Dataset}
We performed a similar set of experiments on the 3D chairs dataset described above. This dataset contains still images rendered from 3D CAD models of 1357 different chairs, each model skinned with the photographic texture of the real chair. Each of these models is rendered in 60 different poses; at each of two elevations, there are 30 images taken from 360 degrees around the model. We used approximately 1200 of these chairs in the training set and the remaining 150 in the test set; as such, the networks had never seen the chairs in the test set from any angle, so the tests explore the networks’ ability to generalize to arbitrary chairs. We resized the images to $150\times150$ pixels and made them grayscale to match our face dataset.
We trained these networks with the azimuth (flat rotation) of the chair as a disentangled variable represented by a single node $z_1$; all other variation between images is undifferentiated and represented by $z_{[2,200]}$. The DC-IGN network succeeded in achieving a mean-squared error (MSE) of reconstruction of $2.7722\times10^{-4}$ on the test set. Each image has grayscale values in the range $[0,1]$ and is $150\times150$ pixels.
In Figure \ref{fig:chairpose} we have included examples of the network’s ability to re-render previously-unseen chairs at different angles given a single image. For some chairs it is able to render fairly smooth transitions, showing the chair at many intermediate poses, while for others it seems to only capture a sort of “keyframes” representation, only having distinct outputs for a few angles. Interestingly, the task of rotating a chair seen only from one angle requires speculation about unseen components; the chair might have arms, or not; a curved seat or a flat one; etc.
\vspace{-3mm}
\section{Discussion}
We have shown that it is possible to train a deep convolutional inverse graphics network with interpretable graphics code layer representation from static images. By utilizing a deep convolution and de-convolution architecture within a variational autoencoder formulation, our model can be trained end-to-end using back-propagation on the stochastic variational objective function \cite{kingma2013auto}. We proposed a training procedure to force the network to learn disentangled and interpretable representations. Using 3D face analysis as a working example, we have demonstrated the invariant and equivariant characteristics of the learned representations.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
(a)\; \includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{media/chairs_transforms_good.png}\\
(b)\; \includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{media/chairs_transforms_bad.png}
\caption{\textbf{Manipulating rotation:} Each row was generated by encoding the input image (leftmost) with the encoder, then changing the value of a single latent and putting this modified encoding through the decoder. The network has never seen these chairs before at any orientation. \textbf{(a)} Some positive examples. Note that the DC-IGN is making a conjecture about any components of the chair it cannot see; in particular, it guesses that the chair in the top row has arms, because it can't see that it doesn't. \textbf{(b)} Examples in which the network extrapolates to new viewpoints less accurately.}
\label{fig:chairpose}
\end{figure*}
To scale our approach to handle more complex scenes, it will likely be important to experiment with deeper architectures in order to handle large number of object categories within a single network architecture. It is also very appealing to design a spatio-temporal based convolutional architecture to utilize motion in order to handle complicated object transformations. Furthermore, the current formulation of SGVB is restricted to continuous latent variables. However, real-world visual scenes contain unknown number of objects that move in and out of frame. Therefore, it might be necessary to extend this formulation to handle discrete distributions \cite{kulkarni2014variational} or extend the model to a recurrent setting. The decoder network in our model can also be replaced by a domain-specific decoder \cite{nair2008analysis} for fine-grained model-based inference. We hope that our work motivates further research into automatically learning interpretable representations using variants of our model.
\subsubsection*{Acknowledgements}
We thank Thomas Vetter for giving us access to the Basel face model. T. Kulkarni was graciously supported by the Leventhal Fellowship. We would like to thank Ilker Yildrim, Max Kleiman-Weiner, Karthik Rajagopal and Geoffrey Hinton for helpful feedback and discussions.
\bibliographystyle{abbrv}
\small{ |
\section{Introduction}
Goodman and Pollack investigated ways of partitioning the infinite number of point sets in the plane into a finite number of equivalence classes.
To this end they introduced \emph{circular sequences}~\cite{nondegenerate} and \emph{order types}~\cite{GoodmanPollack83}.
Two point sets $S_1$ and $S_2$ have the same \emph{order type} iff there exists a bijection between the sets s.t.\ a triple in~$S_1$ has the same orientation (clockwise or counterclockwise) as the corresponding triple in~$S_2$
(in this paper we only consider point sets in general position, i.e., no three points are collinear).
The order type determines many important properties of a point set, e.g., its convex hull and which spanned segments cross.
Determining the orientation of a point triple (called a \emph{sidedness query}) can be done in a computationally robust way~\cite{sign_of_determinants}.
Therefore, algorithms that base their decisions solely on sidedness queries allow robust implementations~\cite{boissonnat_snoeyink}.
Furthermore, this restriction is helpful for mechanically proving correctness of algorithms~\cite{formal_isabelle,formal_coq}.
Another possible advantage of restricting algorithms to sidedness queries allows, for some problems, to cope with degeneracies in point sets.
Edelsbrunner and M\"ucke~\cite{simplicity} describe a general framework for the so-called ``simulation of simplicity'';
in particular, they provide an efficient way to conceptually replace a point set with collinear point triples by one in general position s.t.\ all other orientations of point triples are preserved.
The duality between point sets and their dual line arrangements is a well-established tool in discrete and computational geometry.
Line arrangements can be generalized to pseudo-line arrangements, and many combinatorial and algorithmic questions that can be asked for line arrangements are also interesting for pseudo-line arrangements.
The order type of a point set is encoded in the structure of the dual line arrangement of a point set, in particular by the lines (and even by the number of lines~\cite{GoodmanPollack83}) above and below a crossing in the dual arrangement.
See~\cite{new_trends_gp} for an in-depth treatment of that topic.
The orientation of a triple of pseudo-lines can be obtained from the ordering of crossings just as for lines.
The triple-orientations fulfill certain axioms, and concepts like the convex hull can be defined for sets with appropriate triple-orientations~\cite{knuth} even though they may not be realizable by a point set.
Such a generalization of order types is known as \emph{abstract order type}.
Besides their combinatorial properties, algorithmic aspects of abstract order types have been studied.
Knuth devotes a monograph~\cite{knuth} to this generalization and its variants, in particular w.r.t.\ convex hulls.
Motivated by Knuth's open problems, Aichholzer, Miltzow, and Pilz~\cite{extreme_journal} show how to obtain, for a given pair $(a,b)$ of an abstract order type, the edges of the convex hull that are intersected by the supporting line of $ab$ in linear time, using only sidedness queries.
There appears to be no known reasonable algorithmic problem that can be formulated for both order types and abstract order types such that there is an algorithm for order types that is asymptotically faster than any possible algorithm for abstract order types (see also the discussion in~\cite[p.~29]{erickson_thesis}).
In this paper, we show that the ham-sandwich cut is another problem that does not provide such an example.
Apart from being of theoretical interest, abstract order types that are not realizable by point sets occur naturally when the point set is surrounded by a simple polygon and point triples are oriented w.r.t.\ the geodesics between them~\cite{geodesic_ot}.
A considerable fraction of problems in computational geometry deals with partitioning finite sets of points by hyperplanes while imposing constraints on both the subsets of the partition as well as on the hyperplanes.
In the plane, examples of this class of problems are finding, e.g., a ham-sandwich cut of a bi-chromatic point set~\cite{lo_matousek_steiger}, a four-way partitioning by orthogonal lines, and a six-way partitioning by three concurrent lines~\cite{roy_steiger}, as well as finding three concurrent halving lines that pairwise span an angle of $60^\circ$~\cite{wedges}.
Given a pair $(a,b)$ of points of a bi-chromatic point set $S$ of~$n$ points that are either red or blue, the supporting line of~$a$ and~$b$ is a \emph{ham-sandwich cut} if not more than half of the red and half of the blue points are on either side of $ab$.
This can be verified by using only sidedness queries (implying a brute-force algorithm running in $\Theta(n^3)$ time).
Megiddo~\cite{megiddo} presented a linear-time algorithm for the case in which the points of one color are separable from the points of the other color by a line.
Edelsbrunner and Waupotitsch~\cite{edelsbrunner_waupotitsch} gave an $O(n \log (\min\{n_\mathrm{r}, n_\mathrm{b}\}))$ time algorithm for the general case, with $n_\mathrm{r}$ red and $n_\mathrm{b}$ blue points.
Eventually, a linear-time algorithm was provided by Lo, Matou\v{s}ek, and Steiger~\cite{lo_matousek_steiger} for the general setting (abbrev.~\emph{LMS algorithm}).
Their approach generalizes to arbitrary dimensions.
Bose et al.~\cite{hamsan} generalize ham-sandwich cuts to points inside a simple polygon, obtaining a randomized $O((n+m) \log r)$ time algorithm, where $m$ is the number of vertices of the polygon, of which $r$ are reflex.
Ham-sandwich cuts belong to a class of problems in computational geometry that deal with partitioning finite sets of points by hyperplanes while imposing constraints on both the subsets of the partition as well as on the hyperplanes; see, e.g.,~\cite{roy_steiger} for algorithms for related problems.
The LMS algorithm works on the dual line arrangement of the point set and has to solve the following sub-problem.
\begin{problem}\label{problem_main_geometric}
Given a line arrangement~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ in the plane and two lines~$p$ and~$q$ of that arrangement, let~$v$ be the vertical line passing through the crossing of~$p$ and~$q$.
For a subset $B$ of the lines in~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ and an integer $k \leq |B|$, find a line $m \in B$ such that the $y$-coordinate of the point $v \cap m$ is of rank~$k$ in the sequence of $y$-coordinates of the finite point set $v \cap \bigcup_{b \in B} b$.
\end{problem}
\begin{wrapfigure}{r}{0.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{vertical_selection}
\caption{Crossings along a vertical line.}
\label{fig_vertical_selection}
\end{wrapfigure}
This problem can be solved in linear time by directly applying the linear-time selection algorithm~\cite{blum} to the $y$-coordinates of the intersections of all lines in $B$ with~$v$.
Clearly, the order of the intersections of lines with a vertical line at a crossing is not a property of the order type represented by the arrangement (e.g., in \fig{fig_vertical_selection}, one could change the order of the lines~2 and 4 above the crossing between line 5 and line 6).
The order type only determines the set of lines above and below a crossing.
A reformulation of Problem~\ref{problem_main_geometric} for abstract order types faces two problems.
First, the vertical direction is not determined by the order type (this is a property of the circular sequence of the point set); even though we can represent the abstract order type by a pseudo-line arrangement in the Euclidean plane (where there is a vertical direction), there is, in general, an exponential number of different ways to draw a pseudo-line arrangement representing the abstract order type (w.r.t.\ the $x$-order of crossings), yielding too many different orders of the pseudo-lines along the vertical line through a crossing.
Second, even when such a vertical line is given, directly applying the linear-time selection algorithm requires that a query comparing the order of two pseudo-lines on the vertical line can be answered in constant time.
In this paper, we show how to overcome these two problems.
We define a ``vertical'' pseudo-line through each crossing in a pseudo-line arrangement and show how to select the pseudo-line of a given rank in the order defined by such a ``vertical'' pseudo-line.
We give the precise definition in Section~\ref{sec_levels_at_crossing} where we also examine properties of the construction.
The result is presented in terms of a (dual) pseudo-line arrangement in the Euclidean plane~$\ensuremath{\mathbb{E}}^2$.
However, in our model we are not given an explicit representation but are only allowed sidedness queries.
In Section~\ref{sec_levels_algorithm}, we first explain how the queries about a pseudo-line arrangement can be mapped to sidedness queries, and then give a linear-time algorithm for selecting a pseudo-line with a given rank.
Our result allows for replacing vertical lines in the LMS algorithm, showing that it also works for abstract order types.
An analysis of the LMS algorithm under this aspect is given in Section~\ref{sec_ham_sandwich_revisited}.
We obtain
\begin{theorem}\label{thm_abstract_ham_sandwich}
A ham-sandwich cut of an abstract order type can be found in linear time using only sidedness queries.
\end{theorem}
The observation that the LMS algorithm in principle also works for pseudo-line arrangements has been used by Bose et al.~\cite{hamsan} for their randomized linear-time algorithm for geodesic ham-sandwich cuts.
However, their pseudo-lines are given by (weakly) $x$-monotone polygonal paths with a constant number of edges.
Hence, the intersection of such a path with a vertical line can be computed in constant time, like in the straight-line setting.
Their randomized algorithm runs in $O((n+m) \log r)$ time, where $n$ is the number of red and blue points, $m$ is the number of vertices of the polygon, of which $r$ are reflex.
Geodesic order types are a subset of abstract order types~\cite{geodesic_ot}.
When applying a result from~\cite{simplification} to get, after $O(m)$ preprocessing time, the orientation of each triple of points in a simple polygon in $O(\log r)$ time in combination with the ham-sandwich cut algorithm for abstract order types, we obtain a deterministic $O(n \log r + m)$ time algorithm for geodesic ham-sandwich cuts ``for free''.
(Note that this does not contradict optimal worst-case behavior shown by Bose et al.~\cite{hamsan} for their algorithm, as their analysis is parameterized by $(n+m)$ and~$r$.)
We emphasize that a detailed analysis of their approach may give a more fine-grained runtime analysis, and may allow for directly applying common derandomization techniques.
Nevertheless, our technique results in a complete separation of the part that is specific to the geodesic setting, implementing a general subroutine, and the ham-sandwich cut algorithm.
\newcommand{\GA}[1]{\ensuremath{\gamma_{#1}}}
\newcommand{\ensuremath{\mathrm{lv}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{lv}}}
\newcommand{\ensuremath{\mathrm{rk}}}{\ensuremath{\mathrm{rk}}}
A \emph{pseudo-line} is an $x$-monotone plane curve in~$\ensuremath{\mathbb{E}}^2$.
A \emph{pseudo-line arrangement} is the cell complex defined by the dissection of $\ensuremath{\mathbb{E}}^2$ by a set of pseudo-lines such that each pair of pseudo-lines intersects in exactly one point, at which they cross.
An arrangement is \emph{simple} if no three pseudo-lines intersect in the same point.
Throughout this paper, let~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ be a simple arrangement of~$n$ pseudo-lines.
The two vertically unbounded cells in~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ are called the \emph{north face} and the \emph{south face}.
The \emph{$k$-level} of~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ is the set of all points that lie on a pseudo-line of~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ and have exactly $k-1$ pseudo-lines strictly above them.
The level of a crossing $pq$ is denoted by $\ensuremath{\mathrm{lv}}(pq)$ (i.e., $pq$ is separated from the north face by $\ensuremath{\mathrm{lv}}(pq)-1$ pseudo-lines).
The \emph{upper envelope} of an arrangement is its 1-level, i.e., the union of the segments of pseudo-lines that are incident to the north face.
\section{Pseudo-Verticals}\label{sec_levels_at_crossing}
It will be convenient to consider all pseudo-lines being directed towards positive $x$-direction.
Let~$p$ and~$q$ be two pseudo-lines in~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ and let~$p$ start above~$q$.
We denote the latter by $p \prec q$.
Our first aim is to define a pseudo-vertical through a crossing, i.e, an object that can be used like a vertical line through a crossing in our abstract setting.
For a crossing $pq$ with $p \prec q$ let $\GA{pq}$ be a curve described by the following local properties.
Initially, $\GA{pq}$ passes through the crossing $pq$ and enters the cell~$C$ directly above~$pq$; see \fig{fig_local_vertical}~(a).
To define $\GA{pq}$ it is convenient to think of it as consisting of two parts.
The \emph{northbound ray} is the part starting at $pq$ leading to the north face while the \emph{southbound ray} connects $pq$ to the south face.
Starting from $pq$ the northbound ray follows~$p$ against its direction moved slightly into the interior of cell $C$.
In general the northbound ray of $\GA{pq}$ will be slightly above some line $a_i$ moving against the direction of~$a_i$.
When $a_i$ is crossed by a pseudo-line~$a_j$ we have two cases.
If $a_i$ is crossed from below, $\GA{pq}$ also crosses~$a_j$, and continues following $a_i$; see \fig{fig_local_vertical}~(b).
If~$a_i$ is crossed by~$a_j$ from above, $\GA{pq}$ leaves $a_i$ and continues following~$a_j$ against its direction; see \fig{fig_local_vertical}~(c).
This is continued until $\GA{pq}$ follows some line~$a_i$ and all crossings of~$A$ are to the right of the current position along~$\GA{pq}$.
At that point, $\GA{pq}$ continues vertically in positive $y$-direction to infinity (i.e., it crosses all lines $a$ with $a\prec a_i$ in decreasing $\prec$-order); see \fig{fig_local_vertical_last}~(a).
The southbound ray of $\GA{pq}$ is defined in a similar manner.
It follows some pseudo-lines in their direction but slightly below.
It starts with~$p$ and when following $a_i$ it changes to $a_j$ at a crossing only when $a_j$ is crossing from above (see \fig{fig_local_vertical}~(d) and \fig{fig_local_vertical}~(e)).
The final part may again consist of some crossings with lines $a$ with $a\prec a_i$ in decreasing $\prec$-order.
\fig{fig_gamma_whole_example_straight} gives an example of a pseudo-vertical in the arrangement of \fig{fig_vertical_selection}, and \fig{fig_gamma_whole_example} shows a pseudo-vertical in a wiring diagram.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.91]{local_vertical}
\caption[Local definition of a pseudo-vertical~$\GA{pq}$.]{
Local definition of a pseudo-vertical~$\GA{pq}$.}
\label{fig_local_vertical}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics{local_vertical_last}
\caption[The first and the last pseudo-lines of an arrangement defining~$\GA{pq}$.]{The first~(a) and the last~(b) pseudo-lines of an arrangement defining~$\GA{pq}$~(dotted).%
}
\label{fig_local_vertical_last}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics{gamma_whole_example_straight}
\caption{A pseudo-vertical~$\GA{pq}$ (dotted) in an arrangement of straight lines.}
\label{fig_gamma_whole_example_straight}
\end{figure}
We call $\GA{pq}$ a \emph{pseudo-vertical} and, in the following, identify several properties of such a curve.
Note that, while we used the (rather informal) notion of ``following'' a pseudo-line, $\GA{pq}$ is actually defined by the cells it traverses (i.e., two paths in the dual graph of the cell complex starting at the cells above and below~$pq$).
As~$\GA{pq}$ always follows a pseudo-line of $\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ or continues in a vertical direction, we note that $\GA{pq}$ is $x$-monotone.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.9\textwidth]{gamma_whole_example}
\caption{A pseudo-vertical~$\GA{pq}$ in a pseudo-line arrangement.
The $x$-order or the crossings represents the order induced by the pseudo-verticals.}
\label{fig_gamma_whole_example}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Properties of a Pseudo-Vertical}
As~$\GA{pq}$ always follows a pseudo-line of $\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ or continues in a vertical direction, we can observe the following.
\begin{observation}
For any crossing~$pq$ in a pseudo-line arrangement~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$, the curve $\GA{pq}$ is $x$-monotone.
\end{observation}
The following observation can easily be made by visualizing the arrangement as a wiring diagram.
\begin{observation}\label{obs_level_increasing}
The number of pseudo-lines above a point moving along~$\GA{pq}$ in positive $x$-direction is a monotone function, it increases at every crossing of $\GA{pq}$ with a pseudo-line of~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$.
\end{observation}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem_vertical_pseudo_line}
For any crossing~$pq$ in a pseudo-line arrangement~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$, the curve $\GA{pq}$ is a pseudo-line such that $\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ can be extended by~$\GA{pq}$ to a new (non-simple) pseudo-line arrangement.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let~$n$ be the number of pseudo-lines in~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$.
Since $\GA{pq}$ continues to vertical infinity in both positive and negative $y$-direction, it crosses every pseudo-line of~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ at least once.
From Observation~\ref{obs_level_increasing}, it follows that~$\GA{pq}$ crosses at most~$n$ pseudo-lines.
As~$\GA{pq}$ is an $x$-monotone curve that crosses each pseudo-line of~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ exactly once, an extension of~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ is again a (non-simple) pseudo-line arrangement.
\end{proof}
We say that pseudo-line $a$ is above a crossing $pq$ if $a$ is intersected by the northbound ray of $\GA{pq}$.
If $a$ is intersected by the southbound ray of $\GA{pq}$ it is considered to be below $pq$.
(Note that this is equivalent to $a$ separating $pq$ from the north face or the south face, respectively.)
Just like a vertical line in a line arrangement, a pseudo-vertical defines a total order on the pseudo-lines of~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ by the order it crosses them.
We denote the rank of a pseudo-line $m \in \ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ in this order by $\ensuremath{\mathrm{rk}}_{{pq}}(m)$.
The following lemma shows how we can determine the rank of an element.
Let $L(pq)$ be the set of pseudo-lines in~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ such that each~$a \in L(pq)$ is below $pq$ and $a \prec p$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem_upper_envelope}
The northbound ray of $\GA{pq}$ starting from the crossing $pq$ until reaching an unbounded cell for the first time, follows the upper envelope of the sub-arrangement defined by \mbox{$L(pq) \cup \{p\}$}.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof is by induction on the sequence $\seq{p=a_1, a_2, \dots }$ of pseudo-lines that we follow.
Clearly, the point $pq$ is on the upper envelope of~$L(pq) \cup \{p\}$.
Suppose we traverse $\GA{pq}$ in negative $x$-direction, following a pseudo-line $a_i \in L(pq) \cup \{p\}$.
If~$\GA{pq}$ crosses a pseudo-line~$r$ (i.e., $r$ crosses $a_i$ from below), then~$r$ cannot be below $pq$ as it would have to cross~$\GA{pq}$ again.
If a pseudo-line $a_{i+1}$ crosses $a_i$ from above, then $a_{i+1}$ cannot be above $pq$ as it would have to cross $a_i$ again.
Further, $\GA{pq}$ continues on $a_{i+1}$, keeping the invariant that no element of $L(pq)$ is above the point traversing~$\GA{pq}$.
\end{proof}
Note that every pseudo-line that passes through the upper envelope (from below) will cross~$\GA{pq}$ immediately after that crossing.
\begin{corollary}\label{cor_envelope_order}
Let~$m$ be a pseudo-line in~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ that is above $pq$ and for which there exists a pseudo-line $a \in L(pq) \cup \{p\}$ such that $a \prec m$, i.e., $m$ crosses the upper envelope of $L(pq) \cup \{p\}$ by crossing some $e \in L(pq) \cup \{p\}$ with $e \prec m$.
Then the rank $\ensuremath{\mathrm{rk}}_{pq}(m)$ equals the number of pseudo-lines above the crossing of $e$ and $m$.
\end{corollary}
If~$m$ does not intersect the upper envelope of $L(pq) \cup \{p\}$ at some point in negative $x$-direction of $pq$, it crosses~$q$ before crossing any of the pseudo-lines of~$L(pq)$.
Therefore, we observe:
\begin{observation}\label{obs_rank_above_envelope}
If a pseudo-line $m$ starts above every pseudo-line in~$L(pq)$, then the rank of~$m$ along $\GA{pq}$ is given by the number of pseudo-lines starting above~$m$ increased by~1, i.e., $|\{a \in \ensuremath{\mathcal{A}} : a \prec m \}|+1$.
\end{observation}
\subsection{Ordering Pseudo-Verticals}\label{sec_ordering_pseudo_verticals}
Given two different crossings $pq$ and $rs$ in~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$, it is easy to see that $\GA{pq}$ and $\GA{rs}$ may follow the same part of a pseudo-line.
Nevertheless, one can show that $\GA{pq}$ and $\GA{rs}$ will never intersect when drawn appropriately.
See \fig{fig_non_crossing_vertical} for an illustration accompanying the proof of the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem_vertical_non_crossing}
The set of pseudo-verticals for all crossings of a pseudo-line arrangement~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ can be drawn such that no two pseudo-verticals intersect.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recall that the pseudo-verticals are fully defined by the sequence of cells they traverse.
Further, recall that each bounded cell has a unique leftmost and rightmost crossing.
For two pseudo-verticals to intersect, they have to enter a common cell~$C$.
Suppose first that $C$ is bounded.
Observe that, when traversing, say, $\GA{pq}$ in positive $x$-direction, then~$\GA{pq}$ enters~$C$ from above.
Let $C$ be between the levels $k$ and $(k+1)$.
If the current part of~$\GA{pq}$ is northbound, it enters~$C$ at the $k$-level through the pseudo-line defining the leftmost crossing of~$C$ (in~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$).
If it is southbound, it leaves $C$ at the $(k+1)$-level through the pseudo-line defining the rightmost crossing of~$C$.
For two pseudo-verticals to cross inside $C$, they would have to enter and leave~$C$ through four different pseudo-lines (otherwise, we could draw them without crossing in~$C$, probably changing their relative order in the next cell).
But this can only happen when one pseudo-vertical is northbound and the other is southbound in that cell (as otherwise they would either enter or leave~$C$ through the same pseudo-line), and in that case, there cannot be a crossing inside~$C$, as the pseudo-lines follow the different levels.
Once two, say, southbound rays meet in a cell (i.e., they leave a cell through the same pseudo-line of~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$), they follow the same pseudo-lines until reaching the south face (i.e., they pass through the same sequence of cells), and hence they can be drawn without intersecting each other.
For unbounded cells, the same argument works, with the exception that along the northbound part a pseudo-vertical enters the cell through the leftmost upper pseudo-line (i.e, at level $k$), and the southbound part leaves the cell through the rightmost pseudo-line at level~$(k+1)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics{non_crossing_vertical}
\caption{Four pseudo-verticals (two northbound and two southbound parts) meeting in a common cell.}
\label{fig_non_crossing_vertical}
\end{figure}
\sloppypar{
An augmentation of $\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ with a complete collection of non-intersecting pseudo-verticals defines a total order on the vertices in the arrangement (cf.~the notion of ``$P$-augmentation'' in~\cite{semispaces}).
Given an arrangement of lines, Edelsbrunner and Guibas~\cite{top_sweep,top_sweep_corrig} define a \emph{topological sweep} as a sweep of an arrangement of lines with a moving curve that intersects each line exactly once.
The topological sweep has been generalized to pseudo-line arrangements by Snoeyink and Hershberger~\cite{top_sweep_abstract}.
At any point in time during the sweep, the sweeping curve may pass over at least one crossing of the arrangement, maintaining the property that it intersects each line exactly once.
However, in contrast to a straight vertical line, there can be several crossings that may be passed next by the sweep curve.
It can be observed that we obtain the order of crossings determined by the pseudo-verticals by always sweeping over the lowest-possible crossing in a topological sweep.
In the wiring diagram shown in \fig{fig_gamma_whole_example}, the $x$-order of the crossings represents this order.
}
Lemma~\ref{lem_vertical_non_crossing} shows that we can add pseudo-verticals to an arrangement such that they only intersect at vertical infinity.
Hence, pseudo-verticals can be considered as a $P$-augmentation (cf.~\cite{semispaces}) of the initial arrangement~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$, and we can actually draw a wiring diagram where all the pseudo-verticals can also be represented by vertical lines.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem_order_pseudo_verticals}
The relative order of two pseudo-verticals can be obtained by a linear number of sidedness queries and queries of the form $a \prec b$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For two pseudo-verticals~$\GA{pq}$ and~$\GA{rs}$ (we have $p \prec q$ and $r \prec s$), determining the relative order means we have to find out whether $r$ crosses $s$ before or after crossing $\GA{pq}$, i.e., whether $rs$ is to the left or to the right of~$\GA{pq}$.
The two pseudo-lines defining a crossing naturally partition the plane into four regions, which we call the upper, lower, left, and right \emph{quadrant} of the crossing.
If~$rs$ is in the left quadrant of~$pq$ (i.e., below~$p$ and above~$q$), then $rs$ is definitely to the left of~$\GA{pq}$.
Similarly, if $rs$ is in the right quadrant of $pq$ then~$rs$ is to the right of~$\GA{pq}$.
The analogous holds when exchanging the roles of $pq$ and $rs$.
Therefore, we can assume without loss of generality that $rs$ in the upper quadrant of~$pq$ (as the other case is symmetric), and that $pq$ is either in the upper or lower quadrant of~$rs$.
Consider first the case where~$pq$ is in the upper quadrant of~$rs$.
If $r \prec p$, then $r$ is part of $L(pq)$, and $rs$ is, by Lemma~\ref{lem_upper_envelope}, to the left of~$\GA{pq}$.
Analogously, if $p \prec r$, then $p$ is part of $L(rs)$, and therefore $rs$ is to the right of~$\GA{pq}$.
We are therefore left with the case where~$pq$ is in the lower quadrant of~$rs$.
If there exists a pseudo-line $a \in L(pq)$ that is above~$rs$, we again know by Lemma~\ref{lem_upper_envelope} that $rs$ is to the left of~$\GA{pq}$.
If no such pseudo-line exists, then $\ensuremath{\mathrm{rk}}_{pq}(r) < \ensuremath{\mathrm{rk}}_{pq}(s)$, and therefore, the crossing $rs$ is to the right of~$\GA{pq}$.
\end{proof}
\section{Linear-Time Pseudo-Line Selection}\label{sec_levels_algorithm}
We now discuss algorithmic properties of pseudo-verticals.
For the definition of pseudo-verticals and rank we assumed full knowledge about~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$.
The next task will be to make the notions accessible in the setting where we can only query the abstract order type through an oracle.
At the end we aim at using the oracle to select a pseudo-line of given rank w.r.t.\ a pseudo-vertical in $O(n)$ time.
\subsection{An Oracle for an Arrangement}\label{sec_arrangement_oracle}
Before answering queries on a pseudo-line arrangement, we need to have an internal representation of the arrangement (without explicitly building it).
Let $P$ be a predicate representing an abstract order type on a set $S$ as a counterclockwise oracle, i.e., if there is a primal point set for $S$ then $P(x,y,z)$ tells us whether the three points form a counterclockwise oriented triangle or not, in the general setting $P$ represents a chirotope.
From~\cite{extreme_journal} we borrow a linear-time procedure to determine an extreme point~$x$ of~$S$ using only queries to $P$.
We then use the following internal representation: For all $a \in S \setminus \{x\}$, we define that $x \prec a$.
For two points $a, a' \in S \setminus \{x\}$, we define that $a \prec a'$ if and only if $P(x,a,a')$, i.e., in the arrangement the crossing $ax$ precedes~$a'x$ on~$x$.
For two points $p,q \in S$ with $p \prec q$, the dual pseudo-line $r$ is below the crossing~$pq$ if and only if $P(p,q,r)$.
Hence, for three points $u,v,w \in S \setminus \{x\}$, the dual line $r$ is below the crossing defined by the (unordered) pair $(u,v)$ if and only if $P(u,v,w) = P(u,v,x)$, i.e., above/below queries for the arrangement of pseudo-lines corresponding to $P$ can be answered in constant time.
Note that a constant number of these queries also specify whether the crossing $ap$ precedes the crossing $bp$ on $p$.
Observe that, with this representation, the first unbounded cell we meet when traversing~$\GA{pq}$ against its direction is the north face, because every pseudo-line is crossed by the pseudo-line~$x$ from above (see again \fig{fig_gamma_whole_example}).
However, we will not make use of this fact in the remainder of this paper, in particular since we use the fact that the problem is symmetric when exchanging the role of the north face and the south face (which corresponds to rotating the arrangement by~$180^\circ$).
Our linear-time rank selection algorithm will depend on removing a linear fraction of the pseudo-lines in each iteration.
However, the procedure must not remove the extreme point~$x$, to keep the sub-arrangements consistent with the full arrangement.
\subsection{Selecting a Pseudo-Line}\label{sec_selecting_pseudo_line}
For a given $k$, we want to select the pseudo-line~$m$ of rank~$k$ along $\GA{pq}$.
For a subset $B$ of pseudo-lines and $m\in B$, we denote with $\ensuremath{\mathrm{rk}}_{pq}(m,B)$ the rank of $m$ within $B$ on $\GA{pq}$.
In the straight-line version, a linear-time selection algorithm can be used to find an element of rank~$k$ in $O(n)$ time.
This relies on the fact that the relative position of two lines can be computed in constant time.
Comparing $\ensuremath{\mathrm{rk}}_{pq}(s)$ and $\ensuremath{\mathrm{rk}}_{pq}(r)$ in the abstract setting can be reduced to deciding whether the crossing $rs$ is below some pseudo-line $a \in L(pq) \cup \{p\}$.
Doing this naively results in a linear number of queries and hence we get a selection algorithm with $\Omega(n^2)$ worst-case behavior.
We therefore need a more sophisticated method.
When discussing the relative position of two pseudo-verticals, we have seen that checking whether a crossing $rs$, $r \prec s$, is below~$\GA{pq}$ (in which case we have $\ensuremath{\mathrm{rk}}_{pq}(s) < \ensuremath{\mathrm{rk}}_{pq}(r)$), may require to determine whether $rs$ is below a pseudo-line $a \in L(pq)$, which, in the worst case, results in a linear number of comparisons.
Let $m$ be the (unknown) pseudo-line of rank $k$ within $B$.
We use a prune-and-search approach to identify~$m$.
By counting the elements of $B$ above $pq$, we determine whether $m$ is above or below $pq$ (using $O(n)$ queries).
Without loss of generality, assume $m$ is above $pq$ (the other case is symmetric) and let $U$ be the set of pseudo-lines above $pq$.
Since removing pseudo-lines from $U$ does not change the structure of the northbound part of~$\GA{pq}$, we can restrict attention to $U_B = U \cap B$.
We can also ignore (remove) pseudo-lines below $pq$ that are not in $L(pq)$, i.e., each pseudo-line~$l$ below $pq$ such that $p \prec l$.
As a next step, we can, in linear time, verify whether $m$ starts above all pseudo-lines in $L(pq) \cup \{p\}$.
If this is the case, the rank of $m$ is determined by the order in which the pseudo-lines start, and we can apply the standard selection algorithm using this order (recall Observation~\ref{obs_rank_above_envelope}).
We are therefore left with the case where $m$ starts below some element $a \in L(pq) \cup \{p\}$.
By Corollary~\ref{cor_envelope_order}, we know that we have to find the pseudo-line $e$ where $m$ crosses the upper envelope of $L(pq) \cup \{p\}$ (recall that we have $e \prec m$).
Basically, the algorithm continues as follows.
We alternatingly remove elements in $U_B$ and $L(pq)$ such that the pseudo-lines $e$ and $m$ remain in the respective set until we are left with only a constant number of pseudo-lines in the arrangement.
We describe these two pruning steps in two versions, first in a randomized version and after that in a deterministic version.
In particular the pruning of $U_B$ turns out to be much simpler in the randomized version.
\subsubsection{Randomized Pruning}
We first show how to remove pseudo-lines from~$U_B$:
Pick uniformly at random a pseudo-line $u \in U_B$.
In time proportional to the size of $L(pq)$ we find the last $a \in L(pq) \cup \{p\}$ crossed by $u$.
Since the crossing of $u$ with $\GA{pq}$ is immediately after the crossing with $a$ we can use the crossing $ua$ to split $U_B$ into elements of rank less than $\ensuremath{\mathrm{rk}}_{pq}(u,U_B)$ and elements of larger rank.
One of the two sets can be pruned.
Now we turn to removing pseudo-lines from~$L(pq)$:
One approach is to consider the $k$-level $\sigma$ in the sub-arrangement induced by $U_B$.
We observe that no element of $L(pq)$ can cross $\sigma$ from below before $\sigma$ crosses the upper envelope of $L(pq) \cup \{p\}$, as such a pseudo-line of $L(pq)$ would have to cross that element of $U_B$ again before $pq$.
All pseudo-lines in $L(pq)$ that start below $\sigma$ can therefore be pruned.
Among the remaining elements of $L(pq)$, the crossings with $\sigma$ define a total order.
From the remaining elements, pick, uniformly at random, a pseudo-line $b \in L(pq)$ and select (in $O(n)$ time) the pseudo-line $m' \in U_B$ where $b$ crosses $\sigma$.
We know that $m'$ is unique for the choice of~$b$.
We may prune all elements $b' \in L(pq)$ that are below $bm'$, as no element of $L(pq)$ can cross $\sigma$ more than once, and hence, no such $b'$ can be $e$ (the pseudo-line where $m$ leaves the upper envelope of $L(pq) \cup \{p\}$).
The total order on the remaining elements in $L(pq)$ implies that we can expect half of the elements to be pruned.
With the target of obtaining a deterministic version of our algorithm in mind, we describe the following alternative variant for pruning $L(pq)$.
Suppose we are given any crossing~$vw$, with $v,w \in L(pq)$ and $v \prec w$, on the upper envelope of $L(pq) \cup \{p\}$; see \fig{fig_prune_envelope}.
Let $\ensuremath{\mathrm{lv}}(vw)$ be the number of pseudo-lines of~$U_B$ above the crossing $vw$.
Depending on the value of $\ensuremath{\mathrm{lv}}(vw)$, we remove the pseudo-lines of $L(pq)$ that cannot be on the part of the upper envelope that contains the crossing with~$m$:
On $p$ consider the crossings $vp$ and $wp$.
Elements of $L(pq)$ that contribute to the upper envelope between $vw$ and $pq$ cross $p$ after $wp$.
Similarly, elements of $L(pq)$ that contribute to the upper envelope between the north face and $vw$ cross $p$ before $vp$.
Hence, depending on $\ensuremath{\mathrm{lv}}(vw)$, we can remove either the pseudo-lines in~$L(pq)$ that cross $p$ before~$wp$ or after~$vp$.
It remains to choose $vw$ to prune enough points.
The median~$t$ of the intersections of pseudo-lines from~$L(pq)$ with $p$ can be found with a linear number of queries (even deterministically).
Based on~$t$, we partition $L(pq)$ into the left part $L$ and the right part $R$.
Find the $\prec$-minimal element $r^\star$ of $R$ and remove all elements $l \in L$ with $r^\star \prec l$.
The removed elements do not contribute to the upper envelope of $L(pq) \cup \{p\}$.
If all elements of $L$ are removed by that, we are done.
Otherwise, we want to find the unique crossing $vw$ of a pseudo-line $v \in L$ and a pseudo-line $w \in R$ on the upper envelope of $L(pq)$.
Observe that, in the primal, $vw$ corresponds to an edge of the convex hull of $L(pq) \cup \{p\}$ that is stabbed by the supporting line of $pt$.
Finding $vw$ in linear time is described in~\cite{extreme_journal}.
For the sake of self-containment, we give a description of the randomized variant of that algorithm in terms of calls to our oracle.
We start by picking, uniformly at random, a pseudo-line $r\in R$ and then determine the last crossing $rl$ with a pseudo-line from $L$ on $r$.
It can be argued (cf.~Lemma~\ref{lem:prune_LR}) that every pseudo-line $r' \in R$ whose crossing with $l$ is behind the crossing $rl$ fails to be a candidate for $w$ and can hence be removed.
We expect to remove half of the pseudo-lines from $R$ through this.
A symmetric step can be used to reduce the size of $L$.
By always applying the reduction to the larger of the two we obtain a procedure that outputs the pair $vw$ with expected $O(|L(pq)|)$ queries.
Next we determine which elements of $U_B$ are above and which below $vw$.
From this we deduce whether the element $m\in U_B$ with $\ensuremath{\mathrm{rk}}_{pq}(m,U_B)=k$ intersects $\GA{pq}$ in the part where it follows the envelope of $L$ or where it follows the envelope of $R$.
Depending on this we can either prune $L$ or $R$ from $L(pq)$.
It remains to show that the expected number of queries is in~$O(n)$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics{prune_envelope}
\caption{Partitioning the pseudo-lines in $L(pq)$ along~$p$ by a pseudo-line~$t$.}
\label{fig_prune_envelope}
\end{figure}
We begin with the analysis of the expected number of oracle calls.
The justification of some of the claims that are made is in the lemmas below.
(They are closely related to arguments used in~\cite{extreme_journal} in the primal, and are stated here in terms of queries to our oracle for the sake of self-containment.)
\begin{theorem}
Given an arrangement~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ of pseudo-lines, a subset~$B$ of its pseudo-lines, a crossing $pq$, and a natural number $k \leq |B|$, the pseudo-line~$m \in B$ with $\ensuremath{\mathrm{rk}}_{pq}(m,B) = k$, can be found with a randomized algorithm that uses an expected linear number of calls to the oracle representing $\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Deciding whether $m$ is above or below $pq$ and computing the initial sets $U_B$ and $L(pq)$ can be done deterministically with a linear number of queries.
A pruning step for $U_B$ requires $O(|U_B|+|L(pq)|)$ queries.
We prune $U_B$ only if $|L(pq)| \leq |U_B|$ and in expectation we prune at least one quarter of the elements of $U_B$.
Therefore, the expected number of queries to select $m$ from $B$ is linear in $|B|$.
A pruning step for $L(pq)$ starts with the median computation on $p$.
This requires $O(|L(pq)|)$ queries in expectation.
After that we have the sets $L$ and~$R$ and again with a linear number of queries we make sure that $l \prec r$ for all $l \in L$ and $r \in R$.
Iteratively prune the larger of $L$ and $R$ with $O(|L|+|R|)$ queries.
Upon pruning the expected size of the set halves (Lemma~\ref{lem:exp-pru-size}).
Hence, for pruning steps on $L$ we expect to use $O(|L|)$ queries and symmetrically for $R$.
Finally, we need $O(|U_B|)$ to decide which of $L$ and $R$ can be discarded.
Since $|U_B|\leq |L(pq)|$ we conclude that halving the size of $L(pq)$ can be done with $O(|L(pq)|)$ queries.
Thence the total number of queries used in the pruning of $L(pq)$ is expected to be in $O(|L(pq)|)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:prune_LR}
Let $l$ be the last pseudo-line crossing $r$ and let $r'$ be a pseudo-line crossing $l$ after the crossing $rl$, then $r' \neq w$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose there is a pseudo-line $a \in L$ such that $ar'$ is the crossing on the upper envelope.
Then it follows that the crossing $l r$ is above $r'$ and because $a \prec r$ the crossing $ar$ is below $r'$.
This, however implies that on $r$ the crossing with $l$ precedes the crossing with $a$.
This is a contradiction to the choice of $l$.
\end{proof}
The dual pruning of $L$ is as follows:
Pick uniformly at random a pseudo-line $l\in L$ and determine the first crossing $rl$ with a pseudo-line from $R$ on $l$.
From Lemma~\ref{lem:prune_LR-2} we obtain that every pseudo-line $l'\in L$ whose crossing with $r$ precedes the crossing $rl$ fails to be a candidate for $v$ and can hence be removed.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:prune_LR-2}
Let $r$ be the first pseudo-line crossing $l$ and let $l'$ be a pseudo-line crossing $r$ before the crossing $l r$, then $l' \neq v$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose there is a pseudo-line $b \in R$ such that $l'b$ is the crossing on the upper envelope.
Then it follows that the crossing $l'b$ is above $l$ and because $l \prec r$ the crossing $l'r$ is below $l$.
This, however implies that on $l$ the crossing with $b$ precedes the crossing with $r$.
This is a contradiction to the choice of $r$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:complete}
For every pair $(l,l')$ of pseudo-lines in $L$ we have: if $l'$ is not removed when choosing $l$ as the (random) pseudo-line for pruning, then $l$ is removed when $l'$ is chosen as the (random) pseudo-line for pruning.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
If the same pseudo-line $r \in R$ is the first to cross $l$ and $l'$, then the statement is obvious.
If $r$ is the first to cross $l$ and $r'$ is the first on $l'$, then there must be a crossing of $rr'$ between $l r$ and $l r'$ on $r$.
Hence on $r'$ the crossing with $l$ precedes the crossing with $l'$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:exp-pru-size}
The expected size of the set obtained with a pruning step from $L$ is at most $|L|/2$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
On the set $L$ we define a directed graph $G_L$ with edges $l \to l'$ if $l'$ is removed when choosing $l$ as the (random) pseudo-line for pruning.
Lemma~\ref{lem:complete} implies that $G_L$ is a tournament.
The expected number of pseudo-lines removed in the pruning equals the expected out-degree plus one.
The precise value is $(|L|+1)/2$ so in expectation less than $|L|/2$ pseudo-lines remain.
\end{proof}
The analogous statements of Lemma~\ref{lem:complete} and Lemma~\ref{lem:exp-pru-size} for the set~$R$ are true as well.
\paragraph*{Remark.} Note that, by removing pseudo-lines from $L(pq)$, we obtain a new arrangement~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}'$, in which the pseudo-vertical~$\GA{pq}$ will, in general, follow different pseudo-lines from $L(pq)$ along its northbound ray.
Still, the number of pseudo-lines above the crossing $em$ that we look for remains the same, and $m$ will have the same rank with respect to the new pseudo-vertical $\GA{pq}'$ in~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}'$.
\subsubsection{Deterministic Pruning}
To remove pseudo-lines from~$L(pq)$ deterministically, we can directly apply the deterministic algorithm given in~\cite{extreme_journal} to find~$vw$ after~$O(n)$ queries.
Recall that to remove elements of~$U_B$, we pick a pseudo-line~$u \in U_B$.
We compute the rank $\ensuremath{\mathrm{rk}}_{pq}(u,B)$ by finding the corresponding pseudo-line~$b \in L(pq) \cup \{p\}$ at which $u$ passes through the upper envelope of $L(pq) \cup \{p\}$.
Clearly, this can be done in linear time using our basic operations.
If $u = m$, we are done.
If $\ensuremath{\mathrm{rk}}_{pq}(u,B) < k$, then all pseudo-lines in $U_B$ below $bu$ can be removed (we will see how to choose~$u$ to remove a constant fraction of the pseudo-lines).
Otherwise, we remove all pseudo-lines in $U_B$ above $bu$ and update~$k$ accordingly.
While by this operation we obtain a new arrangement~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}'$, the northbound ray of~$\GA{pq}$ in~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}'$ is defined by the same pseudo-lines as in~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$, and we can therefore safely continue with the next iteration.
It remains to show how to pick $u$ in a deterministic way such that at least a constant fraction of~$U_B$ can be removed.
To this end, we use the concept of $\varepsilon$-approximation of range spaces.
Our definitions follow~\cite{new_trends_matousek}.
A \emph{range space} is a pair $\Sigma = (X, \mathcal{R})$ where $X$ is a set and $\mathcal{R}$ is a set of subsets of~$X$.
The elements of $\mathcal{R}$ are called \emph{ranges}.
For $X$ being finite, a subset $A \subseteq X$ is an \emph{$\varepsilon$-approximation} for $\Sigma$ if, for every range $R \in \mathcal{R}$, we have
\[
\abs{\frac{\abs{A \cap R}}{\abs{A}} - \frac{\abs{X \cap R}}{\abs{X}}} \leq \varepsilon \enspace .
\]
A subset $Y$ of $X$ is \emph{shattered} by $\mathcal{R}$ if every possible subset of~$Y$ is a range of~$Y$.
The \emph{Vapnik-Chervonenkis dimension} (VC-dimension) of $\Sigma$ is the maximum size of a shattered subset of $X$.
For sets with finite VC-dimension, Vapnik and Chervonenkis~\cite{vapnik_chervonenkis} give the following seminal result.
\begin{theorem}[Vapnik, Chervonenkis~\cite{vapnik_chervonenkis}]\label{finite_vc}
Any range space of VC-di\-men\-sion $d$ admits an $\varepsilon$-approximation of size $O(d/\varepsilon^2 \log(d/\varepsilon))$.
\end{theorem}
For $|X| = n$, the \emph{shatter function} $\pi_\mathcal{R}(n)$ of a range space $(X, \mathcal{R})$ is defined by
\[
\pi_\mathcal{R}(n) = \max\{\abs{\{ Y \cap R : R \in \mathcal{R} \}} : Y \subseteq X\} \enspace .
\]
Vapnik and Chervonenkis~\cite{vapnik_chervonenkis} show that, for a range space $(X, \mathcal{R})$ of VC-dimension $d$, $\pi_\mathcal{R}(n) \in O(n^d)$ holds.
Matou\v{s}ek~\cite{matousek_approximations_conf,matousek_approximations_journal} gives, for a constant~$\varepsilon$, a linear-time algorithm for computing a constant-size $\varepsilon$-approximation for range spaces of finite VC-dimension $d$ (simplified by Chazelle and Matou\v{s}ek~\cite{chazelle_matousek}), provided there exists a subspace oracle.
\begin{definition}\label{def_subspace_oracle}
A \emph{subspace oracle} for a range space $(X, \mathcal{R})$ is an algorithm that returns, for a given subset $Y \subseteq X$, the set of all distinct intersections of $Y$ with the ranges in $\mathcal{R}$, i.e., the set $\{Y \cap R : R \in \mathcal{R}\}$ and runs in time $O(|Y|\cdot h)$, where $h$ is the number of sets returned.
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}[{Matou\v{s}ek~\cite[Theorem~4.1]{matousek_approximations_conf}}]\label{thm_vc_linear_time}
Let $\Sigma = (X,\mathcal{R})$ be a range space with the shatter function $\pi_\mathcal{R}(n) \in O(n^d)$, for a constant $d \geq 1$.
Given a subspace oracle for $\Sigma$ and a parameter $r \geq 2$, a $(1/r)$-approximation for $\Sigma$ of size $O(r^2 \log r)$ can be computed in time $O(|X|(r^2 \log r)^d)$.
\end{theorem}
Observe that, for such a range space, the running time of the subspace oracle is bounded by $O(|Y|^{d+1})$, as $h$ is at most $\pi_\mathcal{R}(|Y|)$.
Suppose that, e.g., $X$ is a point set in the Euclidean plane and $\mathcal{R}$ consists of all possible subsets of $X$ defined by half-planes, defining a range space $\Sigma = (X, \mathcal{R})$.
Hence, $\mathcal{R}$ is the set of \emph{semispaces} defined by the order type of~$X$.
The VC-dimension of $(X,\mathcal{R})$ is known to be~$3$~\cite{new_trends_matousek}. %
Hence, a constant-size $\varepsilon$-approximation of a point set for~$\mathcal{R}$ exists.
(As pointed out in~\cite{lo_matousek_steiger}, this approximation allows constructing an approximate ham-sandwich cut in constant time, such that on every side of the cut there are no more than $1/2 + \varepsilon$ of the points of each class.)
The subspace oracle returns, for any subset~$Y$ of points, all possible ways a line can separate $Y$, which can easily be done in time $O(\abs{Y}^3)$.
The VC-dimension of~3 for that range space holds also for abstract order types (see also~\cite{gaertner_welzl}).
A subspace oracle for semispaces of a given set can easily be implemented using the definition of a semispace by allowable sequences~\cite{semispaces};
for each pair $f,g \in Y, f \prec g,$ in the dual pseudo-line arrangement, we report the pseudo-lines above the crossing $fg$ and, say, $f$ as a semispace, and the pseudo-lines below $fg$ and $g$ as a second semispace.
Consider again the set $U_B$ of pseudo-lines above the crossing $pq$ in~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$.
Using Theorem~\ref{thm_vc_linear_time}, we obtain an $\varepsilon$-approximation $A \subset U$ for the range space of semispaces, i.e., the pseudo-lines of~$U$ above and below a point in~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$.
$A$ is of constant size for a fixed~$\varepsilon$.
For each pseudo-line $o \in A$, we obtain the crossing of~$o$ with the pseudo-lines in~$L(pq)$ that defines the rank $\ensuremath{\mathrm{rk}}_{pq}(o)$ in $O(n)$ time.
Let $u_A \in A$ have the median rank among the elements of~$A$.
Then not less than $1/2-\varepsilon$ pseudo-lines of $U$ are above and below the crossing $bu_A$ on the upper envelope of $L(pq)$;
we may prune a constant fraction of the elements in~$U_B$.
\subsubsection{Analysis}
In each iteration, our problem consists of the remaining pseudo-lines in~$U$ and in~$L(pq)$, plus a constant number of additional pseudo-lines (i.e., $p, q,$ and the pseudo-lines needed by the oracle, in our case the pseudo-line~$x$).
Let~$n$ be the number of these pseudo-lines.
In each iteration we prune the larger of $U$ and $L(pq)$.
In both cases, we remove at least half of the pseudo-lines on one side of $pq$, and therefore $n/4-O(1)$ pseudo-lines in each iteration.
Since each iteration takes $O(n)$ time, we have overall a linear-time prune-and-search algorithm.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm_slope_abstract}
Given an arrangement~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ of pseudo-lines, a subset~$B$ of its pseudo-lines, a crossing $pq$, and a natural number $k \leq |B|$, the pseudo-line~$m \in B$ of rank~$k$ in $B$ on the pseudo-vertical through $pq$, i.e., $\ensuremath{\mathrm{rk}}_{pq}(m,B)$, can be found in linear time using only sidedness queries on the corresponding abstract order type.
\end{theorem}
\paragraph*{Remark.}
Several years before the linear-time algorithm for ham-sandwich cuts~\cite{lo_matousek_steiger} was developed, Megiddo~\cite{megiddo} considered the following restricted version of the ham-sandwich cut problem.
Given a set of red and a set of blue points with disjoint convex hulls, find a line that bisects both the red and the blue point set.
Actually, the resulting line does not have to be a bisector, but the number of red and blue points on one side of the line can be chosen arbitrarily.
In the dual representation, we are given $m$ blue lines with positive slope and $n$ red lines with negative slope, and we want to find the intersection point between a $k_1$-level in the blue lines and the $k_2$-level in the red lines.
If we consider the pseudo-lines in $L(pq) \cup \{p\}$ as red pseudo-lines and the pseudo-lines in $U$ as the blue ones, we are looking for the intersection point between the $k$-level in $U$ and the 1-level in $L(pq) \cup \{p\}$.
However, Megiddo's algorithm also depends on the realization of the line arrangement;
the algorithm requires selecting the median of a subset of crossings ordered by their $x$-coordinate and selecting the intersections of a given rank at vertical lines.
These problems also have to be solved when abstracting the general ham-sandwich cut algorithm.
\section{Revisiting the Ham-Sandwich Cut Algorithm}
\label{sec_ham_sandwich_revisited}
In this section, we describe an application of pseudo-verticals for a bisection algorithm, namely the linear-time ham-sandwich cut algorithm by Lo, Matou\v{s}ek, and Steiger~\cite{lo_matousek_steiger} (the LMS algorithm).
To this end, we revisit the description given in~\cite{lo_matousek_steiger}; we adapt some of the terminology (like replacing ``line'' with ``pseudo-line'') and argue for the correspondence between entities in the original description and their abstract counterpart.
Lo, Matou\v{s}ek, and Steiger~\cite{lo_matousek_steiger} describe two different variants of the algorithm, one for points in the plane and the other one for points in arbitrary dimension (their work is a generalization of a 2-dimensional version by Lo and Steiger presented in~\cite{lo_steiger}).
For the 2-dimensional case, a result by Matou\v{s}ek~\cite[Theorem~3.2]{matousek_construction} is used for appropriately selecting a set of vertical lines.
In higher dimensions, they use a different approach (given in~\cite{matousek_approximations_conf}) based on an $\varepsilon$-approximation with the ranges being defined as sets of hyperplanes that are stabbed by segments (we will give a formal definition later).
While the higher-dimensional variant appears to be less instructive, it is easier to apply to our setting.
We therefore will use this variant for our 2-dimensional setting; here, we do not give the description for arbitrary dimension, but transcribe it to dimension~2 only.
Still, our exposition closely follows~\cite{lo_matousek_steiger}, while merely pointing out the parts where the applicability to our abstract setting might not be obvious.
Let $P$ be a finite set of $n$ points in the Euclidean plane.
A line~$h$ \emph{bisects}~$P$ if no more than $n/2$ points lie in either of the open half-planes defined by~$h$.
We call $h$ a \emph{bisector}.
If $P$ is a disjoint union of two point sets $P_1, P_2$, a \emph{ham-sandwich cut} is a line that simultaneously bisects both $P_1$ and $P_2$ (a \emph{red} and a \emph{blue} set).
This definition extends to abstract order types in a natural way.
It is well-known that a ham-sandwich cut always exists.
Let $T$ be an interval on the $x$-axis, and let $V(T)$ be the vertical slab between the two vertical lines defining~$T$.
The interval has the \emph{odd intersection property} with respect to the levels $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ if $|(\lambda_1 \cap \lambda_2) \cap V(T)|$ is odd.
If $k = \floor{(n+1)/2}$, the $k$-level is called \emph{median level}.
In our case, each slab is defined by two pseudo-verticals.
The algorithm works in a prune-and-search manner.
Let us first consider the setting where we are given an actual set of points in~$\ensuremath{\mathbb{E}}^2$.
In every iteration, we are given
\begin{itemize}
\item an interval $T$ on the $x$-axis,
\item two sets $G_1$ and $G_2$ of lines dual to a subset of points in $P_1$ and $P_2$, respectively, with $|G_1| = n_1$ and $|G_2| = n_2$, and
\item two integers $k_1$ and $k_2$, with $1 \leq k_1 \leq n_1$ and $1 \leq k_2 \leq n_2$, denoting the $k_1$-level $\lambda_1$ and the $k_2$-level~$\lambda_2$, respectively.
\end{itemize}
Further, we know that $T$ has the odd intersection property for the $k_1$-level and the $k_2$-level.
We denote the arrangements corresponding to $G_1$ and $G_2$ with $\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}_1$ and $\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}_2$, respectively.
Initially, $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ are the median levels of the two arrangements (for which the odd intersection property holds).
Without loss of generality, suppose $n_1 \geq n_2$.
The algorithm consists of the following four steps:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Divide $T$ into a constant number of subintervals $T_1, \dots, T_C$, to limit the number of pseudo-lines that are on $\lambda_1$ within each subinterval.
\item Find a subinterval $T_j$ with the odd intersection property.
\item Construct a trapezoid $\tau \subset V(T_j)$ such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\lambda_1 \cap V(T_j) \subset \tau$, and
\item at most half of the lines of $\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}_1$ intersect $\tau$.
\end{enumerate}
\item Discard the lines of $\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}_1$ that do not intersect $\tau$, update $k_1$ accordingly and continue within the interval~$T_j$.
\end{enumerate}
In our abstract setting, the interval~$T$ is given by a pair of pseudo-verticals.
Recall that there is a total order on the pseudo-verticals of a pseudo-line arrangement.
The trapezoid~$\tau$ will also be replaced by a corresponding structure that will be described later.
\subsection{Obtaining Intervals}
Step~1 in the algorithm is the one that is technically most involved.
The straight-line version can be solved using the following result by Matou\v{s}ek.%
\footnote{Lo, Matou\v{s}ek, and Steiger~\cite{lo_matousek_steiger} refer to~\cite{matousek_construction}, where~\cite[Lemma~4.5]{haussler_welzl} (Lemma~\ref{lem_corridors} herein) is used, and also refer to~\cite{matousek_approximations_conf} in this context, where a general algorithm for constructing $\varepsilon$-approximations is given.
}
\begin{lemma}[Matou\v{s}ek]\label{lem_segment_ranges}
Let $H$ be a collection of $n$ hyperplanes in $\ensuremath{\mathbb{E}}^d$ and let $\mathcal{R}$ be all subsets of $H$ of the form $\{h \in H : h \cap s \neq \emptyset \}$ where $s$ is a segment in~$\ensuremath{\mathbb{E}}^d$.
An $\varepsilon$-approximation for the range space $(H,\mathcal{R})$ of size $O(\varepsilon^{-2} \log (1/\varepsilon))$ can be computed in time $O(f(\varepsilon)n)$, where $f(\varepsilon)$ is a factor depending on $\varepsilon$ and $d$ only.
\end{lemma}
Let us go into the details why this lemma also holds for arrangements of pseudo-lines.
To this end, a general result by Haussler and Welzl~\cite{haussler_welzl} is used.
\begin{lemma}[{Haussler, Welzl~\cite[Lemma~4.5]{haussler_welzl}}]\label{lem_corridors}
Assume $k \geq 1$ and $(X,\mathcal{R})$ is a range space of VC-dimension $d \geq 2$.
Let~$\mathcal{R}'$ be the set of all sets of the form $\bigcup_{i=1}^k R_i - \bigcap_{i=1}^k R_i$, where $R_i$ is a range in~$\mathcal{R}$, $1 \leq i \leq k$.
Then $(X, \mathcal{R}')$ has VC-dimension less than $2dk \log(dk)$.
\end{lemma}
We already discussed that a range space defined by the semispaces of an abstract order type has VC-dimension~3.
We can combine this fact with Lemma~\ref{lem_corridors} in the following way.
Consider two semispaces $S_1$ and $S_2$ of an abstract order type, defined by the pseudo-lines above two points $p_1$ and $p_2$ in the corresponding pseudo-line arrangement~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ (for simplicity, suppose that none of $p_1$ and $p_2$ lie on a pseudo-line of~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$).
Let $R = (S_1 \cup S_2) \setminus (S_1 \cap S_2)$.
Then $R$ consists exactly of the pseudo-lines that separate $p_1$ from $p_2$.
By the Levi Enlargement Lemma (see \cite{levi}), we can extend~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ by a pseudo-line through any two points, and therefore obtain a pseudo-line $\chi$ for~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ containing both $p_1$ and $p_2$.
Consider the part of $\chi$ between $p_1$ and $p_2$.
We call such a part a \emph{pseudo-segment}.
The pseudo-lines crossed by this pseudo-segment are exactly those in~$R$.
Applying Lemma~\ref{lem_corridors}, we can therefore obtain a range space that is defined by the pseudo-lines that can be crossed by pseudo-segments from the range space defined by the semispaces;
this new range space has again finite VC-dimension.
(Note that, while we explained the application of Lemma~\ref{lem_corridors} using points $p_1$ and $p_2$, the argument also holds for pseudo-segments defined by crossings of~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$, as the endpoints of the pseudo-segment can be perturbed to be in one of the four cells adjacent to a crossing.)
Using Matou\v{s}ek's linear-time algorithm for obtaining an $\varepsilon$-approximation~\cite[Theorem~4.1]{matousek_approximations_conf}, we can state the following counterpart to Lemma~\ref{lem_segment_ranges} for abstract order types in the plane.
\begin{corollary}\label{cor_corridors_abs}
Let $\Sigma = (X, \mathcal{R})$ be a range space where $X$ is the set of pseudo-lines in a pseudo-line arrangement~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ and $\mathcal{R}$ consists of the sets of pseudo-lines of~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ that are crossed by pseudo-segments obtained on~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$.
Then a $(1/r)$-approximation of constant size for $\Sigma$ can be computed in $O(|X|)$ time for a given $r \geq 2$.
\end{corollary}
For future reference, let us call this range space the \emph{pseudo-segment range space} of the arrangement.
For the ham-sandwich cut algorithm, we can now proceed in the following way.
Using Corollary~\ref{cor_corridors_abs}, we obtain an $\varepsilon$-approximation $A$ for the pseudo-segment range space of~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}_1$;
we choose $\varepsilon = 1/12$ with foresight.
Sort the crossings of $A$ by the order implied by the pseudo-verticals through the crossings on the original arrangement~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$.
Since $A$ is of constant size, this can be done in~$O(|\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}|)$ time.
We use Theorem~\ref{thm_slope_abstract} to determine the $k_1$-level of $\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}_1$ at the pseudo-vertical of each crossing in~$A$.
Hence, for each pseudo-vertical, we get a crossing in $\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ that has level $k_1$ in $\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}_1$.
Counting the elements of $\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}_2$ above each such crossing allows us to find a crossing $pq$ and a crossing $p'q'$ consecutive in~$A$ with the odd intersection property.
We again use Theorem~\ref{thm_slope_abstract} to select the pseudo-lines that are of rank $k_1 - c\varepsilon n_1$ and $k_1 + c \varepsilon n_1$ in~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}_1$ at the pseudo-vertical $\GA{pq}$, and do the same at $\GA{p'q'}$ for a constant $c$ (we fix $c = 3/2$ with foresight).
Hence, we have six crossings in $\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}$ of which we know the level within $\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}_1$.
Let $g_\mathrm{l}$ and $g_\mathrm{r}$ be the crossings at the $k_1$-level along $\GA{pq}$ and $\GA{p'q'}$, respectively.
We denote the crossings at the $(k_1 - c \varepsilon n_1)$-level by $d_\mathrm{l}^-$ and $d_\mathrm{r}^-$.
Their counterparts at the $(k_1 + c \varepsilon n_1)$-level are denoted by $d_\mathrm{l}^+$ and $d_\mathrm{r}^+$.
\subsection{Properties of a Trapezoid-Like Structure}
In the original LMS algorithm~\cite{lo_matousek_steiger}, the points at the given levels were determined by the intersections of the levels with the vertical lines.
These points formed a trapezoid.
However, the actual properties used are the ones of the points and not the ones of the trapezoid as a geometric object.
In this part, we reproduce the line of arguments used in~\cite{lo_matousek_steiger} to show that at least half of the pseudo-lines in~$\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}_1$ are either above both $d_\mathrm{l}^-$ and $d_\mathrm{r}^-$ or below both $d_\mathrm{l}^+$ and $d_\mathrm{r}^+$, and that these pseudo-lines are not on the $k_1$-level between $g_\mathrm{l}$ and $g_\mathrm{r}$.
Consider the arrangement $\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}_1$.
We bound the number of pseudo-lines that separate $d_\mathrm{l}^-$ from $d_\mathrm{r}^-$, i.e., the pseudo-lines crossing a pseudo-segment between $d_\mathrm{l}^-$ and $d_\mathrm{r}^-$.
The levels of $d_\mathrm{l}^-$ and $d_\mathrm{r}^-$ are the same.
Therefore, the numbers of pseudo-lines of the approximation~$A$ above these two crossings differ by at most $2\varepsilon\abs{A}$.
If there would be more than $2\varepsilon\abs{A}$ pseudo-lines of $A$ separating $d_\mathrm{l}^-$ from $d_\mathrm{r}^-$, then at least one of these pseudo-lines would have to be above $d_\mathrm{l}^-$ and below $d_\mathrm{r}^-$, and another one would have to be below $d_\mathrm{l}^-$ and above $d_\mathrm{r}^-$.
Hence, the crossing between these two pseudo-lines would have to be in the interval between $\GA{pq}$ and $\GA{p'q'}$.
But this contradicts the choice of $\GA{pq}$ and $\GA{p'q'}$, as there is no pseudo-vertical through a crossing of two pseudo-lines of~$A$ between them.
Hence, any pseudo-segment between $d_\mathrm{l}^-$ and $d_\mathrm{r}^-$ crosses at most $2\varepsilon\abs{A}$ of the pseudo-lines in~$A$.
By the $\varepsilon$-approximation property, at most $3\varepsilon n_1$ pseudo-lines of $\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}_1$ intersect such a pseudo-segment.
Suppose there is a pseudo-line~$w$ of $\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}_1$ that is above both $d_\mathrm{l}^-$ and $d_\mathrm{r}^-$, but still $w$ is an element of the $k_1$-level between $g_\mathrm{l}$ and $g_\mathrm{r}$.
The part of the arrangement where this can happen is bounded by $\GA{pq}$ and $\GA{p'q'}$.
Then also any pseudo-segment~$s$ between $d_\mathrm{l}^-$ and $d_\mathrm{r}^-$ would have to cross the relevant part of the $k_1$-level (recall that the pseudo-segment can be considered as a part of a pseudo-line in an extended arrangement).
At both $d_\mathrm{l}^-$ and $d_\mathrm{r}^-$, the pseudo-segment~$s$ is at level $(k_1 - c \varepsilon n_1)$, and therefore has to cross $2(k_1 - (k_1 - c \varepsilon n_1)) = 2c\varepsilon n_1$ pseudo-lines to reach the $k_1$-level and then return to level $(k_1 -c \varepsilon n_1)$.
By the choice of $c$, this is exactly $3\varepsilon n_1$, the maximum number of crossings the pseudo-segment~$s$ can have.
Hence, $s$ cannot go below the $k_1$-level and therefore the pseudo-line~$w$ cannot intersect the $k_1$-level.
For our prune-and-search approach, we can therefore remove all pseudo-lines of $\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}_1$ that are above both $d_\mathrm{l}^-$ and $d_\mathrm{r}^-$, and, by symmetric arguments, can do the same for the ones below both $d_\mathrm{l}^+$ and~$d_\mathrm{r}^+$.
It remains to count how many pseudo-lines are removed.
There are exactly $2c \varepsilon n_1$ pseudo-lines separating $d_\mathrm{l}^+$ from $d_\mathrm{l}^-$, as well as $d_\mathrm{r}^+$ from $d_\mathrm{r}^-$.
Further, we argued that there are at most $3\varepsilon n_1$ pseudo-lines between $d_\mathrm{l}^-$ and $d_\mathrm{r}^-$, as well as between $d_\mathrm{l}^+$ and $d_\mathrm{r}^+$.
This amounts to $(4c+6) \varepsilon n_1 = 12 \varepsilon n_1$, where each pseudo-line is counted twice.
Therefore, we have to keep at most $6 \varepsilon n_1 = n_1/2$ pseudo-lines of $\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}_1$.
\subsection{A Note on the Intervals}
After having pruned a linear fraction of pseudo-lines, the algorithm performs another iteration within a smaller interval for which the odd-intersection property holds.
Note that we need to continue within this interval, as the $k_1$-level (for an updated $k_1$) equals the median-level only within that region.
In the geometric variant, the interval was explicitly given by the vertical lines of the current slab.
For pseudo-verticals, we have no such fixed position, and actually the pseudo-verticals will, in general, be different when pseudo-lines are removed from the arrangement (even the relative order of two crossings may change).
However, we can safely define the interval for the subproblem by the two crossings $g_\mathrm{l}$ and~$g_\mathrm{r}$, as the odd intersection property can be seen as a property of two points on one of the two levels (only the number of pseudo-lines of $\ensuremath{\mathcal{A}}_2$ above each of the two points is relevant here).
It is interesting to observe that also $\GA{g_\mathrm{l}}$ and $\GA{g_\mathrm{r}}$ do not have a different relative position in the new arrangement.
\paragraph*{}
With the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm_slope_abstract} and the observations implying that all the remaining parts of the LMS algorithm actually do not depend on the geometric realization, we obtain Theorem~\ref{thm_abstract_ham_sandwich} as our main result.
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we defined a possible replacement of a vertical line in line arrangements for arrangements of pseudo-lines and showed that it fulfills important algorithmic properties.
In particular, we were able to show how to select the $k$th pseudo-line crossed by this pseudo-vertical line and the crossing where this pseudo-line (locally) enters the $k$-level in linear time, using only sidedness queries.
As an application, we showed how these pseudo-vertical lines replace vertical lines in the linear-time ham-sandwich cut algorithm by Lo, Matou\v{s}ek, and Steiger~\cite{lo_matousek_steiger}.
In essence, the order of the pseudo-verticals through all crossings of a pseudo-line arrangement fix one specific allowable sequence for an abstract order type.
Theorem~\ref{thm_slope_abstract} allows us to select certain elements of a permutation in that allowable sequence in linear time.
We have seen that this approach is a generalization of the result presented in~\cite{extreme_journal}.
(Note that the oracle also uses the extreme point~$x$, which, in turn, requires applying Theorem~\ref{thm_slope_abstract}; any internal representation that can answer queries of the form $a \prec b$ in constant time allows us to find an extreme point in linear time.)
Compared to $L(pq)$, pruning $U_B$ deterministically required the technically involved step of selecting an $\varepsilon$-approximation.
Is there a more ``light-weight'' deterministic way to prune $U_B$, similar to the one used for $L(pq)$?
\bibliographystyle{abbrv}
|
\section{Introduction}
Increasingly precise cosmological measurements indicate that about 80\%
of the matter density of the universe is composed of constituents that
are non-baryonic, and neutral under both color and electromagnetic
interactions. However, the precise nature of the particles that make up
this dark matter (DM) remains a mystery. One theoretically appealing
possibility is that DM is composed of Weakly Interacting Massive
Particles (WIMPs), particles with mass of order the weak scale that have
interactions of weak scale strength with the standard model (SM) fields.
This scenario is compelling because, provided the WIMPs were in thermal
equilibrium with the SM at early times, just enough of them survive
today as thermal relics to account for the observed dark matter density.
While the WIMP framework requires that DM have interactions of weak
scale strength with the SM fields, efforts to produce it at high energy
colliders have proven fruitless so far. Likewise, efforts to directly
detect DM in the laboratory through its scattering off nucleons, in
spite of the increased sensitivity of current experiments, have also
been unsuccessful. There are some tentative hints from indirect
detection of DM annihilation to SM today, but there is no conclusive signal.
In the wake of these null results, DM scenarios that
retain the cosmological success of the WIMP framework while satisfying
the current experimental bounds have become increasingly compelling.
The matter fields of the SM ($Q, U^c, D^c, L$ and $E^c$) are known to
come in three copies, or flavors. Different flavors carry the
same charges under the SM gauge groups, but have different couplings to
the Higgs, and so differ in their masses. One interesting possibility,
which has been receiving increased attention, is that DM, like the SM
matter fields, also comes in three flavors
~\cite{Batell:2011tc,Agrawal:2011ze,
Kumar:2013hfa,Lopez-Honorez:2013wla,Kile:2013ola,Batell:2013zwa,
Agrawal:2014una, Agrawal:2014aoa,Hamze:2014wca,Lee:2014rba,Kilic:2015vka}
or has flavor-specific couplings to the
SM~\cite{Kile:2011mn,Kamenik:2011nb,Zhang:2012da,Kile:2014jea}.
Specific DM candidates of
this type include sneutrino DM in supersymmetric extensions of the SM,
and Kaluza-Klein neutrino DM in theories with a universal extra
dimension.
In~\cite{Agrawal:2011ze}, the simplest theories of flavored dark matter
(FDM) were classified, and labelled as lepton flavored, quark flavored
or internal flavored, based on the form of the interactions of the dark
matter candidate with the SM fields. Models in which
the DM has tree level interactions with the SM
leptons but not with the quarks -- as in lepton FDM -- can naturally
account for the observed
abundance of DM while remaining consistent with all experimental
bounds~\cite{Bai:2014osa,Chang:2014tea,Agrawal:2014ufa}.
The reason is that strong production at a hadron collider or scattering off a
nucleus rely on DM-quark interactions, which are loop suppressed in this
scenario. In addition, because the average number of photons generated
in DM annihilation to hadrons is much larger than in the case of DM
annihilation to leptons, the limits from indirect DM searches using
gamma rays are also weaker. Some other indirect signals of DM
annihilation, such as the positron flux, are enhanced for lepton FDM,
but regions of parameter space for which the DM is a thermal relic
remain viable.
In general the couplings of lepton FDM violate the flavor symmetries of
the SM. In order to avoid conflict with the very stringent bounds on
flavor violating processes such as $\mu \rightarrow e \gamma$, while
giving rise to an annihilation cross section of weak scale strength, the
couplings of DM to the SM leptons must be aligned with the SM Yukawa
interactions. In theories where the flavor structure is consistent with
Minimal Flavor Violation (MFV), so that the only sources of flavor
violation are associated with the SM Yukawa couplings, this condition is
automatically satisfied. Then each dark matter flavor is
associated with a corresponding lepton flavor. It is this class of
theories that we shall focus on.
In realizations of FDM that respect MFV, the mass splitting between a
pair of
different DM flavors is dictated by the corresponding SM Yukawa couplings. In simple
models, this splitting is proportional to the
difference in the squares of the Yukawa
couplings, so that for a Dirac fermion we obtain,
\begin{align}
m_{\chi, i} - m_{\chi, j} \simeq
\eta\,
(y_i^2 - y_j^2) \,.
\label{splitting1}
\end{align}
In this expression the index $i = 1,2,3$ runs over the three lepton
flavors $e, \mu, \tau$. While $m_{\chi, i}$ represents the mass of the
$i^{th}$ DM flavor,
$y_i$ represents the Yukawa coupling
corresponding to the $i^{th}$ lepton flavor.
The constant $\eta$ has the dimensions of mass and depends on the
dynamics which UV completes flavor at some high
scale $\Lambda$.
If threshold effects at this scale generate mass splittings at tree
level, $\eta$
can naturally be of order $m_\chi$, where $m_\chi$ is the average DM mass.
In this case the largest splitting, that between the $e$ and $\tau$
flavors, is expected to be in the MeV--GeV range for
weak scale DM.
If tree-level contributions at the threshold are absent,
the leading effects are then loop suppressed. The largest splitting
is then much smaller, in the keV--MeV range.
Since the Yukawa
couplings are small, the splittings between the different DM flavors are
suppressed relative to the mass of each flavor. If the splittings are
smaller than the electron mass, the dominant flavor-conserving decay mode
\begin{align}
\chi_i \rightarrow \chi_j + \nu_i + \bar{\nu}_j
\end{align}
is slow on cosmological timescales, so that the lifetimes of the
heavier flavors are much longer than the age of the universe. Then
all three flavors are expected to contribute to the observed
DM abundance.
Now, suppose a tiny additional source of explicit
flavor breaking is present in the theory, so that the flavor violating
decays
\begin{align}
\chi_i \rightarrow \chi_j + \gamma
\end{align}
can occur on cosmological timescales and dominate over the
flavor-conserving decay. The monochromatic photons
produced in such decays then constitute a striking signal of DM.
Provided this new source of flavor violation is too small to contribute
significantly to the splittings between the different DM flavors, the
frequencies of the resulting gamma ray lines depend on the SM Yukawa
couplings as in eq.~\eqref{splitting1}. The constant of proportionality in
eq.~\eqref{splitting1} cancels out when ratios of frequencies are
considered. For example, if the $\tau$ flavor of DM is the heaviest
and $\chi_e$ the lightest, we
have,
\begin{equation}
\frac{\omega \left(\chi_\tau \rightarrow \chi_\mu \right)}
{\omega \left(\chi_\tau \rightarrow \chi_e \right)}
=
\frac{m_{\tau}^2 - m_{\mu}^2}{m_{\tau}^2 - m_{e}^2}
\approx
1 - \frac{m_{\mu}^2}{m_{\tau}^2}
\end{equation}
Similarly,
\begin{align}
\frac{\omega \left(\chi_\mu \rightarrow \chi_e \right)}
{\omega \left(\chi_\tau \rightarrow \chi_e \right)}
&=
\frac{m_{\mu}^2 - m_{e}^2}{m_{\tau}^2 - m_{e}^2}
\approx
\frac{m_{\mu}^2}{m_{\tau}^2}
\label{eq:couplet}
\end{align}
We see that this scenario predicts a pair of very closely spaced lines
in the keV-MeV region corresponding to the $\chi_\tau \rightarrow
\chi_e$ and $\chi_\tau \rightarrow \chi_\mu$ transitions (the
``couplet''), as well as an isolated line in the eV-keV region.
Remarkably, the ratios of the frequencies of these lines are a firm
prediction of this scenario.
In the next section we review the MFV framework for models of lepton
flavored DM. In section \ref{sec:benchmark} we choose a simple
benchmark to illustrate the
phenomenology of this scenario, focusing on constraints from various
dark matter experiments and potential signals. We conclude in section
\ref{sec:conclusions}.
\section{The Framework}
\label{sec:symmetry}
In this section we study the restrictions that MFV places on the
parameters of theories of lepton FDM. The SM has an approximate $U(3)^5$
flavor symmetry that acts on the three generations of fermions $Q, U^c,
D^c, L$ and $E^c$. This symmetry is explicitly broken by the SM Yukawa
couplings. In extensions of the SM that respect MFV, any new parameter
that violates the SM flavor symmetries must be aligned with the SM
Yukawa couplings. Specifically, the Yukawa couplings of the SM are
promoted to spurions that transform under the $U(3)^5$ flavor symmetry.
Any new interactions are then required to be invariant under this
spurious symmetry.
In the lepton sector of the SM there is an approximate
$U(3)_L\times U(3)_E$ flavor symmetry that acts on
the left-handed $SU(2)$ doublets $L^A$ and $SU(2)$ singlets $E^c_i$. We
denote $U(3)_L$ indices by capital Latin letters and
$U(3)_E$ indices by lowercase Latin letters. This symmetry is
violated by the SM Yukawa interactions,
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{\text{Y}}=Y_{A}^{\phantom{A}i}L^AH^{\dag}E^c_i +\text{h.c. }
\label{eq:smlepyuk}
\end{equation}
We can, however, make the Yukawa interactions formally invariant under
the flavor symmetry by promoting the matrix $Y_{A}^{\phantom{A}i}$ to be
a spurion that transforms as $(\mathbf{3},\mathbf{\bar{3}})$ under
$SU(3)_L\times SU(3)_E$ subgroup of $U(3)_L\times U(3)_E$, and has
appropriate charges under the $U(1)$ factors.
Theories of flavored DM posit a $U(3)_{\chi}$ flavor symmetry that acts
on the DM field $\chi^{\alpha}$. We use lowercase Greek indices to
denote the DM flavor. We focus on the case where the DM field is a
fermion that transforms as a singlet under the SM gauge interactions,
and has renormalizable couplings to the to the $SU(2)$ singlet leptons
$E_i^c$ through a scalar mediator $\phi$. The mediator does not
transform under the SM and DM flavor groups. The relevant interaction
takes the form
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{\lambda}=\lambda_{\alpha}^{\phantom{\alpha}i}
\chi^{\alpha}E^c_i\phi +\text{h.c. .} \label{eq:genDMint}
\end{equation}
This interaction explicitly violates the $U(3)_E \times
U(3)_{\chi}$ symmetry. In general, it will give rise to lepton flavor
violating processes at one loop. However, when MFV is imposed, the form
of this interaction is restricted, with the result that flavor violating
processes are forbidden.
We impose MFV by identifying the DM flavor symmetry $U(3)_\chi$ with the
$U(3)_{E}$ flavor symmetry that acts on the $SU(2)$ singlet leptons in
the SM\footnote{One could also identify $U(3)_\chi$ with the
$U(3)_{L}$ symmetry that acts on the $SU(2)$ doublet leptons (see
\cite{Agrawal:2011ze}), but the main results do not depend on this
choice.}, and requiring that the new interaction be invariant under the
spurious $U(3)^{5}$ symmetry. This leads to a restriction on the form of
$\lambda_{\alpha}^{\phantom{\alpha}j} \equiv \lambda_{i}^{\phantom{i}j}$.
To leading order in $Y_{A}^{\phantom{A}i}$ we then have,
\begin{equation}
\lambda_i^{\phantom{i}j} =
\widehat{\lambda}\delta_i^{\phantom{i}j}+\widetilde{\lambda} Y^{\dag A}_i Y_{A}^{\phantom{A}j}
\label{eq:diracmfvparam1}
\end{equation}
MFV also governs the form of the DM mass matrix. If $\chi$ is a Dirac
fermion we can write the mass term in the Lagrangian as
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{\text{M}}=m_{\alpha}^{\phantom{\alpha}\beta}\overline{\chi}_\beta\chi^\alpha
\equiv m_{i}^{\phantom{i}j}\overline{\chi}_j\chi^i
\;.
\label{eq:diracDMmass}
\end{equation}
MFV restricts the mass matrix to be of the form
\begin{equation}
m_i^{\phantom{i}j} =
\widehat{m}\delta_i^{\phantom{i}j}+\widetilde{m} Y^{\dag A}_i Y_{A}^{\phantom{A}j}
\label{eq:diracmfvparam2}
\end{equation}
Then, in a basis where the lepton mass matrix is diagonal, we see that the
splittings between the different DM mass eigenstates are governed by the
SM Yukawa couplings in accordance with eq.~\eqref{splitting1}.
\begin{figure}[tp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{nu_decay.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{chi_i_to_chi_j.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{a) Flavor preserving decay $\chi_{i}\rightarrow\chi_{j}\nu_{i}\bar{\nu}_{j}$ b) A Feynman diagram contributing to the flavor violating decay $\chi_i\rightarrow \chi_{j}\gamma$}
\label{fig:decays}
\end{figure}
\section{A Benchmark Model}
\label{sec:benchmark}
In this section we construct a simplified benchmark model which exhibits
the features described above and consider its phenomenology in detail.
We choose the dark matter $\chi$ to be a Dirac
fermion which transforms as a fundamental under the SM flavor group
$SU(3)_{E}$. The only additional terms in the Lagrangian
beyond the SM are given by eqs.~\eqref{eq:genDMint} and
\eqref{eq:diracDMmass}.
We assume that the structure of the coupling and mass
terms is restricted by MFV, and follows
eqs.~\eqref{eq:diracmfvparam1} and \eqref{eq:diracmfvparam2}. For
this
benchmark we will further restrict to the special case where the DM
mass terms and couplings generated at the high flavor scale $\Lambda$ are
universal, so that $\tilde{m}$ and $\tilde{\lambda}$ are zero at this
scale. The mass and interaction terms for the DM in four-component
notation at scale $\Lambda$ are then given by,
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}
&=
m_\chi \overline{\chi}_i \chi^i
+
\left[
\frac{\lambda}{2} \,
\bar{\chi}_{i}(1+\gamma^5) e^i \phi^\dagger +\text{h.c.}
\right]\, .
\label{eq:lagrangian}
\end{align}
Here $e^i$ is the four-component spinor corresponding to the
charged leptons of the SM.
The only free parameters in this model are the masses of the
dark matter and the mediator, and a coupling $\lambda$. As we shall
see, the mass
splittings generated in this case are
finite at one loop and do not contain divergent pieces.
Later we will introduce a tiny source of flavor violation.
In what follows we determine the splittings between the different dark
matter flavors. We then compute expressions for the lifetimes of the heavier
flavors in the presence of a small source of flavor violation. This
model is constrained by a number of experiments. Constraints
from $g-2$ of the muon and monophoton searches tend to be subdominant
to direct detection constraints~\cite{Agrawal:2014ufa,
Freitas:2014pua}. LHC constraints on the production
of the mediator $\phi$ and indirect
detection constraints from dark matter annihilations into
positrons and photons can also be relevant.
We study these signals in turn.
\begin{figure}[tp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{chi_2pt_func.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{One-loop correction to the two-point function of $\chi$}
\label{fig:2ptfunc}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Splitting and decays}
The breaking of the lepton flavor
symmetry $U(3)\rightarrow U(1)^{3}$ by the SM lepton Yukawa couplings
is communicated to the DM sector through the
FDM interaction, eq.~\eqref{eq:genDMint}.
Even though they are assumed to be degenerate at tree level,
mass splittings between the three $\chi$ flavors will be induced
at the loop level.
In particular, let us consider the 2-point function for the three flavors
of $\chi$ (see figure \ref{fig:2ptfunc}). The one-loop contributions
are identical in the limit of massless leptons, but at order
${\mathcal O}(m_{\ell}^{2})$ they begin to differ, thereby giving rise to
differences in the wavefunction renormalizations for the $\chi_{i}$.
Due to the chiral nature of the FDM coupling, it is easy to see that
there is no direct mass renormalization. Once the fields
$\chi_{i}$ are brought back to canonical normalization, however, a mass
splitting is induced between them,
\begin{align}
m_{\chi,i}-m_{\chi,j}
&\equiv
\Delta m_{ij}
=
\frac{m_{\chi}\lambda^{2}}{32\pi^{2}}
\int_{0}^{1}dx\,x\,
\log \left(
\frac{x\,m_{\phi}^{2}+(1-x)m_{\ell,i}^{2}-x(1-x)m_{\chi}^{2}}
{x\,m_{\phi}^{2}+(1-x)m_{\ell,j}^{2}-x(1-x)m_{\chi}^{2}}
\right).
\end{align}
To leading order in the Yukawa couplings this yields,
\begin{align}
\frac{\Delta m_{ij}}{m_{\chi}}
\simeq
\frac{\lambda^{2}(y_{\ell,i}^{2}-y_{\ell,j}^{2})}
{64\pi^{2}}\frac{v^{2}}{m_{\phi}^{2}}
F({m_\chi^2}/{m_\phi^2}),
\end{align}
where $y_{\ell}$ denote the Yukawa couplings of each lepton and $v =
246$ GeV is
the Higgs vacuum expectation value. The loop function $F(x)$ is given
by,
\begin{align}
F(x)
&=
-\frac{x+\log(1-x)}{x^2}\simeq \frac12 + \frac{x}{3}
+\mathcal{O}(x^2)
\end{align}
We see that $\chi_{\tau}$ is split significantly further from
$\chi_{e}$ and $\chi_{\mu}$ than these two states are
split from each other. For an overall mass scale $m_{\chi}$ in the GeV
regime and $m_\phi \sim \mathcal{O}(100)$ GeV,
\begin{align}
m_{\chi,\tau} - m_{\chi,\mu}
\simeq
m_{\chi,\tau} - m_{\chi,e}
&\equiv \Delta m \sim \mathrm{keV}\\
m_{\chi,\mu} - m_{\chi,e}
&\equiv \delta m \sim \mathrm{eV} \,.
\label{eq:split}
\end{align}
It is interesting to note that the one-loop splitting calculated above
is a finite effect, suppressed by $v^2 / m_\phi^2$ for large $\phi$
masses. Note that the sign of $\Delta m$ is not arbitrary, and as a
consequence $\chi_\tau$ is the heaviest DM flavor. At two loops there
arises a logarithmically divergent contribution to the mass splitting,
where the log divergence is cut off at the UV flavor scale, $\Lambda$.
This two-loop effect
can become important for very large $m_\phi$ and $\Lambda$. We
estimate
that it is subleading to the finite one-loop calculation
for the range of $m_\phi$ we are interested in, provided the new physics
scale $\Lambda$ is less than 100 TeV.
Once the $\chi$ masses are split by these loop corrections, only the
lightest $\chi$ is truly stable. This is true even in the exact MFV
limit where the $U(1)^{3}$ flavor symmetry is preserved. For this
benchmark, the splittings are smaller than the mass of the electron.
Then, the leading
contribution for flavor-preserving $\chi$ decays arises at one loop
and is illustrated in the
left panel of figure \ref{fig:decays}. Note that this
contribution is very suppressed due to the following three factors.
\begin{itemize}
\item With
a $\chi$ mass splitting of order keV, the kinematically
available phase space is extremely small. This results in a
significant suppression for the
$1\rightarrow3$ process.
\item The loop amplitude is suppressed by the
momentum-exchange scale, or more concretely by $(\Delta m /m_{\phi})$.
\item The lepton propagators in the loop couple to
$\phi$ on one end and to $W^{\pm}$ on the other. However, the former
couples to right-chirality leptons while the latter couples to
left-chirality leptons. Therefore both lepton propagators need a mass
insertion to obtain a nonzero amplitude, so the decay rate
is further suppressed by $m^{2}_{\ell_{i}}m^{2}_{\ell_{j}}$.
\end{itemize}
As a consequence of these effects, heavier flavors are long-lived on
cosmological time scales.
Since the rates of flavor-preserving $\chi$ decays are so extremely
small, even a very small flavor-violating contribution can easily be
the dominant channel for the
decays of the heavier $\chi$. We add the following source of flavor
violation to the Lagrangian,
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}_{FV}
&=
\frac12 \delta \lambda_{ij}\,
\bar{\chi}_{i}(1+\gamma^5)e_j \phi^\dagger +\text{h.c.}
\label{eq:flavor-vio}
\end{align}
The leading mechanism for
flavor-violating $\chi$ decays are dipole transitions
$\chi_{i}\rightarrow\chi_{j}\gamma$, which are illustrated in the right
panel of figure \ref{fig:decays}. Note that unlike the
flavor-preserving decays, these are two-body decays, and there are no
suppressions due to lepton masses. The rate for these flavor-violating
decays can be calculated in a straightforward manner. If we assume
that all off-diagonal couplings in $\delta\lambda_{ij}$ are of the same size
$\delta\lambda\ll\lambda$, then to leading order
\begin{equation}
\Gamma_{ij}\equiv\Gamma_{\chi_{i}\rightarrow\chi_{j}\gamma}=\frac{e^{2}\lambda^{2}\delta\lambda^{2}}{1024\,\pi^{5}}\frac{(\Delta m_{ij})^{3}m_{\chi}^{2}}{m_{\phi}^4}\,,
\end{equation}
where we have neglected higher order terms proportional to lepton
masses. There are two aspects of this decay worth mentioning. First,
$\delta \lambda$ is a free parameter that allows the
heavier flavors to decay, but is otherwise small enough to leave the phenomenology
unchanged. Second, in order to not violate the parametric prediction
of the line energies,
$\delta \lambda$ should be small enough such that its
contributions are subdominant to the previously calculated
loop-induced splittings. This condition is not difficult to
satisfy in specific cases.
Note that $\Gamma_{ij}\propto(\Delta m_{ij})^{3}$. Thus, the
rate for the transition between $\chi_{\mu}$ and $\chi_{e}$ will be
many orders of magnitude smaller than those between $\chi_{\tau}$ and
one of these two states (which have essentially the same rate as each
other). Considering that the transition between $\chi_{\mu}$ and
$\chi_{e}$ corresponds to both a smaller energy and to a much smaller
rate, we expect it will be practically unobservable. On the other
hand, a robust prediction of this setup is that if an X-ray line
signal is observed in the keV region, then at around $1\%$ energy
resolution (more precisely, an energy resolution of the order of
$y_{\mu}^{2}/y_{\tau}^{2}$) it will reveal itself as being made up of
two line signals of comparable strength.
\subsection{Relic abundance}
The dark matter annihilation rate in each channel ($\chi_i \overline{\chi}_j \to \ell_i \overline{\ell}_j$) is given by,
\begin{align}
\langle \sigma v \rangle
&=
\frac{\lambda^4 m_\chi^2 }
{32 \pi (m_\chi^2+m_\phi^2)^2}\, .
\end{align}
Since the dark matter is a Dirac fermion, there is no p-wave or chirality suppression, and thus the annihilation cross section today is the same as in the early universe to a good approximation.
\begin{figure}[tp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{constraints100.pdf}
\\
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{constraints200.pdf}
\\
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{constraints400.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{For mediator masses $m_\phi=100,200$ and 400 GeV, we plot
the position of the X-ray signal (in keV, gray dashed contours) as
well as a number of constraints. Direct detection constraints from
LUX are shown as the blue-shaded region, while the indirect
detection constraints from positrons and photons are shown as the
purple and green-shaded regions, respectively.
The red band shows the region where
correct relic abundance is obtained.
}
\label{fig:constraints}
\end{figure}
Since all flavor combinations of dark matter co-annihilate with one
another with the same cross section, the cross section that gives rise
to the correct relic abundance today is the same as for a single
species of Dirac fermion DM, given by
\begin{align}
\langle \sigma v \rangle
&=
2\times(2.2\times10^{-26}~{\rm cm^{3}/s}).\label{eq:factortwo}
\end{align}
The factor of two relative to the canonical quoted value (for Majorana
DM) arises due to the Dirac nature of the dark matter.
The region of parameter space leading to the correct relic density is
shown in figure~\ref{fig:constraints} as a red band.
Note that the above calculation applies only if we assume that the
interaction with leptons alone is responsible for the dark matter
thermal relic abundance. Any coupling to additional non-SM
states will alter these numbers. This constraint can also be relaxed
if the dark matter relic density is set by an asymmetry, which can
arise rather naturally in these models~\cite{Hamze:2014wca}.
\subsection{Direct detection}
As discussed in detail in \cite{Agrawal:2011ze}, lepton flavored dark
matter can scatter off nuclei via a one-loop photon exchange. These
constraints can be severe in the region where the dark matter is a
thermal relic. The dominant contribution to the WIMP-nucleon cross
section is flavor diagonal and for each flavor of FDM it is given by,
\begin{align}
\sigma_n
&=
\frac{\mu_n^2 Z^2}{ A^2 \pi}
\sum_{\ell}
\left(
\frac{\lambda^2 e^2}{64\pi^2 m_\phi^2}
\left[1+\frac23 \log\frac{\Lambda_\ell^2}{m_\phi^2}
\right]
\right)^2
\, .
\end{align}
Here $\mu_n$ is the reduced mass of the dark matter--nucleon system
and $\Lambda_{\ell}$ represents the infrared cutoff in the loop
calculation for the effective DM-photon coupling. This cutoff is
$m_{\ell}$, the mass of the corresponding lepton, unless $m_{\ell}$ is
smaller than the momentum exchange in the process, of the order of
10~MeV. We therefore use $\Lambda_{\tau}=m_{\tau}$ and
$\Lambda_{\mu}=m_{\mu}$, but set $\Lambda_{e}=10~$MeV. In extracting constraints
from the null results of direct detection experiments such as LUX, we
use the total rate, summed over all three FDM flavors. The region of
parameter space excluded by LUX is shown in
figure~\ref{fig:constraints} as the blue-shaded region.
\subsection{Indirect detection}
In the limit
$m_{\chi}\ll m_{\phi}$, $(\Delta m)^{2}$ and $\langle\sigma v\rangle$
both scale approximately as $m_{\chi}^{2}\lambda^{4}/m_{\phi}^{4}$,
and therefore choosing a fixed mass splitting or requiring thermal
relic abundance leads to potentially observable signals for indirect
detection searches in photons and positrons (with the caveats
mentioned at the end of the previous paragraph). The constraints from
both indirect detection channels are more stringent for lower mass
dark matter, since the signal rate scales as the square of the $\chi$
number density, which itself scales as $m_{\chi}^{-1}$, while the
background flux as a function of energy does not change as rapidly.
Therefore, for a given $\Delta m$ or $\langle\sigma v\rangle$, these
constraints can be weakened by increasing the dark matter mass and
either decreasing the coupling or increasing $m_{\phi}$.
For the positron constraint from the AMS-02
experiment~\cite{Ibarra:2013zia}, the signal has contributions both
from the prompt positrons produced when one of the annihilating
particles is $\overline{\chi}_{e}$, and also from secondary positrons
from the decays of $\mu^+$ and $\tau^+$ that are produced when one of
the annihilating particles is $\overline{\chi}_{\mu}$ or
$\overline{\chi}_{\tau}$. The spectrum of the secondary positrons is
shifted towards lower energies compared to the prompt positrons (not
to mention that the branching ratio of $\tau\to e+X$ is rather low),
and therefore the bound from AMS-02 comes mostly from the prompt
positrons. The bound is shown in figure~\ref{fig:constraints} as the
purple-shaded region. Note that the positron constraint is
significantly weaker than the constraint from direct detection across
the parameter space, and therefore the inclusion or non-inclusion of secondary
positrons in determining the bound turns out to be academic. Owing to
the relative factor of
two between Dirac and Majorana DM (eq. \eqref{eq:factortwo}), the
latter being relevant for SUSY for which the AMS bounds are
calculated, the bound on the FDM annihilation cross section leading
from prompt positrons (any one of the three $\chi_{\ell}$ flavors
annihilating with $\overline{\chi}_{e}$) is related to the total
annihilation cross section (all nine annihilation channels) as
\begin{align}
\langle \sigma v \rangle
\leq
6 \langle \sigma v \rangle_{bound,e^+}
\, ,
\end{align}
where $\langle \sigma v \rangle_{bound,e^+}$ is the experimental
bound quoted in~\cite{Ibarra:2013zia} for a Majorana DM annihilating
to $e^+ e^-$ with
$100\%$ branching fraction.
Similar to the case of positron constraints being most sensitive to
prompt positrons in the final state, indirect detection in photons is
most sensitive to $\tau$'s in the final state, since more
photons are produced from $\tau$'s than from $e$'s or $\mu$'s. One can
therefore formulate the bound from indirect detection in the photon
final state~\cite{Tavakoli:2013zva} in terms of the effective
annihilation cross section leading to the production of $\tau$'s,
\begin{align}
\langle \sigma v \rangle
\leq
6 \langle \sigma v \rangle_{bound,\gamma}
\, ,
\end{align}
where $\langle \sigma v \rangle_{bound,\gamma}$ is the experimental
bound quote in~\cite{Tavakoli:2013zva} for a Majorana DM annihilating
to $\tau^+ \tau^-$ with $100\%$
branching ratio.
The constraint from indirect detection in photons is shown in
figure~\ref{fig:constraints} as the green-shaded region.
Dark matter annihilating to leptons can potentially have significant
constraints from the CMB~\cite{Padmanabhan:2005es,2009PhRvD..80d3526S}. However, the annihilation into muons and
taus has a low efficiency to inject energy into the
CMB~\cite{Madhavacheril:2013cna}, and the constraints are
subdominant to the other constraints considered above.
\begin{figure}[tp]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{mphipchi.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Constraints on the mass of dark matter, $m_\chi$ and the
mediator, $m_\phi$ when the X-ray line is at 3.5 keV. The contours
show the value of coupling $\lambda$, and the red band shows the
region where correct relic abundance is obtained. The blue and purple-shaded
regions show the exclusion from LUX and from AMS respectively.}
\label{fig:chiphi}
\end{figure}
\subsection{The 3.5 keV line}
An X-ray line signal has been observed at
3.5~keV~\cite{Bulbul:2014sua,Boyarsky:2014jta}.
We note that there is
currently no consensus about the interpretation of this observation
as arising from a dark matter signal~\cite{Riemer-Sorensen:2014yda,
Boyarsky:2014ska,
Jeltema:2014qfa,Malyshev:2014xqa,Anderson:2014tza,Boyarsky:2014paa,Bulbul:2014ala,Jeltema:2014mla,Iakubovskyi:2014yxa,Carlson:2014lla,
Tamura:2014mta, Urban:2014yda}. Nevertheless, a
large number of DM models have been proposed to explain this signal.
The ideas that have been proposed include
sterile neutrinos \cite{Patra:2014sua,
Lattanzi:2014mia,
Haba:2014taa,
Shuve:2014doa,
Rodejohann:2014eka,
Abada:2014nwa,
Baek:2014qwa,
Chakraborty:2014sda,
Kang:2014cia,
Dobrynina:2014zza,
Okada:2014zea,
Okada:2014oda,
Abada:2014zra,
Ishida:2014fra,
Cline:2014eaa,
Modak:2014vva,
Robinson:2014bma,
Chakraborty:2014tma,
Adulpravitchai:2014xna,
Patra:2014pga,
Merle:2014xpa,
Frigerio:2014ifa,
Tsuyuki:2014aia,
Abazajian:2014gza,
Kang:2014mea,
Harada:2014lma}, axions \cite{Choi:2014tva,
Liew:2014gia,
Higaki:2014qua,
Kawasaki:2014una,
Higaki:2014zua,
Jaeckel:2014qea,
Lee:2014xua,
Kong:2014gea,
Lello:2014yha,
Ishida:2014dlp,
Rosner:2014cha,
Alvarez:2014gua,
Henning:2014dha,
Cicoli:2014bfa,
Dias:2014osa,
Conlon:2014xsa}, supersymmetry \cite{Hamaguchi:2014sea,
Kolda:2014ppa,
Bomark:2014yja,
Ko:2014xda,
Demidov:2014hka,
Dutta:2014saa} and a number of other mechanisms \cite{Pavlidou:2013zha,
Cline:2014vsa,
Baek:2014sda,
Falkowski:2014sma,
Schutz:2014nka,
Boddy:2014qxa,
Farzan:2014foo,
Cline:2014kaa,
Chiang:2014xra,
Geng:2014zqa,
Conlon:2014wna,
Chen:2014vna,
Nakayama:2014rra,
Baek:2014poa,
Lee:2014koa,
Babu:2014pxa,
Dudas:2014ixa,
Queiroz:2014yna,
Nakayama:2014cza,
Allahverdi:2014dqa,
Bezrukov:2014nza,
Nakayama:2014ova,
Frandsen:2014lfa,
Aisati:2014nda,
Krall:2014dba,
Finkbeiner:2014sja,
Babu:2014uoa,
Arcadi:2014dca,
Cheung:2014tha,
Baer:2014eja,
Biswas:2015sva,
Berlin:2015sia}.
We now show that the 3.5 keV line, if confirmed, can be easily
accommodated within the framework of the minimal model.
We show in figure \ref{fig:constraints}
the region of parameter space that provides the right
relic abundance for dark matter, consistent with a 3.5 keV
line. Fixing the splitting to be $3.5$ keV, we show the direct
detection and the AMS positron constraint in figure \ref{fig:chiphi}
along with the region of parameter space consistent with the
requirement of correct relic abundance.
This scenario further predicts that closer inspection of such a line
will reveal two closely spaced lines corresponding to the $\chi_\tau
\to \chi_\mu$
and $\chi_\tau \to \chi_e$ transitions. As noted in eq.~\eqref{eq:couplet}, the
ratio of the line energies in
this couplet are set by the charged lepton masses. Therefore,
\begin{align}
\delta \omega
&=
\omega(\chi_\tau\to\chi_e)-\omega(\chi_\tau \to \chi_\mu)
\\
&\approx
\omega_0 \frac{m_\mu^2}{m_\tau^2}
= 12.4\ \mathrm{ eV}
\end{align}
where $\omega_0 = 3.5$ keV is the average frequency of the two $\chi_\tau$
decay lines.
The broadening of the line due to the kinetic energy of the DM
scales with its velocity.
For typical astrophysical sources, the DM velocity ranges from
{(1--3)}$\times10^{-3}$, resulting in a broadening of
$\mathcal{O}(1$--$10)$ eV. Whether the double line
feature gets washed out by the thermal broadening thus depends on the
astrophysical source.
While this splitting is not currently measurable, it is
within the design resolution of upcoming experiments like ASTRO-H
\cite{Takahashi:2010fa,Takahashi:2014cea}.
The couplet constitutes a
``smoking gun" signal of lepton FDM scenarios at these experiments.
The lifetime for a decaying dark matter candidate to be consistent
with the observed signal is given by (see for instance~\cite{Farzan:2014foo}),
\begin{align}
\tau_{DM}
&\simeq
(10^{28}\ \mathrm{sec})
\frac{ 7\ \mathrm{keV}}{m_\chi}
\, .
\end{align}
For $m_{\chi}=150$~GeV, one obtains $\tau_{DM}\approx10^{20}$~s.
For $m_{\phi}=500$~GeV and
$\lambda\simeq 1$, this would require
$\delta\lambda \simeq 10^{-8}$. The additional mass splittings introduced by
this level of flavor violation are subdominant to the MFV
contributions calculated above.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:conclusions}
We have studied models of lepton flavored dark matter within the
MFV framework. In this scenario, mass
splittings between different dark matter flavors can
naturally be small enough that tree level decays of heavy flavors are
kinematically forbidden.
Then all three
flavors of dark matter can be long-lived on cosmological time scales
(the lightest flavor being exactly stable).
The ratios of the mass splittings
between the three possible pairings among the DM flavors are
predicted.
When even a very small source of flavor violation is present in the dark
sector, a new decay channel becomes available for the decay of
heavier dark matter flavors through a dipole transition. While the lifetime
associated with this decay may be orders of magnitude longer
than the age of the universe, it can still be the dominant decay channel and
gives rise to a very distinct final state. These decays
result in two very closely
separated photon lines, the couplet. For weak scale DM, the overall
energy of the couplet is naturally in the keV--MeV range, with the
splitting of the two lines in the eV--keV range.
We have focused on the detailed phenomenology of a specific model of lepton
flavored DM. In this model, the mass splittings are radiatively generated by
finite one loop effects arising from the breaking of the lepton flavor
symmetry by Yukawa couplings.
The sign of the contribution is fixed, with the result that
$\chi_{\tau}$ is the heaviest and $\chi_e$ the lightest state.
This scenario is a potential explanation for the claimed observation
of a 3.5 keV line in the X-ray spectrum, and there exist regions in
parameter space of the model where such an explanation is entirely
consistent with the observed DM relic density as well as with
experimental constraints set by a number of direct and indirect
detection experiments. While a dark matter explanation of this line is
in dispute, the smoking-gun double-line
structure predicted by the couplet can be directly tested
experimentally. In particular, the next generation experiments
might be able to resolve any such feature in the X-ray
spectrum.
\acknowledgments We thank Ilias Cholis and Dan Hooper for useful
discussions. CK would also like to thank the Aspen Center for Physics
(supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.
PHYS-1066293) as well as the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical
Physics (supported by the Government of Canada through Industry Canada
and by the Province of Ontario through the Ministry of Research and
Innovation), where part of this work was completed, for their
hospitality. ZC and CV are supported by NSF under grant PHY-1315155.
CK is supported by NSF grant numbers PHY-1315983 and PHY-1316033.
Fermilab is operated by Fermi Research Alliance, LLC under Contract
No. De-AC02-07CH11359 with the United States Department of Energy.
\bibliographystyle{JHEP}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Among the most popular theories admitting varying physical constants are those involving the variable fine structure constant $\alpha$, the speed of light $c$, and the gravitational constant $G$. A lot of important motivation for such theories have been provided on both theoretical and experimental basis~\cite{Uzan}.
The most important framework for the variability of the gravitational constant is provided by the scalar-tensor theories, where the effective gravitational constant is determined by the local value of the scalar field~\cite{Brans}.
Theories with variable speed of light can generally be divided into two groups. The first group contains theories that assume the dependence of the speed of light on the space-time coordinates. Such an assumption unavoidably leads to violation of the Lorentz invariance~\cite{Albrecht,Barrow1,Clayton,Drummond,Clayton2,Magueijo1}. In the second group there are theories where the speed of light depends on the energy scale~\cite{Rainbow}.
The most radical example of a theory violating Lorentz invariance assumes the existence of a preferred frame usually identified with the cosmological frame~\cite{Albrecht,Barrow1}. In these theories the dynamics of the gravitational field, matter fields and the scalar field representing the speed of light is described by gravity theory with minimal coupling in the preferred frame. It is also assumed that the scalar field which determines the value of the speed of light does not contribute to the energy momentum tensor. Consequently, in the preferred frame the gravitational field is described by the standard Einstein equations with the speed of light being merely replaced by the above mentioned scalar field.
The bimetric VSL theory~\cite{Clayton,Drummond,Clayton2} is another example of a theory that brakes Lorentz invariance. In this framework the two separate metrics are introduced. One of them describes the geometry of space-time while the other couples to the matter. As a consequence, in such a theory the speed of gravitational waves may differ from the speed of massless particles.
Another interesting subclass of theories with varying speed of light exploits a concept of local Lorentz invariance which is applicable when the speed of light is allowed to vary~\cite{Magueijo1}.
The second class contains theories assuming a modified dispersion relation, wherein the modification becomes important for the energy scales comparable with the Planck scale. As a consequence in the considered model the group velocity of light becomes dependent on the energy scale. Originally, such theories assumed the modified dispersion relation to be fulfilled in the preferred frame and hence they explicitly violated the Lorentz invariance~\cite{Amelino,Ellis,Ellis2}. As it was shown in~\cite{Amelino2,Kowalski}, it is possible to preserve the Lorentz invariance (its non-linear form), while still assuming modified dispersion relation.
In refs.~\cite{Harko,Szydlowski,Yurov} the tunneling from nothing to a de Sitter phase within the quantum cosmology with varying physical $c$ and (or) $G$ constants was discussed.
In ref.~\cite{Leszczynska} the theory of gravity with varying $G$ and $c$, with the minimal coupling in the cosmological frame was considered. Neither $c$ nor $G$ did contributed to the energy momentum tensor. Consequently, the cosmological equations were of the form of the standard Friedmann equations with both constants replaced by arbitrary time dependent functions. By using the quantized theory described by the one-dimensional Wheeler-De Witt equation the probability of tunneling of the universe from nothing was derived.
A similar approach was adopted in ref.~\cite{Garattini} where it was shown that the cosmological constant can be considered as an eigenvalue of an appropriate Sturm-Liouville problem of a varying speed of light theory.
We think it would be advisable to consider a theory where both varying $c$ and $G$ represent additional degrees of freedom. This could be achieved by replacing c and G with two separate scalar fields.
Our paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II we formulate a theory with varying $c$ and $G$ where both constants are represented by non-minimally coupled scalar fields and find the classical solution near the curvature singularity. We show that the cosmological evolution is equivalent to the process of the one-dimensional scattering of the point particle on the exponential potential barrier. In Sec. III we solve the Wheeler-De Witt equation for the quantum counterpart of the considered theory and find that the quantum behavior is equivalent to the one-dimensional quantum stationary scattering of the point particle on the exponential potential barrier. By calculating the probability of scattering we find the probability of the transition from the pre-big-bang collapsing phase to the post-big-bang expanding phase. In Sec. IV we give our conclusions.
\section{Non-minimally coupled classical varying $c$ and $G$ theory}
We consider a theory which admits varying speed of light $c$ and varying gravitational constant $G$. This is achieved by connecting both constants $c$ and $G$ with the two scalar fields $\phi$ and $\psi$. Additionally, we include separate kinetic terms for each scalar field. Such a theory can be represented by the following action:
\begin{equation}
\label{action}
S=\int \sqrt{-g} \left(\frac{e^{\phi}}{e^{\psi}}\right) \left[R+\Lambda + \omega (\partial_\mu \phi \partial^\mu \phi + \partial_\mu \psi \partial^\mu \psi)\right] d^4x~,
\end{equation}
where $\omega$ is a constant parameter and the relations between varying $c(x^\mu)$ and $G(x^\mu)$ and the scalar fields $\phi(x^\mu)$ and $\psi(x^\mu)$ are given by $c^3=e^{\phi}$ and $G=e^\psi$. By the application of the following field transformations:
\begin{equation}
\label{fred}
\begin{split}
\phi &= \frac{\beta}{\sqrt{2\omega}}+\frac{1}{2} \ln \delta \,,
\\
\psi &= \frac{\beta}{\sqrt{2\omega}}-\frac{1}{2} \ln \delta \,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
the action \eqref{action} can be rewritten in the form of the Brans-Dicke action:
\begin{equation}
\label{actionBD}
S=\int \sqrt{-g}\left[ \delta (R+\Lambda) +\frac{\omega}{2}\frac{\partial_\mu \delta \partial^\mu \delta}{\delta} + \delta \partial_\mu \beta \partial^\mu \beta\right]d^4x~,
\end{equation}
where the constant parameter $\omega$ can now be identified with the Brans-Dicke parameter.
We consider a Friedmann universe described by the FLRW metric:
\begin{equation}
\label{metric}
ds^2=-N(t)^2 (dx^0)^2+a(t)^2\left(\frac{dr^2}{1-k r^2}+r^2 d\Omega^2\right)~,
\end{equation}
where $N(t)$ is the lapse function, $a(t)$ the scale factor and $k=0,\pm 1$.
By inserting the metric \eqref{metric} into the action \eqref{actionBD} and then integrating by parts we get:
\begin{equation}
\label{action sym}
S = \frac{3 V_0}{8 \pi} \int dx^0 \left(-\frac{a^2}{N} a' \delta' - \frac{\delta}{N} a a'^2 + k a \delta N + \Lambda \delta a^3 N -\frac{\omega}{2} \frac{a^3}{N} \frac{\delta'^2}{\delta}-\frac{a^3}{N}\delta \beta'^2 \right)~.
\end{equation}
where $(~)'=\frac{\partial}{\partial x^0}$. By choosing the lapse function as $N=a^3 \delta$ and further by application of the fields transformations given by:
\begin{equation}
\label{fred2}
\begin{split}
X &= \ln(a \sqrt{\delta}) \,,
\\
Y &= \frac{1}{2A} \ln \delta \,,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $A=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-2\omega}}$, one arrives in the following form of the action:
\begin{equation}
S=\frac{3 V_0}{8 \pi} \int dx^0 \left[ -X'^2 + Y'^2 + e^{4X}\left(k+\Lambda e^{2(X-AY)} \right)-\beta'^2\right]~.
\end{equation}
From now on, we restrict our considerations to the spatially flat Friedmann universes and put $k=0$. Further fields redefinition $I=AY-3X$, $J=3Y-AX$ and $B=\sqrt{\tilde{V}_0}\beta$ gives:
\begin{equation}
\label{action final}
S= \int dx^0 \left[m (J'^2-I'^2) + \bar{\Lambda} e^{-2I}-B'^2\right]~,
\end{equation}
where we have defined the following constant parameters:
\begin{equation*}
\label{eq:x}
\begin{split}
\tilde{V}_0 = \frac{3 V_0}{8\pi} \,,
\qquad
m = \frac{\tilde{V}_0}{9-A^2} \,,
\qquad
\bar{\Lambda} = \tilde{V}_0\Lambda \,.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Equivalently, our theory can be described by the following Hamiltonian:
\begin{equation}
\label{ham}
H=\frac{1}{4}\left[\frac{1}{m}\left(\pi_J^2- \pi_I^2\right)- \pi_B^2\right] -\bar{\Lambda}e^{-2I}~,
\end{equation}
where $\pi_J=2mJ'$, $\pi_I=-2mI'$, and $\pi_B=-2B'$ are the canonically conjugated momenta. The form of the hamiltonian \eqref{ham} clearly shows that $\pi_J$ and $\pi_B$ are conserved. Consequently, the classical evolution near the singularity can be reduced to the problem of motion of the point particle in the one-dimensional exponential potential.
The associated Hamilton equations read as:
\begin{equation}
\label{ham eq}
\begin{split}
B' &= \frac{\partial H}{\partial \pi_B}=-\frac{\pi_B}{2}\,,
\qquad
\pi_B' = -\frac{\partial H}{\partial B}=0\,,
\\
I' &= \frac{\partial H}{\partial \pi_I}=-\frac{\pi_I}{2m}\,,
\qquad
\pi_I' = -\frac{\partial H}{\partial I}=-2 \bar{\Lambda} e^{-2I} \,,
\\
J'&=\frac{\partial H}{\partial \pi_J} = \frac{\pi_J}{2m}\,,
\qquad
\pi_J' = - \frac{\partial H}{\partial J}=0 \,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The solution of the Hamilton equations \eqref{ham eq} is given by:
\begin{equation}
\label{ham sol}
\begin{split}
B & = -\frac{\pi_B}{2} x^0+ P \,,
\\
I & = \ln \sinh|\sqrt{(A^2-9)\Lambda }x^0| \,,
\\
J & = \frac{\pi_J}{2m} x^0+ E \,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $E$ and $P$ are new integration constants. This solution expressed in terms of the scale factor $a$ and the field $\delta$ is:
\begin{equation}
\label{roz}
\begin{split}
a & = \frac{1}{D^2 {(e^{ F x^0})}^2 \sinh ^ M |\sqrt{(A^2-9)\Lambda } x^0| } \,,
\\
\delta & = \frac{D^6 {(e^{ F x^0})}^6}{\sinh ^ W |\sqrt{(A^2-9)\Lambda } x^0|} \,,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\label{const}
\begin{split}
D=e^{\frac{A}{9-A^2}E} \,,
\qquad
F=\frac{A}{9-A^2}\frac{\pi_J}{2m} \,,
\qquad
M=\frac{3-A^2}{9-A^2} \,,
\qquad
W=\frac{2A^2}{9-A^2} \,,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
and $A^2>9$.
It is also possible to relate variable $x^0$ with the proper time $\tau$ encountered by the comoving observers since both quantities are related by:
\begin{equation}
\label{vsl}
d\tau = \frac{\sqrt{-ds^2}}{c(x^0)} \,,
\end{equation}
where $ds^2 = - N^2 (dx^0)^2$. The relation \eqref{vsl} is a postulated generalisation of the general relativistic definition of the proper time for the case of varying speed of light $c$ and it is assumed to be fulfilled in the cosmological frame. A justification for this particular generalisation of the proper time definition arises from the fact that we require light rays to follow null geodesics. The different way of introducing varying $c$ into the metric was presented in ref.~\cite{GFEllis} where it was argued that varying $c$ merely reflects the rescaling in the time coordinate and thus does not affect the value of the physical speed of light. In the definition \eqref{vsl}, however, $c$ does represent the physical value of the speed of light. Noticing that:
\begin{equation}
\label{laps}
N=\frac{1}{\sinh |\sqrt{(A^2-9)\Lambda } x^0|} \,,
\end{equation}
we obtain:
\begin{equation}
\label{conect}
\begin{split}
x^0 &= \frac{2}{\sqrt{(A^2-9)\Lambda}} \arctanh \left(e^{\sqrt{(A^2-9)\Lambda}\bar{x}^0}\right) \,,
\qquad
\text{for $\bar{x}^0<0$} \,,
\\
x^0 &= \frac{2}{\sqrt{(A^2-9)\Lambda}} \arctanh \left(e^{- \sqrt{(A^2-9)\Lambda}\bar{x}^0}\right) \,,
\qquad
\text{for $\bar{x}^0>0$} \,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where we have defined $d\bar{x}^0\equiv c(\bar{x}^0) d\tau$.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.55\textwidth]{cGa.pdf}
\caption{\label{brancze} Qualitative behaviour of $a$ (gray), $c$ (black) and $G$ (dashed) before ($\bar{x}^0<0$) and after ($\bar{x}^0>0$) the big-bang singularity.}
\end{figure}
In Fig.\eqref{brancze} we have plotted the behaviour of the scale factor $a$ (gray), the speed of light $c$ (black), and the gravitational constant $G$ (dashed) for the pre-big-bang $\bar{x}^0<0$ and post-big-bang $\bar{x}^0>0$ phases. At $\bar{x}^0=0$ an interesting behaviour occurs:
as the universe approaches the singularity ($a\rightarrow0$), the gravitational constant $G$ goes to zero while the speed of light $c$ reaches infinity.
This corresponds to the Newton's Mechanics limit represented by one of the vertex of the Bronshtein-Zelmanov-Okun cube~\cite{Duff,Okun}.
An analogous behavior is encountered in the case of the ekpyrotic~\cite{Khoury,Khoury2} and cyclic scenarios~\cite{Steinhardt,Steinhardt2}, where in the high curvature regime the universe, after having undergone the phase of the accelerated contraction, faces the big-crunch/bang singularity and then bounces to enter the standard expanding phase. On the other hand, we encounter a qualitatively different behavior in the pre-big bang scenario within the framework of string cosmology where the pre-big bang phase corresponds to expanding and accelerating universe approaching the strong coupling regime~\cite{Gasperini3}.
\section{Quantum mechanical behavior near the curvature singularity}
By examining the classical solution we find that the high-curvature (near big-bang) regime appears for $I\rightarrow \infty$, which is equivalent to $x^0\rightarrow \infty$ for $\bar{x}^0\rightarrow 0$, while the low-curvature (far away from big-bang) regime appears for $I\rightarrow -\infty$, which is equivalent to $x^0\rightarrow 0$. The latter regime corresponds to $\bar{x}^0\rightarrow -\infty$ or to $\bar{x}^0\rightarrow \infty$ for the pre and post-big-bang branch, respectively. Both regimes are characterized by the following asymptotic values of the momentum $\pi_I$:
\[ \pi_I = \left\{
\begin{array}{l l}
2 \tilde{V}_0\sqrt{\frac{\Lambda}{A^2-9}} & \quad \text{collapsing pre-big-bang }\\
-2 \tilde{V}_0\sqrt{\frac{\Lambda}{A^2-9}} & \quad \text{expanding post-big-bang}
\end{array} \right.\]
in the high-curvature limit and
\[ \pi_I = \left\{
\begin{array}{l l}
2 \tilde{V}_0\sqrt{\frac{\Lambda}{A^2-9}} e^{-I} & \quad \text{collapsing pre-big-bang}\\
-2 \tilde{V}_0\sqrt{\frac{\Lambda}{A^2-9}} e^{-I} & \quad \text{expanding post-big-bang}
\end{array} \right.\]
in the low-curvature limit.
In order to quantize the considered theory we make the following substitution:
\begin{equation}
\label{quant}
\begin{split}
\pi_J\rightarrow \hat{\pi}_J=-i \frac{\partial}{\partial J} \,,
\qquad
\pi_I\rightarrow \hat{\pi}_I=-i \frac{\partial}{\partial I} \,,
\qquad
\pi_B\rightarrow \hat{\pi}_B= -i \frac{\partial}{\partial B}\,.
\qquad
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The resulting Wheeler-De Witt equation is:
\begin{equation}
\label{WDW}
\left\{\frac{1}{4}\left[\frac{1}{m}\left(\frac{\partial^2}{\partial I^2}-\frac{\partial^2}{\partial J^2}\right)+ \frac{\partial^2}{\partial B^2}\right] -\bar{\Lambda}e^{-2I}\right\}\Phi=0 \,.
\end{equation}
It is interesting to point out that the sequence of the fields transformations given by \eqref{fred} and \eqref{fred2} reduces the problem of the factor ordering.
We look for the solution of eq. \eqref{WDW} which is separable~\cite{DabQ}:
\begin{equation}
\label{psi}
\Phi=\alpha(J)\gamma(B)\beta(I) \,,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\alpha(J) &= e^{i2k \sqrt{\frac{\tilde{V}_0}{A^2-9}}J} \,,
\\
\gamma(B) &= e^{i2lB} \,,
\\
\label{bessel}
\beta(I) &= J_{-i\pi^\infty_I}(\pi^\infty_I e^{-I}) \,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\tilde{V}_0 \Lambda &= k^2+l^2\,,
\\
\pi^\infty_I&= 2 \tilde{V}_0\sqrt{\frac{\Lambda}{A^2-9}} \,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The wave function $\Phi$, asymptotically for $I\rightarrow\infty$, is an eigenfunction of the momentum operator
$\hat{\pi}_I$ since:
\begin{equation}
\hat{\pi}_I \beta(I)=\pi^\infty_I\beta(I) \,.
\end{equation}
Thus, in the high-curvature regime $\Phi$ contains only those modes which represent collapsing universe~\cite{DabKief,Gasperini2}.
In the low curvature limit ($I \rightarrow -\infty$) the Bessel function $J_{in}$ can be decomposed in the following way:
\begin{equation}
J_{in}(z)=\Psi_1+\Psi_2 \,,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\Psi_1&=\sqrt{\frac{1}{2 \pi z}} e^{i\left(z-\frac{\pi}{2}in - \frac{\pi}{4}\right)} \,,
\\
\Psi_2&=\sqrt{\frac{1}{2 \pi z}} e^{-i\left(z-\frac{\pi}{2}in - \frac{\pi}{4}\right)} \,,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{subequations}\label{eq:y}
\begin{align}
\label{ev1}
\hat{\pi}_I \Psi_1 &= -z \Psi_1
\\
\label{ev2}
\hat{\pi}_I \Psi_2 &= z \Psi_2
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where $n\equiv-\pi^\infty_I$ and $z\equiv\pi^\infty_I e^{-I}= 2 \tilde{V}_0\sqrt{\frac{\Lambda}{A^2-9}} e^{-I}$. Eqs. (\ref{ev1}) and (\ref{ev2}) therefore imply that $\Psi_2$ and $\Psi_1$ correspond, to the pre- and post-big-bang branches in their low curvature evolution phases, respectively. The probability of the transition form the pre-big-bang low curvature initial state to the post-big-bang low curvature final state is given by the reflection coefficient:
\begin{equation}
R=\frac{|\Psi_1|^2}{|\Psi_2|^2}=e^{2 \pi n}=e^{-4 \pi \tilde{V}_0\sqrt{\frac{\Lambda}{A^2-9}}} \,.
\end{equation}
On the contrary, in the scenario provided by the string quantum cosmology~\cite{Gasperini,Gasperini2}, the initial state from which the quantum transition to the expanding phase occurs, represents an accelerating expanding universe.
\section{Conclusions}
We have considered a theory with varying $c$ and $G$ where both constants are represented by non-minimally coupled scalar fields. Such theory is equivalent to the Brans-Dicke theory. We have examined the cosmological evolution near the curvature singularity. It turned out that dynamics of the expansion can be reduced to the problem of one dimensional scattering of the point particle on the potential described with an exponential function. We have found that the cosmological evolution contains both the collapsing pre-big-bang phase and the expanding post-big-bang phase with the both phases separated by the curvature singularity. At the curvature singularity $c$ reaches infinity while $G$ teds to zero. Thus, we have shown that the near curvature singularity evolution phase takes place well within the Newton's Mechanics regime given by $G = 0$ and $c = \infty$.
We have also examined the quantum mechanical behavior near the curvature singularity by examining the Wheeler-De Witt equation. We have shown this to be equivalent to the quantum stationary scattering of the point particle on the exponential potential barrier. The solution of the Wheeler-De Witt in the low curvature regime is the superposition of the wave function that represents a particle with positive momentum moving towards the potential barrier and the wave function that represents a particle scattered on the barrier. The former correspond to a collapsing universe in the pre-big-bang phase while the latter represents an expanding universe in the post-big-bang phase. We have also calculated the probability of scattering, which is equivalent to the probability of the transition from the pre-big-bang phase to post-big-bang phase.
\acknowledgments
I wish to thank Mariusz D\c{a}browski for discussions. This project was financed by the Polish National Science Center Grant DEC-2012/06/A/ST2/00395.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{secdt}
\subsection{Scientific discovery as a decision theory problem}
The process of scientific discovery is oftentimes based on intuition, trial and error and plain guesswork. This paper is motivated by the question of the existence of a rational decision framework that could be used to facilitate/guide this process, or turn it, to some degree, into an algorithm.
In exploring this question, we will consider the problem of finding a method for solving (up to a pre-specified level of accuracy)
PDEs with rough ($L^\infty$) coefficients as fast as possible with the following prototypical PDE (and its possible discretization over a fine mesh) as an example
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:scalar}
\begin{cases}
-\operatorname{div} \big(a(x) \nabla u(x)\big)=g(x) \quad x \in \Omega;\, g \in L^2(\Omega),\text{ or }g \in H^{-1}(\Omega) \\
u=0 \quad \text{on}\quad \partial \Omega,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $\Omega$ is a bounded subset of $\mathbb{R}^d$ (of arbitrary dimension $d\in \mathbb{N}^*$) with piecewise Lipschitz boundary, $a$ is a symmetric, uniformly elliptic $d\times d$ matrix with entries in $L^\infty(\Omega)$ and such that for all $x\in \Omega$ and $l\in \mathbb{R}^d$,
\begin{equation}
\lambda_{\min}(a) |l|^2 \leq l^T a(x) l \leq \lambda_{\max}(a)|l|^2.
\end{equation}
Although multigrid methods \cite{Fedorenko:1961, Brandt:1973, Hackbusch:1978, Hackbusch:1985, Stuben:2001} are now well known as the fastest for solving elliptic boundary-problems and have successfully been generalized to other types of PDEs and computational problems \cite{Yavneh:2006}, their convergence rate can be severely affected by the lack of regularity of the coefficients \cite{EngquistLuo:1997, wan2000}. Furthermore, although significant progress has been achieved in the development of multigrid methods that are, to some degree, robust with respect to meshsize and lack of smoothness
(we refer in particular to algebraic multigrid \cite{RugeStuben1987}, multilevel finite element splitting \cite{Yserentant1986}, hierarchical basis multigrid \cite{BankYserentant88, ChowVassilevski2003}, multilevel preconditioning \cite{Vassilevski89}, stabilized hierarchical basis methods \cite{Vassilevski1997sirev, VassilevskiWang1997a, VassilevskiWang1998}, energy minimization \cite{Mandel1999, wan2000, Xu2004, XuZhu2008, Vassilevski2010} and homogenization based methods \cite{EngquistLuo:1997, Efendiev2011}), the design of multigrid methods that are provably robust with respect to rough ($L^\infty$) coefficients has remained an open problem of practical importance \cite{BraWu09}.
Alternative hierarchical strategies for the resolution of \eqref{eqn:scalar} are (1) wavelet based methods \cite{Beylkin:1995,Beylkin:1998,Beylkin:1998b, DorobantuEngquist1988, EngquistRunborg02} (2)
the Fast Multipole Method \cite{GreengardRokhlin:1987} and (3) Hierarchical matrices \cite{HackbuschGrasedyck:2002, Bebendorf:2008}. Although methods based on (classical) wavelets achieve a multiresolution compression of the solution space of \eqref{eqn:scalar} in $L^2$ and although approximate wavelets and approximate $L^2$ projections can stabilize hierarchical basis methods \cite{VassilevskiWang1997a, VassilevskiWang1998}, their applications to \eqref{eqn:scalar} are limited by the facts that (a) the underlying wavelets can perform arbitrarily badly \cite{BaOs:2000} in their $H^1_0(\Omega)$ approximation of the solution space and (b) the operator \eqref{eqn:scalar} does not preserve the orthogonality between subscales/subbands with classical wavelets.
The Fast Multipole Method and hierarchical matrices exploit the property that sub-matrices of the inverse discrete operator are low rank away from the diagonal. This low rank property can be rigorously proven for \eqref{eqn:scalar} (based on the approximation of its Green's function by sums of products of harmonic functions \cite{Bebendorf2005}) and leads to provable convergence (with rough coefficients), up to the pre-specified level of accuracy $\epsilon$ in $L^2$-norm, in $\mathcal{O}(N \ln^{6} N \ln^{2d+2} \frac{1}{\epsilon})$ operations (\cite{Bebendorf2005} and \cite[Thm.~2.33 and Thm.~4.28]{Bebendorf:2008}).
Can the problem of finding a fast solver for \eqref{eqn:scalar} be, to some degree, reformulated as an Uncertainty Quantification/Decision Theory problem that could, to some degree, be solved as such in an automated fashion? Can discovery be computed?
Although these questions may seem unorthodox their answer appears to be positive: this paper shows that
this reformulation is possible and leads to a multigrid/multiresolution method/algorithm solving \eqref{eqn:scalar}, up to the pre-specified level of accuracy $\epsilon$ in $H^1$-norm (i.e. finding $u^{{\mathrm{app}}}$ such that $\|u-u^{{\mathrm{app}}}\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)}\leq \epsilon \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}$ for an arbitrary $g$ decomposed over $N$ degrees of freedom), in $\mathcal{O}\big(N \ln^{3d}\big( \max(\frac{1}{\epsilon},N^{1/d})\big)\big)$ operations (for $\epsilon\sim N^{-1/d}$, the hierarchical matrix method achieves $\epsilon$-accuracy in $L^2$ norm in $\mathcal{O}(N \ln^{2d+8} N)$ operations and the proposed multiresolution method achieves $\epsilon$-accuracy in $H^1$ norm in $\mathcal{O}(N \ln^{3d} N)$ operations). For subsequent solves (i.e. if \eqref{eqn:scalar} needs to be solved for more than one $g$) then the proposed multiresolution method achieves accuracy $\epsilon \approx N^{-\frac{1}{d}}$ in $H^1$-norm in $\mathcal{O}(N \ln^{d+1} N)$ operations (we refer to Subsection \ref{subseccomplexity} and in particular to Table \ref{tabcomplexity} for a detailed complexity analysis of the proposed method, which can also achieve sublinear complexity if one only requires $L^2$-approximations).
The core mechanism supporting the complexity of the method presented here is the fast decomposition of $H^1_0(\Omega)$ into a direct sum of linear subspaces that are orthogonal (or near-orthogonal) with respect to the energy scalar product and over which \eqref{eqn:scalar} has uniformly bounded condition numbers. It is, to some degree, surprising that this decomposition can be achieved in near linear complexity and not in the complexity of an eigenspace decomposition. Naturally \cite{OwZh:2016}, this decomposition can be applied to the fast simulation of the wave and parabolic equations associated to \eqref{eqn:scalar} or to its fast diagonalization.
The essential step behind the automation of the discovery/design of scalable numerical solvers is the observation that fast computation requires repeated computation with partial information (and limited resources) over hierarchies of levels of complexity and the reformulation of this process as that of playing underlying hierarchies of adversarial information games \cite{VNeumann28, VonNeumann:1944}.
Although the problem of finding a fast solver for \eqref{eqn:scalar} may appear disconnected from that of finding statistical estimators or making decisions from data sampled from an underlying unknown probability distribution, the proposed game theoretic reformulation is, to some degree, analogous to the one developed in Wald's Decision Theory \cite{Wald:1945}, evidently influenced by Von Neumann's Game Theory \cite{VNeumann28, VonNeumann:1944} (the generalization of worst case Uncertainty Quantification analysis \cite{ouq2010} to sample data/model uncertainty requires an analogous game theoretic formulation \cite{OwhadiScovel:2015w}, see also \cite{OwhadiScovel:2013} for how the underlying calculus could be used to guide the discovery of new Selberg identities).
We also refer to subsection \ref{subsecone3} for a review of the correspondence between statistical inference and numerical approximation.
\subsection{Outline of the paper}
The essential difficulty in generalizing the multigrid concept to PDEs with rough coefficients lies in the fact that the interpolation (downscaling) and restriction (upscaling) operators are, a priori, unknown. Indeed, in this situation, piecewise linear finite-elements can perform arbitrarily badly \cite{BaOs:2000} and the design of the interpolation operator requires the identification of accurate basis elements adapted to the microstructure $a(x)$.
This identification problem has also been the essential difficulty in numerical homogenization
\cite{WhHo87, BaOs:1983, BaCaOs:1994, Beylkin:1995, HoWu:1997, EEngquist:2003, OwZh:2007a, BraWu09}.
Although inspired by classical homogenization ideas and concepts (such as oscillating test functions \cite{Mur78, EfHo:2007, EfGiHouEw:2006}, cell problems/correctors and effective coefficients \cite{BeLiPa78, PapanicolaouVaradhan:1981, Abdulle:2004,NoPaPi:2008, EnSou08, AnGlo06}, harmonic coordinates \cite{Kozlov:1979, BaOs:1983, BaCaOs:1994, Owhadi:2003, BenarousOwhadi:2003, AllBri05, OwZh:2007a}, compactness by compensation \cite{Spagnolo:1968,Gio75, Muratb:1978, BeOw:2010}) an essential goal of numerical homogenization has been the numerical approximation of the solution space of \eqref{eqn:scalar} with arbitrary rough coefficients \cite{OwZh:2007a}, i.e., in particular, without the assumptions found in classical homogenization, such as scale separation, ergodicity at fine scales and $\epsilon$-sequences of operators (otherwise the resulting method could lack robustness to rough coefficients, even under the assumption that coefficients are stationary \cite{BalJing10}).
Furthermore, to envisage applications to multigrid methods, the computation of these basis functions must also be provably localized \cite{ BaLip10, OwZh:2011, MaPe:2012, GrGrSa2012, OwhadiZhangBerlyand:2014, HouLiu2015} and compatible with nesting strategies \cite{OwhadiZhangBerlyand:2014}.
In \cite{Owhadi:2014}, it has been shown that this process of identification (of accurate basis elements for numerical homogenization), could, in principle, be guided through its reformulation as a Bayesian Inference problem in which the source term $g$ in \eqref{eqn:scalar} is replaced by noise $\xi$ and one tries to estimate the value of the solution at a given point based on a finite number of observations. In particular it was found that Rough Polyharmonic Splines \cite{OwhadiZhangBerlyand:2014} and Polyharmonic Splines \cite{Harder:1972, Duchon:1976,Duchon:1977,Duchon:1978} can be re-discovered as solutions of Gaussian filtering problems. This paper is inspired by the suggestion that this link between numerical homogenization and Bayesian Inference (and the link between Numerical Quadrature and Bayesian Inference \cite{Poincare:1896, Diaconis:1988, Shaw:1988, Hagan:1991, Hagan:1992}) are not coincidences but particular instances of mixed strategies for underlying information games and that optimal or near optimal methods could be obtained by identifying such games and their optimal strategies.
The process of identification of these games starts with the (Information Based Complexity \cite{Woniakowski2009}) notion that computation can only be done with partial information.
For instance, since the operator \eqref{eqn:scalar} is infinite dimensional, one cannot directly compute with $u\in H^1_0(\Omega)$ but only with finite-dimensional \emph{features} of $u$. An example of such finite-dimensional features is the $m$-dimensional vector $u_m:=(\int_{\Omega}u\phi_1,\ldots,\int_{\Omega}u\phi_m)$ obtained by integrating the solution $u$ of \eqref{eqn:scalar} against $m$ test/measurement functions $\phi_i \in L^2(\Omega)$. However to achieve an accurate approximation of $u$ through computation with $u_m$ one must fill the information gap between $u_m$ and $u$ (i.e. construct an interpolation operator giving $u$ as a function of $u_m$). We will, therefore, reformulate the identification of this interpolation operator as a non-cooperative (min max) game where Player I chooses the source term $g$ \eqref{eqn:scalar} in an admissible set/class (e.g. the unit ball of $L^2(\Omega)$) and Player II is shown $u_m$ and must approximate $u$ from these incomplete measurements. Using the energy norm
\begin{equation}\label{eqenergynorm}
\|u\|_a^2:=\int_{\Omega}\nabla u^T(x) a(x)\nabla u(x)\,dx,
\end{equation}
to quantify the accuracy of the recovery and calling $u^*$ Player I's bet (on the value of $u$),
the objective of Player I is to maximize the approximation error $\|u-u^*\|_{a}$, while the objective of Player II is to minimize it.
A remarkable result from Game Theory (as developed by Von Neumann \cite{VNeumann28}, Von Neumann and Morgenstern \cite{VonNeumann:1944} and Nash \cite{Nash:1951}) is that optimal strategies for deterministic zero sum finite games are mixed (i.e. randomized) strategies. Although the information game described above is zero sum, it is not finite. Nevertheless, as in Wald's Decision Theory \cite{Wald:1945}, under sufficient regularity conditions it can be made compact and therefore approximable by a finite game.
Therefore although the information game described above is purely deterministic (and has no a priori connection to statistical estimation), under compactness (and continuity of the loss function), the best strategy for Player I is to play at random by placing a probability distribution $\pi_{I}$ on the set of candidates for $g$ (and select $g$ as a sample from $\pi_{I}$) and the optimal strategy for Player II is to place a probability distribution $\pi_{II}$ on the set of candidates for $g$ and approximate the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar} by the expectation of $u$ (under $\pi_{II}$ used as a prior distribution) conditioned on the measurements $\int_{\Omega} u\phi_i$.
Although the estimator employed by Player II may be called Bayesian, the game described here is not (i.e. the choice of Player I might be distinct from that of Player II) and Player II must solve a min max optimization problem over $\pi_{I}$ and $\pi_{II}$ to identify an optimal prior distribution for the Bayesian estimator (a careful choice of the prior also appears to be important due to the possible high sensitivity of posterior distributions \cite{OSS:2013, OwhadiScovel:2013, owhadiBayesiansirev2013}).
Although solving the min max problem over $\pi_{I}$ and $\pi_{II}$ may be one way of determining the strategy of Player II, it will not be the method employed here. We will instead analyze the error of Player II's approximation as a function of Player II's prior and the source term $g$ picked by Player I. Furthermore, to preserve the linearity of the calculations we will restrict Player II's decision space (the set of possible priors $\pi_{II}$) to Gaussian priors on the source term $g$.
Since the resulting analysis is independent of the structure of \eqref{eqn:scalar} and solely depends on its linearity we will first perform this investigation, in Section \ref{sec:problem}, in the algebraic framework of linear systems of equations, identify Player II's optimal mixed strategy and show that it is characterized by deterministic optimal recovery and accuracy properties.
The mixed strategy identified in Section \ref{sec:problem} will then be applied in
\ref{sec:contcase} to the numerical homogenization of \eqref{eqn:scalar} and the discovery of interpolation interpolators. In particular, it will be shown that the resulting elementary gambles form a set of deterministic basis functions (gamblets) characterized by (1) optimal recovery and accuracy properties (2) exponential decay (enabling their localized computation) (3) robustness to high contrast.
To compute fast, the game presented above must not be limited to filling the information gap between $u_m\in \mathbb{R}^m$ and $u\in H^1_0(\Omega)$. This game must be played (and repeated) over hierarchies of levels of complexity (e.g. one must fill information gaps between $\mathbb{R}^{4}$ and $\mathbb{R}^{16}$, then $\mathbb{R}^{16}$ and $\mathbb{R}^{64}$, etc...). We will therefore, in Section \ref{sechnh}, consider the (hierarchical) game where Player I chooses the r.h.s of \eqref{eqn:scalar} and Player II must (iteratively) gamble on the value of its solution based on a hierarchy of nested measurements of $u$ (from coarse to fine measurements).
Under Player II's mixed strategy (identified in Section \ref{sec:problem} and used in Section \ref{sec:contcase}), the resulting
sequence of multi-resolution approximations forms a martingale. Conditioning and the independence of martingale increments lead to the hierarchy of nested interpolation operators and to the multiresolution orthogonal decomposition of \eqref{eqn:scalar} into independent linear systems of uniformly bounded condition numbers.
The resulting elementary gambles (gamblets) (1) form a hierarchy of nested basis functions leading to the orthogonal decomposition (in the scalar product of the energy norm) of $H^1_0(\Omega)$ (2) enable the sparse compression of the solution space of \eqref{eqn:scalar} (3) can be computed and stored in near-linear complexity by solving a nesting of linear systems with uniformly bounded condition numbers (4) enable the computation of the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar} (or its hyperbolic or parabolic analogues) in near-linear complexity. The implementation and complexity of the algorithm are discussed in Section \ref{secnumimple} with numerical illustrations.
\subsection{On the correspondence between statistical inference and numerical approximation}\label{subsecone3}
As exposed by Diaconis \cite{Diaconis:1988}, the investigation of the correspondence between statistical inference and numerical approximation can be traced back to Poincar{\'e}'s course in Probability Theory \cite{Poincare:1896}. It is useful to recall Diaconis' compelling example \cite{Diaconis:1988} as an illustration of this conection. Let $f:[0,1]\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ be a given function and assume that we are interested in the numerical approximation of $\int_0^1 f(t)\,dt$. The Bayesian approach to this quadrature problem is to (1) Put a prior (probability distribution) on continuous functions $\mathcal{C}[0,1]$ (2) Calculate $f$ at $x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n$ (to obtain the data $(f(x_1),\ldots,f(x_n))$) (3) Compute a posterior (4) Estimate $\int_0^1 f(t)\,dt$ by the Bayes rule. If the prior on $\mathcal{C}[0,1]$ is that of a Brownian Motion (i.e. $f(t)=B_t$ where $B_t$ is a Brownian motion and $B_0$ is normal), then $\mathbb{E}\big[f(x)\big|f(x_1),\ldots,f(x_n)\big]$ is the piecewise linear interpolation of $f$ between the points $x_1,\ldots,x_n$ and one re-discovers the trapezoidal quadrature rule. If the prior on $\mathcal{C}[0,1]$ is that of the first integral of a Brownian Motion (i.e. $f(t)\sim \int_0^t B_s\,ds$) then the posterior $\mathbb{E}\big[f(x)\big|f(x_1),\ldots,f(x_n)\big]$ is the cubic spline interpolant and integrating $k$ times yields splines of order $2k+1$.
Subsequent to Poincar{\'e}'s early discovery \cite{Poincare:1896}, Sul'din \cite{Suldin1959} and (in particular) Larkin \cite{Larkin1972} initiated the systematic investigation of the correspondence between conditioning Gaussian measures/processes and numerical approximation. As noted by Larkin \cite{Larkin1972}, despite Sard's introduction of probabilistic concepts in the theory of linear approximation \cite{Sard1963}, and Kimeldorf and Wahba's exposition \cite{Kimeldorf70} of the correspondence between Bayesian estimation and spline smoothing/interpolation, the application of probabilistic concepts and techniques to numerical integration/approximation ``attracted little attention among numerical analysts'' (perhaps due to the counterintuitive nature of the process of randomizing a known function). However, a natural framework for understanding this process of randomization can be found
in the pioneering works of Wo{\'z}niakowski \cite{Woniakowski1986}, Packel \cite{Packel1987}, and Traub, Wasilkowski,
and Wo\'{z}niakowski \cite{Traub1988} on Information Based Complexity \cite{Nemirovsky1992, Woniakowski2009}, the branch of computational complexity that studies the complexity of approximating continuous mathematical operations with discrete and finite ones up a to specified level of accuracy.
Indeed the concept that numerical implementation requires computation with partial information and limited resources emerges naturally from Information Based Complexity, where it is also augmented by concepts of contaminated and priced information associated with, for example, truncation errors and the cost of numerical operations. In this framework, the performance of an algorithm operating on incomplete information can be analysed in the usual worst case setting or the average case (randomized) setting \cite{Ritter2000, Novak2010} with respect to the missing information.
Although the measure of probability (on the solution space) employed in the average case setting may be arbitrary,
as observed by Packel \cite{Packel1987}, if that measure is chosen carefully (as the solution of a game theoretic problem) then
the average case setting can be interpreted as lifting a (worst case) min max problem (where saddle points of pure strategies do not, in general, exist) to a min max problem over mixed (randomized) strategies (where saddle points do exist \cite{VNeumann28, VonNeumann:1944}).
As exposed by Diaconis \cite{Diaconis:1988} (see also Shaw \cite{Shaw:1988}) the randomized setting also establishes a correspondence
between Numerical Analysis and Bayesian Inference providing a natural framework for the statistical description of numerical errors (in which confidence intervals can be derived from posterior distributions). Furthermore \cite{PalastiRenyi1956, Diaconis:1988}, classical min max numerical quadrature rules can be formulated as solutions of Bayesian inference problems with carefully chosen priors \cite{Diaconis:1988} and, as shown by O'Hagan \cite{Hagan:1991, Hagan:1992}, this correspondence can be exploited to discover new and useful numerical quadratures rules.
As envisioned by Skilling \cite{Skilling1992}, by placing a (carefully chosen) probability distribution on the solution space of an ODE and conditioning on quadrature points, one obtains a posterior distribution on the solution whose mean may coincide with classical numerical integrators such as Runge-Kutta methods \cite{schober2014nips}. As shown in \cite{ChkrebtiiCampbell2015} the statistical approach is particularly well suited for chaotic dynamical systems for which deterministic worst case error bounds may provide little information.
While in \cite{Skilling1992, schober2014nips, ChkrebtiiCampbell2015} the probability distribution is directly placed on the solutions space, for PDEs \cite{Owhadi:2014} argues that the prior distribution must be placed on source terms
(or on the image space of an integro-differential operator) and propagated/filtered through the inverse operator to reflect the structure of the solution space. In particular \cite{Owhadi:2014} shows that this process of filtering noise with the inverse operator, when combined with conditioning, produces accurate finite-element basis functions for the solution space whose deterministic worst case errors can be bounded by standard deviation errors using the reproducing kernel structure of the covariance function of the filtered Gaussian field. As already witnessed in \cite{ChkrebtiiCampbell2015, schober2014nips, Owhadi:2014,Hennig2015, Hennig2015b, Briol2015, Conrad2015}, it is natural to expect that the possibilities offered by combining numerical uncertainties/errors with model uncertainties/errors in a unified framework will stimulate a resurgence of the statistical inference approach to numerical analysis.
\section{Linear Algebra with incomplete information}\label{sec:problem}
\subsection{The recovery problem}
The problem of identifying interpolation operators for \eqref{eqn:scalar} is equivalent (after discretization or in the algebraic setting) to that of recovering or approximating the
solution of a linear system of equations from an incomplete set of measurements (coarse variables) given known norm constraints on the image of the solution.
Let $n\geq 2$ and $A$ be a known real invertible $n\times n$ matrix. Let $b$ be an unknown element of $\mathbb{R}^n$.
Our purpose is to approximate the solution $x$ of
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:scalargeneral}
A x=b
\end{equation}
based on the information that (1) $x$ solves
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ekiudiu3d}
\Phi x =y,
\end{equation}
where $\Phi$ (the measurement matrix) is a known, rank $m$, $m\times n$ real matrix such that $m<n$ and $y$ (the measurement vector) is a known vector of $\mathbb{R}^m$, and (2) the norm $b^T T^{-1} b$ of $b$ is known or bounded by a known constant (e.g., $b^T T^{-1} b \leq 1$), where $T^{-1}$ is a known positive definite $n\times n$ matrix (with $T^{-1}$ being the identity matrix as a prototypical example).
Observe that since $m<n$, the measurements \eqref{eq:ekiudiu3d} are, a priori, not sufficient to recover the exact value $x$.
As described in Section \ref{secdt}, by formulating this recovery problem as a (non-cooperative) information game (where Player I chooses $b$ and
Player II chooses an approximation $x^*$ of $x$ based on the observation $\Phi x$), one (Player II) is naturally lead to search for mixed strategy in the Bayesian class by placing a prior distribution on $b$. The purpose of this section is to analyze the resulting approximation error and select the prior distribution accordingly. To preserve the linearity (i.e. simplicity and computational efficiency) of calculations we will restrict Player II's decision space to Gaussian priors.
\subsection{Player I's mixed strategy}
We will therefore, in the first step of the analysis, replace $b$ in \eqref{eqn:scalargeneral} by $\xi$, a centered Gaussian vector of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with covariance matrix $Q$ (which may be distinct from $T$) and consider the following stochastic linear system
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:noisy}
A X=\xi\,.
\end{equation}
The Bayesian answer (a mixed strategy for Player II) to the recovery problem of Section \ref{sec:problem} is to approximate $x$ by the conditional expectation
$\mathbb{E}[X|\Phi X=y]$.
\begin{Theorem}\label{thm:Gaussian}
The solution $X$ of \eqref{eqn:noisy} is a centered Gaussian vector of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with covariance matrix
\begin{equation}\label{eqhbddjdhh}
K=A^{-1} Q (A^{-1})^T\,.
\end{equation}
Furthermore, $X$ conditioned on the value $\Phi X=y$ is a Gaussian vector of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with mean $\mathbb{E}[X|\Phi X=y]= \Psi y$,
and of covariance matrix $K^{\Phi}$, where $\Psi$ is the $n \times m$ matrix
\begin{equation}\label{eq:phiidef}
\Psi:=K \Phi^T (\Phi K \Phi^T)^{-1},
\end{equation}
and $K^{\Phi}$ is the rank $n-m$ positive $n\times n$ symmetric matrix defined by $K^{\Phi}:= K - \Psi \Phi K$.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
\eqref{eqhbddjdhh} simply follows from $X=A^{-1}\xi$. Since $X$ is a Gaussian vector,
$\mathbb{E}[X|\Phi X=y]= \Psi y$ where $\Psi$ is a $n\times m$ matrix minimizing the mean squared error
$\mathbb{E}\big[|X- M\Phi X|^2\big]$
over all $n\times m$ matrices $M$. We have
$\mathbb{E}\big[|X- M\Phi X|^2\big]= \operatorname{Trace}[K]+ \operatorname{Trace}[M \Phi K \Phi^T M^T] -2 \operatorname{Trace}[\Phi K M]$
whose minimum is achieved for $M=\Psi$ as defined by \eqref{eq:phiidef}. The covariance matrix of $X$ given $\Phi X=y$ is then obtained by observing that for $v\in \mathbb{R}^n$, $v^T K^{\Phi} v=\mathbb{E}\big[|v^T X- v^T \Psi \Phi X|^2\big]= v^T K v - v^T \Psi \Phi K v$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Variational/optimal recovery properties and approximation error}\label{subsecvarprop}
For a $n\times n$ symmetric positive definite matrix $M$ let $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_{M}$ be the (scalar) product on $\mathbb{R}^n$ defined by: for $u, v\in \mathbb{R}^n$,
$ \<u, v\>_{M} := u^T M v$ and write $\|v\|_{M}:=\<v, v\>_M^\frac{1}{2}$ the corresponding norm. When $M$ is the identity matrix then we write $\<u, v\>$ and $ \|v\|$ the corresponding scalar product and norm.
For a linear subspace $V$ of $\mathbb{R}^n$ we write $P_{V, M}$ for the orthogonal projections onto $V$ with respect to the scalar product $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_{M}$.
For a (possibly rectangular) matrix $B$ we write $\operatorname{Im}(B)$ the image (range) of $B$ and $\operatorname{Ker}(B)$ the null space of $B$.
For an integer $n$, let $I_n$ be the $n\times n$ identity matrix.
\begin{Theorem}\label{lem:minimizingproperty}
For $w\in \mathbb{R}^m$, $\Psi w$ is the unique minimizer of the following quadratic problem
\begin{equation}\label{eq:dueihdbis}
\begin{cases}
\text{Minimize } &\<v, v\>_{K^{-1}}\\
\text{Subject to } &\Phi v=w\text{ and } v \in \mathbb{R}^n\,.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
In particular, $v=\Psi y$, the Bayesian approximation of the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalargeneral}, is the unique minimizer of $\|A v\|_{Q^{-1}}$ under the measurement constraints $\Phi v=y$. Furthermore, it also holds true that (1) $\Phi \Psi=I_m$
(2) $\operatorname{Im}(\Psi)$ is the orthogonal complement of $\operatorname{Ker}(\Phi)$ with respect to the product $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_{K^{-1}}$ and (3) $\Psi\Phi=P_{\operatorname{Im}(K \Phi^T), K^{-1}}$ and $I_n-\Psi\Phi=P_{\operatorname{Ker}(\Phi), K^{-1}}$.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
First observe that \eqref{eq:phiidef} implies that $\Phi \Psi=I_m$ where $I_m$ is the identity $m\times m$ matrix. Therefore $\Phi (\Psi w)=w$.
Note that \eqref{eq:phiidef} implies that for all $z\in \mathbb{R}^m$, $\<\Psi z,v\>_{K^{-1}} =z^T \big(\Phi K \Phi^T\big)^{-1} \Phi v$.
Therefore if $v\in \operatorname{Ker}(\Phi)$ then $\<\Psi z,v\>_{K^{-1}}=0$ for all $z\in \mathbb{R}^m$. Conversely if $\<\Psi z,v\>_{K^{-1}}=0$ for all $z\in \mathbb{R}^m$ then $v$ must belong to $\operatorname{Ker}(\Phi)$.
Since the dimension of $\operatorname{Im}(\Psi)$ is $m$ and that of $\operatorname{Ker}(\Phi)$ is $n-m$ we conclude that $\operatorname{Im}(\Psi)$ is the orthogonal complement $\operatorname{Ker}(\Phi)$ with respect to the product $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_{K^{-1}}$ and in particular,
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:orthogonalitybis}
\<\Psi w,v\>_{K^{-1}} =0, \quad \forall w\in \mathbb{R}^m \text{ and } \forall v\in \mathbb{R}^n \text{ such that }\Phi v=0\,.
\end{equation}
Let $w\in \mathbb{R}^m$ and $v\in \mathbb{R}^n$ such that $\Phi v=w$. Since $\Psi w -v \in \operatorname{Ker}(\Phi)$, it follows from \eqref{eqn:orthogonalitybis} that
$ \<v,v\>_{K^{-1}} = \<\Psi w,\Psi w\>_{K^{-1}} +\<v-\Psi w,v-\Psi w\>_{K^{-1}}$.
Therefore $\Psi w$ is the unique minimizer of $\<v,v\>_{K^{-1}}$
over all $v\in \mathbb{R}^n$ such that $\Phi v=w$.
Now consider $f\in \mathbb{R}^n$, since $\operatorname{Im}(\Psi)=\operatorname{Im}(K\Phi^T)$ and $\operatorname{Im}(\Psi)$ is the orthogonal complement of $\operatorname{Ker}(\Phi)$ with respect to the product $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_{K^{-1}}$,
there exists a unique $z\in \mathbb{R}^m$ and a unique $g\in \operatorname{Ker}(\Phi)$ such that $f=K \Phi^T z +g$.
Since $\Psi \Phi =K \Phi^T (\Phi K \Phi^T)^{-1} \Phi$,
it follows that $\Psi \Phi f= K \Phi^T z \text{ and }(I_n-\Psi \Phi)f=g$.
We conclude by observing that $g=P_{\operatorname{Ker}(\Phi), K^{-1}} f$.
\end{proof}
\begin{Theorem}\label{thm:gedgdgjdh}
For $v\in \mathbb{R}^n$, $w^*=\Phi v$ is the unique minimizer of $\|v- \Psi w\|_{K^{-1}}$
over all $w\in \mathbb{R}^m$. In particular, $\|v-\Psi \Phi v\|_{K^{-1}}=\min_{z\in \mathbb{R}^m} \|v-K\Phi^T z\|_{K^{-1}}$
and if $x$ is the solution of the original equation \eqref{eqn:scalargeneral}, then
$\|x-\Psi y\|_{K^{-1}} =\min_{w\in \mathbb{R}^m} \|x-\Psi w\|_{K^{-1}} =\min_{z\in \mathbb{R}^m} \|x-K\Phi^T z\|_{K^{-1}}$.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
The proof follows by observing that $v-\Psi \Phi v$ belongs to the null space of $\Phi$ which, from Theorem \ref{lem:minimizingproperty}, is the orthogonal complement of the image of $\Psi$ with respect to the scalar product defining the norm $\|\cdot\|_{K^{-1}}$. Observe also that the image of $\Psi$ is equal to that of $K\Phi^T$.
\end{proof}
\begin{Remark}\label{rmk:accurkm1}
Observe that, from Theorem \ref{lem:minimizingproperty}, $v-\Psi \Phi v$ spans the null space of $\Phi$, and
$\|v\|_{K^{-1}}^2= \big\|v-\Psi \Phi v\big\|_{K^{-1}}^2+\big\|\Psi \Phi v\big\|_{K^{-1}}^2$. Therefore if
$D$ is a symmetric positive definite $n\times n$ matrix then
$\sup_{v \in \mathbb{R}^n} \big\|v-\Psi \Phi v\big\|_{D}/\|v\|_{K^{-1}}=\sup_{v\in \mathbb{R}^n,\, \Phi v=0}\|v\|_{D}/\| v\|_{K^{-1}}$.
In particular, if $x$ is the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalargeneral} and $y$ the vector in \eqref{eq:ekiudiu3d}, then
$\big\|x-\Psi y\big\|_{D}/\|b\|_{Q^{-1}}\leq \sup_{v\in \mathbb{R}^n,\, \Phi v=0} \|v\|_{D}/\| v\|_{K^{-1}}$
and the right hand side is the smallest constant for which the inequality holds (for all $b$).
\end{Remark}
\begin{Remark}
A simple calculation (based on the reproducing Kernel property $\<v,K_{\cdot,i}\>_{K^{-1}}=v_i$) shows that if $x$ is the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalargeneral} and $y$ the vector in \eqref{eq:ekiudiu3d}, then\\
$\Big|(x-\Psi y)_i\Big| \leq \big(K^\Phi_{i,i}\big)^\frac{1}{2} \|b\|_{Q^{-1}}$, i.e.
the variance of the $i$th entry of the solution of the stochastic system \eqref{eqn:noisy} conditioned on $\Phi X=y$, controls the accuracy of the approximation of the $i$th entry of the solution of the deterministic system \eqref{eqn:scalargeneral}. In that sense, the role of
$K^\Phi$ is analogous to that of the power function in radial basis function interpolation \cite{Wendland:2005, Fasshauer:2005}
and that of the Kriging function \cite{WuSchback:93} in geostatistics \cite{Myers:1992}.
\end{Remark}
\subsection{Energy norm estimates and selection of the prior}\label{subsecpriorselection}
We will from now on assume that $A$ is symmetric positive definite. Observe that in this situation
the energy norm $\|\cdot\|_A$ is of practical significance
for quantifying the approximation error and Theorem \ref{thm:gedgdgjdh} leads to the estimate
$\|x-\Psi y\|_{K^{-1}} =\min_{z\in \mathbb{R}^m} \|Q^{-\frac{1}{2}}b- Q^{-\frac{1}{2}} A^{\frac{1}{2}} K^\frac{1}{2}\Phi^T z\|$ which simplifies to the energy norm estimate expressed by Corollary \eqref{cor:geaaedgjdh} under the choice $Q=A$ (note that $K^{-1}=A$ under that choice).
\begin{Corollary}\label{cor:geaaedgjdh}
If $A$ is symmetric positive definite and $Q=A$, then for $v\in \mathbb{R}^n$, $\|v-\Psi \Phi v\|_{A}=\min_{z\in \mathbb{R}^m} \|v-A^{-1}\Phi^T z\|_{A}$.
Therefore, if $x$ is the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalargeneral} and $y$ the vector in \eqref{eq:ekiudiu3d}, then
$\|x-\Psi y\|_{A} =\min_{w\in \mathbb{R}^m} \|x-\Psi w\|_{A} =\min_{z\in \mathbb{R}^m} \|x-A^{-1}\Phi^T z\|_{A}$. In particular
\begin{equation}\label{eq:gdugeueydd}
\|x-\Psi y\|_{A} =\min_{z\in \mathbb{R}^m} \|A^{-\frac{1}{2}} b-A^{-\frac{1}{2}}\Phi^T z\|\,.
\end{equation}
\end{Corollary}
\begin{Remark}\label{rmk:galerkinproj}
Therefore, according to Corollary \ref{cor:geaaedgjdh}, if $Q=A$, then $\Psi y$ is the Galerkin approximation of $x$, i.e.~the best approximation of $x$ in $\|\cdot\|_A$-norm in the image of $\Psi$ (which is equal to the image of $A^{-1}\Phi^T$). This is interesting because $\Psi y$ is obtained without the prior knowledge of $b$.
\end{Remark}
Corollary \ref{cor:geaaedgjdh} and Remark \ref{rmk:galerkinproj} motivate us to select $Q=A$ as the covariance matrix of the Gaussian prior distribution (mixed strategy of Player II).
\subsection{Impact and selection of the measurement matrix $\Phi$}
It is natural to wonder how good this recovery strategy is (under the choice $Q=A$) compared to the best possible function of $y$ and how the approximation error is impacted by the measurement matrix $\Phi$. If the energy norm is used to quantify accuracy, then the recovery problem can be expressed as finding the function $\theta$ of the measurements $y$ minimizing the (worst case) approximation error $\inf_{\theta}\sup_{\|b\|\leq 1} \|x - \theta(y)\|_A/\|b\|$
with $x=A^{-1}b$ and $y=\Phi A^{-1} b$. Writing $0<\lambda_1(A)\leq \cdots \leq \lambda_n(A)$, the eigenvalues of $A$ in increasing order, and $a_1,\ldots,a_n$, the corresponding eigenvectors, it is easy to obtain that (1) the best choice for $\Phi$ would correspond to measuring the projection of $x$ on $\operatorname{span}\{a_1,\ldots,a_m\}$ and would lead to the worst approximation error $1/\sqrt{\lambda_{m+1}}$
and (2) the worst choice would correspond to measuring the projection of $x$ on a subspace orthogonal to $a_1$ and would lead to the worst approximation error $1/\sqrt{\lambda_{1}}$.
Under the decision $Q=A$ the minimal value of \eqref{eq:gdugeueydd} is also $1/\sqrt{\lambda_{m+1}}$ and achieved for $\operatorname{Im}(\Phi^T)=\operatorname{span}\{a_1,\ldots,a_m\}$ and the maximal value of \eqref{eq:gdugeueydd} is $1/\sqrt{\lambda_{1}}$ and achieved when $\operatorname{Im}(\Phi^T)$ is orthogonal to $a_1$. The following theorem, which is a direct application of \eqref{eq:gdugeueydd} and the estimate derived in \cite[p.~10]{HalkoMartinssonTropp:2011} (see also \cite{MartinssonRokhlinTygert:2011}), shows that, the subset of measurement matrices that are not \emph{nearly optimal} is of small measure if the rows of $\Phi^T$ are sampled independently on the unit sphere of $\mathbb{R}^n$.
\begin{Theorem}\label{thm:duihdi3dw}
If $\Phi$ is a $n\times m$ matrix with i.i.d. $\mathcal{N}(0,1)$ (Gaussian) entries, $Q=A$, $x$ is the solution of the original equation \eqref{eqn:scalargeneral}, and $2\leq p$ then
with probability at least $1-3 p^{-p}$, $\|x-\Psi y\|_{A}/\|b\|\leq (1+9 \sqrt{m+p}\sqrt{n})/\sqrt{\lambda_{m+1}}.$
\end{Theorem}
Although the randomization of the measurement matrix \cite{Frieze98fastmontecarlo, LeParker99, Gilbert2002,OwhadiCandes2004} can be an efficient strategy in compressed sensing \cite{Tropp2005, CandesTao2006, CandesRombergTao2006, Donoho:2006, Gilbert:2007, Chandrasekaran2011} and in
Singular Value Decomposition/Low Rank approximation \cite{HalkoMartinssonTropp:2011}, we will not use this strategy here because the design of the interpolation operator presents the (added) difficulty of approximating the eigenvectors associated with the smallest eigenvalues of $A$ rather than those associated with the largest ones. Furthermore, $\Psi$ has to be computed efficiently and the dependence of the approximation constant in Theorem \ref{thm:duihdi3dw} on $n$ and $m$ can be problematic if sharp convergence estimates are to be obtained.
We will instead select the measurement matrix based on the transfer property introduced in \cite{BeOw:2010}
and given in a discrete context in the following theorem.
\begin{Theorem}\label{thm:geaaejhdgjvvggdh}
If $A$ is symmetric positive definite, $Q=A$ and $x$ is the solution of the original equation \eqref{eqn:scalargeneral}, then for any symmetric positive definite matrix $B$, we have
\begin{equation}
\inf_{v\in \mathbb{R}^n}\sqrt{\frac{v^T B v}{v^T A v}}\min_{z\in \mathbb{R}^m} \|b-\Phi^T z\|_{B^{-1}} \leq \|x-\Psi y\|_{A} \leq \sup_{v\in \mathbb{R}^n}\sqrt{\frac{v^T B v}{v^T A v}}\min_{z\in \mathbb{R}^m} \|b-\Phi^T z\|_{B^{-1}}
\end{equation}
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
Corollary \ref{cor:geaaedgjdh} implies that if $x$ is the solution of the original equation \eqref{eqn:scalargeneral}, then
$\|x-\Psi y\|_{A} =\min_{z\in \mathbb{R}^m} \|b-\Phi^T z\|_{A^{-1}}$. We finish the proof by observing that
if $A$ and $B$ are symmetric positive definite matrices such that $\alpha_1 B \leq A \leq \alpha_2 B$ for some constants $\alpha_1,\alpha_2>0$ then
$\alpha_2^{-1} B^{-1} \leq A^{-1} \leq \alpha_1^{-1} B^{-1}$.
\end{proof}
Therefore according to Theorem \ref{thm:geaaejhdgjvvggdh}, once a good measurement matrix $\Phi$ has been identified for a symmetric positive definite matrix $B$ such that $\alpha_1 B \leq A $, the same measurement matrix can be used for $A$ at the cost of an increase of the bound on the error by the multiplicative factor $\alpha_1^{-1/2}$.
As a prototypical example, one may consider a (stiffness) matrix $A$ obtained from a finite element discretization of the PDE \eqref{eqn:scalar} and
$B$ may be the stiffness matrix of the finite element discretization of the Laplace Dirichlet PDE
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:LapDir}
-\Delta u'(x)=g(x) \text{ on } \Omega \text{ with } u'=0 \text{ on }\partial \Omega,
\end{equation}
obtained from the same finite-elements (e.g. piecewise-linear nodal basis functions over the same fine mesh $\mathcal{T}_h$). Using the energy norm \eqref{eqenergynorm}, Theorem \ref{thm:geaaejhdgjvvggdh} and Remark \ref{rmk:galerkinproj} imply the following proposition
\begin{Proposition}\label{prop:guguyuyh}
Let $u_h$ (resp. $u_h'$) be the finite element approximation of the solution $u$ of \eqref{eqn:scalar} (resp. the solution $u'$ of \eqref{eqn:LapDir}) over the finite nodal elements of $\mathcal{T}_h$. Let $u_H$ (resp. $u_H'$) be the finite element approximation of the solution $u$ of \eqref{eqn:scalar} (resp. the solution $u'$ of \eqref{eqn:LapDir}) over linear space spanned by the rows of $A^{-1} \Phi^T$ (resp. over the linear space spanned by the rows of $B^{-1} \Phi^T$). It holds true that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:dgiegduygd}
\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(a)}} \|u_h'-u_H'\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq \|u_h-u_H\|_a\leq \frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)}} \|u_h'-u_H'\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)}
\end{equation}
\end{Proposition}
Observe that the right hand side of \eqref{eq:dgiegduygd} does not depend on $\lambda_{\max}(a)$, therefore if $\lambda_{\min}(a)=1$, then the error bound on $\|u_h-u_H\|_a$ does not depend on the contrast of $a$ (i.e. $\lambda_{\max}(a)/\lambda_{\min}(a)$).
\section{Numerical homogenization and design of the interpolation operator in the continuous case}\label{sec:contcase}
We will now generalize the results and continue the analysis of Section \ref{sec:problem} in the continuous case and design the interpolation operator for \eqref{eqn:scalar} in the context of numerical homogenization.
\subsection{Information Game and Gamblets}
As in Section \ref{sec:problem} we will identify the interpolation operator (that will be used for the multigrid algorithm) through a non cooperative
game formulation where Player I chooses the source term $g$ \eqref{eqn:scalar} and Player II tries to approximate the solution $u$ of \eqref{eqn:scalar} based on a finite number of measurements $(\int_{\Omega} u\phi_i)_{1\leq i \leq m}$ obtained from linearly independent test functions $\phi_i\in L^2(\Omega)$.
As in Section \ref{sec:problem}, this game formulation, motivates the search for a mixed strategy for Player II that can be expressed by replacing the source term $g$ with noise $\xi$. We will therefore consider the following SPDE
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:scalarspde}
\begin{cases}
-\operatorname{div} \Big(a(x) \nabla v(x)\Big)=\xi(x) \quad x \in \Omega;\\
v=0 \quad \text{on}\quad \partial \Omega,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $\Omega$ and $a$ are the domain and conductivity of \eqref{eqn:scalar}. As in Section \ref{sec:problem}, to preserve the computational efficiency of the interpolation operator we will assume that $\xi$ is a centered Gaussian field on $\Omega$. The decision space of Player II is therefore the covariance function of $\xi$.
Write $\mathcal{L}$ the differential operator $-\operatorname{div}(a\nabla)$ with zero Dirichlet boundary condition mapping $H^1_0(\Omega)$ onto $H^{-1}(\Omega)$. Motivated by the analysis (Remark \ref{rmk:galerkinproj}) of Subsection \ref{subsecpriorselection} (which can be reproduced in the continuous case) we will select the covariance function of $\xi$ (Player II's decision) to be $\mathcal{L}$. Therefore, under that choice,
for all $f\in H^1_0(\Omega)$, $\int_{\Omega}f(x)\xi(x)\,dx$ is a Gaussian random variable with mean 0 and variance $\int_{\Omega} f\mathcal{L} f=\|f\|_a^2$ where $\|f\|_a$ is the energy norm of $f$ defined in \eqref{eqenergynorm}. Introducing the scalar product on $H^1_0(\Omega)$ defined by
\begin{equation}\label{eqsp}
\<v,w\>_a:=\int_{\Omega} (\nabla v)^T a \nabla w\,,
\end{equation}
recall that if $(e_1,e_2,\ldots)$ is an orthonormal basis of $(H^1_0(\Omega),\|\cdot\|_a)$ diagonalizing $\mathcal{L}$, then
$\xi$ can formally be represented as $\xi=\sum_{i=1}^\infty (\mathcal{L} e_i) X_i$ (where the $X_i$ are i.i.d. $\mathcal{N}(0,1)$ random variables) and, therefore, $\xi$ can
also be identified as the linear isometry mapping $H^1_0(\Omega)$ onto a Gaussian space and $f=\sum_{i=1}^\infty \<f,e_i\>_a e_i$ onto $\int_{\Omega}f(x)\xi(x)\,dx=\sum_{i=1}^\infty \<f, e_i\>_a X_i$.
Observe also that \cite{Owhadi:2014}, if $\xi'$ is White Noise on $\Omega$ (i.e. a Gaussian field with covariance function $\delta(x-y)$) then $\xi$ can be represented as $\xi=\mathcal{L}^{-\frac{1}{2}}\xi'$. Furthermore \cite[Prop.~3.1]{Owhadi:2014} the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalarspde} is Gaussian field with covariance function $G(x,y)$ (where $G$ is the Green's function of the PDE \eqref{eqn:scalar}, i.e. $\mathcal{L} G(x,y)=\delta(x-y)$ with $G(x,y)=0$ for $y\in \partial \Omega$).
Let $\mathcal{F}$ be the $\sigma$-algebra generated by the random variables $\int_{\Omega}v(x)\phi_i$ for $i\in \{1,\ldots,m\}$ (with $v$ solution of \eqref{eqn:scalarspde}). We will identify the interpolation basis elements by conditioning the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalarspde} on $\mathcal{F}$. Observe that the covariance matrix of the measurement vector $(\int_{\Omega}v(x)\phi_i)_{1\leq i \leq m}$ is the $m\times m$ symmetric matrix $\Theta$ defined by
\begin{equation}\label{eqtheta0}
\Theta_{i,j}:=\int_{\Omega^2}\phi_i(x)G(x,y) \phi_j(y)\,\,{\rm d}x\,dy
\end{equation}
Note that for $l\in \mathbb{R}^m$, $l^T \Theta l=\|w\|_a^2$ where $w$ is the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar} with right hand side $g=\sum_{i=1}^m l_i \phi_i$.
Therefore (since the test functions $\phi_i$ are linearly independent) $\Theta$ is positive definite and we will write $\Theta^{-1}$ its inverse.
Write $\delta_{i,j}$ the Kronecker's delta ($\delta_{i,i}=1$ and $\delta_{i,j}=0$ for $i\not=j$).
\begin{Theorem}\label{thmgufufg0}
Let $v$ be the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalarspde}. It holds true that
\begin{equation}\label{eqmeanvspde0}
\mathbb{E}\big[v(x)\big| \mathcal{F} \big]=\sum_{i=1}^m \psi_i(x) \int_{\Omega} v(y)\phi_i (y)\,dy
\end{equation}
where the functions $\psi_i \in H^1_0(\Omega)$ are defined by
\begin{equation}\label{eqgamblet}
\psi_i(x):=\mathbb{E}\Big[v(x)\Big| \int_{\Omega} v(y)\phi_j(y)\,dy=\delta_{i,j},\,j\in \{1,\ldots,m\}\Big]
\end{equation}
and admit the following representation formula
\begin{equation}\label{eq:doehdd}
\psi_i(x)=\sum_{j=1}^m \Theta_{i,j}^{-1} \int_{\Omega}G(x,y)\phi_j(y)\,dy\,.
\end{equation}
Furthermore, the distribution of $v$ conditioned on $\mathcal{F}$ is that of a Gaussian field with mean \eqref{eqmeanvspde0} and covariance function
$\Gamma(x,y)=G(x,y)+ \sum_{i,j=1}^m \psi_i(x) \psi_j(y) \Theta_{i,j}$\\ $- \sum_{i=1}^m \psi_i(x) \int_{\Omega} G(y,z)\phi_i (z)\,dz- \sum_{i=1}^m \psi_i(y) \int_{\Omega} G(x,z)\phi_i (z)\,dz\,.$
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
The proof is similar to that of \cite[Thm.~3.5]{Owhadi:2014}. The identification of the covariance function follows from the expansion of
$\Gamma(x,y)=\mathbb{E}\Big[\big(v(x)-\mathbb{E}\big[v(x)\big| \mathcal{F} \big]\big)\big(v(y)-\mathbb{E}\big[v(y)\big| \mathcal{F} \big]\big) \Big]$. Note that \eqref{eq:doehdd} proves that $\psi_i \in H^1_0(\Omega)$.
\end{proof}
Since, according to \eqref{eqgamblet} and the discussion preceding \eqref{eqn:scalarspde}, each $\psi_i$ is an elementary gamble (bet) on value of the solution
of \eqref{eqn:scalar} given the information $\int_{\Omega}\phi_j u=\delta_{i,j}$ for $j=1,\ldots,m$ we will refer to
the basis functions $(\psi_i)_{1\leq i \leq m}$, as \emph{gamblets}. According to \eqref{eqmeanvspde0}, once gamblets have been identified, they form a basis for betting on the value of the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar} given the measurements $(\int_{\Omega}\phi_j u)_{1\leq i \leq m}$.
\subsection{Optimal recovery properties}
Although gamblets admit the representation formula \eqref{eq:doehdd}, we will not use it for their practical (numerical) computation. Instead we will work with variational properties inherited from the conditioning of the Gaussian field $v$. To guide our intuition, note that
since $\mathcal{L}$ is the precision function (inverse of the covariance function) of $v$,
the conditional expectation of $v$ can be identified by minimizing $\int_{\Omega}\psi\mathcal{L} \psi $ given measurements constraints.
This observation motivates us to consider, for $i\in \{1,\ldots, m\}$, the following quadratic optimization problem
\begin{equation}\label{eq:dueihdbewdaisq}
\begin{cases}
\text{Minimize } &\|\psi\|_a\\
\text{Subject to } &\psi \in H^1_0(\Omega)\text{ and }\int_{\Omega}\phi_j \psi=\delta_{i,j}\text{ for } j=1,\ldots,m
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $\|\psi\|_a$ is the energy norm of $\psi$ defined in \eqref{eqenergynorm}.
The following theorem shows that \eqref{eq:dueihdbewdaisq} can be used to identify $\psi_i$ and that gamblets are characterized by optimal (variational) recovery properties.
\begin{Theorem}\label{thm:dkdehgjdhdgh0}
It holds true that (1) The optimization problem \eqref{eq:dueihdbewdaisq} admits a unique minimizer $\psi_i$ defined by \eqref{eqgamblet} and \eqref{eq:doehdd}
(2) For $w\in \mathbb{R}^m$, $\sum_{i=1}^m w_i \psi_i$ is the unique minimizer of $\|\psi\|_a$ subject to $\int_{\Omega} \psi(x) \phi_j(x)=w_j$ for $j\in \{1,\ldots,m\}$ and (3) (using the scalar product defined in \eqref{eqsp}) $\<\psi_i,\psi_j\>_a=\Theta_{i,j}^{-1}$.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $w\in \mathbb{R}^m$ and $\psi_w=\sum_{i=1}^m w_i \psi_i$ with $\psi_i$ defined as in \eqref{eq:doehdd}. The definition of $\Theta$ implies that $\int_{\Omega} \psi_w(x) \phi_j(x)=w_j$ for $j\in \{1,\ldots,m\}$. Furthermore we obtain by integration by parts that
for all $\varphi\in H^1_0(\Omega)$, $\<\psi_w,\varphi\>_a=\sum_{i,j=1}^m w_i \Theta_{i,j}^{-1} \int_{\Omega} \phi_j \varphi$.
Therefore, if $\psi \in H^1_0(\Omega)$ is such that $\int_{\Omega} \psi(x) \phi_j(x)=w_j$ for $j\in \{1,\ldots,m\}$ then
$\<\psi_w,\psi-\psi_w\>_a=0$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:hdkhdkjh33e}
\|\psi\|_a^2=\|\psi_w\|_a^2+\|\psi-\psi_w\|_a^2
\end{equation}
which finishes the proof of optimality of $\psi_i$ and $\psi_w$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Optimal accuracy of the recovery}\label{subsecoptaccuracy}
Define
\begin{equation}\label{eqmawybdysedsd}
u^*(x):= \sum_{i=1}^m \psi_i(x) \int_{\Omega} u(y) \phi_i(y)\,dy
\end{equation}
where $u$ is the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar} and $\psi_i$ are the gamblets defined by \eqref{eqgamblet} and \eqref{eq:doehdd}. Note $u^*$ corresponds to Player II's bet on the value of $u$ given the measurements $(\int_{\Omega} u(y) \phi_i(y)\,dy)_{1\leq i \leq m}$. In particular, if
$v$ is the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalarspde} then
\begin{equation}\label{eqmawybdyd}
u^*(x)=\mathbb{E}\big[v(x)\big| \int_{\Omega} v(y)\phi_i (y)\,dy=\int_{\Omega} u(y)\phi_i (y)\,dy \big]
\end{equation}
For $\phi \in H^{-1}(\Omega)$ write $\mathcal{L}^{-1}\phi$ the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar} with $g=\phi$.
The following Theorem shows that $u^*$ is the best approximation (in energy norm) of $u$ in $\operatorname{span} \{\mathcal{L}^{-1} \phi_i : i\in \{1,\ldots,m\}\}$.
\begin{Theorem}\label{thm:dkdehgjdhdgh02}
Let $u$ be the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar}, $u^*$ defined in \eqref{eqmawybdysedsd} and \eqref{eqmawybdyd}. It holds true that
\begin{equation}\label{sidasaeweddaud02}
\|u - u^*\|_{a}=\inf_{\psi \in \operatorname{span} \{\mathcal{L}^{-1} \phi_i : i\in \{1,\ldots,m\}\}}\|u-\psi\|_a
\end{equation}
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem \ref{thmgufufg0} $\operatorname{span} \{\mathcal{L}^{-1} \phi_i : i\in \{1,\ldots,m\}\}=\operatorname{span}\{\psi_1,\ldots,\psi_m\}$ and \eqref{sidasaeweddaud02} follows from the fact that
$\int_{\Omega}(u-u^*)\phi_j=0$ for all $j$ implies that $u-u^*$ is orthogonal to $\operatorname{span}\{\psi_1,\ldots,\psi_m\}$ with respect to the scalar product $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_a$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Transfer property and selection of the measurement functions}
We will now select the measurement (test) functions $\phi_i$ by
extending the result of Proposition \ref{prop:guguyuyh} to
the continuous case. For $V$, a finite dimensional linear subspace of $H^{-1}(\Omega)$, define
\begin{equation}\label{ksjjseddesel3}
(\operatorname{div} a \nabla)^{-1} V:=\operatorname{span} \{(\operatorname{div} a\nabla)^{-1} \phi \,:\, \phi\in V\}.
\end{equation}
where $(\operatorname{div} a\nabla)^{-1} \phi$ is the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar} with $g=-\phi$.
Similarly define $\Delta^{-1}V:=\operatorname{span} \{\Delta^{-1} \phi \,:\, \phi\in V\}$ where $\Delta^{-1}\phi$ is the solution of \eqref{eqn:LapDir} with $g=-\phi$.
\begin{Proposition}\label{prop:deihdidu}
If $u$ and $u'$ are the solutions of \eqref{eqn:scalar} and \eqref{eqn:LapDir} (with the same r.h.s. $g$) and $V$ is a finite dimensional linear subspace of $H^{-1}(\Omega)$, then
\begin{equation}\label{sidasasedsssddaud}
\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(a)}}\inf_{v\in \Delta^{-1}V} \|u' - v\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq \inf_{v\in (\operatorname{div} a\nabla)^{-1} V} \|u - v\|_{a}\leq \frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)}}\inf_{v\in \Delta^{-1}V} \|u' - v\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)}
\end{equation}
\end{Proposition}
\begin{proof}
Write $G$ the Green's function of \eqref{eqn:scalar} and $G^*$ the Green's function of \eqref{eqn:LapDir}. Observe that for $f\in V$ and $v=(\operatorname{div} a\nabla)^{-1}f$,
$\|u - v\|_{a}^2=\int_{\Omega^2}(g(x)-f(x))G(x,y) (g(y)-f(y))\,dx\,dy$. The monotonicity of Green's function as a quadratic form (see for instance \cite[Lemma~4.13]{BenarousOwhadi:2003}), implies $ \int_{\Omega^2}(g(x)-f(x))G(x,y) (g(y)-f(y))\,dx\,dy \leq \frac{1}{\lambda_{\min}(a)} \int_{\Omega^2}(g(x)-f(x))G^*(x,y) (g(y)-f(y))\,dx\,dy$ (with a similar inequality on the l.h.s.) which concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
This extension, which is also directly related to the transfer property of the flux-norm (introduced in \cite{BeOw:2010} and generalized in \cite{Sym12}, see also \cite{Wang:2012}), allows us to select accurate finite dimensional bases for the approximation of the solution space of \eqref{eqn:scalar}.
\begin{Construction}\label{cons:odoehdduhd}
Let $(\tau_i)_{1\leq i \leq m}$ be a partition of $\Omega$ such that each $\tau_i$ is Lipschitz, convex and of diameter at most $H$. Let $(\phi_i)_{1\leq i \leq m}$ be elements of $L^2(\Omega)$ such that for each $i$, the support of
$\phi_i$ is contained in the closure of $\tau_i$ and $\int_{\tau_i} \phi_i\not=0$.
\end{Construction}
\begin{Proposition}\label{prop:gegddgdjdef}
Let $(\phi_i)_{1\leq i \leq m}$ be the elements of Construction \ref{cons:odoehdduhd} and let $u$ be the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar}. If $V=\operatorname{span} \{\phi_i\,:\, 1\leq i\leq m\}$ then
\begin{equation}\label{sidasaeweddaud2}
\inf_{v\in (\operatorname{div} a\nabla)^{-1} V} \|u - v\|_{a}\leq C H \|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}
\end{equation}
with $C=\big(\pi \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)}\big)^{-1} \Big(1+\max_{1 \leq i \leq m} \big(\frac{ \frac{1}{|\tau_i|}\int_{\tau_i} \phi_i^2}{(\frac{1}{|\tau_i|}\int_{\tau_i} \phi_i)^2})^\frac{1}{2}\Big)$ (writing $|\tau_i|$ the volume of $\tau_i$).
\end{Proposition}
\begin{proof}
Using Proposition \ref{prop:deihdidu} it is sufficient to complete proof when $a$ is the constant identity matrix. Let $u'$ be the solution of \eqref{eqn:LapDir} and $v\in \Delta^{-1} V$. Note that $\Delta v=\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \phi_i$, therefore $\|u' - v\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)}^2= -\int_{\Omega} (u'-v) (g-\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \phi_i)$.
Taking $c_i=\int_{\tau_i} g/ \int_{\tau_i} \phi_i $
we obtain that $\int_{\tau_i} (g- \sum_{j=1}^m c_j \phi_j)=0$ and, writing $|\tau_i|$ the volume of $\tau_i$,
$ \|u' - v\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)}^2=-\sum_{i=1}^m \int_{\tau_i} (u'-v-\frac{1}{|\tau_i|}\int_{\tau_i}(u'-v)) (g- \sum_{j=1}^m c_j \phi_j)$
which by Poincar\'{e}'s inequality (see \cite{PayneWeinberger:1960} for the optimal constant $1/\pi$ used here) lead to
$ \|u' - v\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)}^2 \leq \frac{H}{\pi} \sum_{i=1}^m \big(\int_{\tau_i} |\nabla (u'-v)|^2\big)^\frac{1}{2}
\big(\int_{\tau_i} (g-\sum_{j=1}^m c_j \phi_j)^2\big)^\frac{1}{2}$.
Therefore, by using Cauchy-Schwartz inequality and simplifying,
$\|u' - v\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq \frac{H}{\pi} \|g-\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \phi_i\|_{L^2(\Omega)}\,.$
Now, since each $\phi_i$ has support in $\tau_i$ we have
$ \|\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \phi_i\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2=\sum_{i=1}^m (\int_{\tau_i} g)^2 \frac{ \int_{\tau_i} \phi_i^2}{(\int_{\tau_i} \phi_i)^2}\leq \|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2 \max_{1 \leq i \leq m} \frac{ \frac{1}{|\tau_i|}\int_{\tau_i} \phi_i^2}{(\frac{1}{\tau_i}\int_{\tau_i} \phi_i)^2}$,
which concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
The value of the constant $C$ in Proposition \ref{prop:gegddgdjdef} motivates us to modify Construction \ref{cons:odoehdduhd} as follows.
\begin{Construction}\label{cons:odoehdduhdI}
Let $(\phi_i)_{1\leq i \leq m}$ be the elements constructed in \ref{cons:odoehdduhd} under the additional assumptions that (a) each $\phi_i$ is equal to one on $\tau_i$ and zero elsewhere (b) there exists $\delta \in (0,1)$ such that for each $i\in \{1,\ldots,m\}$, $\tau_i$ contains a ball of diameter $\delta H$.
\end{Construction}
Let $(\phi_i)_{1\leq i \leq m}$ be as in Construction \ref{cons:odoehdduhdI}. Note that the additional assumption (a) implies that the constant $C$ in Proposition \ref{prop:gegddgdjdef} is equal to $2/(\pi \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)})$. Assumption (b) will be used for localization purposes in subsections \ref{subsec:expdecay} and \ref{subsec:localization} (and is not required for Theorem \ref{thm:dkdehgjdhdgh}). The following theorem is a direct consequence of Proposition \ref{prop:gegddgdjdef} and Theorem \ref{thm:dkdehgjdhdgh02}.
\begin{Theorem}\label{thm:dkdehgjdhdgh}
If $u$ is the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar} and $(\psi_i)_{i=1}^m$ are the gamblets identified in \eqref{eqgamblet}, \eqref{eq:dueihdbewdaisq} and \eqref{eq:doehdd} then
\begin{equation}\label{sidasaeweddaud}
\inf_{v\in \operatorname{span}\{\psi_1,\ldots,\psi_m\}} \|u - v\|_{a}\leq \frac{2}{\pi \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)}} H \|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}
\end{equation}
and the minimum in the l.h.s of \eqref{sidasaeweddaud} is achieved for $v=u^*$ defined in \eqref{eqmawybdysedsd} and \eqref{eqmawybdyd}.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{Remark}\label{rmkiegudyg3}
The assumption of convexity of the subdomains $\tau_i$ is only used to derive sharper constants via Poincar\'{e}'s inequality for convex domains (without it, approximation error bounds remain valid after multiplication by $\pi$). Similarly, the transfer property can be used to derive constructions that are distinct from \ref{cons:odoehdduhd} and \ref{cons:odoehdduhdI}.
\end{Remark}
\begin{Remark}
Gamblets defined via the constrained energy minimization problems \eqref{eq:dueihdbewdaisq} are analogous to the \emph{energy minimizing bases} of \cite{Mandel1999, wan2000, Xu2004, XuZhu2008} and in particular \cite{Vassilevski2010}. However
they form a different set of basis functions when global constraints are added: the (total) \emph{energy minimizing bases} of \cite{Mandel1999, wan2000, Xu2004, XuZhu2008, Vassilevski2010} are defined by minimizing the total energy $\sum_i \|\psi_i\|_a^2$ subject to the constraint $\sum_i \psi_i(x)=1$ related to the local preservation of constants.
Numerical experiments \cite{ Xu2004} suggest that total energy minimizing basis functions could lead to a $\mathcal{O}(\sqrt{H})$ convergence rate (with rough coefficients). Note that \eqref{eq:dueihdbewdaisq} is also analogous to the constrained minimization problems associated with Polyharmonic Splines \cite{Harder:1972, Duchon:1976,Duchon:1977,Duchon:1978, OwhadiZhangBerlyand:2014}, which can be recovered with a Gaussian prior (on $\xi$) with covariance function $\delta(x-y)$ (corresponding to exciting \eqref{eqn:scalarspde} with white noise). We suspect that the basis functions obtained in the orthogonal decomposition of \cite{MaPe:2012} can also be recovered via the variational formulation \eqref{eq:dueihdbewdaisq} by identifying the null space of the Clement quasi-interpolation operator with that of appropriately chosen measurement functions $\phi_i$.
\end{Remark}
\subsection{Exponential decay of gamblets}\label{subsec:expdecay}
Theorems \ref{thm:dkdehgjdhdgh0} and \ref{thm:dkdehgjdhdgh02} show that the gamblets $\psi_i$ have optimal recovery properties analogous to the discrete case of Theorem \ref{lem:minimizingproperty} and Corollary \ref{cor:geaaedgjdh}. However one may wonder why one should compute these gamblets rather than the elements $(\operatorname{div} a\nabla)^{-1} \phi_i$ since they span the same linear space (by the representation formula \eqref{eq:doehdd}).
The answer lies in the fact that each gamblet $\psi_i$ decays exponentially as a function of the distance from the support of $\phi_i$ and its computation can therefore be localized to a subdomain of diameter $ \mathcal{O}(H \ln \frac{1}{H})$ without impacting the order of accuracy \eqref{sidasaeweddaud}. Consider the construction \ref{cons:odoehdduhdI}. Let $\psi_i$ be defined as in Theorem \ref{thm:dkdehgjdhdgh0} and let $x_i$ be an element of $\tau_i$. Write $B(x,r)$ the ball of center $x$ and radius $r$.
\begin{Theorem}\label{thm:expdecay}{\bf Exponential decay of the basis elements $\psi_i$.}
It holds true that
\begin{equation}
\int_{\Omega \cap (B(x_i,r))^c}(\nabla \psi_i)^T a \nabla \psi_i\leq e^{1-\frac{ r}{l H}} \int_{\Omega}(\nabla \psi_i)^T a \nabla \psi_i
\end{equation}
with $l=1+ (e/\pi) \sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(a)/\lambda_{\min}(a)} (1+2^\frac{3}{2}(2/\delta)^{1+d/2})$ (where $e$ is Euler's number).
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $k,l \in \mathbb{N}^*$ and $i\in \{1,\ldots,m\}$. Let $S_0$ be the union of all the domains $\tau_j$ that are contained in the closure of
$ B(x_i, k l H)\cap \Omega$, let $S_{1}$ be the union of all the domains $\tau_j$ that are contained in the closure of
$(B(x_i, (k+1) l H))^c\cap \Omega$ and let $S^*=S_0^c \cap S_{1}^c \cap \Omega$ (be the union of the remaining elements $\tau_j$ not contained in $S_0$ or $S_{1}$). Let $\eta$ be the function on $\Omega$ defined by $\eta(x)=\operatorname{dist}(x,S_0)/(\operatorname{dist}(x,S_0)+\operatorname{dist}(x,S_1))$.
Observe that (1) $0\leq \eta \leq 1$ (2) $\eta$ is equal to zero on $S_0$ (3) $\eta$ is equal to one on $S_{1}$ (4) $\|\nabla \eta \|_{L^\infty(\Omega)}\leq \frac{1}{ l H}$. Observe that
$- \int_{\Omega}\eta \psi_i \operatorname{div}( a \nabla \psi_i)=\int_{\Omega}\nabla (\eta \psi_i) a \psi_i=\int_{\Omega} \eta (\nabla \psi_i)^T a \nabla \psi_i+\int_{\Omega} \psi_i (\nabla \eta)^T a \nabla \psi_i$. Therefore $\int_{S_1} (\nabla \psi_i)^T a \nabla \psi_i\leq I_1+I_2$ with
\begin{equation}\label{eqleldkdlkdjd}
I_1=\|\nabla \eta\|_{L^\infty(\Omega)}
\big(\sum_{\tau_j \subset S^*}\int_{\tau_j}\psi_i^2\big)^\frac{1}{2}
\big(\int_{S^*}(\nabla \psi_i)^T a \nabla \psi_i\big)^\frac{1}{2} \sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(a)}
\end{equation}
and
$I_2=- \int_{\Omega}\eta \psi_i \operatorname{div}( a \nabla \psi_i)$. By \eqref{eq:doehdd}, $- \operatorname{div}( a \nabla \psi_i)$ is piecewise constant and equal to $\Theta_{i,j}^{-1}$ on $\tau_j$. By the constraints of \eqref{eq:dueihdbewdaisq} $\int_{\tau_j}\psi_i=0$ for $i\not=j$. Therefore (writing $\eta_j$ the volume average of $\eta$ over $\tau_j$) we have
\begin{equation}\label{eqkjkhkjhkejhccd}
I_2 \leq -\sum_{\tau_j \subset S_1 \cup S^*} \int_{\tau_j}(\eta-\eta_j) \psi_i \operatorname{div}( a \nabla \psi_i) \leq \frac{1}{l} \sum_{\tau_j \subset S^*} \|\psi_i\|_{L^2(\tau_j)} \|\operatorname{div}( a \nabla \psi_i)\|_{L^2(\tau_j)}.
\end{equation}
We will now need the following lemma
\begin{Lemma}\label{lemdhkedjhdkjh}
If $v\in \operatorname{span}\{\psi_1,\ldots,\psi_m\}$ then
\begin{equation}
\|\operatorname{div}( a \nabla v)\|_{L^2(\Omega)} \leq H^{-1} \|v\|_a (\lambda_{\max}(a) 2^{5+d}/\delta^{2+d})^\frac{1}{2}
\end{equation}
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $c\in \mathbb{R}^m$ and $v=\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \psi_i$.
Observing that $-\operatorname{div}(a\nabla v)=\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \Theta_{i,j}^{-1}$ in $\tau_j$ and using the decomposition
$ \|\operatorname{div}( a \nabla v)\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2 =\sum_{i=1}^m \|\operatorname{div}( a \nabla v)\|_{L^2(\tau_j)}^2$, we obtain that
\begin{equation}\label{eqhuhh7rfrtrd}
\|\operatorname{div}( a \nabla v)\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2 = \sum_{j=1}^m (\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \Theta_{i,j}^{-1})^2 |\tau_j|
\end{equation}
Furthermore, $v$ can be
decomposed over $\tau_j$ as $v=v_1+v_2$, where $v_1$ solves $-\operatorname{div}(a\nabla v_1)=\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \Theta_{i,j}^{-1}$ in $\tau_j$ with $v_1=0$ on $\partial\tau_j$, and $v_2$ solves $-\operatorname{div}(a\nabla v_2)=0$ in $\tau_j$ with $v_2=v$ on $\partial \tau_j$. Using the notation $|\xi|_a^2=\xi^T a \xi$,
observe that $\int_{\tau_j} |\nabla v|_a^2=\int_{\tau_j} |\nabla v_1|_a^2+ \int_{\tau_j} |\nabla v_2|_a^2$. Furthermore,
$\int_{\tau_j} |\nabla v_1|_a^2=\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \Theta_{i,j}^{-1} \int_{\tau_j} v_1$. Writing $G_j$ the Green's function of the operator $-\operatorname{div}(a\nabla \cdot)$ with Dirichlet boundary condition on $\partial \tau_j$, note that $\int_{\tau_j} v_1= (\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \Theta_{i,j}^{-1}) \int_{\tau_j^2} G_j(x,y)\,dx\,dy$.
Using the monotonicity of the Green's function as a quadratic form (as in the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:deihdidu}), we have $\int_{\tau_j^2} G_j(x,y)\,dx\,dy \geq \frac{1}{\lambda_{\max}(a)}\int_{\tau_j^2} G_j^*(x,y)\,dx\,dy $ where $G^*_j$ is the Green's function of the operator $-\Delta$ with Dirichlet boundary condition on $\partial \tau_j$.
Recall that $2\int_{\tau_j} G_j^*(x,y)\,dy$ is the mean exit time (from $\tau_j$) of a Brownian motion started from $x$ and the mean exit time of a Brownian motion started from $x$ to exit a ball of center $x$ and radius $r$ is $r^2$ (see for instance \cite{BenarousOwhadi:2003}). Since $\tau_j$ contains a ball of diameter $\delta H$, it follows that $2 \int_{\tau_j^2} G_j^*(x,y)\,dx\,dy \geq (\delta H/4)^{2+d} V_d$ (where $V_d$ is the volume of the $d$-dimensional unit ball). Therefore (after using $|\tau_j|\leq V_d (H/2)^d$ and simplification),
\begin{equation}\label{eqhhdhdgdjhdg3e}
\int_{\tau_j} |\nabla v_1|_a^2\geq (\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \Theta_{i,j}^{-1})^2 |\tau_j| H^2 \delta^{2+d}/(2^{5+d}\lambda_{\max}(a)),
\end{equation}
which finishes the proof after taking the sum over $j$.
\end{proof}
Now observe that since $\int_{\tau_j}\psi_i=0$ for $i\not=j$, we obtain, using Poincar\'{e}'s inequality (with the optimal constant of \cite{PayneWeinberger:1960}), that $\|\psi_i\|_{L^2(\tau_j)} \leq \|\nabla \psi_i\|_{L^2(\tau_j)} H/\pi$.
Therefore, combining \eqref{eqleldkdlkdjd}, \eqref{eqkjkhkjhkejhccd} and the result of Lemma \ref{lemdhkedjhdkjh}, we obtain after simplification
\begin{equation}
\int_{S_1}(\nabla \psi_i)^T a \nabla \psi_i\leq \frac{1}{\pi l} \sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(a)/\lambda_{\min}(a)} (1+2^\frac{3}{2}(2/\delta)^{1+d/2})\int_{S^*}(\nabla \psi_i)^T a \nabla \psi_i
\end{equation}
Taking $l\geq \frac{e}{\pi } \sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(a)/\lambda_{\min}(a)} (1+2^\frac{3}{2}(2/\delta)^{1+d/2}) $ and enlarging the integration domain on the right hand side we obtain
$
\int_{S_{1}}(\nabla \psi_i)^T a \nabla \psi_i\leq e^{-1} \int_{S^*\cup S_{1}}(\nabla \psi_i)^T a \nabla \psi_i.
$
We conclude the proof via straightforward iteration on $k$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Localization of the basis elements}\label{subsec:localization}
Theorem \ref{thm:expdecay} allows us to localize the construction of basis elements $\psi_i$ as follows. For $r>0$ let $S_r$ be the union of the subdomains $\tau_j$ intersecting $B(x_i,r)$ (recall that $x_i$ is an element of $\tau_i$) and let $\psi_i^{{\rm loc},r}$ be the minimizer of the following quadratic problem
\begin{equation}\label{eq:dwehhsiuhssq}
\begin{cases}
\text{Minimize } &\int_{S_r} (\nabla \psi)^T a \nabla \psi\\
\text{Subject to } &\psi \in H^1_0(S_r)\text{ and }\int_{S_r}\phi_j \psi=\delta_{i,j}\text{ for }j \text{ such that } \tau_j \subset S_r.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
We will naturally identify $\psi_i^{{\rm loc},r}$ with its extension to $H^1_0(\Omega)$ by setting $\psi_i^{{\rm loc},r}=0$ outside of $S_r$.
From now on, to simplify the expression of constants, we will assume without loss of generality that the domain is rescaled so that $\operatorname{diam}(\Omega)\leq 1$.
\begin{Theorem}\label{thm:hieuhdds}
It holds true that
\begin{equation}
\|\psi_i-\psi_i^{{\rm loc},r}\|_{a} \leq C e^{-\frac{r}{2l H}},
\end{equation}
where $l$ is defined in Theorem \ref{thm:expdecay},
$C= (\lambda_{\max}(a)/\sqrt{ \lambda_{\min}(a)}) H^{-\frac{d}{2}-2} 2^{2d+9}/(\sqrt{V_d} \delta^{d+2})$ and $V_d$ is the volume of the $d$-dimensional unit ball.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
We will need the following lemma.
\begin{Lemma}\label{lem:dihidue23}
It holds true that
\begin{equation}\label{eqgguguyg6}
\|\psi_i\|_a \leq (H \delta)^{-\frac{d}{2}-1} \sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(a)} 2^{\frac{3}{2}d+2} (V_d)^{-\frac{1}{2}}
\end{equation}
where $V_d$ is the volume of the $d$-dimensional unit ball, and,
\begin{equation}\label{eqbbuybuybfcc}
|\<\psi_i,\psi_j\>_a|\leq e^{-\frac{ r_{i,j}}{2 l H}} H^{-2-d} \lambda_{\max}(a) 2^{\frac{5d+11}{2}}/(V_d \delta^{d+2})
\end{equation}
where $l$ is the constant of Theorem \ref{thm:expdecay} and $r_{i,j}$ is the distance between $\tau_i$ and $\tau_j$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $\tau_i$ contains a ball $B(x_i,\delta H/2)$ of center $x_i\in \tau_i$ and diameter $\delta H/2$, there exists a piece-wise differentiable function $\eta$,
equal to $1$ on $B(x_i,\delta H/4)$, equal to $0$ on $(B(x_i,\delta H/2))^c$ and such that $0\leq \eta \leq 1$ with $\|\nabla \eta\|_{L^\infty(\Omega)}\leq \frac{4}{H \delta}$. Since $\psi=\eta/ (\int_{\tau_i}\eta)$ satisfies the constrains of the minimization problem \eqref{eq:dueihdbewdaisq} we have $\|\psi_i\|_a \leq \|\psi\|_a$, which proves \eqref{eqgguguyg6}. Theorem \ref{thm:dkdehgjdhdgh0} implies that $\<\psi_i,\psi_j\>_a=\Theta_{i,j}^{-1}$.
Observing that $-\operatorname{div}( a \nabla \psi_i)$ is piecewise constant and equal to $\Theta_{i,j}^{-1}$ on $\tau_j$ and applying \eqref{eqhhdhdgdjhdg3e} (with $v=\psi_i$ and using $\int_{\tau_j} |\nabla v_1|_a^2\leq \int_{\tau_j} |\nabla v|_a^2$),
we obtain that
\begin{equation} \label{equsiheiuhdihd}
|\Theta_{i,j}^{-1}| \leq \big(\lambda_{\max}(a) 2^{5+d}/(\delta^{2+d} |\tau_j|)\big)^\frac{1}{2} H^{-1} \big(\int_{\tau_j}(\nabla \psi_i)^T a \nabla \psi_i\big)^\frac{1}{2}.
\end{equation}
which leads to \eqref{eqbbuybuybfcc} by the exponential decay obtained in Theorem \ref{thm:expdecay} and \eqref{eqgguguyg6}.
\end{proof}
Let us now prove Theorem \ref{thm:hieuhdds}.
Let $S_0$ be the union of the subdomains $\tau_j$ not contained in $S_r$ and let $S_1$ be the union of the subdomains $\tau_j$ that are at distance at least
$H$ from $S_0$ (for $S_0=\emptyset$ the proof is trivial, so we may assume that $S_0\not=\emptyset$, similarly it is no restriction to assume that $S_1\not=\emptyset$).
Let $\eta$ be the function on $\Omega$ defined by $\eta(x)=\operatorname{dist}(x,S_0)/(\operatorname{dist}(x,S_0)+\operatorname{dist}(x,S_1))$. Observe that is a piecewise differentiable function on $\Omega$ such that (1) $\eta$ is equal to one on $S_1$ and zero on $S_0$ (2) $\|\nabla \eta\|_{L^\infty(\Omega)}\leq \frac{1}{H}$ and (3) $0\leq \eta \leq 1$.
Since $\psi_i^{{\rm loc},r}$ satisfies the constraints of \eqref{eq:dueihdbewdaisq}, we have from \eqref{eq:hdkhdkjh33e},
\begin{equation}\label{eqkjhdkjdhdkjh}
\|\psi_i-\psi_i^{{\rm loc},r}\|_a^2 =\|\psi_i^{{\rm loc},r}\|_a^2-\|\psi_i\|_a^2.
\end{equation}
Let $\psi_k^{i,r}$ be the minimizer of $\int_{S_r} (\nabla \psi)^T a \nabla \psi$ subject to $\psi \in H^1_0(S_r)$ and $\int_{S_r}\phi_j \psi=\delta_{k,j}$ for $\tau_j \subset S_r$.
Write $w_j=\int_{\Omega} \eta \psi_i \phi_j$. Let $\psi_w^{i,r}:=\sum_{j=1}^m w_j \psi_j^{i,r}$.
Noting that $\psi_w^{i,r}=\psi_i^{{\rm loc},r}+\sum_{\tau_j \subset S^*}w_j \psi_j^{i,r}$, where $S^*$ is the union of $\tau_j\subset S_r$ not contained in $S_1$, and using property (3) of Theorem \ref{thm:dkdehgjdhdgh0} (with $\Theta^{i,-1}_{k,k'}=\int_{S_r} (\nabla \psi_k^{i,r})^T a \nabla \psi_{k'}^{i,r}$) it follows that
\begin{equation}\label{eqkswkjh}
\|\psi_w^{i,r}\|_a^2 =\|\psi_i^{{\rm loc},r}\|_a^2+ \|\sum_{\tau_j \subset S^*}w_j \psi_j^{i,r}\|^2_a+2 \sum_{\tau_j \subset S^*} \Theta^{i,-1}_{i,j} w_j\,.
\end{equation}
Noting that $\eta \psi_i \in H^1_0(S_r)$,
Theorem \ref{thm:dkdehgjdhdgh0} implies that $\|\psi_w^{i,r}\|_a \leq \|\eta \psi_i\|_a$, which, combined with \eqref{eqkswkjh} and \eqref{eqkjhdkjdhdkjh} leads to $\|\psi_i-\psi_i^{{\rm loc},r}\|_a^2 \leq \|\eta \psi_i\|_a^2-\|\psi_i\|_a^2-2 \sum_{\tau_j \subset S^*} \Theta^{i,-1}_{i,j} w_j$ and (using $\|\eta \psi_i\|_a^2-\|\psi_i\|_a^2\leq \int_{S*}\nabla (\eta \psi_i)^T a \nabla (\eta \psi_i)$)
\begin{equation}\label{eqkjhdkgygejdhdkjh}
\|\psi_i-\psi_i^{{\rm loc},r}\|_a^2 \leq \int_{S*}\nabla (\eta \psi_i)^T a \nabla (\eta \psi_i)+2 |\sum_{\tau_j \subset S^*} \Theta^{i,-1}_{i,j} w_j|\,.
\end{equation}
Now observe that $ \frac{1}{2}\int_{S*}\nabla (\eta \psi_i)^T a \nabla (\eta \psi_i)\leq \int_{\Omega \cap (B(x_i,r-2 H))^c}(\nabla \psi_i)^T a \nabla \psi_i
+\frac{\lambda_{\max}(a)}{H^2} \int_{S^*}|\psi_i|^2$.
Applying Poincar\'{e}'s inequality we obtain
$\int_{S^*}|\psi_i|^2 \leq \frac{1}{\pi^2} H^2\sum_{\tau_j \subset S^*} \int_{\tau_j}|\nabla \psi_i|^2$ (since $\int_{\tau_j} \psi_i=0$ for $\tau_j \subset S^*$), and $\int_{S^*}|\psi_i|^2 \leq
\frac{H^2}{ \pi^2 \lambda_{\min}(a)} \int_{\Omega \cap (B(x_i,r-2 H))^c}(\nabla \psi_i)^T a \nabla \psi_i$.
Combining these equations with the exponential decay of Theorem \ref{thm:expdecay} we deduce
\begin{equation}\label{eqkjhhggjdhdkjh}
\int_{S*}\nabla (\eta \psi_i)^T a \nabla (\eta \psi_i) \leq
2 \Big(1+\lambda_{\max}(a)/\big(\pi^2 \lambda_{\min}(a)\big) \Big) e^{1-\frac{ r-2H}{l H}} \|\psi_i\|_a^2\,.
\end{equation}
Similarly, using Cauchy-Schwartz and Poincar\'e inequalities we have for $\tau_j \subset S^*$,\\
$|w_j|\leq |\tau_j|^\frac{1}{2} \|\psi_i\|_{L^2(\tau_j)} \leq |\tau_j|^\frac{1}{2} (\int_{\tau_j} (\nabla \psi_i)^Ta(\nabla \psi_i))^\frac{1}{2} /\sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)}$
and \\
$
|\sum_{\tau_j \subset S^*} \Theta^{i,-1}_{i,j} w_j|\leq |\sum_{\tau_j \subset S^*} (\Theta^{i,-1}_{i,j})^2|\tau_j| |^\frac{1}{2}
\big (\int_{S^*} (\nabla \psi_i)^Ta(\nabla \psi_i)/\lambda_{\min}(a)\big)^\frac{1}{2}.
$
Using \eqref{equsiheiuhdihd} we obtain that
$
|\sum_{\tau_j \subset S^*} (\Theta^{i,-1}_{i,j})^2 |\tau_j| |^\frac{1}{2} \leq \big(\lambda_{\max}(a) 2^{5+d}/\delta^{2+d} \big)^\frac{1}{2} H^{-1} \big(\int_{S^*}(\nabla \psi_i^{i,r})^T a \nabla \psi_i^{i,r}\big)^\frac{1}{2},
$
which by the exponential decay of Theorem \eqref{thm:expdecay} (and $\|\psi_i\|_a\leq \|\psi_i^{i,r}\|_a$) leads to
\begin{equation}\label{eqhgygjhhhh}
|\sum_{\tau_j \subset S^*} \Theta^{i,-1}_{i,j} w_j|\leq \big(\frac{\lambda_{\max}(a) 2^{5+d}}{\lambda_{\min}(a)\delta^{2+d}} \big)^\frac{1}{2} H^{-1}
\|\psi_i^{i,r}\|_a^2 e^{1-\frac{ r-2H}{l H}}\,.
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{eqgguguyg6} to bound $\|\psi_i^{i,r}\|_a$ and combining \eqref{eqhgygjhhhh} with \eqref{eqkjhhggjdhdkjh} and \eqref{eqkjhdkgygejdhdkjh} concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
The following theorem shows that gamblets preserve the $\mathcal{O}(H)$ rate of convergence (in energy norm) after localization to sub-domains of size $\mathcal{O}(H \ln(1/H))$. They can therefore be used as localized basis functions in numerical homogenization
\cite{ BaLip10, OwZh:2011, MaPe:2012, OwhadiZhangBerlyand:2014}. Section \ref{sechnh} will show that they can also be computed hierarchically at near linear complexity.
\begin{Theorem}\label{thm:dhfkdehgjdhdgh}
Let $u$ be the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar} and $(\psi_1^{{\rm loc},r})_{1\leq i \leq m}$ the localized gamblets identified in \eqref{eq:dwehhsiuhssq},
then for $r \geq H (C_1 \ln \frac{1}{H} + C_2) $ we have
\begin{equation}\label{sidasaeuyweddaud}
\inf_{v\in \operatorname{span}\{\psi_1^{{\rm loc},r},\ldots,\psi_m^{{\rm loc},r}\}} \|u - v\|_{a}\leq \frac{1}{ \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)}} H \|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}\,.
\end{equation}
The constants are $C_1=(d+4)l$ and $C_2=2l \ln \Big(\frac{\lambda_{\max}(a)}{ \lambda_{\min}(a)}\frac{ 2^{\frac{3}{2}d+11} }{\delta^{d+2} }\Big)$ where $l$ is the constant of Theorem \ref{thm:hieuhdds}.
Furthermore, the inequality \eqref{sidasaeuyweddaud} is achieved for $v=\sum_{i=1}^m \psi_i^{{\rm loc},r}\int_{\Omega} u \phi_i$.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $v_1:=\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \psi_i$ and $v_2=\sum_{i=1}^m c_i \psi_i^{{\rm loc},r}$ with $c_i=\int_{\Omega} u \phi_i$. Theorem \ref{thm:dkdehgjdhdgh} implies that
$\|u-v_1\|_a\leq 2/(\pi \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)}) H \|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}$.
Observe that $\|u - v_2\|_{a} \leq \|u - v_1\|_{a}+\|v_1 - v_2\|_{a}$ and $\|v_1 - v_2\|_{a}\leq \max_{i}\|\psi_i-\psi_i^{{\rm loc},r}\|_{a} \sum_{i=1}^m |c_i|$.
Using Poincar\'e's inequality $\|u\|_{L^2(\Omega)}\leq \operatorname{diam}(\Omega) \|\nabla u\|_{L^2(\Omega)}$ (with $\operatorname{diam}(\Omega)\leq 1$) we obtain
$\sum_{i=1}^m |c_i| \leq \int_{\Omega} |u| \leq \|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)} 2^{-d/2}V_d^\frac{1}{2} /\lambda_{\min}(a) $. We conclude using Theorem \ref{thm:hieuhdds} to bound $\max_{i}\|\psi_i-\psi_i^{{\rm loc},r}\|_{a}$.
\end{proof}
\section{Multiresolution operator decomposition}\label{sechnh}
Building on the analysis of Section \ref{sec:contcase}, we will now gamble on the approximation of the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar} based on measurements
performed at different levels of resolution. The resulting hierarchical (and nested) games will then be used to derive a
multiresolution decomposition of \eqref{eqn:scalar} (orthogonal across subscales) and a near-linear complexity multiresolution algorithm with a priori error bounds.
\subsection{Hierarchy of nested measurement functions}\label{subsecdomdecomphi}
In order to define the hierarchy of games we will first define a hierarchy of nested measurement functions.
\begin{Definition}\label{defindextree}
We say that $\mathcal{I}$ is an index tree of depth $q$ if it is a finite set of $q$-tuples of the form $i=(i_1,\ldots,i_q)$ with $1\leq i_1 \leq m_0$ and
$1\leq i_j \leq m_{(i_1,\ldots,i_{j-1})}$ for $j\geq 2$, where $m_0$ and $m_{(i_1,\ldots,i_{j-1})}$ are strictly positive integers. For $1\leq k \leq q$ and $i=(i_1,\ldots,i_q)\in \mathcal{I}$, we write
$i^{(k)}:=(i_1,\ldots,i_k)$ and $\mathcal{I}^{(k)}:=\{i^{(k)}\,:\, i\in \mathcal{I}\}$. For $k\leq k'\leq q$ and $j=(j_1,\ldots,j_{k'})\in \mathcal{I}^{(k')}$ we write
$j^{(k)}:=(j_1,\ldots,j_k)$. For $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$ and $k\leq k'\leq q$ we write
$i^{(k,k')}$ the set of elements $j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k')}$ such that $j^{(k)}=i$.
\end{Definition}
\begin{Construction}\label{defmulires}
Let $\mathcal{I}$ be an index tree of depth $q$. Let $\delta \in (0,1)$ and $0< H_q <\cdots <H_1<1$. Let $(\tau_i^{(k)}, k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}, i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)})$ be a collection of subsets of $\Omega$ such that (1) for $1\leq k \leq q$, $(\tau_i^{(k)}, i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)})$ is a partition of $\Omega$ such that each $\tau_i^{(k)}$ is a Lipschitz, convex subset of $\Omega$ of diameter at most $H_k$ and contains a ball of diameter $\delta H_k$ (2) the sequence of partitions is nested, i.e. for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q-1\}$ and $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$, $\tau_i^{(k)}:=\cup_{j\in i^{(k,k+1)}} \,\tau_j^{(k+1)}$.
\end{Construction}
As in Remark \ref{rmkiegudyg3}, the assumption of convexity of the subdomains $\tau_i^{(k)}$ is not necessary to the results presented here and is only used to derive sharper/simpler constants.
Let $\phi_i^{(k)}$ be the indicator function of the set $\tau_i^{(k)}$ (i.e. $\phi_i^{(k)}=1$ if $x\in \tau_i^{(k)}$ and $\phi_i^{(k)}=0$ if $x\not\in \tau_i^{(k)}$). Note that the nesting of the domain decomposition implies that of the measurement functions, i.e. for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q-1\}$ and $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:eigdeiud3dd}
\phi^{(k)}_i=\sum_{j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}}\pi^{(k,k+1)}_{i,j} \phi^{(k+1)}_j
\end{equation}
where $\pi^{(k,k+1)}$ is the $\mathcal{I}^{(k)}\times \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}$ matrix defined by $\pi^{(k,k+1)}_{i,j}=1$ if $j\in i^{(k,k+1)}$ and $\pi^{(k,k+1)}_{i,j}=0$ if $j\not\in i^{(k,k+1)}$. We will assume without loss of generality that $\|\phi_i^{(k)}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2=|\tau_i^{(k)}|$ is constant in $i$ (for the general case, rescale/renormalize each $\phi_i^{(k)}$ and the entries of $\pi^{(k,k+1)}$ by the corresponding multiplicative factors, we will keep track of the dependence of some of the constants on $\max_{i,j}|\tau_i^{(k)}|/|\tau_j^{(k)}|$).
\subsection{Hierarchy of nested gamblets and multiresolution approximations}
Let us now consider the problem of recovering the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar} based on the nested measurements $(\int_{\Omega} u \phi_i^{(k)})_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}}$ for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$. As in Section \ref{sec:contcase} we are lead to investigate the mixed strategy (for Player II) expressed by replacing the source term $g$ with a centered Gaussian field with covariance function $\mathcal{L}=-\operatorname{div}(a\nabla)$. Under that mixed strategy, Player II's bet on the value of the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar}, given the measurements $(\int_{\Omega} u(y)\phi^{(k)}_i(y)\,dy)_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}}$, is (see Subsection \ref{subsecoptaccuracy})
\begin{equation}\label{eqdefuk}
u^{(k)}(x):=\sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} \psi^{(k)}_i(x) \int_{\Omega} u(y)\phi^{(k)}_i (y)\,dy,
\end{equation}
where (see Theorem \ref{thm:dkdehgjdhdgh0}), for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ and $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$, $\psi^{(k)}_i$ is the minimizer of
\begin{equation}\label{eq:dfddeytfewdaisq}
\begin{cases}
\text{Minimize } &\|\psi\|_a\\
\text{Subject to } &\psi \in H^1_0(\Omega)\text{ and }\int_{\Omega}\phi_j^{(k)} \psi=\delta_{i,j}\text{ for } j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}\,.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Define $\mathfrak{V}^{(q+1)}:=H^1_0(\Omega)$ and, for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eqdefvk}
\mathfrak{V}^{(k)}:=\operatorname{span}\{\psi^{(k)}_i \mid i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}\} .
\end{equation}
By Theorem \ref{thmgufufg0} $\operatorname{span}\{\psi_i^{(k)} \mid i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}\}=\operatorname{span} \{\mathcal{L}^{-1} \phi_i^{(k)} \mid i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}\}$, and the nesting \eqref{eq:eigdeiud3dd} of the measurement functions implies the nesting of the spaces $\mathfrak{V}^{(k)}$. The following theorem is (which is a direct application of theorems \ref{thm:dkdehgjdhdgh02} and \ref{thm:dkdehgjdhdgh}) shows that $u^{(k)}$ is the best (energy norm) approximation of the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar} in $\mathfrak{V}^{(k)}$.
\begin{Theorem}\label{thmgugyug0}
It holds true that (1) for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$, $\mathfrak{V}^{(k)} \subset \mathfrak{V}^{(k+1)}$ and
$\mathfrak{V}^{(k)}=\operatorname{span} \{\mathcal{L}^{-1} \phi_i^{(k)} \mid i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}\}$
and (2) If $u$ is the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar} and $u^{(k)}$ defined in \eqref{eqdefuk} then
\begin{equation}\label{eqdhekjddkjhdjk}
\|u - u^{(k)}\|_{a}=\inf_{v\in \mathfrak{V}^{(k)}} \|u - v\|_{a}\leq \frac{2}{\pi \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)}} H_k \|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}
\end{equation}
\end{Theorem}
\subsection{Nested games and martingale/multiresolution decomposition}\label{subsecmaringaleopdecomposition}
As in Section \ref{sec:contcase} we consider the mixed strategy (for Player II) expressed by replacing the source term $g$ with a centered Gaussian field with covariance function $\mathcal{L}$. Under this mixed strategy, Player II's bet \eqref{eqdefuk} on the value of the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar}, given the measurements $(\int_{\Omega} u(y)\phi^{(k)}_i(y)\,dy)_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}}$, can also be obtained by conditioning the solution $v$
of the SPDE \eqref{eqn:scalarspde} (see \eqref{eqmawybdyd}), i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{eqkdkjdkjdh}
u^{(k)}(x)=\mathbb{E}\Big[v(x)\Big| \int_{\Omega} v(y)\phi^{(k)}_i(y)\,dy=\int_{\Omega} u(y)\phi^{(k)}_i(y)\,dy ,\,i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}\Big]
\end{equation}
Furthermore, each gamblet $\psi_i^{(k)}$ represents Player II's bet on the value of the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar} given the measurements $\int_{\Omega} u(y)\phi^{(k)}_j(y)\,dy=\delta_{i,j}$, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{eqrepphii}
\psi^{(k)}_i=\mathbb{E}\Big[v\Big| \int_{\Omega} v(y)\phi^{(k)}_j(y)\,dy=\delta_{i,j},\,j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}\Big]
\end{equation}
Now consider the nesting of non-cooperative games where Player I chooses $g$ in \eqref{eqn:scalar} and Player II is shown the measurements $(\int_{\Omega} u \phi_i^{(k)})_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}}$, step by step, in a hierarchical manner, from coarse ($k=1$) to fine ($k=q$) and must, at each step $k$ of the game, gamble on the value of solution $u$. The following theorem and \eqref{eqkdkjdkjdh} show that the resulting sequence of approximations $u^{(k)}$ form the realization of a martingale with independent increments.
\begin{Theorem}\label{thmdgdjdgygugyd}
Let $\mathcal{F}_k$ be the $\sigma$-algebra generated by the random variables $(\int_{\Omega}v(x)\phi_i^{(k)})_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}}$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eqmdedeanvspde}
v^{(k)}(x):=\mathbb{E}\big[v(x)\big| \mathcal{F}_k \big]=\sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} \psi^{(k)}_i(x) \int_{\Omega} v(y)\phi^{(k)}_i (y)\,dy
\end{equation}
It holds true that (1) $\mathcal{F}_1,\ldots,\mathcal{F}_q$ forms a filtration, i.e. $\mathcal{F}_k\subset \mathcal{F}_{k+1}$
(2) For $x\in \Omega$, $v^{(k)}(x)$ is a martingale with respect to the filtration $(\mathcal{F}_k)_{k\geq 1}$, i.e.
$v^{(k)}(x)=\mathbb{E}\big[v^{(k+1)}(x)\big| \mathcal{F}_{k}\big]$ (3) $v^{(1)}$ and the increments $(v^{(k+1)}-v^{(k)})_{k\geq 1}$ are independent Gaussian fields.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
The nesting \eqref{eq:eigdeiud3dd} of the measurement functions implies $\mathcal{F}_k \subset \mathcal{F}_{k+1}$ and $(\mathcal{F}_k)_{k\geq 1}$ is therefore filtration. The fact that $v^{(k)}$ is a martingale follows from $v^{(k)}=\mathbb{E}\big[v\big| \mathcal{F}_k \big]$. Since $v^{(1)}$ and the increments $(v^{(k+1)}-v^{(k)})_{k\geq 1}$ are Gaussian fields belonging to the same Gaussian space their independence is equivalent to zero covariance, which follows from the martingale property, i.e. for $k\geq 1$
$\mathbb{E}\big[v^{(1)}(v^{(k+1)}-v^{(k)})\big]=\mathbb{E}\Big[\mathbb{E}\big[v^{(1)}(v^{(k+1)}-v^{(k)})\big|\mathcal{F}_k\big]\Big]=\mathbb{E}\Big[v^{(1)} \mathbb{E}\big[(v^{(k+1)}-v^{(k)})\big|\mathcal{F}_k\big]\Big]=0$
and for $k>j\geq 1$,
$\mathbb{E}\big[(v^{(j+1)}-v^{(j)})(v^{(k+1)}-v^{(k)})\big]=\mathbb{E}\Big[(v^{(j+1)}-v^{(j)}) \mathbb{E}\big[(v^{(k+1)}-v^{(k)})\big|\mathcal{F}_k\big]\Big]=0$.
\end{proof}
\begin{Remark}
Theorem \ref{thmdgdjdgygugyd} enables the application of classical results concerning martingales to the numerical analysis of $v^{(k)}$ (and $u^{(k)}$). In particular (1) Martingale (concentration) inequalities can be used to control the fluctuations of $v^{(k)}$ (2) Optimal stopping times can be used to derive optimal strategies for stopping numerical simulations based on loss functions mixing computation costs with the cost of imperfect decisions (3) Taking $q=\infty$ in the construction of the basis elements $\psi^{(k)}_i$ (with a sequence $H_k$ decreasing towards 0) and using the martingale convergence theorem imply that, for all $\varphi\in C_0^\infty(\Omega)$, $\int_{\Omega} v^{(k)}\varphi \rightarrow \int_{\Omega} v\varphi$
as $k\rightarrow \infty$ (a.s. and in $L^1$).
\end{Remark}
The independence of the increments $v^{(k+1)}-v^{(k)}$ is related to the following orthogonal multiresolution decomposition of the operator \eqref{eqn:scalar}. For $\mathfrak{V}^{(k)}$ defined as in \eqref{eqdefvk} and for $k\in \{2,\ldots,q+1\}$ let $\mathfrak{W}^{(k)}$ be the orthogonal complement of $\mathfrak{V}^{(k-1)}$ within $\mathfrak{V}^{(k)}$ with respect to the scalar product $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_a$. Write $\oplus_a$ the orthogonal direct sum with respect to the scalar product $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_a$.
Note that by Theorem \ref{thmgugyug0}, $u^{(k)}$ defined by \eqref{eqdefuk} is the finite element solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar} in $\mathfrak{V}^{(k)}$ (in particular we will write $u^{(q+1)}=u$).
\begin{Theorem}\label{thmgugyug2}
It holds true that (1) For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q+1\}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eqdedhhiuhe3}
\mathfrak{V}^{(k)}=\mathfrak{V}^{(1)}\oplus_a \mathfrak{W}^{(2)} \oplus_a \cdots \oplus_a \mathfrak{W}^{(k)},
\end{equation}
(2) for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$, $u^{(k+1)}-u^{(k)}$ belongs to $\mathfrak{W}^{(k+1)}$ and
\begin{equation}\label{equdecom}
u=u^{(1)}+(u^{(2)}-u^{(1)})+\cdots+(u^{(q)}-u^{(q-1)})+(u-u^{(q)})
\end{equation}
is the orthogonal decomposition of $u$ in
$H^1_0(\Omega)=\mathfrak{V}^{(1)}\oplus_a \mathfrak{W}^{(2)}\oplus_a \cdots \oplus_a \mathfrak{W}^{(q)} \oplus_a \mathfrak{W}^{(q+1)}$,
and (3) $u^{(k+1)}-u^{(k)}$ is the finite element solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar} in $\mathfrak{W}^{(k+1)}$.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
Observe that since the $\mathfrak{V}^{(k)}$ are nested (Theorem \ref{thmgugyug0}) $u^{(k+1)}-u^{(k)}$ belongs to $\mathfrak{V}^{(k+1)}$.
Furthermore (by Property (1) of Theorem \ref{thmgugyug0} and integration by parts), for $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$,
$\<u^{(k+1)}-u^{(k)}, \psi_i^{(k)}\>_a$ belongs to $\operatorname{span}\{\int_{\Omega}(u^{(k+1)}-u^{(k)}) \phi_i^{(k)}\mid i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)} \}$.
Finally, \eqref{eqdefuk}, the constraints of \eqref{eq:dfddeytfewdaisq} and the nesting property \eqref{eq:eigdeiud3dd} imply that for $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$,
$\int_{\Omega}(u^{(k+1)}-u^{(k)}) \phi_i^{(k)}=\sum_{j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}}\pi^{(k,k+1)}_{i,j}\int_{\Omega}u \phi_{j}^{(k+1)} -\int_{\Omega}u \phi_i^{(k)}=0$
which implies that $u^{(k+1)}-u^{(k)}$ belongs to $\mathfrak{W}^{(k+1)}$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Interpolation and restriction matrices/operators}
Since the spaces $\mathfrak{V}^{(k)}$ are nested there exists a $\mathcal{I}^{(k)}\times \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}$ matrix $R^{(k,k+1)}$ such that
for $1\leq k \leq q-1$ and $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ftfytftfx}
\psi^{(k)}_i=\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}} R_{i,j}^{(k,k+1)} \psi_j^{(k+1)}
\end{equation}
We will refer to $R^{(k,k+1)}$ as the restriction matrix and to its transpose
$R^{(k+1,k)}:=(R^{(k,k+1)})^T$ as the interpolation/prolongation matrix.
The following theorem shows that (see Figure \ref{fig:bets}) $R^{(k,k+1)}_{i,j}$ is Player II's best bet on the value of $\int_{\Omega} u\phi^{(k+1)}_j$ given the information that $\int_{\Omega} u\phi^{(k)}_s=\delta_{i,s},\,s\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$).
\begin{Theorem}\label{eqhjgjhgjgjg}
It holds true
that for $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$ and $j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}$,\\
$R^{(k,k+1)}_{i,j}= \int_{\Omega} \psi^{(k)}_i \phi_j^{(k+1)}= \mathbb{E}\big[\int_{\Omega} v(y)\phi^{(k+1)}_j(y)\,dy\big| \int_{\Omega} v(y)\phi^{(k)}_l(y)\,dy=\delta_{i,l},\,l\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}\big]$.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
The first equality is obtained by integrating \eqref{eq:ftfytftfx} against $\phi_j^{(k+1)}$ and using the constraints satisfied by $\psi^{(k+1)}_j$ in \eqref{eq:dfddeytfewdaisq}.
For the second equality, observe that
since $\mathcal{F}_k$ is a filtration we can replace $v$ in the representation formula \eqref{eqrepphii} by $v^{(k)}$ (as defined by the r.h.s. of \eqref{eqmdedeanvspde}) and obtain\\
$
\psi^{(k)}_i(x) =\sum_{j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}} \psi^{(k+1)}_j(x) \mathbb{E}\big[\int_{\Omega} v(y)\phi^{(k+1)}_j(y)\,dy\big| \int_{\Omega} v(y)\phi^{(k)}_l(y)\,dy=\delta_{i,l},\,l\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}\big]
$
which corresponds to \eqref{eq:ftfytftfx}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Nested computation of the interpolation and stiffness matrices}
Let $v$ be the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalarspde}. Observe that $(\int_{\Omega}v(x)\phi_i^{(k)})_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}}$ is a Gaussian vector with (symmetric, positive definite) covariance matrix
$\Theta^{(k)}$ defined by for $i,j \in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:kldldje34}
\Theta^{(k)}_{i,j}:=\int_{\Omega^2 }\phi^{(k)}_i(x) G(x,y) \phi^{(k)}_j(y)\,dx\,dy\,.
\end{equation}
As in \eqref{eqtheta0}, $\Theta^{(k)}$ is invertible and we write $\Theta^{(k),-1}$ its inverse.
Observe that, as in Theorem \ref{thm:dkdehgjdhdgh0}, $\psi_i^{(k)}$ admits the following representation formula
\begin{equation}\label{eq:doehddcasek}
\psi_i^{(k)}(x)=\sum_{j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} \Theta_{i,j}^{(k),-1} \int_{\Omega}G(x,y)\phi_j^{(k)}(y)\,dy
\end{equation}
Observe that, as in Theorem \ref{thm:dkdehgjdhdgh0}, $\Theta^{(k),-1}=A^{(k)}$ where $A^{(k)}$ is the (symmetric, positive definite) stiffness matrix of the elements $\psi^{(k)}_i$, i.e., for $i,j \in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:iwihud3de}
A^{(k)}_{i,j}:=\< \psi^{(k)}_i, \psi^{(k)}_j\>_a
\end{equation}
Write $\pi^{(k+1,k)}$ the transpose of the matrix $\pi^{(k,k+1)}$ (defined below \eqref{eq:eigdeiud3dd}) and $I^{(k)}$ the $\mathcal{I}^{(k)}\times \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$ identity matrix. The following theorem enables the hierarchical/nested computation of $A^{(k)}$ from $A^{(k+1)}$.
\begin{Theorem}\label{thmhggfees5}
For $b\in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{I}^{(k)}}$, $R^{(k+1,k)}b$ is the (unique) minimizer $c\in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}}$ of
\begin{equation}\label{eq:dfdytffdeytfewdaisq}
\begin{cases}
\text{Minimize } &c^T A^{(k+1)} c \\
\text{Subject to } &\pi^{(k,k+1)}c=b
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Furthermore $R^{(k,k+1)} \pi^{(k+1,k)}=\pi^{(k,k+1)}R^{(k+1,k)} =I^{(k)}$, $R^{(k,k+1)}=A^{(k)}\pi^{(k,k+1)}\Theta^{(k+1)}$, $\Theta^{(k)}=\pi^{(k,k+1)}\Theta^{(k+1)}\pi^{(k+1,k)}$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eqhuhiuv}
A^{(k)}= R^{(k,k+1)}A^{(k+1)}R^{(k+1,k)}\,.
\end{equation}
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
Using the decompositions \eqref{eq:ftfytftfx} and \eqref{eq:eigdeiud3dd} in $\int_{\Omega}\phi_j^{(k)} \psi_i^{(k)}=\delta_{i,j}$ leads to\\
$R^{(k,k+1)} \pi^{(k+1,k)}=I^{(k)}$. Using \eqref{eq:doehddcasek} and \eqref{eq:eigdeiud3dd} to expand $\psi^{(k)}_i$ Theorem \ref{eqhjgjhgjgjg} leads to $R^{(k,k+1)}=A^{(k)}\pi^{(k,k+1)}\Theta^{(k+1)}$. Using \eqref{eq:eigdeiud3dd} to expand $\phi_i^{(k)}$ and $\phi_j^{(k)}$ in \eqref{eq:kldldje34} leads to $\Theta^{(k)}=\pi^{(k,k+1)}\Theta^{(k+1)}\pi^{(k+1,k)}$. Using \eqref{eq:ftfytftfx} to expand $\psi^{(k)}_i$ and $\psi^{(k)}_j$ in \eqref{eq:iwihud3de} leads to \eqref{eqhuhiuv}. Let $b\in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{I}^{(k)}}$. Theorem \ref{thm:dkdehgjdhdgh0} implies that $\sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}}b_i \psi_i^{(k)}$ is the unique minimizer
of $\|v\|_a^2$ subject to $v\in H^1_0(\Omega)$ and $\int_{\Omega}\phi_j^{(k)} v=b_j$ for $j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$. Since $\mathfrak{V}^{(k)}\subset \mathfrak{V}^{(k+1)}$ and since the minimizer is in $\mathfrak{V}^{(k)}$, the minimization over $v\in H^1_0(\Omega)$ can be reduced to $v\in \mathfrak{V}^{(k+1)}$ of the form $v=\sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}}c_i \psi_i^{(k+1)}$, which after using \eqref{eq:eigdeiud3dd} to expand the constraint $\int_{\Omega}\phi_j^{(k)} v=b_j$, corresponds to \eqref{eq:dfdytffdeytfewdaisq}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Multiresolution gamblets}\label{subsecmultiresbasis}
The interpolation and restriction operators are sufficient to derive a multigrid method for solving \eqref{eqn:scalar}. To design a multiresolution algorithm we need to continue the analysis and identify basis functions for the subspaces $\mathfrak{W}^{(k)}$.
For $k=2,\ldots,q$ let $\mathcal{J}^{(k)}$ be the finite set of $k$-tuples of the form $i=(i_1,\ldots,i_k)$ with $1\leq i_1 \leq m_0$, $1\leq i_j \leq m_{(i_1,\ldots,i_{j-1})}$ for $ 2\leq j \leq k-1$ and $1\leq i_k \leq m_{(i_1,\ldots,i_{k-1})}-1$. Where the integers $m_\cdot$ are the same as those defining the index tree $\mathcal{I}$. For a matrix $M$ write $\operatorname{Im}(M)$ and $\operatorname{Ker}(M)$ its image and kernel.
\begin{Lemma}\label{lemwk}
For $k=2,\ldots,q$ let $W^{(k)}$ be a $\mathcal{J}^{(k)}\times \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$ matrix such that $\operatorname{Im}(W^{(k),T})=\operatorname{Ker}(\pi^{(k-1,k)})$. It holds true that the elements $(\chi_i^{(k)})_{i\in \mathcal{J}^{(k)}}\in \mathfrak{V}^{(k)}$ defined as
\begin{equation}\label{eqjkhdkdh}
\chi^{(k)}_i:=\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} W_{i,j}^{(k)} \psi_j^{(k)}
\end{equation}
form a basis of $\mathfrak{W}^{(k)}$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $\mathcal{L} \mathfrak{V}^{(k-1)}=\operatorname{span}\{\phi^{(k-1)}_i\mid i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}\}$,
$w\in \mathfrak{V}^{(k)}$ belongs to $\mathfrak{W}^{(k)}$ if and only if $\int_{\Omega} \phi^{(k-1)}_j w =0$ for all $j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}$, which, taking $w=\chi^{(k)}_i$ and using \eqref{eq:eigdeiud3dd}, translates into $(\pi^{(k-1,k)}W^{(k),T})_{j,i}=0$. Writing $|\mathcal{J}^{(k)}|$ the number of elements of $\mathcal{J}^{(k)}$ (which is equal to the dimension of $\mathfrak{W}^{(k)}$), observe that $|\mathcal{J}^{(k)}|=|I^{(k)}|-|I^{(k-1)}|$. Therefore $\operatorname{Im}(W^{(k),T})=\operatorname{Ker}(\pi^{(k-1,k)})$ also implies that the $|\mathcal{J}^{(k)}|$ elements $\chi^{(k)}_i$ are linearly independent and, therefore, form a basis of $\mathfrak{W}^{(k)}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{Remark}\label{rmkljdlkdjiji}
Observe that since $0=\<\psi_i^{(k-1)}, \chi_j^{(k)}\>_a=(R^{(k-1,k)} A^{(k)}W^{(k),T})_{i,j}$, it also holds true that $\operatorname{Im}(W^{(k),T})=\operatorname{Ker}(R^{(k-1,k)}A^{(k)})$ and $\operatorname{Im}(A^{(k)} W^{(k),T})= \operatorname{Ker}(R^{(k-1,k)})$ .
\end{Remark}
From now on we choose, for each $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$, a $\mathcal{J}^{(k)}\times \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$ matrix $W^{(k)}$
as in Lemma \ref{lemwk}. This choice is not unique and to enable fast multiplication by $W^{(k)}$ (or its transpose) we require that for $(j,i)\in \mathcal{J}^{(k)}\times \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$, $W^{(k)}_{j,i}=0$ if $j^{(k-1)}\not=i^{(k-1)}$. Therefore, the construction of $W^{(k)}$ requires, for each $s\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}$, to specify a number $m_s-1$ of $m_s$-dimensional vectors $W^{(k)}_{(s,1),(s,\cdot)},\ldots, W^{(k)}_{(s,m_s-1),(s,\cdot)}$ that are linearly independent and orthogonal to the $m_s$-dimensional vector $(1,1,\ldots,1,1)$. We propose two simple constructions.
\begin{Construction}\label{const1}
For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$, choose $W^{(k)}$ such (1) $W^{(k)}_{j,i}=0$ for $(j,i)\in \mathcal{J}^{(k)}\times \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$ with $j^{(k-1)}\not=i^{(k-1)}$ and (2) for
$s\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}$, $t\in \{1,\ldots,m_s-1\}$ and $t'\in \{1,\ldots,m_s\}$, $W^{(k)}_{(s,t),(s,t')}=\delta_{t,t'}-\delta_{t+1,t'}$.
\end{Construction}
For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ and $i=(i_1,\ldots,i_{k-1},i_k)\in \mathcal{J}^{(k)}$ define $i^+:=(i_1,\ldots,i_{k-1},i_k+1)$ and observe that under construction \ref{const1},
\begin{equation}\label{eqchipsi}
\chi^{(k)}_i=\psi^{(k)}_{i}-\psi^{(k)}_{i^+}
\end{equation}
whose game-theoretic interpretation is provided in Figure \ref{fig:bets}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./fig/bets}
\caption{If $(\tau_s^{(k)}, s\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)})$ is a nested rectangular partition of $\Omega$ then (a) $\psi_i^{(k)}$ is Player II's best bet on the value of the solution $u$ of \eqref{eqn:scalar} given $\int_{\tau^{(k)}_j}u=\delta_{i,j}$ for $j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$ (b) $\chi_i^{(k)}$ is Player II's best bet on $u$ given $\int_{\tau^{(k)}_j}u=\delta_{i,j}-\delta_{i^+,j}$ for $j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$ (c) $R^{(k,k+1)}_{i,j}$ is Player II's best bet on $\int_{\tau^{(k+1)}_j} u$ given $\int_{\tau^{(k)}_j}u=\delta_{i,j}$ for $j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$.}\label{fig:bets}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
For the second construction we need the following lemma whose proof is trivial.
\begin{Lemma}\label{const0}
Let $U^{(n)}$ be the sequence of $n\times n$ matrices defined (1) for $n=2$ by $U^{(2)}_{1,\cdot}=(1,-1)$ and $U^{(2)}_{2,\cdot}=(1,1)$ and (2) iteratively for $n\geq 2$ by $U^{(n+1)}_{i,j}=U^{(n)}_{i,j}$ for $1\leq i,j \leq n$, $U^{(n+1)}_{n+1,j}=1$ for $1\leq j \leq n+1$, $U^{(n+1)}_{i,n+1}=0$ for $1\leq i\leq n-1$ and
$U^{(n+1)}_{n,n+1}=-n$. Then for $n\geq 2$, the rows of $U^{(n)}$ are orthogonal, $U^{(n)}_{n,j}=1$ for $1\leq j \leq n$ and we write $\bar{U}^{(n)}$ the corresponding orthonormal matrix obtained by renormalizing the rows of $U^{(n)}$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{Construction}\label{const2}
For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$, choose $W^{(k)}$ such (1) $W^{(k)}_{j,i}=0$ for $(j,i)\in \mathcal{J}^{(k)}\times \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$ with $j^{(k-1)}\not=i^{(k-1)}$ and (2) for
$s\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}$ and $t\in \{1,\ldots,m_s-1\}$ and $t' \in \{1,\ldots,m_s\}$ $W^{(k)}_{(s,t),(s,t')}=\bar{U}^{(m_s)}_{t,t'}$ (where $\bar{U}^{(m_s)}$ is defined in Lemma \ref{const0}).
\end{Construction}
Observe that under Construction \ref{const2} (1) the complexity of constructing $W^{(k)}$ is $|\mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}|\times m_s^2$ and (2) $W^{(k)}W^{(k),T}=J^{(k)}$ where $J^{(k)}$ is the $\mathcal{J}^{(k)}\times \mathcal{J}^{(k)}$ identity matrix.
\subsection{Multiresolution operator inversion}\label{subsecmultiresoperatorinversion}
We will now use the basis functions $\psi_i^{(1)}$ and $\chi^{(k)}_i$ to perform the multiresolution inversion of \eqref{eqn:scalar}. Let $B^{(k)}$ be the $\mathcal{J}^{(k)}\times \mathcal{J}^{(k)}$ (stiffness)matrix $B^{(k)}_{i,j}=\<\chi_i^{(k)},\chi_j^{(k)}\>_a$ and observe that
\begin{equation}\label{eqjgfytfjhyyyg}
B^{(k)}= W^{(k)}A^{(k)}W^{(k),T}
\end{equation}
Observe that $B^{(k)}$ is positive, symmetric, definite and write $B^{(k),-1}$ its inverse.
Let $\bar{\pi}^{(k,k+1)}$ be the $\mathcal{I}^{(k)}\times \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}$ matrix defined by
\begin{equation}
\bar{\pi}^{(k,k+1)}_{i,j}=\pi^{(k,k+1)}_{i,j}/ (\pi^{(k,k+1)} \pi^{(k+1,k)})_{i,i}
\end{equation}
Using the notations of Definition \ref{defindextree} note that $(\pi^{(k,k+1)} \pi^{(k+1,k)})_{i,i}=m_{i}$.
Let $D^{(k,k-1)}$ be the $\mathcal{J}^{(k)}\times \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}$ matrix defined as
\begin{equation}\label{eqdkdjhdkhse}
D^{(k,k-1)}:=- B^{(k),-1}W^{(k)}A^{(k)}\bar{\pi}^{(k,k-1)}
\end{equation}
and write $D^{(k-1,k)}:=D^{(k,k-1),T}$ its transpose.
\begin{Theorem}
It holds true that for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q-1\}$ and $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eqdidhduhh}
\psi_i^{(k)}= \sum_{l\in \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}}\bar{\pi}^{(k,k+1)}_{i,l}\psi^{(k+1)}_l+ \sum_{j\in \mathcal{J}^{(k+1)}} D^{(k,k+1)}_{i,j} \chi^{(k+1)}_j\,.
\end{equation}
In particular,
\begin{equation}\label{eqhuhiddeuv}
R^{(k,k+1)}= \bar{\pi}^{(k,k+1)}+D^{(k,k+1)}W^{(k+1)}
\end{equation}
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
For $s\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$ write $\bar{\psi}_s^{(k)}:= \sum_{l\in \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}}\bar{\pi}^{(k,k+1)}_{s,l}\psi^{(k+1)}_l$ and $\bar{\mathfrak{V}}^{(k)}:=\operatorname{span}\{\bar{\psi}_s^{(k)}\mid s\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)} \}$. Let $x\in \mathbb{R}^{I^{(k)}}$, $y\in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{J}^{(k+1)}}$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eqdhdihedu65c}
\psi =\sum_{s\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} x_s \bar{\psi}_s^{(k)} + \sum_{j\in \mathcal{J}^{(k+1)}}y_j \chi_j^{(k+1)}\,.
\end{equation}
If $\psi=0$ then integrating $\psi$ against $\phi_i^{(k)}$ for $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$ (and observing that $\int_{\Omega}\phi_i^{(k)} \bar{\psi}_s^{(k)}= \delta_{i,s}$) implies $x=0$ and $y=0$. Therefore the elements $\bar{\psi}_s^{(k)}, \chi_j^{(k+1)}$ form a basis for $\bar{\mathfrak{V}}^{(k)}+\mathfrak{W}^{(k+1)}$. Observing that $\operatorname{dim}(\mathfrak{V}^{(k+1)})=\operatorname{dim}(\bar{\mathfrak{V}}^{(k)})+\operatorname{dim}(\mathfrak{W}^{(k+1)})$ we deduce that $\mathfrak{V}^{(k+1)}=\bar{\mathfrak{V}}^{(k)}+\mathfrak{W}^{(k+1)}$. Therefore, since $\mathfrak{V}^{(k)}\subset \mathfrak{V}^{(k+1)}$, $\psi_i^{(k)}$ can be decomposed as in \eqref{eqdhdihedu65c}. The constraints $\int_{\Omega} \phi_s^{(k)}\psi_i^{(k)}=\delta_{i,s}$ lead to $x_s= \delta_{i,s}$. The orthogonality between $\psi$ and $\mathfrak{W}^{(k+1)}$ leads to the equations $\<\psi,\chi^{(k+1)}_j\>_a=0$ for $j\in \mathcal{J}^{(k+1)}$, i.e.\\
$\sum_{l\in \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}}\bar{\pi}^{(k,k+1)}_{i,l}\<\psi^{(k+1)}_l,\chi^{(k+1)}_j\>_a+\sum_{j'\in \mathcal{J}^{(k+1)}} y_{j'} \<\chi^{(k+1)}_{j'},\chi^{(k+1)}_j\>_a=0$, which translates into $ W^{(k+1)} A^{(k+1)} \bar{\pi}^{(k+1,k)}_{\cdot,i} + B^{(k+1)} y$, that is \eqref{eqdidhduhh}.
Plugging \eqref{eqjkhdkdh} in \eqref{eqdidhduhh} and comparing with \eqref{eq:ftfytftfx} leads to \eqref{eqhuhiddeuv}.
\end{proof}
Let $g$ be the r.h.s of \eqref{eqn:scalar}. For $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ let $g^{(k)}$ be the $|\mathcal{I}^{(k)}|$-dimensional vector defined by
$g^{(k)}_i=\int_{\Omega}\psi_i^{(k)}g \text{ for }i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$.
Observe that $g^{(k)}$ can be computed iteratively using
\begin{equation}\label{eqyguugy6t}
g^{(k)}=R^{(k,k+1)} g^{(k+1)}\,.
\end{equation}
For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$, let $w^{(k)}$ be $|\mathcal{J}^{(k)}|$-dimensional vector defined as the solution of
\begin{equation}\label{eqsdjoejddi1}
B^{(k)} w^{(k)}=W^{(k)} g^{(k)}
\end{equation}
Furthermore let $U^{(1)}$ be the $|\mathcal{I}^{(1)}|$-dimensional vector
defined as the solution of
\begin{equation}\label{eqsdjoejddi2}
A^{(1)} U^{(1)}=g^{(1)}
\end{equation}
According to following theorem, which is a direct consequence of Theorem \ref{thmgugyug2}, the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar} can be computed at any scale by solving the decoupled linear systems \eqref{eqsdjoejddi1} and \eqref{eqsdjoejddi2}.
\begin{Theorem}\label{thddwedmgugyug}
For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$, let $u^{(k)}$ be the finite element solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar} in $\mathfrak{V}^{(k)}$. It holds true that $u^{(k)}-u^{(k-1)}=\sum_{i\in \mathcal{J}^{(k)}}w^{(k)}_i \chi^{(k)}_i$ and, in particular,
\begin{equation}
u^{(k)}=\sum_{i \in \mathcal{I}^{(1)}} U^{(1)}_i \psi^{(1)}_i+\sum_{k'=2}^k \sum_{i\in \mathcal{J}^{(k')}}w^{(k')}_i \chi^{(k')}_i
\end{equation}
\end{Theorem}
\subsection{Uniformly bounded condition numbers across subscales/subbands}\label{subsecmultires}
Taking $q=\infty$ in Theorem \ref{thmgugyug2}, the construction of the basis elements $\psi^{(k)}_i$ leads to the multiresolution orthogonal decomposition,
\begin{equation}
H^1_0(\Omega)=\mathfrak{V}^{(1)}\underset{i=2}{\overset{\infty}{\oplus_a}} \mathfrak{W}^{(i)}.
\end{equation}
In that sense the basis elements $\psi^{(k)}_i$ and $\chi^{(k)}_i$ could be seen as a generalization of wavelets to the orthogonal decomposition of $H^1_0(\Omega)$ (rather than $L^2(\Omega)$) adapted to the solution space of the PDE \eqref{eqn:scalar}. We will now show that
this orthogonal decomposition induces a subscale decomposition of the operator $-\operatorname{div}(a\nabla)$ into layered subbands of increasing frequencies. Moreover the condition number of the operator $-\operatorname{div}(a\nabla)$ restricted to each subspace $\mathfrak{W}^{(k)}$ will be shown to be uniformly bounded if $H_{k-1}/H_{k}$ is uniformly bounded (e.g. if $H_k$ is a geometric sequence). Write $H_0:=1$ and let $\delta$ be defined as in Construction \ref{defmulires}.
\begin{Theorem}\label{thmuuhiuhddu}
If $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ and $v\in \mathfrak{V}^{(k)}$ then
\begin{equation}\label{eqguygugu68lhs}
\frac{\delta^{1+d/2}}{\sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(a)} 2^{5/2+d/2}} H_{k} \leq \frac{\|v\|_a}{\|\operatorname{div}(a\nabla v)\|_{L^2(\Omega)}}\,.
\end{equation}
If $(k=1$ and $v\in \mathfrak{V}^{(1)})$ or $(k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ and $v\in \mathfrak{W}^{(k)})$ then
\begin{equation}\label{eqguygugu68}
\frac{\|v\|_a}{\|\operatorname{div}(a\nabla v)\|_{L^2(\Omega)}} \leq \frac{1}{ \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)}} H_{k-1}\,.
\end{equation}
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
\eqref{eqguygugu68lhs} is a direct consequence of Lemma \ref{lemdhkedjhdkjh}. For $k=1$ \eqref{eqguygugu68} is a simple consequence of Poincar\'{e}'s inequality.
Let $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$. $\mathfrak{V}^{(k)}=\mathfrak{V}^{(k-1)}\oplus_a \mathfrak{W}^{(k)}$ and Theorem \ref{thmgugyug0} imply\\
$
\sup_{v\in \mathfrak{W}^{(k)}} \frac{\|v\|_a}{\|\operatorname{div}(a\nabla v)\|_{L^2(\Omega)}} \leq \sup_{v\in \mathfrak{V}^{(k)}} \inf_{v' \in \mathfrak{V}^{(k-1)}} \frac{\|v-v'\|_a}{\|\operatorname{div}(a\nabla v)\|_{L^2(\Omega)}} \leq \frac{2}{\pi \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)}} H_{k-1}.
$\\
\end{proof}
Write $|c|$ the Euclidean norm of $c$ and for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ let
\begin{equation}\label{eqgam1}
\ubar{\gamma}_k:=\inf_{c\in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{I}^{(k)}}} \frac{\| \sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} c_i \, \phi_i^{(k)} \|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2}{|c|^2} \text{ and }\bar{\gamma}_k:=\sup_{c\in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{I}^{(k)}}} \frac{\| \sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} c_i \, \phi_i^{(k)} \|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2}{|c|^2}
\end{equation}
Write $|\tau|$ the volume of a set $\tau$ and note that $\bar{\gamma}_k\leq \max_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} |\tau_i^{(k)}|$ and $\ubar{\gamma}_k\geq \min_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} |\tau_i^{(k)}|$, therefore $\bar{\gamma}_k/\ubar{\gamma}_k \leq \delta^{-d}$.
For a given matrix $M$, write $\operatorname{Cond}(M):=\sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(M^T M)}/\sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(M^T M)}$ its condition number.
\begin{Theorem}\label{thmodhehiudhehd}
It holds true that
\begin{equation}\label{eqcond1}
\operatorname{Cond}(A^{(1)})\leq \frac{1}{H_{1}^2}\frac{\lambda_{\max}(a) 2^{5+d}}{\lambda_{\min}(a) \delta^{2+2 d} },
\end{equation}
and for $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eqcond2}
\operatorname{Cond}(B^{(k)})\leq \big(\frac{ H_{k-1}}{ H_{k}}\big)^{2} \big(\frac{\lambda_{\max}(a)}{\lambda_{\min}(a)}\big)^2
\frac{ 2^{11+2d}}{\delta^{4+7d} \pi^2 } \operatorname{Cond}(W^{(k)}W^{(k),T})\,.
\end{equation}
Furthermore, $\operatorname{Cond}(W^{(k)}W^{(k),T})=1$ under Construction \ref{const2} and
$\operatorname{Cond}(W^{(k)}W^{(k),T})\leq 2 \big(H_{k-1}/(\delta H_k)\big)^{2d}$ under Construction \ref{const1}.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ and $c\in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{I}^{(k)}}$. Write $v=\sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} c_i \psi_i^{(k)}$. Observing that $\|v\|_a^2=c^T A^{(k)} c$ and
$\|\operatorname{div}(a\nabla v)\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2=\|\sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} (A^{(k)} c)_i \phi_i^{(k)}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2 \geq \ubar{\gamma}_k |A^{(k)} c|^2$, \eqref{eqguygugu68lhs} implies that $\ubar{\gamma}_k H_k^2 \delta^{2+d}/(\lambda_{\max}(a) 2^{5+d}) \leq c^T A^{(k)}c/ |A^{(k)} c|^2$, which, after taking the minimum in $c$ leads to (for $k\geq 1$)
\begin{equation}\label{eqkhiduhdf7d}
\lambda_{\max}(A^{(k)})\leq \lambda_{\max}(a) 2^{5+d}/(H_{k}^2 \delta^{2+d} \ubar{\gamma}_k ),
\end{equation}
and for $k\geq 2$ (using \eqref{eqjgfytfjhyyyg})
\begin{equation}\label{eqkhiduhde2df7d}
\lambda_{\max}(B^{(k)})\leq \lambda_{\max}(W^{(k)}W^{(k),T}) \lambda_{\max}(a) 2^{5+d}/(H_{k}^2 \delta^{2+d} \ubar{\gamma}_k )\,.
\end{equation}
Similarly for $k=1$ \eqref{eqguygugu68} leads to $\lambda_{\min}(A^{(1)})\geq \lambda_{\min}(a)/\bar{\gamma}_1$.
Now let us consider $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ and $c\in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{J}^{(k)}}$. Write $w=\sum_{i\in \mathcal{J}^{(k)},\,j \in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} c_i W_{i,j}^{(k)} \psi_j^{(k)}$.
\eqref{eqjkhdkdh} and \eqref{eqjgfytfjhyyyg} imply that $\|w\|_a^2=c^T B^{(k)} c$ and (using \eqref{eqgam1})\\ $\|\operatorname{div}(a\nabla w) \|_{L^2(\Omega)}=\| \sum_{i\in \mathcal{J}^{(k)},\,j \in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} (A^{(k)} W^{(k),T} c)_{j} \phi_j^{(k)}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}\leq \bar{\gamma}_k |A^{(k)} W^{(k),T} c|^2$. Observing that $w\in \mathfrak{W}^{(k)}$,
\eqref{eqguygugu68} implies that
$\frac{c^T B^{(k)} c}{c^T W^{(k)} (A^{(k)})^2 W^{(k),T} c} \leq \bar{\gamma}_k\,\frac{1}{ \lambda_{\min}(a)} H_{k-1}^2$.
Taking $c=B^{(k),-1} y$ for $y\in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{J}^{(k)}}$ we deduce that
$ \frac{y^T B^{(k),-1} y}{|A^{(k)} W^{(k),T} B^{(k),-1} y|^2 } \leq \bar{\gamma}_k\,\frac{1}{ \lambda_{\min}(a)} H_{k-1}^2$.
Writing $N^{(k)}=-A^{(k)} W^{(k),T} B^{(k),-1}$, we have obtained that
\begin{equation}\label{eqjgjhdjhgdy}
\lambda_{\min}(a)/\big(H_{k-1}^2 \bar{\gamma}_k\lambda_{\max}(N^{(k),T}N^{(k)})\big) \leq \lambda_{\min}(B^{(k)})\,.
\end{equation}
For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ let $P^{(k)}:=\pi^{(k,k-1)} R^{(k-1,k)}$. Using $R^{(k-1,k)}=A^{(k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}\Theta^{(k)}$ and
$\pi^{(k-1,k)}\Theta^{(k)}\pi^{(k,k-1)}=\Theta^{(k-1)}$ (Theorem \ref{thmhggfees5}) we obtain that $(P^{(k)})^2=P^{(k)}$, i.e. $P^{(k)}$ is a projection. Write $\|P^{(k)}\|_{\operatorname{Ker}(\pi^{(k-1,k)})}:=\sup_{x\in \operatorname{Ker}(\pi^{(k-1,k)})} |P^{(k)} x|/|x|$.
\begin{Lemma}\label{lemfdhgdf}
It holds true that for $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$,
\begin{equation}
\lambda_{\max}(N^{(k),T}N^{(k)})\leq \frac{1+\|P^{(k)}\|_{\operatorname{Ker}(\pi^{(k-1,k)})}^2}{\lambda_{\min}(W^{(k)} W^{(k),T})}\,.
\end{equation}
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $\operatorname{Im}(W^{(k),T})$ and $\operatorname{Im}(\pi^{(k,k-1)})$ are orthogonal and ${\operatorname{dim}}(\mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{I}^{(k)}})={\operatorname{dim}}\big(\operatorname{Im}(W^{(k),T})\big)+{\operatorname{dim}}\big(\operatorname{Im}(\pi^{(k,k-1)})\big)$,
for $x\in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{I}^{(k)}}$ there exists a unique $y\in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{J}^{(k)}}$ and $z\in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}}$ such that
$x=W^{(k),T}y+\pi^{(k,k-1)} z$
and
$
|x|^2=|W^{(k),T}y|^2+|\pi^{(k,k-1)} z|^2.
$
Observe that $W^{(k)} x=W^{(k)}W^{(k),T}y$ (since $W^{(k)}\pi^{(k,k-1)}=0$) and $R^{(k-1,k)}x =R^{(k-1,k)} W^{(k),T}y+z$ (since $R^{(k-1,k)}\pi^{(k,k-1)}=I^{(k-1)}$ from Theorem \ref{thmhggfees5}). Therefore,
$
|x|^2=|W^{(k),T} y|^2+|P^{(k)} (x-W^{(k),T}y)|^2
$
with $y=(W^{(k)} W^{(k),T})^{-1}W^{(k)} x$.
Let $v\in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{J}^{(k)}}$. Taking $x=A^{(k)}W^{(k),T}v$ and observing that $P^{(k)}x=0$ (since $R^{(k-1,k)}A^{(k)}W^{(k),T}=0$ from the $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_a$-orthogonality between $\mathfrak{V}^{(k-1)}$ and $\mathfrak{W}^{(k)}$)
leads to
$
|A^{(k)}W^{(k),T}v|^2=|W^{(k),T} y |^2+ |P^{(k)} W^{(k),T}y |^2
$
with $y=(W^{(k)} W^{(k),T})^{-1} B^{(k)} v$. Therefore
$
|A^{(k)}W^{(k),T}v|^2\leq (1+\|P^{(k)}\|_{\operatorname{Ker}(\pi^{(k-1,k)})}^2)\frac{|B^{(k)}v|^2}{\lambda_{\min}(W^{(k)} W^{(k),T})},
$
which concludes the proof after taking $v=B^{(k),-1}v'$ and maximizing the l.h.s. over $|v'|=1$.
\end{proof}
\begin{Lemma}\label{lemdjoidjdi}
Writing $\|M\|_2:=sup_x |M x|/x$ the spectral norm, we have
\begin{equation}
\|P^{(k)}\|_{\operatorname{Ker}(\pi^{(k-1,k)})}^2 \leq \|\pi^{(k,k-1)}A^{(k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}\|_2 \sup_{x\in \operatorname{Ker}(\pi^{(k-1,k)})}\frac{x^T \Theta^{(k)} x}{x^T x}
\end{equation}
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $x\in \operatorname{Ker}(\pi^{(k-1,k)})$. Using
$P^{(k)}=\pi^{(k,k-1)}A^{(k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}\Theta^{(k)}$
we obtain that
$
|P^{(k)}x|=\|\pi^{(k,k-1)}A^{(k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}(\Theta^{(k)})^\frac{1}{2}\|_2 |(\Theta^{(k)})^\frac{1}{2} x|
$.
Observing that for \\$M=\pi^{(k-1,k)}(\Theta^{(k)})^\frac{1}{2}$ we have $M M^T=\Theta^{(k-1)}$ and for $N=\pi^{(k,k-1)}A^{(k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}(\Theta^{(k)})^\frac{1}{2}$ we have $\lambda_{\max}(N^T N)=\lambda_{\max}(N N^T)$ we deduce
\\$\|\pi^{(k,k-1)}A^{(k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}(\Theta^{(k)})^\frac{1}{2}\|_2^2=\|\pi^{(k,k-1)}A^{(k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}\|_2$ and conclude by taking the supremum over
$x\in \operatorname{Ker}(\pi^{(k-1,k)})$.
\end{proof}
\begin{Lemma}\label{lemddjoj3ir}
It holds true that
\begin{equation}
\sup_{x\in \operatorname{Ker}(\pi^{(k-1,k)})}\frac{x^T \Theta^{(k)} x}{x^T x} \leq H_{k-1}^2 \frac{\bar{\gamma}_k^2}{\ubar{\gamma}_k\pi^2 \lambda_{\min}(a)}
\end{equation}
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $y\in \mathbb{R}^{\mathcal{J}^{(k)}}$ and $\alpha \in \mathbb{R}$. Let $x=\alpha W^{(k),T} y$. Write $\phi=\sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} x_i \phi_i^{(k)}$ and $\psi=(-\operatorname{div}(a\nabla \cdot))^{-1} \phi$. Observe that $ \|\psi\|^2_a=x^T \Theta^{(k)} x \geq \alpha y^T W^{(k)}\Theta^{(k)} W^{(k),T}y $. Using $\int_{\Omega}\phi_i^{(k)} \phi_l^{(k)} =0$ for $i\not=l$ and selecting $\alpha=\|\phi_i^{(k)}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^{-2}$ (assuming, without loss of generality, that $\|\phi_i^{(k)}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2=|\tau_i^{(k)}|$ is constant in $i$, for the general case, rescale each $\phi_i^{(k)}$ by a multiplicative constant) we obtain that for $j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}$,
$\int_{\Omega}\phi \phi_j^{(k-1)} =\sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} x_i \|\phi_i^{(k)}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2 \pi^{(k-1,k)}_{j,i}=(\pi^{(k-1,k)} W^{(k),T} y)_j=0
$.
Therefore, since $\|\psi\|^2_a=\int_{\Omega}\phi \psi$, we have for $\psi'\in \operatorname{span}\{\phi_i^{(k-1)}\mid i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}\}$
$
\|\psi\|^2_a =\int_{\Omega}\phi (\psi-\psi') \leq \|\phi\|_{L^2(\Omega)} \|\psi-\psi'\|_{L^2(\Omega)}
$.
Choosing $\psi'= \sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}} \phi_i^{(k-1)} \int_{\Omega}\psi \phi_i^{(k-1)}/ \|\phi_i^{(k-1)}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2$ we obtain (via Poincar\'{e} and Cauchy-Schwartz inequalities as in the proof of Proposition \ref{prop:gegddgdjdef}) that
$\|\psi-\psi'\|_{L^2(\Omega)} \leq H_{k-1} \|\psi\|_a/(\pi \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)})$ and deduce $\|\psi\|_a \leq H_{k-1} \|\phi\|_{L^2(\Omega)} /(\pi \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(a)})$.
Observing that $\|\phi\|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2\leq |x|^2 \bar{\gamma}_k$ and $ \ubar{\gamma}_k \leq \alpha^{-1} \leq \bar{\gamma}_k$ we
summarize and obtain that\\
$
y^T W^{(k)}\Theta^{(k)} W^{(k),T}y \leq H_{k-1}^2 |x|^2 \bar{\gamma}_k^2 /(\pi^2 \lambda_{\min}(a)) \leq H_{k-1}^2 |W^{(k),T}y|^2 \bar{\gamma}_k^2 /(\ubar{\gamma}_k\pi^2 \lambda_{\min}(a))
$, which concludes the proof of the lemma (since $\operatorname{Ker}(\pi^{(k-1,k)})=\operatorname{Im}(W^{(k),T})$).
\end{proof}
Observing that $ \|\pi^{(k,k-1)}A^{(k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}\|_2 \leq \lambda_{\max}(\pi^{(k,k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}) \lambda_{\max}(A^{(k-1)})$ and using \eqref{eqkhiduhdf7d}, we derive from lemmas \ref{lemdjoidjdi} and \ref{lemddjoj3ir} that
\begin{equation}\label{eqdihduhuq2he}
\|P^{(k)}\|_{\operatorname{Ker}(\pi^{(k-1,k)})}^2 \leq \lambda_{\max}(\pi^{(k,k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}) \frac{ \bar{\gamma}_k^2 2^{5+d} \lambda_{\max}(a)}{ \ubar{\gamma}_k \ubar{\gamma}_{k-1} \delta^{2+d} \pi^2 \lambda_{\min}(a)}\,.
\end{equation}
Observing that $\pi^{(k,k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}$ is block-diagonal and using the notations of Definition \ref{defindextree} we have
$\lambda_{\max}(\pi^{(k,k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)})=\max_{j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}}\sup_{x\in \mathbb{R}^{m_j}} |\sum_{i=1}^{m_j} x_i|^2/|x|^2=\max_{j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}} m_j$. Noting that a set $\tau_j^{(k-1)}$ can contain at most $(\max_{j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}} |\tau_j^{(k-1)}|)/ (\min_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} |\tau_i^{(k)}|)$ subsets $\tau_i^{(k)}$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{eqddkhjji}
\max_{j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}} m_j \leq \big(H_{k-1}/(\delta H_k)\big)^d
\end{equation}
and conclude that $\lambda_{\max}(\pi^{(k,k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}) \leq \big(H_{k-1}/(\delta H_k)\big)^d$.
Therefore \eqref{eqjgjhdjhgdy} and Lemma \ref{lemfdhgdf} imply, after simplification, that
\begin{equation}\label{eqjgjhdjghgfhgdy}
\lambda_{\min}(B^{(k)}) \geq \frac{\lambda_{\min}(a)}{H_{k-1}^2 \bar{\gamma}_k} \lambda_{\min}(W^{(k)} W^{(k),T}) \frac{ H_{k}^{d} \ubar{\gamma}_{k-1} \ubar{\gamma}_k \delta^{2+2d} \pi^2 \lambda_{\min}(a)}{ H_{k-1}^{d} \bar{\gamma}_k^2 2^{6+d} \lambda_{\max}(a)}\,.
\end{equation}
Recalling that $\bar{\gamma}_k/\ubar{\gamma}_k \leq \delta^{-d}$, using $\bar{\gamma}_k/\ubar{\gamma}_{k-1}\leq H_k^d/ (H_{k-1} \delta)^d$, and summarizing we conclude the proof of \eqref{eqcond1} and \eqref{eqcond2}. Recall that under construction \ref{const2} we have $W^{(k)}W^{(k),T}=J^{(k)}$ which implies $\operatorname{Cond}(W^{(k)}W^{(k),T})=1$. Under
construction \ref{const1}, $W^{(k)}W^{(k),T}$ is block diagonal with for $j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}$, diagonal blocks corresponding to $(m_j-1)\times (m_j-1)$ matrices $M^{(m_j-1)}$ such that (1) for $n=1$ and $x\in \mathbb{R}$, $x^T M^{(1)}x=2 x^2$ (2) for $n=2$ and $x\in \mathbb{R}^2$, $x^T M^{(2)}x=x_1^2+(x_2-x_1)^2+x_2^2$ and (3) for
for $n\geq 3$, and $x\in \mathbb{R}^n$, $x^T M^{(n)} x=x_1^2+\sum_{i=1}^{n-2} (x_{i}-x_{i+1})^2+ x_{n}^2$. Note that for all $n\geq 1$, $\lambda_{\max}(M^{(n)})\leq 3$. Furthermore, for $n\geq 3$ ($n\leq 2$ is trivial), introducing the variables $y_2=x_2-x_1,\ldots,y_n=x_n-x_{n-1}$ we obtain that
$x^T M^{(n)} x=x_1^2+y_2^2+\cdots+y_n^2+ x_n^2$ and $|x|^2=x_1^2+(x_1+y_2)^2+\cdots+(x_1+y_2+\cdots+y_n)^2 \leq (x^T M^{(n)} x) n(n+1)/2$. Therefore,
$\lambda_{\min}(M^{(n)})\geq 2/(n(n+1))$. We conclude that under construction \ref{const1} $\operatorname{Cond}(W^{(k)}W^{(k),T})\leq \max_{j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}} 3 (m_j-1)m_j/2$ and bound $m_j$ as in \eqref{eqddkhjji}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Well conditioned relaxation across subscales}\label{subseccg}
If $H_k$ is a geometric sequence or if $H_{k-1}/H_k$ is uniformly bounded, then, by Theorem \eqref{thmodhehiudhehd}, the linear systems (\eqref{eqsdjoejddi1} and \eqref{eqsdjoejddi2}) entering in the calculation of the gamblets $\chi^{(k)}_i$ (and therefore $\psi_i^{(k)}$) and the subband/subscale solutions $u^{(1)}$ and $u^{(k+1)}-u^{(k)}$ have uniformly bounded condition numbers (in particular, these condition numbers are bounded independently from mesh size/resolution and the regularity of $a(x)$).
Therefore these systems can be solved efficiently using iterative methods.
One such methods is the Conjugate Gradient (CG) method \cite{HestenesStiefel1952}.
Recall \cite{Shewchuk1994} that the application of the CG method to a linear system $A x=b$ (where $A$ is a $n\times n$ symmetric positive definite matrix) with initial guess $x^{(0)}$, yields a sequence of approximations $x^{(l)}$ satisfying (writing $|e|_A^2:=e^T A e$)
$|x-x^{(l)}|_A \leq 2 \Big(\frac{\sqrt{\operatorname{Cond}(A)}-1}{\sqrt{\operatorname{Cond}(A)}+1}\Big)^l|x-x^{(0)}|_A$
where $\operatorname{Cond}(A):=\lambda_{\max}(A)/\lambda_{\min}(A)$.
Recall \cite{Shewchuk1994} also that the maximum number of iterations required to reduce the error by a factor $\epsilon$ ($|x-x^{(l)}|_A \leq \epsilon |x-x^{(0)}|_A$) is bounded by $\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\operatorname{Cond}(A)}\ln \frac{2}{\epsilon}$ and has complexity (number of required arithmetic operations)
$\mathcal{O}(\sqrt{\operatorname{Cond}(A)} N_A)$ (writing $N_A$ the number of non-zero entries of $A$).
\subsection{Hierarchical localization and error propagation across scales}\label{sechierarloc}
Although the multi-resolution decomposition presented in this section leads to well conditioned linear systems, the resulting matrices $B^{(k)}$ and $A^{(k)}$ are dense and to achieve near-linear complexity in the resolution of \eqref{eqn:scalar} these matrices must be truncated by localizing the computation of the basis functions $\psi_i^{(k)}$ (and therefore $\chi_i^{(k)}$).
The approximation error induced by these localization/truncation steps is controlled by the exponential decay of gamblets and the uniform bound on the condition numbers of the matrices $B^{(k)}$. To make this control explicit and derive a bound the size of the localization sub-domains we need to quantify the propagation of truncation/localization errors across scales and this is the purpose of this subsection.
For $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$, $\rho\geq 1$ and $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$ we define (1) $i^{\rho}$ as the subset of indices $j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$ whose corresponding subdomains $\tau_j^{(k)}$ are at distance at most $H_k \rho$ from $\tau_i^{(k)}$ and (2) $S^i_\rho:=\cup_{j\in i^{\rho}}\tau_j^{(k)}$.
Let $\rho_1,\ldots,\rho_q\geq 1$. For $k\in \{1,\ldots,q-1\}$ and $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$, write $i^{\rho,k+1}$ as the subset of indices $j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}$ such that
$j^{(k)}\in i^{\rho}$.
For $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(q)}$ let $\mathfrak{V}^{(q+1),{\rm loc}}_i:=H^1_0(S^i_{\rho_q})$. For $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ and $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$, let $\psi^{(k),{\rm loc}}_i$ be the minimizer of
\begin{equation}\label{eqpsiikloc}
\text{Minimize } \|\psi\|_a \text{ subject to } \psi\in \mathfrak{V}^{(k+1),{\rm loc}}_i \text{ and } \int_{\Omega}\psi \phi_j^{(k)}=\delta_{i,j} \text{ for }j\in i^{\rho_k}
\end{equation}
where for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q-1\}$ and $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$, $\mathfrak{V}^{(k+1),{\rm loc}}_i$ is defined (via induction) by $\mathfrak{V}^{(k+1),{\rm loc}}_i:=\operatorname{span}\{\psi_j^{(k+1),{\rm loc}}\mid j\in i^{\rho_k,k+1}\}$.
From now on we will assume that $H_k=H^k$ for some $H\in (0,1)$ (or simply that $H_k$ is uniformly bounded from below and above by $H^k$).
To simplify the presentation, we will also, from now on, write $C$ any constant that depends only $d, \Omega, \lambda_{\min}(a), \lambda_{\max}(a), \delta$ (e.g., $2 C \lambda_{\max}(a)$ will still be written $C$). The following theorem allows us to control the localization error propagation across scales.
For $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$, let $A^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ be the $\mathcal{I}^{(k)}\times \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$ matrix defined by $A^{(k),{\rm loc}}_{i,j}:=\<\psi^{(k),{\rm loc}}_i,\psi^{(k),{\rm loc}}_j\>_a$ and let $\mathcal{E}(k)$ be the (localization) error
$\mathcal{E}(k):=\big(\sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} \|\psi_i^{(k)}-\psi_i^{(k),{\rm loc}}\|_a^2\big)^\frac{1}{2}$.
\begin{Theorem}\label{thmerrorpropagation}
For $k\in \{1,\ldots,q-1\}$, we have
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{E}(k)\leq C H^{-\frac{d}{2}} \mathcal{E}(k+1)+ C e^{-\rho_{k}/C} H^{\frac{d}{2}-(k+1)(d+1)}.
\end{equation}
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
We will need the following lemma summarizing and simplifying some results obtained in Theorem \ref{thmuuhiuhddu} when $H_k=H^k$.
\begin{Lemma}\label{lembase}
Let $H_k=H^{k}$ and $W^{(k)}$ be as in Construction \ref{const1} or Construction \ref{const2}.
It holds true that for $k\in \{q,\ldots,2\}$ (1) $\|W^{(k)}\|_2\leq \sqrt{3}$ (2) $1/\lambda_{\min}(W^{(k)} W^{(k),T}) \leq C H^{-2d}$
(3) $\|\bar{\pi}^{(k-1,k)}\|_2\leq C H^\frac{d}{2}$ (4) $\|\pi^{(k-1,k)}\|_2 \leq C H^{-d/2}$
(5) $\|R^{(k-1,k)}\|_2 \leq C H^{-d/2}$ (6) $\operatorname{Cond}(B^{(k)})\leq C H^{-2-2d}$ (7) $ \lambda_{\max}(B^{(k)})\leq C H^{-k(2+d)}$\\ (8) $ 1/\lambda_{\min}(B^{(k)})\leq C H^{k (2+d)-2-2d}$. Furthermore, (9) $\operatorname{Cond}(A^{(1)})\leq C H^{-2}$ (10) $1/\lambda_{\min}(A^{(1)})\leq C H^d$
and for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ (11) $\lambda_{\max}(A^{(k)})\leq C H^{-k(2+d)}$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
From the proof of Theorem \ref{thmodhehiudhehd} we have (1) and
$1/\lambda_{\min}(W^{(k)} W^{(k),T})\leq$ \\$ \max_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}} (m_i-1)m_i/2$, which implies (2). For (3),
noting that $\bar{\pi}^{(k-1,k)}_{i,j}=0$ if $j^{(k-1)}\not=i$ and $\bar{\pi}^{(k-1,k)}_{i,j}=1/m_i$ otherwise, we have $\|\bar{\pi}^{(k-1,k)}\|_2=\max_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}}1/\sqrt{m_i}\leq C H^\frac{d}{2}$. (4) follows from $\lambda_{\max}(\pi^{(k,k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)})= \max_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}} m_i\leq C H^{-d}$.
Let us now prove (5). Using \eqref{eqhuhiddeuv}, \eqref{eqdkdjhdkhse} and defining $N^{(k)}=-A^{(k)} W^{(k),T} B^{(k),-1}$ as in Lemma \ref{lemfdhgdf}, we have
$R^{(k-1,k)}= \bar{\pi}^{(k-1,k)}+ \bar{\pi}^{(k-1,k)}N^{(k)} W^{(k)}$, which leads to
$\|R^{(k-1,k)}\|_2 \leq \|\bar{\pi}^{(k-1,k)}\|_2 (1+ \|N^{(k)}\|_2 \|W^{(k)}\|_2)$.
Using Lemma \ref{lemfdhgdf} and \eqref{eqdihduhuq2he} we obtain that $\lambda_{\max}(N^{(k),T}N^{(k)})\leq \big(1+C \lambda_{\max}(\pi^{(k,k-1)}\pi^{(k-1,k)}) H^{d}\big)/\lambda_{\min}(W^{(k)} W^{(k),T})$ and therefore $\|N^{(k)}\|_2 \leq C H^{-d}$. Summarizing we have obtained (5).
(6), (7), (8) and (11) follow from Theorem \ref{thmuuhiuhddu} and in particular \eqref{eqkhiduhde2df7d}, \eqref{eqjgjhdjghgfhgdy} and \eqref{eqkhiduhdf7d}. See \eqref{eqcond1} and the proof of Theorem \ref{thmodhehiudhehd} for (9) and (10).
\end{proof}
We will also need the following lemma.
\begin{Lemma}\label{lemfyfyfyvh}
Let $k\in \{1,\ldots,q-1\}$ and let $R$ be the $\mathcal{I}^{(k)}\times \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}$ matrix defined by and $R_{i,j}=0$ for $j \in i^{\rho_k,k+1}$ and $R_{i,j}=R_{i,j}^{(k,k+1)}$ for $j \in \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}/i^{\rho_k,k+1}$. It holds true that $\|R\|_2 \leq C H^{d/2} e^{- \rho_k/C }$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
Observe that $\|R\|_2^2 \leq |\mathcal{I}^{(k)}| \max_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}}\sum_{j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}/i^{\rho_k,k+1}} |R_{i,j}^{(k,k+1)}|^2$ with $|\mathcal{I}^{(k)}|\leq C H_k^{-d}$.
Let $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$. Using Theorem \ref{eqhjgjhgjgjg} and Cauchy-Schwartz inequality we have $|R_{i,j}^{(k,k+1)}|\leq \|\psi^{(k)}_i\|_{L^2(\tau_j^{(k+1)})} \|\phi_j^{(k+1)}\|_{L^2(\tau_j^{(k+1)})}$. Therefore
$\sum_{j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}/i^{\rho_k,k+1}} |R_{i,j}^{(k,k+1)}|^2 \leq C H_{k+1}^d \sum_{j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}/i^{\rho_k,k+1}} \|\psi^{(k)}_i\|_{L^2(\tau_j^{(k+1)})}^2$.
Observe that $\sum_{j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}/i^{\rho_k,k+1}} \|\psi^{(k)}_i\|_{L^2(\tau_j^{(k)})}^2=\sum_{s\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}/i^{\rho_k}} \|\psi^{(k)}_i\|_{L^2(\tau_s^{(k)})}^2$. Since $\int_{\tau_s^{(k)}}\psi^{(k)}_i =0$ for $s\not=i$ we obtain
from Poincar\'{e}'s inequality that $\|\psi^{(k)}_i\|_{L^2(\tau_s)}\leq C \|\nabla \psi^{(k)}_i\|_{L^2(\tau_s^{(k)})} H_k $. Therefore
$\sum_{j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}/i^{\rho_k,k+1}} |R_{i,j}^{(k,k+1)}|^2 \leq C H_{k+1}^d H_k^2 \sum_{s\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}/i^{\rho_k}} \|\nabla \psi^{(k)}_i\|_{L^2(\tau_s^{(k)})}^2$.
Using Theorem \ref{thm:expdecay} we obtain that\\ $\sum_{s\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}/i^{\rho_k}} \|\nabla \psi^{(k)}_i\|_{L^2(\tau_s^{(k)})}^2 \leq C e^{-C^{-1} \rho_k} \|\psi_i^{(k)}\|_a^2$. Using \eqref{eqgguguyg6} we have $\|\psi_i^{(k)}\|_a^2\leq C H_k^{-d-2}$, therefore
$\sum_{j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}/i^{\rho_k,k+1}} |R_{i,j}^{(k,k+1)}|^2 \leq C H^d e^{-C^{-1} \rho_k}$.
\end{proof}
Let us now prove Theorem \ref{thmerrorpropagation}.
We obtain by induction (using the constraints in \eqref{eqpsiikloc}) that for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ and $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$, $\psi_i^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ satisfies the constraints of \eqref{eq:dfddeytfewdaisq}. Moreover \eqref{eq:hdkhdkjh33e} implies that if $\psi$ satisfies the constraints of \eqref{eq:dfddeytfewdaisq} then
$\|\psi\|_a^2= \|\psi_i^{(k)}\|_a^2+\|\psi- \psi_i^{(k)}\|_a^2$.
Therefore, for $k\in \{2,\ldots,q-1\}$, $\psi_i^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ is also the minimizer of $\|\psi- \psi_i^{(k)}\|_a$ over functions $\psi$ of the form $\psi=\sum_{j \in i^{\rho_k,k+1}} c_j \psi_j^{(k+1),{\rm loc}}$ satisfying the constraints of \eqref{eqpsiikloc}. Thus, writing $\psi^*:= \sum_{j \in i^{\rho_k,k+1}} R_{i,j}^{(k,k+1)} \psi_j^{(k+1),{\rm loc}} $, we have (since $\psi^*$ satisfies the constraints of \eqref{eqpsiikloc})
$\| \psi_i^{(k),{\rm loc}}-\psi_i^{(k)}\|_a\leq \| \psi^*-\psi_i^{(k)}\|_a$. Write
$\psi_1:= \sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}} R_{i,j}^{(k,k+1)} \psi_j^{(k+1),{\rm loc}} $ and $\psi_2:=\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}/i^{\rho_k,k+1}} R_{i,j}^{(k,k+1)} \psi_j^{(k+1),{\rm loc}}$.
Observing that $\psi^*=\psi_1-\psi_2$ we deduce that $\| \psi_i^{(k),{\rm loc}}-\psi_i^{(k)}\|_a^2 \leq 2 \| \psi_1-\psi_i^{(k)}\|_a^2 + 2 \| \psi_2\|_a^2$ and after summing over $i$,
$\big(\mathcal{E}(k)\big)^2\leq 2(I_1+I_2)$ with $I_1= \sum_{i \in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} \|\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}} R_{i,j}^{(k,k+1)} (\psi_j^{(k+1)}-\psi_j^{(k+1),{\rm loc}})\|_a^2$
and $I_2=\sum_{i \in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} \|\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}/i^{\rho_k,k+1}} R_{i,j}^{(k,k+1)} \psi_j^{(k+1),{\rm loc}}\|_a^2$.
Writing $S$ the $\mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}\times \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}$ symmetric positive matrix with entries $S_{i,j}=\<\psi_i^{(k+1)}-\psi_i^{(k+1),{\rm loc}},\psi_j^{(k+1)}-\psi_j^{(k+1),{\rm loc}}\>_a$, note that $I_1=\operatorname{Trace}[R^{(k,k+1)}S R^{(k+1,k)}]$. Writing $S^\frac{1}{2}$ the matrix square root of $S$, observe that for a matrix $U$, using the cyclic property of the trace, $\operatorname{Trace}[U S U^T]=\operatorname{Trace}[S^\frac{1}{2} U^T U S^\frac{1}{2}]\leq \lambda_{\max}(U^T U) \operatorname{Trace}[S]$, which (observing that $\operatorname{Trace}[S]=(\mathcal{E}(k+1))^2$ and $\lambda_{\max}(U^T U)=\|U\|_2^2$) implies
$I_1 \leq \|R^{(k,k+1)}\|_2^2 \big(\mathcal{E}(k+1)\big)^2$. Therefore (using Lemma \ref{lembase}) we have $\sqrt{I_1} \leq C H^{\frac{d}{2}} \mathcal{E}(k+1)$.
Let us now bound $I_2$. Let $R$ be defined as in Lemma \ref{lemfyfyfyvh}. Noting that $\<\psi_i^{(k+1),{\rm loc}},\psi_j^{(k+1),{\rm loc}}\>_a=A^{(k+1),{\rm loc}}_{i,j}$ we have (as above)
$I_2=\operatorname{Trace}[R A^{(k+1),{\rm loc}} R^T]\leq \lambda_{\max}(R^T R) \operatorname{Trace}[A^{(k+1),{\rm loc}}]$. Summarizing and using Lemma \ref{lemfyfyfyvh} we deduce that
$\mathcal{E}(k)\leq C H^{\frac{d}{2}} \mathcal{E}(k+1)+ C H^{\frac{d}{2}} e^{-\rho_{k}/C} \sqrt{\operatorname{Trace}[A^{(k+1),{\rm loc}}]}$. Observing that
$\sqrt{\operatorname{Trace}[A^{(k+1),{\rm loc}}]}\leq \mathcal{E}(k+1)+\sqrt{\operatorname{Trace}[A^{(k+1)}]}$ and using $\operatorname{Trace}[A^{(k+1)}]\leq C H_{k+1}^{-d} \max_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}}\|\psi_i^{(k+1)}\|_{a}^2 $
and (Lemma \ref{lem:dihidue23}) $\|\psi_i^{(k+1)}\|_a \leq C H_{k+1}^{-\frac{d}{2}-1}$,
we conclude the proof of the theorem.
\end{proof}
Let $u^{(1),{\rm loc}}$ be the finite element solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar} in $\mathfrak{V}^{(1),{\rm loc}}:=\operatorname{span}\{\psi_j^{(k),{\rm loc}}\mid j\in \mathcal{I}^{(1)}\}$.
For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$, let $W^{(k)}$ be defined as in Construction \ref{const1} or Construction \ref{const2}.
For $i\in \mathcal{J}^{(k)}$, let $\chi^{(k),{\rm loc}}_i:=\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} W_{i,j}^{(k)} \psi_j^{(k),{\rm loc}}$.
For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ let $u^{(k),{\rm loc}}-u^{(k-1),{\rm loc}}$ be the finite element solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar} in $\mathfrak{W}^{(k),{\rm loc}}:=\operatorname{span}\{\chi_j^{(k),{\rm loc}}\mid j\in \mathcal{J}^{(k)}\}$.
For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$, write $u^{(k),{\rm loc}}:=u^{(1),{\rm loc}}+\sum_{j=2}^k (u^{(j),{\rm loc}}-u^{(j-1),{\rm loc}})$.
Let $B^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ be the $\mathcal{J}^{(k)}\times \mathcal{J}^{(k)}$ matrix defined by $B^{(k),{\rm loc}}_{i,j}:=\<\chi^{(k),{\rm loc}}_i,\chi^{(k),{\rm loc}}_j\>_a$.
Observe that $B^{(k),{\rm loc}}= W^{(k)}A^{(k),{\rm loc}}W^{(k),T}$.
Write for $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$, $\mathcal{E}(k,\chi):=\big(\sum_{j\in \mathcal{J}^{(k)}} \|\chi_j^{(k)}-\chi_j^{(k),{\rm loc}}\|_a^2\big)^\frac{1}{2}$. The following theorem allows
us to control the effect of the localization error on the approximation of the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar}.
\begin{Theorem}\label{thmdhdjh3}
It holds true that for $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ (1) $\mathcal{E}(k,\chi) \leq C H^{-d/2}\mathcal{E}(k)$. Furthermore for $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ and $\mathcal{E}(k,\chi)\leq C^{-1} H^{-k (1+d/2)+1+d}$ we have\\ (2) $\operatorname{Cond}(B^{(k),{\rm loc}})\leq C H^{-2-2d}$, and (3) $\|u^{(k)}-u^{(k-1)}-(u^{(k),{\rm loc}}-u^{(k-1),{\rm loc}})\|_a \leq$\\$ C \mathcal{E}(k,\chi) \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}
H^{k (1+d/2)-3d-3}$. Similarly for $\mathcal{E}(1)\leq C^{-1}H^{-d/2} $, we have\\ (4) $\operatorname{Cond}(A^{(1),{\rm loc}})\leq C H^{-2}$, and (5)
$\|u^{(1)}-u^{(1),{\rm loc}}\|_a \leq C \mathcal{E}(1) \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)} H^{-2+d/2}$.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
We will need the following lemma.
\begin{Lemma}\label{lemshgjhgdhg3e}
Let $\chi_1,\ldots,\chi_m$ be linearly independent elements of $H^1_0(\Omega)$. Let $\chi_1',\ldots,\chi_m'$ be another set of linearly independent elements of $H^1_0(\Omega)$. Write $\mathcal{E}:=\big(\sum_{i=1}^m \|\chi_i-\chi_i'\|_a^2\big)^\frac{1}{2}$. Let $B$ (resp. $B'$) be the $m\times m$ matrix defined by
$B_{i,j}=\<\chi_i,\chi_j\>_a$ (resp. $B_{i,j}'=\<\chi_i',\chi_j'\>_a$). Let $u_m$ (resp. $u_m'$) be the solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar} in $\operatorname{span}\{\chi_i\mid i=1,\ldots,m\}$ (resp. $\operatorname{span}\{\chi_i'\mid i=1,\ldots,m\})$. It holds true that for $\mathcal{E} \leq \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(B)} /2$ (1) $\operatorname{Cond}(B')\leq 8 \operatorname{Cond}(B)$ (2)
$\|B-B'\|_2 \leq 3 \sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(B)} \mathcal{E}$ (3) $\|B^{-1}-(B')^{-1}\|_2 \leq 12 \sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(B)} \big(\lambda_{\min}(B)\big)^{-2} \mathcal{E}$ and (4)
$\|u_m-u_m'\|_a\leq C \mathcal{E} \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)} \frac{\operatorname{Cond}(B)}{\sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(B)}}$.
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
For (1) observe that $\sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(B')}=\sup_{|x|=1}\|\sum_{i=1}^m x_i \chi_i'\|_a\leq \sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(B)}+ \mathcal{E}$ and $\sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(B')}=\inf_{|x|=1}\|\sum_{i=1}^m x_i \chi_i'\|_a\geq \sqrt{\lambda_{\min}(B)}
- \mathcal{E}$. For (2) observe that for $x,y\in \mathbb{R}^m$ with $|x|=|y|=1$ we have $y^T(B-B')x=\<\sum_{i=1}^m y_i (\chi_i-\chi_i'),\sum_{i=1}^m x_i \chi_i\>_a-\<\sum_{i=1}^m y_i \chi_i',\sum_{i=1}^m x_i (\chi_i'-\chi_i)\>_a\leq (\sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(B')}+\sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(B)})\mathcal{E}$.
(3) follows from (2) and $\|B^{-1}-(B')^{-1}\|_2 \leq \|B-B'\|_2/\big(\lambda_{\min}(B) \lambda_{\min}(B')\big)$.
For (4) observe that $u_m=\sum_{i=1}^m w_i\chi_i$ (resp. $u_m'=\sum_{i=1}^m w_i'\chi_i'$) where $w=B^{-1} b$ with $b_i=\int_{\Omega} g \chi_i$ (resp. $w'=(B')^{-1} b'$ with $b_i'=\int_{\Omega} g \chi_i'$). Therefore $\|u_m-u_m'\|_a\leq |w| \mathcal{E}+|w-w'|\sqrt{\lambda_{\max}(B)}$. $w-w'=B^{-1}(b-b')-B^{-1}(B-B')w'$ leads to
$|w-w'|\leq C (\|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}\mathcal{E} +\|B-B'\|_2 |w'|)/\lambda_{\min}(B)$. Using (2),
$\lambda_{\min}(B) |w|^2\leq \|\sum_{i=1}^m w_i\chi_i\|_a^2 \leq \|u\|_a^2 \leq C \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}^2$, and $\lambda_{\min}(B') |w'|^2\leq C \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}^2$ we conclude the proof of (4) after simplification.
\end{proof}
Let us now prove Theorem \ref{thmdhdjh3}.
Using $\chi_j^{(k)}-\chi_j^{(k),{\rm loc}}=\sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} W^{(k)}_{j,i} (\psi_i^{(k)}-\psi_i^{(k),{\rm loc}})$ and noting that $W^{(k)}_{j,i}=0$ for $i^{(k-1)}\not=j^{(k-1)}$ we have
$\big(\mathcal{E}(k,\chi)\big)^2 \leq \sum_{j\in \mathcal{J}^{(k)}}$\\ $\big(\sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} (W^{(k)}_{j,i})^2 \sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}, i^{(k-1)}=j^{(k-1)}} \|\psi_i^{(k)}-\psi_i^{(k),{\rm loc}}\|_a^2\big)$. Therefore,
$\big(\mathcal{E}(k,\chi)\big)^2 \leq$\\ $\big(\mathcal{E}(k)\big)^2 \max_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}}m_i \max_{j\in \mathcal{J}^{(k)}} \sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} (W^{(k)}_{j,i})^2 $.
Observing that (see \eqref{eqddkhjji})\\ $\max_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}}m_i \leq 1/(H \delta)^d$ and $\sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} (W^{(k)}_{j,i})^2 \leq \lambda_{\max}(W^{(k)}W^{(k),T})\leq 3$ (see Lemma \ref{lembase}) we conclude that (1) holds true with $C=(3/\delta^d)^\frac{1}{2}$. (2) and (3) are a direct application of lemmas \ref{lemshgjhgdhg3e} and \ref{lembase}. For (3), observe that
$u^{(k)}-u^{(k-1)}$ (resp. $u^{(k),{\rm loc}}-u^{(k-1),{\rm loc}}$) is the finite element solution of \eqref{eqn:scalar} in $\mathfrak{W}^{(k)}$ (resp. $\mathfrak{W}^{(k),{\rm loc}}:=\operatorname{span}\{\chi_j^{(k),{\rm loc}}\mid j\in \mathcal{J}^{(k)}\}$). The proof of (4) and (5) is similar to that of (2) and (3).
\end{proof}
\begin{Theorem}\label{thmdjjuud}
Let $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$. We have, $\mathcal{E}(k)\leq C \sum_{j=k}^q e^{-\rho_{j}/C} C^{j-k}H^{-\frac{d}{2}+k\frac{d}{2}-j3\frac{d}{2}}$.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem \ref{thmerrorpropagation}, for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q-1\}$, we have
$\mathcal{E}(k)\leq a_k+b_k \mathcal{E}(k+1)$ with $a_k=C e^{-\rho_{k}/C} H^{\frac{d}{2}-(k+1)(d+1)}$ and $b_k=C H^{-\frac{d}{2}}$. Therefore we obtain by induction that
$\mathcal{E}(k) \leq a_k + b_k a_{k+1}+ b_k b_{k+1} a_{k+2}+\cdots + b_k \cdots b_{q-2}a_{q-1}+ b_k \cdots b_{q-1} \mathcal{E}(q)$.
Using Theorem \ref{thm:hieuhdds} we have $\mathcal{E}(q)\leq C H^{-d/2-q(2+d/2)}e^{-\rho_q/C}$ and obtain the result after simplification.
\end{proof}
\begin{Theorem}\label{tmshjgeydg}
Let $\epsilon \in (0,1)$. It holds true that if $\rho_k\geq C \big((1+\frac{1}{\ln(1/H)})\ln \frac{1}{H^k}+\ln \frac{1}{\epsilon}\big)$ for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ then (1) for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ we have
$\|u^{(k)} - u^{(k),{\rm loc}}\|_a \leq \epsilon \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}$\\ and $\|u - u^{(k),{\rm loc}}\|_a \leq C (H^k+\epsilon) \|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}$ (2) $\operatorname{Cond}(A^{(1),{\rm loc}})\leq C H^{-2}$, and for $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ we have (3)
$\operatorname{Cond}(B^{(k),{\rm loc}})\leq C H^{-2-2d}$ and (4) $\|u^{(k)}-u^{(k-1)}-(u^{(k),{\rm loc}}-u^{(k-1),{\rm loc}})\|_a \leq \frac{\epsilon}{2 k^2} \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}$.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
Theorems \ref{thmgugyug0} and \ref{thmdhdjh3} imply that the results of Theorem \ref{tmshjgeydg} hold true if for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$
$\mathcal{E}(k) \leq C^{-1} H^{-k (1+d/2)+7d/2+3} \epsilon/k^2$. Using Theorem \ref{thmdjjuud} we deduce that the results of Theorem \ref{tmshjgeydg} hold true if for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ and $k\leq j \leq q$ we have $C e^{-\rho_{j}/C} C^{j-k}H^{-\frac{d}{2}+k\frac{d}{2}-j3\frac{d}{2}} \leq H^{-k (1+d/2)+7d/2+3} \epsilon/(k^2 j^2)$. We conclude after simplification.
\end{proof}
\section{The algorithm, its implementation and complexity}\label{secnumimple}
\subsection{The initialisation of the algorithm}\label{subsechierarlocnested}
To describe the practical implementation of the algorithm we consider the (finite-element) discretized version of \eqref{eqn:scalar}. Let $\mathcal{T}_h$ be a regular fine mesh discretization of $\Omega$ of resolution $h$ with $0<h \ll 1$. Let $\mathcal{N}$ be the set of interior nodes $z_i$ and $N=|\mathcal{N}|$ be the number of interior nodes ($N= \mathcal{O}(h^{-d})$) of $\mathcal{T}_h$. Write $(\varphi_i)_{i\in \mathcal{N}}$ a set of regular nodal basis elements (of $H^1_0(\Omega)$) constructed from $\mathcal{T}_h$ such that
for each $i\in \mathcal{N}$, ${\operatorname{support}}(\varphi_i)\subset B(z_i, C_0 h)$ and for $y\in \mathbb{R}^N$,
\begin{equation}\label{eqhhgfff65f}
\ubar{\gamma} h^d |y|^2 \leq \|\sum_{i\in \mathcal{N}} y_i \varphi_i \|_{L^2(\Omega)}^2 \leq \bar{\gamma} h^d |y|^2
\end{equation}
for some constants $\ubar{\gamma}, \bar{\gamma}, C_0\approx \mathcal{O}(1)$. In addition to \eqref{eqhhgfff65f} the regularity of the finite elements is used to ensure the availability of the inverse Poincar\'{e} inequality
\begin{equation}\label{eqinvpoincdiscrete}
\|\nabla v\|_{L^2(\Omega)}\leq C_1 h^{-1} \| v\|_{L^2(\Omega)}
\end{equation}
for $v\in \operatorname{span}\{\varphi_i\mid i\in \mathcal{N}\}$ and some constant $C_1 \approx \mathcal{O}(1)$, used to generalize the proof of Theorem \ref{thmuuhiuhddu} to the discrete case.
Given $g=\sum_{i\in \mathcal{N}} g_i \varphi_i$ we want to find $u\in \operatorname{span}\{\varphi_i \mid i\in \mathcal{N}\}$ such that for all $j\in \mathcal{N}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eqhuiuhiuhuiu}
\<\varphi_j,u\>_a=\int_{\Omega} \varphi_j g \text{ for all } j\in \mathcal{N}
\end{equation}
In practical applications
$a$ is naturally assumed to be piecewise constant over the fine mesh (e.g. of constant value in each triangle or square of $\mathcal{T}_h$) and one purpose of the algorithm is the fast resolution of the linear system \eqref{eqhuiuhiuhuiu} up to accuracy $\epsilon \in (0,1)$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./fig/tau}
\caption{The (fine) mesh $\mathcal{T}_h$, $a$ (in $\log_{10}$ scale) and $u$.}\label{fig:tau}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{Example}\label{ex1}
We will illustrate the presentation of the algorithm with a numerical example in which $\mathcal{T}_h$ is a square grid of mesh size $h=(1+2^{q})^{-1}$ with $q=6$ and $64\times 64$ interior nodes (Figure \ref{fig:tau}). $a$ is piecewise constant on each square of $\mathcal{T}_h$ and given by
$a(x)=\prod_{k=1}^6 \Big(1+0.5 \cos\big(2^k \pi (\frac{i}{2^q+1}+\frac{j}{2^q+1})\big)\Big) \Big(1+0.5 \sin\big(2^k \pi (\frac{j}{2^q+1}-3\frac{i}{2^q+1})\big)\Big)$
for $x\in [\frac{i}{2^q+1},\frac{i+1}{2^q+1})\times [\frac{j}{2^q+1},\frac{j+1}{2^q+1})$. The contrast of $a$ (i.e., when $a$ is scalar, the ratio between its maximum and minimum value) is $1866$. The finite-element discretization \eqref{eqhuiuhiuhuiu} is obtained using
continuous nodal basis elements $\varphi_i$ spanned by $\{1,x_1,x_2,x_1 x_2\}$ in each square of $\mathcal{T}_h$. Writing $z_i$ the positions of the interior nodes of $\mathcal{T}_h$, we choose, for our numerical example, $g(x)=\sum_{i\in \mathcal{N}} \big(\cos(3z_{i,1}+z_{i,2})+\sin(3z_{i,2})+\sin(7z_{i,1}-5z_{i,2})\big) \varphi_i(x)$.
\end{Example}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./fig/Pi}
\caption{$\mathcal{I}^{(1)}$, $\mathcal{I}^{(2)}$ and $\mathcal{I}^{(3)}$.}\label{fig:Pi}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The first step of the proposed algorithm is the construction of the index tree $\mathcal{I}$ of Definition \ref{defmulires} describing the domain decomposition of Definition \ref{defmulires}. To ensure a uniform bound on the condition numbers of the stiffness matrices \eqref{eqjgfytfjhyyyg} one must select the resolutions $H_k$ to form a geometric sequence (or simply such that $H_{k-1}/H_k$ is uniformly bounded), i.e. $H_k=H^k$ for some $H\in (0,1)$ {\it (for our numerical example $H=1/2$, $q=6$ and we identify $\mathcal{I}^{(k)}$ as the indices of the interior nodes of a square grid of resolution $(1+2^{k})^{-1}$ as illustrated in
Figure \ref{fig:Pi})}. In this construction $H^q=h$ corresponds to the resolution of the fine mesh and each subset $\tau_i^{(q)}$ ($i\in \mathcal{I}^{(q)}$) contains one and only one element of $\mathcal{N}$ (interior node of the fine mesh). Using this one to one correspondence we use the elements of $\mathcal{I}=\mathcal{I}^{q}$ to (re)label the nodal elements $(\varphi_i)_{i\in \mathcal{N}}$ as $(\varphi_i)_{i\in \mathcal{I}}$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./fig/phi}
\caption{The functions $\phi^{k}_i$ with $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ and $q=6$.}\label{fig:phi}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The measurement functions $(\phi_i^{(k)})_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}}$ are then identified (1) by selecting $\phi_i^{(q)}=\varphi_i$ for $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(q)}$ and (2)
via the nested aggregation \eqref{eq:eigdeiud3dd} of the nodal elements (as commonly done in AMG), i.e. $\phi^{(k)}_i=\sum_{j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k+1)}}\pi^{(k,k+1)}_{i,j} \phi^{(k+1)}_j=\sum_{j \in i^{(k,k+1)}} \phi^{(k+1)}_j$ for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q-1\}$ and $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$.
\begin{Remark}
We refer to Figure \ref{fig:phi} for an illustration of these measurement functions for our numerical example.
Note that the support of each $\phi^{(k)}_i$ is only approximatively (and not exactly) $\tau^{(k)}_i$ and that the $\phi^{(k)}_i$ are only approximate set functions (and not exact ones). This does not affect the design, accuracy and localization of the algorithm presented here because the frame inequalities \eqref{eqgam1}, and the Poincar\'e inequalities $\|\sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}}x_i \phi_i^{(k)}\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}\leq C\,H^{k-1}\|\phi_i^{(k)}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}$ for $x\in \operatorname{Ker}(\pi^{(k-1,k)})$, hold true. Indeed, \eqref{eqhhgfff65f} and Construction \ref{defmulires} imply that the frame inequalities \eqref{eqgam1} with $\bar{\gamma}_k\leq \bar{\gamma}\delta^{-d}$ and $\ubar{\gamma}_k\geq \ubar{\gamma}\delta^{d}$, and the Poincar\'e inequalities are regularity/homogeneity conditions on the mesh and the aggregated elements. Although a fine mesh has been used to facilitate the presentation of the algorithm, the proposed method is meshless (it only requires the specification of the basis elements $(\varphi_i)_{i\in \mathcal{I}}$).
\end{Remark}
\begin{algorithm}[!ht]
\caption{Exact Gamblet transform/solve.}\label{gambletsolve}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE\label{step1} For $i,j\in \mathcal{I}^{(q)}$, $M_{i,j}=\int_{\Omega} \varphi_i \varphi_j$ \COMMENT{Mass matrix}
\STATE\label{step2} For $i,j\in \mathcal{I}^{(q)}$, $A_{i,j}=\int_{\Omega} (\nabla \varphi_i)^T a \nabla \varphi_j$ \COMMENT{Stiffness matrix}
\STATE\label{step2a} Compute $M^{-1}$ \COMMENT{Mass matrix inversion}
\STATE\label{step3} For $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(q)}$, $\psi^{(q)}_i=\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}^{(q)}} M^{-1}_{i,j} \varphi_j$ \COMMENT{Level $q$ gamblets}
\STATE\label{step4} For $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(q)}$, $g^{(q)}_i=g_i$ \COMMENT{$g^{(q)}_i=\int_{\Omega} \psi_i^{(q)} g$ with $g=\sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(q)}} g_i \varphi_i$}
\STATE\label{step5} For $i,j\in \mathcal{I}^{(q)}$, $A^{(q)}_{i,j}= \int_{\Omega} (\nabla \psi_i^{(q)})^T a \nabla \psi_j^{(q)}$ \COMMENT{$A^{(q)}=M^{-1} A M^{-1,T}$}
\FOR{$k=q$ to $2$}
\STATE\label{step7} $B^{(k)}= W^{(k)}A^{(k)}W^{(k),T}$ \COMMENT{Eq.~\eqref{eqjgfytfjhyyyg}}
\STATE\label{step8} $w^{(k)}=B^{(k),-1} W^{(k)} g^{(k)}$ \COMMENT{Eq.~\eqref{eqsdjoejddi1}}
\STATE\label{step9} For $i\in \mathcal{J}^{(k)}$, $\chi^{(k)}_i=\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} W_{i,j}^{(k)} \psi_j^{(k)}$ \COMMENT{Eq.~\eqref{eqjkhdkdh}}
\STATE\label{step10} $u^{(k)}-u^{(k-1)}=\sum_{i\in \mathcal{J}^{(k)}}w^{(k)}_i \chi^{(k)}_i$ \COMMENT{Thm.~\ref{thddwedmgugyug}}
\STATE\label{step11} $ D^{(k,k-1)}= -B^{(k),-1}W^{(k)}A^{(k)}\bar{\pi}^{(k,k-1)}$ \COMMENT{Eq.~\eqref{eqdkdjhdkhse}}
\STATE\label{step12} $R^{(k-1,k)}=\bar{\pi}^{(k-1,k)}+D^{(k-1,k)}W^{(k)}$ \COMMENT{Eq.~\eqref{eqhuhiddeuv}}
\STATE\label{step13} $A^{(k-1)}= R^{(k-1,k)}A^{(k)}R^{(k,k-1)}$ \COMMENT{Eq.~\eqref{eqhuhiuv}}
\STATE\label{step14} For $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}$, $\psi^{(k-1)}_i=\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} R_{i,j}^{(k-1,k)} \psi_j^{(k)}$ \COMMENT{Eq.~\eqref{eq:ftfytftfx}}
\STATE\label{step15} $g^{(k-1)}=R^{(k-1,k)} g^{(k)}$ \COMMENT{Eq.~\eqref{eqyguugy6t}}
\ENDFOR
\STATE\label{step16} $ U^{(1)}=A^{(1),-1}g^{(1)}$ \COMMENT{Eq.~\eqref{eqsdjoejddi2}}
\STATE\label{step17} $u^{(1)}=\sum_{i \in \mathcal{I}^{(1)}} U^{(1)}_i \psi^{(1)}_i$ \COMMENT{Thm.~\ref{thddwedmgugyug}}
\STATE\label{step18} $u=u^{(1)}+(u^{(2)}-u^{(1)})+\cdots+(u^{(q)}-u^{(q-1)})$ \COMMENT{Thm.~\ref{thmgugyug2} with $u=u^{(q)}$}
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Exact gamblet transform and multiresolution operator inversion}
The near-linear complexity of the proposed multi-resolution algorithm (Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve}) is based on three properties (i) nesting (ii) uniformly bounded condition numbers (iii) localization/truncation based on exponential decay. Truncation/localization levels/subsets are, a priori, functions of the desired level of accuracy $\epsilon \in (0,1)$ in approximating the solution of \eqref{eqhuiuhiuhuiu} and to distinguish the implementation of localization/truncation (and its consequences)
we will first describe this algorithm in its \emph{zero approximation error version} (i.e. $\epsilon=0$ and without using localization/truncation, Algorithm \ref{gambletsolve}). Although this \emph{error-free} version (Algorithm \ref{gambletsolve}) performs the decomposition of the resolution of the linear system \eqref{eqhuiuhiuhuiu} (whose condition number is of the order of $h^{-d-2}\gg 1$) into the resolutions of a nesting of linear systems with uniformly bounded condition numbers, it is not of near linear complexity due to the presence of dense matrices. Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve} achieves near-linear complexity by truncating/localizing the dense matrices appearing in Algorithm \ref{gambletsolve} ($\epsilon$-accuracy is ensured using the off-diagonal exponential decay of these dense matrices).
Let us now describe Algorithm \ref{gambletsolve} in detail. Lines \ref{step1} and \ref{step2} correspond to the computation of the (sparse) mass and stiffness matrices of \eqref{eqhuiuhiuhuiu}. Line \ref{step3} corresponds to the calculation of level $q$ gamblets $\psi_i^{(q)}$ defined as the minimizer of $\|\psi\|_a$ subject to $\int_{\Omega} \psi \phi_j^{(q)}=\delta_{i,j}$ and $\psi \in \operatorname{span}\{\varphi_l \mid l \in \mathcal{I}\}$, note that since the number of constraints is equal to the number of degrees of freedom of $\psi$, and since $\int_{\Omega} \varphi_l \phi_j^{(q)}=M_{l,j}$, level $q$ gamblets do not depend on $a$ and are obtained by inverting the mass matrix in Line \ref{step2a} (note that by \eqref{eqhhgfff65f}, the mass matrix is of $\mathcal{O}(1)$ condition number).
Although not done here, one can also initialize the algorithm (and its fast version) with $\psi_i^{(q)}=\varphi_i$ (which is equivalent to using $\sum_{j\in \mathcal{I}^{(q)}}M^{-1}_{i,j}\varphi_j^{(q)}$ as level $q$ measurement functions).
Line \ref{step4} corresponds to initialization of the vector $g^{(q)}$ introduced above \eqref{eqyguugy6t}. Line \ref{step5} corresponds to the initialization of the stiffness matrix $A^{(q)}$ introduced in \eqref{eq:iwihud3de}.
The core of the algorithm is the nested computation performed (iteratively from $k=q$ down to $k=2$) in lines \ref{step7} to \ref{step15}.
Note that this nested computation takes $A^{(k)}, g^{(k)}$ and $(\psi_i^{(k)})_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}}$ as inputs and produces (1)
$A^{(k-1)}, g^{(k-1)}$ and $(\psi_i^{(k-1)})_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}}$ as outputs for the next iteration and (2) the subband $u^{(k)}-u^{(k-1)}$ of the solution and subband gamblets $(\chi_i^{(k)})_{i\in \mathcal{J}^{(k)}}$ (which, do not need to be explicitly computed/stored since Line \ref{step10} is equivalent to
$u^{(k)}-u^{(k-1)}=\sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}}(W^{(k),T} w^{(k)})_i \psi^{(k)}_i$). Note also that the gamblets $(\psi_i^{(k)})_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}}$ and $(\chi_i^{(k)})_{i\in \mathcal{J}^{(k)}}$ can be stored and displayed using the hierarchical structure \eqref{eq:ftfytftfx}. Through this section and the remaining part of the paper we assume that the matrices $W^{(k)}$ are obtained as in Construction \ref{const1} or \ref{const2}.
Note that the number of non-zero entries of $\pi^{(k-1,k)}$ and $W^{(k)}$ is $\mathcal{O}( |\mathcal{I}^{(k)}|)$ (proportional to $H^{-k}$ in our numerical example). Lines \ref{step8} corresponds to solving the well conditioned linear system $B^{(k)} w^{(k)}=W^{(k)} g^{(k)}$ and the $|\mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}|$ well conditioned linear systems $B^{(k)} D^{(k,k-1)}=-W^{(k)}A^{(k)}\pi^{(k,k-1)}$. Note that by Theorem \ref{thmodhehiudhehd} the matrices $B^{(k)}$ have uniformly bounded condition numbers and these linear systems can be solved efficiently using iterative methods (such as the Conjugate Gradient method recalled in Subsection \eqref{subseccg}).
$u^{(1)}$ is computed in lines \ref{step17} and \ref{step18} (recall that $A^{(1)}$ is also of uniformly bounded condition number) and the last step of the algorithm, is to obtain $u$ via simple addition of the subband/subscale solution $u^{(1)}$ and $(u^{(k)}-u^{(k-1)})_{2\leq k \leq q}$.
Observe that the operating diagram of Algorithm \ref{gambletsolve} is not a V or W but an inverted pyramid (or a comb).
More precisely, the basis functions $\psi_i^{(k)}$ are computed hierarchically from fine to coarse scales. Furthermore as soon as the elements $\psi_i^{(k)}$ have been computed, they can be applied (independently from the other scales) to the computation of $u^{(k)}-u^{(k-1)}$ (the projection of $u$ onto $\mathfrak{W}^{(k)}$ corresponding to the bandwidth $[H^k,H^{k-1}]$).
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./fig/psi}
\caption{The basis elements $\psi^{k}_i$ with $k\in \{1,\ldots,6\}$.}\label{fig:psi}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./fig/expdecay}
\caption{Exponential Decay.}\label{fig:expdecay}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./fig/chi}
\caption{The basis elements $\psi^{1}_i$ and $\chi^{k}_i$ with $k\in \{2,\ldots,6\}$.}\label{fig:chi}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./fig/conditionnumbers}
\caption{Condition numbers of $A^{(k)}$ and $B^{(k)}$.}\label{fig:conditionnumbers}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./fig/udiff}
\caption{$u^{(1)}$, $u^{(2)}-u^{(1)}$,\ldots, and $u^{(q)}-u^{(q-1)}$.}\label{fig:udiff}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./fig/coeffnormalized}
\caption{The coefficients of $u$ in the expansion $u=\sum_{i} c^{(1)}_i \frac{\psi^{(1)}_i}{\|\psi_i^{(1)}\|_a }+\sum_{k=2}^q \sum_j c^{(k)}_j \frac{\chi^{(k)}_j}{\|\chi_j^{(k)}\|_a }$.}\label{fig:coeffnormalized}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./fig/uk}
\caption{$u^{(1)}$, \ldots, $u^{(q)}$. Relative approximation error in energy norm in $\log_{10}$ scale. Compression of $u$ over the basis functions $\psi_i^{(1)}, \chi_i^{(2)}, \ldots, \chi_i^{(q)}$ by setting $99$\% of the smallest coefficients to zero in the decomposition of Figure \ref{fig:coeffnormalized}.}\label{fig:uk}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{Example}
We refer to figures \ref{fig:psi} and \ref{fig:chi} for an illustration of the gamblets $\psi_i^{(k)}$ and $\chi_j^{(k)}$ corresponding to Example \ref{ex1} with $W^{(k)}$ defined by Construction \ref{const1}. We refer to Figure \ref{fig:expdecay} for an illustration of the exponential decay of the gamblets $\psi_i^{(k)}$.
We refer to Figure \ref{fig:conditionnumbers} for an illustration of the condition numbers of $A^{(k)}$ and $B^{(k)}$ (with $W^{(k)}$ still defined by Construction \ref{const1}). Observe that the bound on the condition numbers of $B^{(k)}$ depends on the contrast and the saturation of that bound occurs for smaller values of $k$ under low contrast. We refer to Figure \ref{fig:udiff} for an illustration of the subband solutions $u^{(1)}, u^{(2)}-u^{(1)},\ldots,u^{(q)}-u^{(q-1)}$ corresponding to Example \ref{ex1}. Observe that these (subband) solutions form a multiresolution decomposition of $u$ as a sum of functions characterising the behavior of $u$ at subscales $[H,1]$, $[H^2,H]$,\ldots,$[H^q,H^{q-1}]$.
Once the components $u^{(1)}$, $u^{(2)}-u^{(1)}$,\ldots, and $u^{(q)}-u^{(q-1)}$ have been computed one obtains, via simple summation, $u^{(1)}$, \ldots, $u^{(q)}$, the finite-element approximation of $u$ at resolutions $H$, $H^2$, \ldots, $H^q$ illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:uk}. As described in Theorem \ref{thmgugyug0} the error of the approximation of $u$ by $u^{(k)}$ is proportional to $H^k$ for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q-1\}$. For $k=q$, as illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:uk}, this approximation error drops down to zero because there is no gap between $H^q$ and the fine mesh (i.e., $\psi^{(q)}_i$ and $\varphi_i$ span the same linear space in the discrete case).
Moreover, as illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:coeffnormalized}, the representation of $u$ in the basis formed by the functions $\frac{\psi^{(1)}_i}{\|\psi_i^{(1)}\|_a}$ and $\frac{\chi^{(k)}_j}{\|\chi_j^{(k)}\|_a}$ is sparse. Therefore, as illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:uk} one can compress $u$, in this basis, by setting the smallest coefficients to zero without loss in energy norm.
\end{Example}
\begin{algorithm}[!ht]
\caption{Fast Gamblet transform/solve.}\label{fastgambletsolve}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE\label{line1} For $i,j\in \mathcal{I}^{(q)}$, $M_{i,j}=\int_{\Omega} \varphi_i \varphi_j$ \COMMENT{$\mathcal{O}(N)$}
\STATE\label{line2} For $i,j\in \mathcal{I}^{(q)}$, $A_{i,j}=\int_{\Omega} (\nabla \varphi_i)^T a \nabla \varphi_j$ \COMMENT{$\mathcal{O}(N)$}
\STATE\label{line2a} $M^{i,\rho_q} M^{-1,\rho_q}_{\cdot,i}=\delta_{\cdot,i}$ \COMMENT{Def.~\ref{deflocinvm}, Thm.~\ref{tmdiscreteaccuracy}, $\mathcal{O}\big(N \rho_q^{d} \ln \max( \frac{1}{\epsilon},q )\big)$}
\STATE\label{line3} For $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(q)}$, $\psi^{(q),{\rm loc}}_i=\sum_{j \in i^{\rho_q}} M^{-1,\rho_q}_{j,i} \varphi_j$ \COMMENT{$\mathcal{O}(N \rho_q^d)$}
\STATE\label{line4} For $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(q)}$, $g^{(q),{\rm loc}}_i=\int_{\Omega} \psi^{(q),{\rm loc}}_i g$ \COMMENT{$\mathcal{O}(N \rho_q^d)$}
\STATE\label{line5} For $i,j\in \mathcal{I}^{(q)}$, $A^{(q),{\rm loc}}_{i,j}= \int_{\Omega} (\nabla \psi_i^{(q),{\rm loc}})^T a \nabla \psi_j^{(q),{\rm loc}}$ \COMMENT{ $\mathcal{O}(N \rho_q^{2d})$}
\FOR{$k=q$ to $2$}
\STATE\label{line7} $B^{(k),{\rm loc}}= W^{(k)}A^{(k),{\rm loc}}W^{(k),T}$ \COMMENT{$\mathcal{O}(|\mathcal{I}^{(k)}| \rho_k^{d})$}
\STATE\label{line8} $ w^{(k),{\rm loc}}= (B^{(k),{\rm loc}})^{-1} W^{(k)} g^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ \COMMENT{Thm.~\ref{tmdiscreteaccuracy}, $\mathcal{O}(|\mathcal{I}^{(k)}| \rho_k^{d} \ln \frac{1}{\epsilon})$}
\STATE\label{line9} For $i\in \mathcal{J}^{(k)}$, $\chi^{(k),{\rm loc}}_i=\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} W_{i,j}^{(k)} \psi_j^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ \COMMENT{$\mathcal{O}(|\mathcal{I}^{(k)}| \rho_k^{d})$}
\STATE\label{line10} $u^{(k),{\rm loc}}-u^{(k-1),{\rm loc}}=\sum_{i\in \mathcal{J}^{(k)}} w^{(k),{\rm loc}}_i \chi^{(k),{\rm loc}}_i$ \COMMENT{$\mathcal{O}(N \rho_k^{d})$}
\STATE\label{line11} $\operatorname{Inv}(B^{(k),{\rm loc}} D^{(k,k-1),{\rm loc}}= -W^{(k)}A^{(k),{\rm loc}}\bar{\pi}^{(k,k-1)},\rho_{k-1})$ \COMMENT{Def.~\ref{defb}, Thm.~\ref{tmdiscreteaccuracy}, $\mathcal{O}(|\mathcal{I}^{(k)}| \rho_{k-1}^{d} \rho_k^d \ln \frac{1}{\epsilon})$}
\STATE\label{line12} $R^{(k-1,k),{\rm loc}}=\bar{\pi}^{(k-1,k)}+D^{(k-1,k),{\rm loc}}W^{(k)}$ \COMMENT{Def.~\ref{defb}, $\mathcal{O}(|\mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}| \rho_{k-1}^{d})$}
\STATE\label{line13} $A^{(k-1),{\rm loc}}= R^{(k-1,k),{\rm loc}}A^{(k),{\rm loc}}R^{(k,k-1),{\rm loc}}$ \COMMENT{ $\mathcal{O}(|\mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}| \rho_{k-1}^{2d} \rho_{k}^{d})$}
\STATE\label{line14} For $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}$, $\psi^{(k-1),{\rm loc}}_i=\sum_{j \in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} R_{i,j}^{(k-1,k),{\rm loc}} \psi_j^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ \COMMENT{$\mathcal{O}(|\mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}| \rho_{k-1}^{d} )$}
\STATE\label{line15} $g^{(k-1),{\rm loc}}=R^{(k-1,k),{\rm loc}} g^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ \COMMENT{$\mathcal{O}(|\mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}| \rho_{k-1}^{d} )$}
\ENDFOR
\STATE\label{line16} $ U^{(1),{\rm loc}}=A^{(1),{\rm loc},-1}g^{(1),{\rm loc}}$ \COMMENT{$\mathcal{O}(|\mathcal{I}^{(1)}| \rho_{1}^{d} \ln \frac{1}{\epsilon})$}
\STATE\label{line17} $u^{(1),{\rm loc}}=\sum_{i \in \mathcal{I}^{(1)}} U^{(1)}_i \psi^{(1)}_i$ \COMMENT{$\mathcal{O}(N \rho_1^{d})$}
\STATE\label{line18} $u^{{\rm loc}}=u^{(1),{\rm loc}}+(u^{(2),{\rm loc}}-u^{(1),{\rm loc}})+\cdots+(u^{(q),{\rm loc}}-u^{(q-1),{\rm loc}})$ \COMMENT{ $\mathcal{O}(N q)$}
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Fast Gamblet transform/solve}
Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve} achieves near linear complexity (1) in approximating the solution of \eqref{eqhuiuhiuhuiu} to a given level of accuracy $\epsilon$ and (2) in performing an approximate Gamblet transform (sufficient to achieve that level of accuracy). This fast algorithm
is obtained by localizing/truncating the linear systems corresponding to lines \ref{line2a} and \ref{line11} in Algorithm \ref{gambletsolve}.
We define these localization/truncation steps as follows. For $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ and $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$ define $i^{\rho}$ as in Subsection \ref{sechierarloc} (i.e. as the subset of indices $j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}$ whose corresponding subdomains $\tau_j^{(k)}$ are at distance at most $H_k \rho$ from $\tau_i^{(k)}$).
\begin{Definition}\label{deflocinvm}
For $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(q)}$, let $M^{(i,\rho_q)}$ be the $i^{\rho_q} \times i^{\rho_q}$ matrix defined by $M^{(i,\rho_q)}_{l,j}=M_{l,j}$ for $l,j\in i^{\rho_q}$. Let $e^{(i,\rho_q)}$ be the $|i^{\rho_q}|$-dimensional vector defined by $e_j^{(i,\rho_q)}=\delta_{j,i}$ for $j\in i^{\rho_q}$. Let $y^{(i,\rho_q)}$ be the $|i^{\rho_q}|$-dimensional vector solution of $M^{(i,\rho_q)} y^{(i,\rho_q)}=e^{(i,\rho_q)}$.
We define the solution $M^{-1,\rho_q}_{\cdot,i}$ of the localized linear system $M^{i,\rho_q} M^{-1,\rho_q}_{\cdot,i}=\delta_{\cdot,i}$ (Line \ref{line2a} of Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve}) as the $i^{\rho_q}$-vector given by $M^{-1,{\rm loc}}_{j,i}= y_j^{(i,\rho_q)}$ for $j\in i^{\rho_q}$.
\end{Definition}
Note that the associated gamblet $\psi^{(q),{\rm loc}}_i$ (Line \ref{line3} of Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve}) is also the solution of the problem of finding $\psi\in \operatorname{span}\{\varphi_j \mid j\in i^{\rho_q}\}$ such that $\int_{\Omega}\psi \varphi_j=\delta_{i,j}$ for $j\in i^{\rho_q}$ (i.e. localizing the computation of the gamblet $\psi_i^{(q)}$ to a subdomain of size $H_q \rho_q$). Line \ref{line4} can be replaced by $g^{(q),{\rm loc}}_i=g_i$ without loss of accuracy ($g^{(q),{\rm loc}}_i=\int_{\Omega} \psi^{(q),{\rm loc}}_i g$ simplifies the presentation of the analysis).
Line \ref{line11} of Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve} is defined in a similar way as follows.
\begin{Definition}\label{defb}
Let $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ and $B$ be the positive definite $\mathcal{J}^{(k)}\times \mathcal{J}^{(k)}$ matrix $B^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ computed in Line \ref{line7} of Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve}.
For $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}$, let $\rho=\rho_{k-1}$ and let $i^\chi$ be the subset of indices $j\in \mathcal{J}^{(k)}$ such that $j^{(k-1)}\in i^{\rho}$ (recall that if $j=(i_1,\ldots,i_k)\in \mathcal{J}^{(k)}$ then $j^{(k-1)}:=(j_1,\ldots,j_{k-1})\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}$).
$B^{(i,\rho)}$ be the $i^{\chi}\times i^{\chi}$ matrix defined by $B^{(i,\rho)}_{l,j}=B_{l,j}$ for $l,j \in i^{\chi}$.
Let $b^{(i,\rho)}$ be the $|i^{\chi}|$-dimensional vector defined by $b_j^{(i,\rho)}=-(W^{(k)}A^{(k),{\rm loc}}\bar{\pi}^{(k,k-1)})_{j,i}$ for $j\in i^{\chi}$. Let $y^{(i,\rho)}$ be the $|i^{\chi}|$-dimensional vector solution of
$B^{(i,\rho)} y^{(i,\rho)}=b^{(i,\rho)}$.
We define the solution $D^{(k,k-1),{\rm loc}}$ of the localized linear system $\operatorname{Inv}(B^{(k),{\rm loc}} D^{(k,k-1),{\rm loc}}= -W^{(k)}A^{(k),{\rm loc}}\bar{\pi}^{(k,k-1)},\rho_{k-1})$
as the $\mathcal{J}^{(k)}\times \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}$ sparse matrix given by $D^{(k,k-1),{\rm loc}}_{j,i}=0$ for $j\not \in i^{\chi}$ and $D^{(k,k-1),{\rm loc}}_{j,i}= y_j^{(i,\rho)}$ for $j\in i^{\chi}$. $D^{(k-1,k),{\rm loc}}$ (Line \ref{line12} of Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve}) is then defined as the transpose of $D^{(k,k-1),{\rm loc}}$.
\end{Definition}
\begin{Remark}\label{rmklocalgfast} Definition \ref{defb} (Line \ref{line7} of Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve}) is equivalent to localizing the computation of each gamblet $\psi_i^{(k-1)}$ to a subdomain of size $H_{k-1} \rho_{k-1}$, i.e., the gamblet $\psi^{(k-1),{\rm loc}}_i$ computed in Line \ref{line14} of Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve} is the solution of (1) the problem of finding $\psi$ in the affine space $\sum_{j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}}\bar{\pi}_{i,j}^{(k-1,k)}\psi_j^{(k),{\rm loc}}+\operatorname{span}\{\chi_j^{(k),{\rm loc}} \mid j^{(k-1)}\in i^{\rho_{k-1}}\}$ such that $\psi$ is $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_a$ orthogonal to $\operatorname{span}\{\chi_j^{(k),{\rm loc}} \mid j^{(k-1)}\in i^{\rho_{k-1}}\}$, and (2)
the problem of minimizing $\|\psi\|_a$ in $\operatorname{span}\{\psi_l^{(k),{\rm loc}} \mid l^{(k-1)}\in i^{\rho_{k-1}}\}$ subject to constraints $\int_{\Omega} \phi_j^{(k-1)} \psi=\delta_{i,j}$ for $j\in i^{\rho_{k-1}}$.
\end{Remark}
\subsection{Complexity vs accuracy of Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve} and choice of the localization radii $\rho_k$}\label{subseccomplexity}
The sizes of the localization radii $\rho_k$ (and therefore the complexity of Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve}) depend on whether Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve} is used as a pre-conditioner (as done with AMG) or as a direct solver.
Although it is natural to expect the complexity of Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve} to be significantly smaller if used as pre-conditioner (since pre-conditioning requires lower accuracy and therefore smaller localization radii) we will restrict our analysis and presentation to using Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve} as a direct solver. Note that, when used as a direct solver, Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve} is parallel both in space (via localization) and in bandwith/subscale (subscales can be computed independently from each other and $\psi^{(k-1),{\rm loc}}_i$ and $u^{(k),{\rm loc}}-u^{(k-1),{\rm loc}}$ can be resolved in parallel).
We will base our analysis on the results of Subsection \ref{sechierarloc} and in particular Theorem \ref{tmshjgeydg}.
Although obtained in a continuous
setting, these results can be generalized to the discrete setting without difficulty. Two small differences are worth mentioning.
(1) In this discrete setting, an alternative approach for obtaining localization error bounds in the first step of the algorithm (the computation of the localized gamblets $\psi_i^{(q),{\rm loc}}$) is to use the exponential decay property of the inverse of symmetric well-conditioned banded matrices \cite{Demko1984}: since $M$ is banded and of uniformly bounded condition number \cite{Demko1984} (see also \cite[Thm~4.10]{Bebendorf:2008}) implies that $M_{i,j}^{-1}$ decays like $\exp\big(-\operatorname{dist}(\tau_i^{(q)},\tau_j^{(q)})/C\big)$ which guarantees that the bound $\mathcal{E}(q)\leq C H^{-d/2-q(2+d/2)}e^{-\rho_q/C}$ (used in Theorem \ref{thmdjjuud}) remains valid in the discrete setting. (2) Since the basis functions $\varphi_i$ are not exact set functions, neither are the resulting aggregates $\phi_i^{(k)}$. This implies that, in the discrete setting, $\int_{\Omega}\psi_i^{(k),{\rm loc}} \phi_j^{(k)}$ is not necessarily equal to zero if $\tau_j^{(k)}$ is adjacent to $S^i_{\rho_k}$ (with $j\not\in i^{\rho_k}$, using the notation of Subsection \ref{sechierarloc}). This, however does not prevent the generalization of the proof because the value of $\int_{\Omega}\psi_i^{(k),{\rm loc}} \phi_j^{(k)}$ (when $\tau_j^{(k)}$ is adjacent to $S^i_{\rho_k}$) can be controlled via the exponential decay of the basis functions (e.g. as done in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:hieuhdds}). We will summarize this generalization in the following theorem (where the constant $C$ depends on the constants $C_1, C_0, \bar{\gamma}$ and $\ubar{\gamma}$ associated with the finite elements $(\varphi_i)$ in \eqref{eqhhgfff65f}, in addition to $d, \Omega, \lambda_{\min}(a), \lambda_{\max}(a), \delta$).
\begin{Theorem}\label{tmdiscrete}
Let $u$ be the solution of the discrete system \eqref{eqhuiuhiuhuiu}. Let $u^{(1),{\rm loc}}$, $u^{(k),{\rm loc}}-u^{(k-1),{\rm loc}}$, $u^{{\rm loc}}$, $A^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ and $B^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ be the outputs of Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve}. Let $u^{(1)}$ and $u^{(k)}-u^{(k-1)}$ be the outputs of Algorithm \ref{gambletsolve}.
For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$, write $u^{(k),{\rm loc}}:=u^{(1),{\rm loc}}+\sum_{j=2}^k (u^{(j),{\rm loc}}-u^{(j-1),{\rm loc}})$.
Let $\epsilon \in (0,1)$. It holds true that if $\rho_k\geq C \big((1+\frac{1}{\ln(1/H)})\ln \frac{1}{H^k}+\ln \frac{1}{\epsilon}\big)$ for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ then (1) for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q-1\}$ we have
$\|u^{(k)} - u^{(k),{\rm loc}}\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq \epsilon \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}$ and $\|u^{(k)} - u^{(k),{\rm loc}}\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq C (H^k+\epsilon) \|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}$ (2) $\operatorname{Cond}(A^{(1),{\rm loc}})\leq C H^{-2}$, and for $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ we have (3)
$\operatorname{Cond}(B^{(k),{\rm loc}})\leq C H^{-2-2d}$ and (4) $\|u^{(k)}-u^{(k-1)}-(u^{(k),{\rm loc}}-u^{(k-1),{\rm loc}})\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq \frac{\epsilon}{2 k^2} \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}$. Finally, (6) $\|u - u^{{\rm loc}}\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq \epsilon \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}$.
\end{Theorem}
Therefore, according to Theorem \ref{tmdiscrete} if the localization radii $\rho_k$ are chosen so that $\rho_k=\mathcal{O}\big(\ln \max(1/\epsilon, 1/H_k)\big)$ for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ then the condition numbers of the matrices $B^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ and $A^{(1),{\rm loc}}$ remain uniformly bounded and the algorithm achieves accuracy $\epsilon$ in a direct solve. The following theorem shows that the linear systems appearing in lines \ref{line2a}, \ref{line8} and \ref{line11} of Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve} do not need to be solved exactly and provide bounds on the accuracy requirements (to simplify notations, we will from now on drop the superscripts of the vectors $y$ and $b$ appearing in definitions \ref{deflocinvm} and \ref{defb}).
\begin{Theorem}\label{tmdiscreteaccuracy}
The results of Theorem \ref{tmdiscrete} remain true if (1) $\rho_k\geq C \big((1+\frac{1}{\ln(1/H)})\ln \frac{1}{H^k}+\ln \frac{1}{\epsilon}\big)$ for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$ (2) For each $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(q)}$ the localized linear system $M^{i,\rho_q} y=\delta_{\cdot,i}$ of Definition \ref{deflocinvm} and Line \ref{line2a} of Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve} is solved up to accuracy $|y-y^{{\mathrm{app}}}|_{M^{i,\rho_q}}\leq C^{-1} H^{7d/2+3} \epsilon/q^2$ (using the notations of Subsection \ref{subseccg}, i.e. $|e|_A^2:=e^T A e$, and writing $y^{{\mathrm{app}}}$ the approximation of $y$) (3) For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ and each $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}$, the localized linear system $B^{(i,\rho)} y=b$ of Definition \ref{defb} and Line \ref{line11} of Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve} is solved up to accuracy
$|y-y^{{\mathrm{app}}}|_{B^{(i,\rho)}} \leq C^{-1} H^{-k+7d/2+4}\epsilon/(k-1)^2$. (4) For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ the linear system $ B^{(k),{\rm loc}}y= W^{(k)} g^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ of Line \ref{line8} of Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve} is solved up to accuracy $|y-y^{{\mathrm{app}}}|_{B^{(k),{\rm loc}}}\leq \epsilon \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}/(2q)$.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{proof}
From the proof of Theorem \eqref{tmshjgeydg} we need $\mathcal{E}(k) \leq C^{-1} H^{-k (1+d/2)+7d/2+3} \epsilon/k^2$ for $k\in \{1,\ldots,q\}$. By the inverse Poincar\'{e} inequality \eqref{eqinvpoincdiscrete} this inequality is satisfied for $k=q$ for
$\|\psi_i^{(q)}-\psi_i^{(q),{\rm loc}}\|_{L^2(\Omega)} \leq C^{-1} H^{7d/2+3} \epsilon/q^2 $ for each $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(q)}$, which by the definition of $M^{i,\rho_q}$ and Line \ref{line3} of Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve} leads to (2).
For $k\in \{2,\ldots,q\}$ the inequality $\mathcal{E}(k-1) \leq C^{-1} H^{-(k-1) (1+d/2)+7d/2+3} \epsilon/(k-1)^2$ is satisfied if for $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}$,
$\|\psi_i^{(k-1)}-\psi_i^{(k-1),{\rm loc}}\|_{a} \leq C^{-1} H^{-(k-1) +7d/2+3}\epsilon/(k-1)^2$. Using the notations of Definition \ref{defb} we have,
$\psi^{(k-1),{\rm loc}}_i=\sum_{j\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}}\bar{\pi}^{(k-1,k)}_{i,j}\psi_j^{(k),{\rm loc}} + \sum_{j \in i^\chi} D_{i,j}^{(k-1,k),{\rm loc}} \chi_j^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ with
$\<\chi_j^{(k),{\rm loc}},\chi_l^{(k),{\rm loc}}\>_a=B^{(i,\rho)}_{j,l}$ which leads to (3) by lines \ref{line14}, \ref{line12}, \ref{line9} and \ref{line7} of Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve}. For (4) we simply observe that for $y\in \mathcal{J}^{(k)}$, $\|\sum_{i\in \mathcal{J}^{(k)}} (y-y^{\mathrm{app}})_i\chi_i^{(k),{\rm loc}}\|_a=|y-y^{\mathrm{app}}|_{B^{(k),{\rm loc}}}$.
\end{proof}
Let us now describe the complexity of Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve}. This complexity depends on the desired accuracy $\epsilon \in (0,1)$.
Lines \ref{line1} and \ref{line2} correspond to the computation of the (sparse) mass and stiffness matrices of \eqref{eqhuiuhiuhuiu}. Note since $A$ and $M$ are sparse and banded (of bandwidth $2d=4$ in our numerical example) this computation is of $\mathcal{O}(N)$ complexity.
Line \ref{line2a} corresponds to the resolution of the localized linear system introduced in Definition \ref{deflocinvm} using $M^{i,\rho_q}$, the $i^{\rho_q}\times i^{\rho_q}$ sub-matrix of $M$. According to Theorem \ref{tmdiscrete}, the accuracy of each solve must be $|y-y^{{\mathrm{app}}}|_{M^{i,\rho_q}}\leq C^{-1} H^{7d/2+3} \epsilon/q^2$.
Since $|i^{\rho_q}|=\mathcal{O}(\rho_q^d)$ and since $M^{i,\rho_q}$ is of condition number bounded by that of $M$, for each $i$ the linear system of Line \ref{line2a} can be solved efficiently (to accuracy $\mathcal{O}(C^{-1} H^{7d/2+3} \epsilon/q^2)$ using $\mathcal{O}(\rho_q)=\mathcal{O}\big(\ln \max( \frac{1}{\epsilon},q)\big)$ iterations of the CG method (reminded in Subsection \ref{subseccg}) with a cost of $\mathcal{O}(\rho_q^d)$ per iteration, which results in a total cost of $\mathcal{O}\big(N \rho_q^{d} \ln \max( \frac{1}{\epsilon},q )\big)$. Lines \ref{line3} and \ref{line4} are naturally of complexity $\mathcal{O}(N \rho_q^d)$. Since $A^{(q),{\rm loc}}_{i,j}=0$ if $\tau_i^{(q)}$ and $\tau_j^{(q)}$ are at a distance larger than $2 H^q \rho_q$ the complexity of Line \ref{line5} is $\mathcal{O}(N \rho_q^{2d})$. Note that $A^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ and $B^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ are banded and of bandwidth $\mathcal{O}(N \rho_k^{d})$. It follows that Line \ref{line7} is of complexity $\mathcal{O}(|\mathcal{I}^{(k)}| \rho_k^{d})$. According to Theorem \ref{tmdiscreteaccuracy} the linear system of Line \ref{line8} needs to be solved up to accuracy $|y-y^{{\mathrm{app}}}|_{B^{(k),{\rm loc}}}\leq \epsilon \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}/2$. Since $B^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ is of uniformly bounded condition number this can be done using $\mathcal{O}(\ln \frac{1}{\epsilon})$ iterations of the CG method with a cost of $\mathcal{O}(|\mathcal{I}^{(k)}| \rho_k^d)$ per iteration (using $\mathcal{O}(|\mathcal{J}^{(k)}|)=\mathcal{O}(|\mathcal{I}^{(k)}|)$), which results in a total cost of $\mathcal{O}(|\mathcal{I}^{(k)}| \rho_k^{d} \ln \frac{1}{\epsilon})$ for Line \ref{line8}. Storing the fine mesh values of $u^{(k),{\rm loc}}-u^{(k-1),{\rm loc}}$ in Line \ref{line10} costs $\mathcal{O}(N \rho_k^{d})$ (since for each node $x$ on the fine mesh only $\mathcal{O}(\rho_k^{d})$ localized basis functions contribute to the value of $u^{(k),{\rm loc}}-u^{(k-1),{\rm loc}}$).
According to Theorem \ref{tmdiscreteaccuracy}, for each $i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}$ the linear system $B^{(i,\rho)} y=b$ of Line \ref{line11} needs to be solved up to accuracy $|y-y^{{\mathrm{app}}}|_{B^{(i,\rho)}} \leq C^{-1} H^{-k+7d/2+4}\epsilon/(k-1)^2$. Since the matrix $B^{(i,\rho)}$ inherits the uniformly bounded condition number from $B^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ this can be done using $\mathcal{O}(\ln \frac{1}{\epsilon})$ iterations of the CG method with a cost of $\mathcal{O}(H^{-d}\rho_{k-1}^d \rho_k^d)=\mathcal{O}(\rho_{k-1}^d \rho_k^d)$ per iteration. This results in a total cost of $\mathcal{O}(|\mathcal{I}^{(k)}| \rho_{k-1}^{d} \rho_k^d \ln \frac{1}{\epsilon})$ for Line \ref{line11}. We obtain, using the sparsity structures of
$D^{(k-1,k),{\rm loc}}$ and $R^{(k-1,k),{\rm loc}}$ that the complexity of Line \ref{line12} is
$\mathcal{O}(|\mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}| \rho_{k-1}^{d} H^{-d})=\mathcal{O}(|\mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}| \rho_{k-1}^{d} )$ and that of Line \ref{line13} is $\mathcal{O}(|\mathcal{I}^{(k-1)}| \rho_{k-1}^{2d} \rho_{k}^{d})$. The complexity of lines \ref{line14} to \ref{line15} is summarized in the display of Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve} and a simple consequence of the sparsity structure of $R^{(k-1,k),{\rm loc}}$. Line \ref{line16} is complexity $\mathcal{O}(|\mathcal{I}^{(1)}| \rho_{1}^{d} \ln \frac{1}{\epsilon})$ (using CG as in Line \ref{line8}). As in Line \ref{line10}, storing the values of $u^{(1),{\rm loc}}$ costs $\mathcal{O}(N \rho_{1}^{d} )$. Finally, obtaining $u^{{\rm loc}}$ in Line \ref{line18} costs $\mathcal{O}(N q)$ (observe that $q=\mathcal{O}(\ln N)$).
\begin{table}[!h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ l || c | r }
\hline
Compute and store $\psi_i^{(k),{\rm loc}}$, $\chi_i^{(k),{\rm loc}}$, $A^{(k),{\rm loc}}$, $B^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ & $\epsilon\leq H^{q}$ & $\epsilon\geq H^{q}$\\
and $u^{{\rm loc}}$ s.t. $\|u - u^{{\rm loc}}\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq \epsilon \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}$ & & \\\hline
First solve & $N \ln^{3d} \frac{1}{\epsilon} $ & $N \ln^{3d} N$ \\\hline
Subsequence solves & $N \ln^{d+1} \frac{1}{\epsilon}$ & $N \ln^d N \ln \frac{1}{\epsilon} $ \\ \hline \hline
Subsequent solves to compute $u^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ s.t. & & $N \ln^{d+1} \frac{1}{\epsilon}$ \\
$\|u - u^{(k),{\rm loc}}\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq C \epsilon \|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}$ & & \\\hline \hline
Subsequent solves to compute the coefficients $c_i^{(k)}$ & & \\ of $u^{(k),\hom}=\sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} c_i^{(k)} \psi_i^{(k)}$ & &$\epsilon^{-d} \ln^{d+1} \frac{1}{\epsilon}$ \\
s.t. $\|u - u^{(k),{\rm loc}}\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq C \epsilon (\|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}+\|g\|_{\textrm{Lip}})$ & & \\
\hline \hline
Subsequent solves to compute $u^{(k),\hom}$ s.t. & &$\epsilon^{-d} \ln^{d+1} \frac{1}{\epsilon}$ \\
$\|u-u^{(k),{\rm hom}}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}\leq C \epsilon (\|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}+\|g\|_{\textrm{Lip}})$ & & \\ \hline \hline
$a$ periodic/ergodic with mixing length $H^p\leq \epsilon$, & & $(N (\ln^{3d} N) H^p$ \\
first solve of $u^{(k),\hom}$ s.t. & & $+\epsilon^{-d})$ \\
$\|u-u^{(k),{\rm hom}}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}\leq C \epsilon (\|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}+\|g\|_{\textrm{Lip}})$ & & $ \ln^{d+1} \frac{1}{\epsilon}$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Complexity of Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve}.}
\label{tabcomplexity}
\end{table}
\paragraph{Total computational complexity, first solve.}
Summarizing we obtain that the complexity of Algorithm \ref{fastgambletsolve}, i.e. the cost of computing the gamblets $(\psi_i^{(k),{\rm loc}})$, $(\chi_j^{(k),{\rm loc}})$, their stiffness matrices $(A^{(k),{\rm loc}},B^{(k),{\rm loc}})$, and the approximation $u^{{\rm loc}}$ such that
$\|u - u^{{\rm loc}}\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq \epsilon \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}$ is $\mathcal{O}\big(N \big(\ln \max (\frac{1}{\epsilon},N^\frac{1}{d})\big)^{3d}\big)$ (with Line \ref{line13} being the corresponding complexity bottleneck). The complexity of storing the gamblets $(\psi_i^{(1),{\rm loc}})$, $(\chi_j^{(k),{\rm loc}})$ and their stiffness matrices $(A^{(1),{\rm loc}},B^{(k),{\rm loc}})$ is $\mathcal{O}\big(N \big(\ln \max (\frac{1}{\epsilon},N^\frac{1}{d})\big)^{d}\big)$.
\paragraph{Computational complexity of subsequent solves with $g\in H^{-1}(\Omega)$.}
If \eqref{eqhuiuhiuhuiu} (i.e. \eqref{eqn:scalar}) needs to be solved for more than one $g$ then the gamblets $\psi_i^{(k),{\rm loc}}, \chi^{(k),{\rm loc}}_i$ and the stiffness matrices $B^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ do not need to be recomputed. The cost of subsequent solves is therefore that of Line \ref{line8} i.e. $\mathcal{O}\big(N \big(\ln \max (\frac{1}{\epsilon},N^\frac{1}{d})\big)^{d} \ln \frac{1}{\epsilon}\big)$ to achieve the approximation accuracy $\|u - u^{{\rm loc}}\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq \epsilon \|g\|_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}$.
\paragraph{Computational complexity of subsequent solves with $g\in L^2(\Omega)$ and $\epsilon \geq H^q$.}
If $g\in L^2(\Omega)$ (i.e. if $\|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}$ is used to express the accuracy of the approximation)
and $\epsilon \in [H^k,H^{k-1}]$ then, by Theorem \ref{tmdiscrete}, $u^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ achieves the approximation accuracy $\|u - u^{(k),{\rm loc}}\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \leq C \epsilon \|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}$ (i.e. $u^{(j+1),{\rm loc}}-u^{(j),{\rm loc}}$ does not need to be computed for $j\geq k$) and the corresponding complexity is
$\mathcal{O}\big(N (\ln \frac{1}{\epsilon})^{d+1}\big)$ (if $g\in H^{-1}(\Omega)$ then the energy of the solution can be in the fine scales and $u^{(j+1),{\rm loc}}-u^{(j),{\rm loc}}$ do need to be computed for $j\geq k$).
\paragraph{Computational complexity of subsequent solves with $g$ Lipschitz continuous and $\epsilon \geq H^q$.}
Note that the computational complexity bottleneck for computing the coefficients of $u^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ in the basis $(\psi_i^{(k),{\rm loc}})$ when $g\in \mathcal{L}^2(\Omega)$ and $\epsilon \in [H^k,H^{k-1}]$ is in the computation of the vectors $g^{(j),{\rm loc}}$ for $j>k$. If $g$ is Lipschitz continuous then $g^{(k),{\rm loc}}_i$ be approximated $g(x_i^{(k)})$ where $x_i^{(k)}$ is any point in $\tau_i^{(k)}$ without loss of accuracy. Note that this approximation requires (only) $\mathcal{O}(H^{-kd})$ evaluations of $g$ and leads to a corresponding $u^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ satisfying $\|u - u^{(k),{\rm loc}}\|_a \leq C \epsilon (\|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}+\|g\|_{\textrm{Lip}})$ (with $\|g\|_{\textrm{Lip}}=\sup_{x,y\in \Omega}|g(x)-g(y)|/|x-y|$). Therefore the computational complexity of subsequent solves to obtain the coefficients $c_i^{(k)}$ in the decomposition $u^{(k),{\rm loc}}=\sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}}c_i^{(k)} \psi_i^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ is $\mathcal{O}\big(\epsilon^{-d} (\ln \frac{1}{\epsilon})^{d+1}\big)$ (i.e. independent from $N$ if $g$ is Lipschitz continuous).
Of course, obtaining an $H^1_0(\Omega)$-norm approximation of $u$ with accuracy $H^k$ requires expressing the values of $\psi_i^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ (and therefore $u^{(k),{\rm loc}}$) on the fine mesh, which leads to a total cost of $\mathcal{O}(N (\ln \frac{1}{\epsilon})^d )$. However if one is only interested expressing the values of $u^{(k),{\rm loc}}$ on the fine mesh in a sub-domain of diameter $\epsilon$ then the resulting complexity is $\mathcal{O}((N \epsilon^d+\epsilon^{-d}) (\ln \frac{1}{\epsilon})^d )$
\paragraph{Computational complexity of subsequent $L^2$-approximations with $g$ Lipschitz continuous and $\epsilon \geq H^q$.}
Let $(x_i^{(k)})_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}}$ be points of $(\tau_i^{(k)})_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}}$ forming a regular coarse mesh of $\Omega$ of resolution $H^k$ and write $\varphi_i^{(k)}$ the corresponding (regular and coarse) piecewise linear nodal basis elements.
If (as in classical homogenization or HMM) one is only interested in an $L^2$-norm approximation of $u$ with accuracy $H^k$ then the coefficients $c_i^{(k)}$ defined above are sufficient to obtain the approximation
$u^{{\rm hom}}=\sum_{i\in \mathcal{I}^{(k)}} \frac{c_i^{(k)}}{\int_{\Omega}\phi_i^{(k)}} \varphi_i^{(k)}$ that satisfies $\|u^{(k),{\rm loc}}-u^{{\rm hom}}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}\leq C H^k \|u^{(k),{\rm loc}}\|_{H^1_0(\Omega)}$ ($\int_{\Omega}u^{{\rm hom}}\phi_i^{(k)}=\int_{\Omega}u^{(k),{\rm loc}}\phi_i^{(k)}$) and therefore $\|u-u^{(k),{\rm hom}}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}\leq C \epsilon (\|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}+\|g\|_{\textrm{Lip}})$.
Note that the computational complexity of subsequent solves to obtain $u^{{\rm hom}}$ is $\mathcal{O}\big(\epsilon^{-d} (\ln \frac{1}{\epsilon})^{d+1}\big)$.
\paragraph{Total computational complexity if $a$ is periodic or ergodic with mixing length $H^p$ and $\epsilon \approx H^{k}$ with $k\geq p$.}
Under the assumptions of classical homogenization or HMM \cite{EEngquist:2003} (e.g. $a$ is of period $H^p$ or $a$ is ergodic with $H^p$ as mixing length), if the sets $\tau_i^{(k)}$ are chosen to match the period of $a$ and the domain is rescaled so that $1/H$ is an integer, then the entries of $A^{(k)}$ are invariant under periodic translations (or stationary if the medium is ergodic). Therefore, under these assumptions, as in classical homogenization, it sufficient to limit the computation of gamblets to periodicity cells (or ergodicity cells with a tight control on mixing as in \cite{GloriaNeukmanOtto2015}).
The resulting cost of obtaining $u^{(k),{\rm hom}}$ (in a first solve) such that $\|u^{(k),{\rm loc}}-u^{(k),{\rm hom}}\|_{L^2(\Omega)}\leq C \epsilon (\|g\|_{L^2(\Omega)}+\|g\|_{\textrm{Lip}})$, is $\mathcal{O}\big(N \ln^{3d}N \,H^p+\epsilon^{-d}) \ln^{d+1} \frac{1}{\epsilon}\big)$.
\paragraph{Acknowledgements.}
The author gratefully acknowledges this work supported by the Air Force Office of Scientific Research and the DARPA EQUiPS Program under
awards number FA9550-12-1-0389 (Scientific Computation of Optimal Statistical Estimators) and number FA9550-16-1-0054 (Computational Information Games) and the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science, Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research, through the Exascale Co-Design Center for Materials in Extreme Environments (ExMatEx, LANL Contract No
DE-AC52-06NA25396, Caltech Subcontract Number 273448). The author also thanks C. Scovel, L. Zhang, P. B. Bochev, P. S. Vassilevski, J.-L. Cambier, B. Suter, G. Pavliotis and an anonymous referee for valuable comments and suggestions.
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
Yellow fever (YF) is a disease produced by an \textbf{ar}thropod
\textbf{bo}rne \textbf{vi}rus (arbovirus) of the family \emph{flaviviridae}
and genus \emph{Flavivirus}. The arthropod vector can be one of
several mosquitoes and the usual hosts are monkeys and/or people.
Wild mosquitoes of genus \emph{Haemagogus}, \emph{Sabetes} and
\emph{Aedes} are responsible for the transmission of the virus among
wild monkeys, such as the Brown Howler Monkey (\emph{Alouatta guariba})
associated to recent outbreaks of YF in Brazil, Paraguay
and Argentina \cite{paho2008}). In contrast, urban YF is
transmitted by a domestic and anthropophilic mosquito, \emph{Aedes
aegypti}, human beings being the host \cite{chri60}. \emph{Aedes
aegypti} is a tree hole mosquito, with origins in Africa, that has
been dispersed through the world thanks to its association with people.
During the end of the XVIII and the XIX centuries, YF caused
large urban outbreaks in the Americas from Boston (1798), New York
(1798) and Philadelphia (1793, 1797, 1798, 1799) in the North \cite{cart31}
to Montevideo (1857) and Buenos Aires (1858, 1870, 1871) \cite{penn95}
in the South. These historical episodes arise as ideal cases for
testing the capabilities of YF models in urban settings.
Is it possible to reconstruct the evolution of one of these epidemic
outbreaks? Can enough information be recovered to produce a thorough
test on the models? This is seldom the case, for example, for the
study of the Memphis (1878) epidemic, with over 10000 casualties, only
1965 were considered potentially usable \cite{arde03}. In contrast,
the records of the outbreak in Buenos Aires 1871, unearthed and digitized for this work, left us with an amount of 1274 death cases
located in time and space for the initial focus in the quarter of
San Telmo, about 78\% of the total mortality in the quarter \cite{acev73}.
According to the 1869 national census \cite{cens69} Buenos Aires
had 177787 inhabitants, 12329 of them living in San Telmo, about half
of them just immigrated into the country mostly from Europe.
In this work, we will compare the initial development of the epidemic
outbreak (Buenos Aires, 1871) with the simulations resulting from
an eco-epidemiological model developed in Refs. \cite{oter06,oter08,oter10},
testing the worth of the predictive model.
The simulations were performed under a number of assumptions, most
of them essentially forced by the lack of better information. We will
assume that:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Now and before, YF is the same illness, i.e., we can use
current information on YF development such as: the average
extent of the incubation, infection, recovery, and toxic periods,
as well as the mortality level in 1871. In other words, the
virus presents no substantial changes since 1871 to present days.
We do not expect this hypothesis to be completely correct: the YF
virus is an \emph{RNA}-virus as opposed to the stable \emph{DNA}-viruses,
as such, mutations in about 140 years of continuous replications in
mosquitoes and primates can hardly be ruled out. Furthermore, present-day YF has been subject to different evolutionary pressures
than the YF in the XIX century. While in the XIX century yellow
fever circulated continuously in human populations, today the wild
part of the cycle involving wild populations of monkeys plays a substantial
role.
\item The epidemic was transmitted by \emph{Aedes aegypti}. There is no
evidence of this fact since the scientific society and medical doctors
in general were not aware of the role played by the mosquito until
the confirmation given by Reed \cite{cart31} of Finlay's ideas \cite{finl99}.
\footnote{According to other sources, it was Beauperthuy \cite{agra08} the
first one to accurately describe the transmission of YF by mosquitoes,
as observed in the epidemic outbreak at Cumaná, Venezuela (1853), as
well as the efficient measures of protection taken by Native Americans,
the use of nets to prevent the spread of the epidemic \cite{tepa90}.%
}
We assume that \emph{Aedes aegypti} has not changed since then,
and/or there are no substantial changes in the life cycle, vector
capabilities and adaptation between the (assumed) population in 1871
and present-day populations in Buenos Aires city. After the eradication
campaign (1958--1965) \cite{sope65}, \emph{Aedes aegypti} was eradicated
from Buenos Aires \cite{mini64}. Hence, the present populations
result from a re-infestation and they are not the direct descendants of
the mosquitoes population of 1871.
\item Lacking time statistics for the duration of the different stages in
the development of the illness, reproduction of the virus and life
cycle of the mosquito, we use, as distribution for such events, a maximum
likelihood distribution subject to the constrain of the average value
for the cycle. In short, we use exponentially distributed times for
the next event for all type of events.
\item Finally, and most importantly, we assume that the human population mobility is not a factor in the local spread of the disease. We
anticipate one of our conclusions: this assumption is likely to be false for
the full development of the epidemic outbreak but seems reasonable for the
early (silent) development. The study of the secondary foci of the epidemic
outbreak merits a detailed analysis of the social and political circumstances
related to human mobility and it is beyond the possibilities of this study.
\end{enumerate}
Since we want the test to be as demanding as possible, more information
is needed to simulate the outbreak eliminating sources of ambiguity
and parameters to be fitted using the same test data. We recovered
the following information:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Estimations of daily temperatures. They are relevant since the
temperature regulates the developmental rates of the mosquitoes.
\item A very rough, anecdotal, estimation of the availability of breeding
sites (BS) that, ultimately, control the carrying capacity of the
environment, the number of vectors and the infection rate.
\item Human populations discriminated by block in the city.
\item Estimations of the date of arrival of the virus to the city, putting
bounds to the reasonable initial conditions for the simulation.
\end{enumerate}
This climatological, social and historical information represents
a determining part of the reconstruction as it is integrated into
the model jointly with the entomological and medical information to
produce stochastic simulations of possible outbreaks to be compared
with the historic records of casualties.
We will show that the model predicts large probabilities for the occurrence
of YF in the given historical circumstances and it is also
able to answer why a minor outbreak in 1870 did not progress towards
a large epidemic. The total number of deaths and the time-evolution
of the death record will be shown to agree between the historical
record and the simulated episodes as well, within the original focus.
The rest of the manuscript will be organized as follows: we will begin
with the description of YF in section II, including
the eco-epidemiological model. In section III, we
will address the relevant climatological, social and historical aspects.
In section IV, we will explore the sensitivity of the model
to initial conditions and the number of available breeding sites, discussing
the statistics more clearly influenced by vector abundance. The historic
mortality records and the simulated records are compared in section
\ref{Compara}. We will finally discuss the performance of the model in
section \ref{Discu}
\section{The disease}
\label{Enfer} We will simply quote the fact sheet provided by the
World Health Organization \cite{onu08} as the standardized description:
\begin{quote}
``YF is a viral disease, found in tropical regions of Africa
and the Americas. It principally affects humans and monkeys, and is
transmitted via the bite of \emph{Aedes} mosquitoes. It can produce
devastating outbreaks, which can be prevented and controlled by mass
vaccination campaigns.
The first symptoms of the disease usually appear 3–6 days after infection.
The first, or acute, phase is characterized by fever, muscle pain,
headache, shivers, loss of appetite, nausea and vomiting. After 3–4
days, most patients improve and symptoms disappear. However, in a
few cases, the disease enters a toxicphase: fever reappears, and
the patient develops jaundice and sometimes bleeding, with blood appearing
in the vomit (the typical \emph{vomito negro}).
About 50\% of patients who enter the toxic phase die within 10--14
days''.
\end{quote}
We add that the remission period lasts between 2 and 48 hours \cite{ops05},
and as it was mentioned in the introduction, not only \emph{Aedes} mosquitoes
transmit the disease.
\subsection{The model}
The yellow fever model is rather similar to the already presented
dengue model \cite{oter10}, the similarity corresponds to the fact
that dengue is produced by a \emph{Flavivirus} as well, it is transmitted
by the same vector and follows the same clinical sequence in the human being,
although with substantially lesser mortality.
The model describes the life cycle of the mosquito \cite{oter06}
and its dispersalafter a blood meal, seeking oviposition sites \cite{oter08}.
The mosquito goes through several stages: egg, larva, pupa, adult (non
parous), flyer (i.e., the mosquito dispersing) and adult (parous). In
each stage, the mosquito can die or continue the cycle with a transition
rate between the subpopulations that depends on the temperature. The
mortality in the larva stage is nonlinear and it regulates the population
as a function of the availability of breeding sites. Thus, the
transitions from adult to flyer are associated with blood meals, the
event that can transmit the virus from human to mosquito and vice-versa.
From the epidemiological point of view, the mosquito follows a SEI
sequence (Susceptible, Exposed ---extrinsic period---, Infective). Correspondingly,
the adult populations are subdivided according to their status with
respect to the virus. We assume that there is no vertical transmission
of the virus and eggs, larvae, pupae and non parous adults are always
susceptible.
The humans are subdivided in subpopulations according to their status
with respect to the illness as: susceptible (S), exposed (E), infective
(I), in remission (r), toxic (T) and recovered (R). The temporary
remission period is followed by recovery with a probability between
0.75 and 0.85 or a toxic period (probability 0.25 to 0.15) which ends
half of the times in death and half of the times in recovery. The
yellow fever model differs in the structure from the dengue model
in Ref. \cite{oter10}, as the human part of the dengue model
is SEIR and the yellow fever model is SEIrRTD. However, the additional stages
do not alter the evolution of the epidemic since the ``in
remission'', toxic and dead stages do not participate in the transmission
of the virus. The YF parameters are presented in Table \ref{parbo}.
\begin{table}[hbt]
\centering
\footnotesize
\begin{tabular}{lrr
\hline \hline
Period & value & range\tabularnewline
\hline
Intrinsic Incubation (IIP) & 4 days & 3--6 days \tabularnewline
Extrinsic Incubation (EIP) & 10 days & 9--12 days \tabularnewline
Human Viremic (VP) & 4 days & 3--4 days \tabularnewline
Remission (rP) & 1 days & 0--2 days \tabularnewline
Toxic (tP) & 8 days & 7--10 days \tabularnewline
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}
\vskip 1em
\begin{tabular}{lll
\hline \hline
Probability & value & range\tabularnewline
\hline
Recovery after remission (rar) & 0.75 & 0.75--0.85 \tabularnewline
Mortality for toxic patients (mt) & 0.5 & \tabularnewline
Transmission host to vector (ahv) & 0.75 & \tabularnewline
Transmission vector to host (avh) & 0.75 & \tabularnewline
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Parameters (mean value of state) adopted for YF.
The range indicated is taken from PAHO \cite{ops05}.\label{parbo}}
\end{table}
The model is compartmental, all populations are counted as non-negative
integers numbers and evolve by a stochastic process in which the time
of the next event is exponentially distributed and the events compete
with probabilities proportional to their rates in a process known
as density-dependent-Poisson-process \cite{durr01}. The model can
be understood qualitatively with the scheme of the Fig. \ref{esquema}.
The model equations are summarized in Appendix \ref{apendice}.
\begin{figure}[hbt]
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{modeloYF}
\caption{Scheme of the yellow fever model. On the left side, the evolution of
the mosquito and, on the right side, the evolution of human subpopulations.
Hollow arrows indicate the progression through the life cycle of the
mosquito following the sequence: egg, larva, pupa, adult (non-parous),
flyer, adult (parous) and the repetition of the two last steps. The
mortality events are not shown to lighten the scheme. Eggs are laid
in the transition from flyer to adult. The adult mosquito populations
are subdivided according to their status with respect to the virus
as: susceptible (S), exposed (E) and infective (I). The virus is transmitted
from mosquitoes to humans and vice-versa in the transition from adult
to flyer (blood meal) when either the mosquito or the human is infective
and the other susceptible (red arrows). The red bold arrows indicate
the progression of the disease, from exposed to infective in the
mosquito and, in humans, following the sequence: exposed (E), infective (I),
in remission (r), toxic, recovered (R) or dead.\label{esquema}}
\end{figure}
The city is divided in blocks, roughly following the actual division (see Fig.
\ref{districtos}). The human populations are constrained to the block while the
mosquitoes can disperse from block to block.
\section{Historical, social and climatological information}
\label{Hist}
\subsection{When and how the epidemic started}
The YF outbreak in Buenos Aires (1871) was one of a series
of large epidemic outbreaks associated to the end of the War of the
Triple Alliance or Paraguayan war. The war confronted Argentina, Brazil
and Uruguay (the three allies) on one side and Paraguay on the other
side, and ended by March, 1870. By the end of 1870, Asunción, Paraguay's capital city, was under the rule of the Triple Alliance. The return
of Paraguay's war prisoners from Brazil (where YF was almost
endemic at that time) to Asunción triggered a large epidemic outbreak
\cite{penn95}. The allied troops received their main logistic support
from Corrientes (Argentina), a city with 11218 inhabitants according
to the 1869 census \cite{cens69}, located about 300 km south of Asunción
(following the waterway) and 1000 km north of Buenos Aires along the
Paraná river (see Fig. \ref{parana}). On December 14, 1870, the
first case of YF was diagnosed in Corrientes \cite{more49},
and a focus developed around this case imported from Asunción. According
to some sources, the epidemic produced panic, resulting in about half
the population leaving the city between December 15 and January 15
\cite{scen74}. However, other historical reasons might have played
a relevant role since the city of Corrientes was under the influence
and ruling of Buenos Aires, while in the farmlands, the General Ricardo
López Jordan was commanding a rebel army (a sequel of Argentina civil
wars and the war of the Triple Alliance). The subversion ended with
the battle of Ñaembé, about 200 km east of Corrientes, on January 26,
1871.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig-final}
\caption{Police districts from a map of the time and computer representation.
The red colored area in district 14 (San Telmo) are the two blocks where the 1871
epidemic started. The green colored area in district 3 is the block where the Hotel
Roma was and where the 1870 focus began (see section \ref{Compara}\ref{1870}).
The red and green lines sourround the region simulated for the 1871 epidemics
and the 1870 focus, respectively. Notice that districts 15
and 13 disagree in the maps. The computer representation follows the
information in Ref. \cite{cens89} from where the population information was
obtained. \label{districtos}}
\end{figure}
Putting things in perspective, we must realize that in those times, YF
was recognized only in its toxic stage associated to the black vomit, it is
then perfectly plausible that recently infected individuals would have left
Corrientes and Asunción reaching Buenos Aires, despite quarantine measures that
were late and leaky \cite{rmqu71,penn95}.\footnote{On December 16, a sanitary
official from Buenos Aires was commissioned to Corrientes to organize the
quarantine, a measure that was applied to ships coming from Paraguay but not to
those with Corrientes as departing port.%
} The death toll in Corrientes was of
1289 people in the city (and about 700 more in places around the city)
\cite{scen74}, representing a 11,5\% of the population (notice that this number
is not consistent with current numbers in use by WHO \cite{ops05} which
indicate a 7.5\% of mortality in diagnosed cases of YF but is well in
line with historical reports \cite{coop93} of 20\% to 70\% mortality in
diagnosed cases ---the statistical basis has changed with the
improved knowledge of early, not toxic, YF cases.
According to this historical view, the initial arrival of infectious
people to Buenos Aires happened, more likely, during December 1870 and
January 1871. In his study of the YF epidemic, written twenty
three years after the epidemic outbreak, José Penna (MD) \cite{penn95}
quotes the issue of the journal ``Revista Médico Quirúrgica'', published
in Buenos Aires on December 23, 1870 \cite{rmqu70}, which presents
a report regarding the sanitary situation during the last fifteen
days, indicating the emergence of a ``bilious fever'' and a general
tendency of other fevers to produce icterus or jaundice. In the next
issue, dated January 8, 1871, the ``Revista'' indicates an important
increase in the number of bilious fever cases reported \cite{rmqu71}.
In a separate article, the doctors call the attention on how
easily and how often the quarantine to ships coming from Paraguay is
avoided, and calls for strengthening the measures. Penna indicates
that the ``bilious fever'' (not a standard term in medicine)
likely corresponded to milder cases of YF. We will term this
idea ``Penna's conjecture'' and will come
back to it later.
For our initial guess, we considered this information as evidence
that the epidemic outbreak started during December, 1870. Exploring
the model, and arbitrarily, we took December 16, 1870, as the time
to introduce two infectious people with YF in the simulations,
at the blocks where the mortality started. Yet, an educated guess
for Penna's conjecture is to consider the 3--6 days needed from infection
to clinical manifestation and the 9--12 days of the extrinsic cycle. Hence, since the first clinical manifestations of transmitted YF
happened between December 11--23, we would guess the infected people
arriving somewhere between November 21 and December 11.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{parana}
\caption{A 1870 map \cite{mitc70} showing Asunción next to the Paraguay river,
Corrientes and Rosario next to the Paraná river and Buenos Aires (spelled
Buenos Ayres) next to the Rio de la Plata.\label{parana}}
\end{figure}
Yet, we must take into account that Penna's conjecture contrasts with
the conjectures presented by MD Wilde and MD Mallo, members of the
Sanity committee in charge during the YF epidemic. Wilde
and Mallo advocated for the spontaneous origin of the disease, very
much in line with the theories of miasmas in use in those times, theories
that guided the sanitary measures taken \cite{more49}.
Wilde and Mallo also argued that Asunción could not be the origin of
the epidemic, because of their belief that the ten or fifteen days
quarantine (counting since the last port touched) was enough to avoid
the propagation of the disease. This belief contrasts with the experience
of 1870 (in Buenos Aires) where a ten day quarantine was not enough
to prevent a minor epidemic \cite{penn95}. Nevertheless, the quarantine measures
werefully implemented in Corrientes by December 31,
1870. The measures were later lifted because of the epidemic in Corrientes
and implemented at ports down the Paraná river, being completed nearby
Buenos Aires (ports of La Conchas, Tigre, San Fernando and ``La
Boca'' within Buenos Aires city) by mid-February when
the epidemic was in full development in Buenos Aires according to
the port sanitary authorities, Wilde and Mallo \cite{more49}.
Being Corrientes the source of infected people can hardly be disregarded.
With about 5000 people leaving the city between December 15 and
January 15 \cite{more49}, a city where YF was developing.
According to Wilde and Mallo \cite{more49}, there were (non-fatal?)
YF cases in Buenos Aires as early as January 6, 1871, reported
by MDs Argerich and Gallarani as well as documented cases of YF
death after disembarking in Rosario (200 km North of Buenos Aires along
the Paraná river) having boarded in Corrientes.
\subsection{Breeding sites}
One of the key elements in the reconstruction and simulation of an
epidemic transmitted by mosquitoes is to have an estimation of their
numbers which will be reflected directly in the propagation of the
epidemic. In the mosquito model \cite{oter06}, this number is regulated
by the quality and abundance of breeding sites. The production of
a single breeding site, normalized to be a flower pot in a local cemetery,
was taken as unit in Ref. \cite{oter06} and the number of breeding sites
measured in this unit roughly corresponds to half a liter
of water.
The \emph{Aedes aegypti} population in monitored areas of Buenos
Aires, today, is compatible with about 20 to 30 breeding sites per block
\cite{oter08}. Estimating the number of sites available for breeding
today is already a difficult task, the estimation of breeding sites
available in 1871 is a nearly impossible one. In what remains of this
subsection, we will try to get a very rough a-priori estimate.
\begin{table}[hbt]
\centering
\footnotesize
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
\hline \hline
District & Population/$(100\text{ m})^{2}$ & $\text{BS}/(100\text{ m})^{2}$\tabularnewline
\hline
1 & 339 & 391.0\tabularnewline
2 & 279 & 300.0\tabularnewline
3 & 428 & 522.0\tabularnewline
4 & 353 & 443.0\tabularnewline
5 & 330 & 430.0\tabularnewline
6 & 259 & 365.0\tabularnewline
13 & 160 & 196.0\tabularnewline
14 & 224 & 300.0\tabularnewline
15 & 90 & 157.0 \tabularnewline
16 & 165 & 316.0\tabularnewline
18 & 23 & 52.0\tabularnewline
19 & 13 & 26.0\tabularnewline
20 & 30 & 52.0\tabularnewline
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Population data. Buenos Aires, 1869 \cite{cens69}. Population density
by police district (see Fig. \ref{districtos}) and equivalent breeding sites,
$\text{BS}$, originally estimated as proportional to the house density in the police
district.
\label{poblacion}}
\end{table}
A very important difference between those days and the present corresponds
to the supply of fresh water which today is taken from the river,
processed and distributed through pipes; but in those days, it was
an expensive commodity taken from the river by the ``waterman''
and sold to the customers who, in turn, had to let it rest so that the
clay in suspension decanted to the bottom of the vessel (a process
that takes at least 3 days). Additionally, there were some wells available
but the water was (is) of low quality (salty). The last, and rather
common resource \cite{more49,herz79}, was the collection of rain
water in cisterns.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[height=8cm,angle=-90,clip]{temperature}
\caption{Average daily temperature and periodic approximation fitted accordng
to Eq. (\ref{temperatura}), $t=0$ corresponds to January 1, 1866. The
inset shows the difference between the measured temperatures and the fit
(residuals) during 1871. \label{fig-temp}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Temperature reconstruction}
\emph{Aedes aegypti} developmental times depend on temperature.
Although it would seem reasonable to use as substitute of the real
data of the average temperature registered since systematic data collection
began, records of temperature in those times were kept privately \cite{goul78}
and are available. The data set consists of three daily measurements
made from January 1866 until December 1871, at 7AM, 2PM and 9PM. When
averaged, the records allow an estimation of the average temperature
of the day better than the usual procedure of adding maximum and minimum
dividing by two. Unfortunately, the register has some important missing
points during the epidemic outbreak. Because of this problem, the
data in Ref. \cite{goul78} was used to fit an approximation in the form:
\begin{align}
T=& 7.22^{\circ}\text{C} \times \cos(2\pi t/(365.25 \text{ days}) + 5.9484)\nonumber \\
& +17.21^{\circ}\text{C},\label{temperatura}
\end{align}
following Ref. \cite{kira02} and then extrapolating to the epidemic
period. In Fig. \ref{fig-temp}, the data and the fit are displayed.
The residuals of the fit do not present seasonality or sistematic
deviations, as we can see in the inset of Fig. \ref{fig-temp}.
It is worth noticing that a similar fit on temperature data from the
period 1980--1990 presents a mean temperature of $18.0^{\circ}$C, amplitude
of $6.7^{\circ}$C and a phase shift of $6.058^{\circ}$C \cite{oter06}
(notice that $t=0$ in the reference corresponds to July 1 while
in this work it corresponds to January 1). According to the threshold
computations in Ref. \cite{oter06}, the climatic situation was less favorable
for the mosquito in 1866--1871 than in the 1960--1991 period.
The reconstruction of temperatures needs to be performed at least from
the 1868 winter, since a relatively arbitrary initial condition in the form of
eggs for July 1, 1868 is used to initialize the code, and then run over a
transitory of two years. Such procedure has been found to give reliable results
\cite{oter06}. There are several factors in the biology of \emph{Ae. ae.} that
indicate that the biological response to air-temperature fluctuations is
reflected in attenuated fluctuations of biological variables. First, the larvae
and pupae develop in water containers, thus, what matters is the water
temperature. This fact represents a first smoothing of air-temperature
fluctuations. Second, insects developmental rates for fluctuating temperature
environments correspond to averages in time of rates obtained in constant
temperature environments \cite{liu95}, an alternative view is that development
depends on accumulated heat \cite{fock93a}. Such averages occur over a period
of about 6 days at $30^\circ$C and longer times for other temperatures and
non-optimal food conditions \cite{gilp79}. Third, the biting rate (completion
of the gonotrophic cycle) depends as well on temperatures averaged over a
period of a few days. Last, mosquitoes actively seek the conditions that fit
best to them and more often than not, they are found resting inside the houses.
\subsection{Mortality data}
For this work, the daily mortality data recorded during the 1871
epidemic outbreak \cite{acev73} is key. This statistical work has received
no attention in the past, and no study of the YF outbreak in Buenos
Aires made reference to this information. We have cross-checked the
information with data in the 1869 national census \cite{cens69},
as well as with data in published works \cite{penn95}, and the details
are consistent among these sources.
The data set is presented here closing the historic research part.
\begin{figure}[htn]
\includegraphics[height=9cm,clip,angle=-90]{daily}
\caption{Daily mortality cases in the police district 14 (see Fig. \ref{districtos})
corresponding to the quarter San Telmo \cite{acev73}, $t=0$ corresponds to January 1, 1871.\label{daily}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Revising the clinical development of yellow fever.}
A YF epidemic outbreak happened in Buenos Aires, in 1870, developing
about 200 cases \cite{penn95} (the text is ambiguous on whether
the cases are toxic or fatal). The epidemic outbreak was noticed by
February 22 (first death), a sailor who left Rio de Janeiro (Brazil)
on February 7, and presumably landed on February 17 (no cases
of YF were reported on board of the Poitou ---the boat).
This well documented case allows us to see the margins of tolerance
that have to be exercised in taking medical information prepared for
clinical use as statistical information. Assume, following Penna,
that the sailor was exposed to YF before boarding in Rio
de Janeiro, according to information in Table \ref{parbo} collected
from the Pan American Health Organization \cite{ops05}, adding incubation
and viremic period, we have a range of 6--10 days, hence the sailor
was close to the limit of his infectious period. He was not toxic,
according to the MD on board who signed a certificate accepted by
the sanitary authority. Yet, five days later, he was dying, making
the remission plus toxic period of 5 days, shorter than the range
of 7--12 days listed in Table \ref{parbo} and substantially shorter
than the 10--15 days (remission plus toxic) communicated in Ref. \cite{onu08}.
Shall we assume as precise the values reported in Ref. \cite{onu08,ops05}
we would have to conclude that the disease was substantially different,
at least in its clinical evolution, in 1871 as compared with present
days.
In clinical studies performed during a YF epidemic on the
Jos Plateau, Nigeria, Jones and Wilson \cite{jone72} report a 45.6\%
overall mortality and a significant difference in the duration of
the illness for fatal and non-fatal cases with averages of 6.4 and
17.8 days. Série \emph{et al.} \cite{seri68a} reports for the 1960--1962
epidemic in Ethiopia a mortality ranging from 43\% (Kouré) to 100\%
(Boloso) and 50\% (Menéra) with a total duration of the clinic phase
of the illness of 7.14, 2.14 and 4.5 days, respectively (weighted average
of 4.6 days in 18 cases).
We must conclude that the extension of the toxic period preceding
the death presents high variability. This variability may represent
variability in the illness or in medical criteria. For example, Série
\cite{seri68a} indicates that the 100\% mortality found at the Boloso
Hospital is associated to the admission criteria giving priority to
the most severe cases. In correspondence with this extremely high
mortality level, the survival period is the shortest registered. The minimum
length of the clinical phase is of 10--14 days or 13--18 days, depending
of the source (adding viremic, remission and toxic periods). We note
that not only the toxic period of fatal cases must be shorter than
the same period for non-fatal cases, but also the viremic period must
be shorter in average, if all the pieces of data are consistent.
The time elapsed between the first symptoms and death is probably
longer today than in 1871, since it, in part, reflects the evolution
of medical knowledge. The hospitalization time is also rather arbitrary
and changes with medical practices which do not reflect changes in
the disease.
A rudimentary procedure to correct for this differences is to shift the
simulated mortality some fixed time between 5 and 8 days (the difference
between our 13 days guessed (Table \ref{parbo}) and the 4.5--6.4 reported for
Africa \cite{seri68a,jone72}). Such a procedure is not conceptually optimal,
but it is as much as it can be done within present knowledge. We certainly do not
know whether just the toxic period must be shortened or the viremic period must
be shortened as well, and in the latter case, how this would affect the
spreading of the disease.
A second source of discrepancies between recorded data and simulations are the
inaccuracies in the historic record. Can we consider the daily mortality record
as a perfect account? Which was the protocol used to produce it? We can hardly
expect it to be perfect, although we will not make any provision for this
potential source of error.
\section{Simulation results}
\label{Model2} The simulations were performed using a one-block spatial
resolution, with the division in square blocks of the police districts 14 (San
Telmo), 16, 2 and 4, corresponding to Concepción, Catedral Sur and Montserrat;
and part of the districts 6, 18, 19, 19A and 20 (see Fig. \ref{districtos}),
and totalized for each police district to obtain daily mortality
comparable to those reported in Ref. \cite{acev73} and picture in Fig.
\ref{daily}. Numerical mosquitoes were not allowed to fly over the river. At
the remaining borders of the simulated region, a Stochastic Newmann Boundary
Condition was used, meaning that the mosquito population of the next block
across the boundary was considered equal to the block inside the region; but the
number of mosquito dispersion events associated to the outside block was drawn
randomly, independently of the events in the corresponding inner block. Larger
regions for the simulations were tested producing no visible differences.
The time step was set to the small value of $30$ s, avoiding the introduction of further complications in the program related to fast event rates for
tiny populations \cite{sola03}, although an implementation of the method in
Ref. \cite{sola03}, not relying on the smallness of the time step so heavily, is
desirable for a production phase of the program.
Before we proceed to the comparison between the historic mortality
records of the epidemic and the simulated results, we need to gain
some understanding regarding the sensitivity of the simulations to
the parameters guessed and the best forms of presenting these results.
We performed a moderate set of computations, since the code has not
been optimized for speed and it is highly demanding for the personal
computers where it runs for several days. Here, we illustrate the
main lessons learned in our explorations. Poor people, unable
to buy large quantities of water, had to rely mostly on the cisterns
and other forms of keeping rain water. Since 1852, when the population
of Buenos Aires was about 76000 people, there was an important immigration
flow, increasing the population to about 178000 people by 1869 \cite{cens69}.
The immigrants occupied large houses where they rented a room, usually
for an entire family, a housing that was known as ``conventillo''
and was the dominant form of housing in some districts such as San
Telmo, where the epidemic started \cite{scen74}. In some police
chronicles of the time, houses with as many as 300 residents are mentioned
\cite{bare80}. Under such difficult social circumstances, we can
only imagine that the number of breeding sites available to mosquitoes
has to be counted as orders of magnitude larger than present-day
available sites.
An a-priori and conservative estimation is to consider about ten times
the number of breeding sites estimated today. Thus, we assume, as a
first guess, 300 breeding sites per block in San Telmo. We will have
to tune this number later as it regulates mosquito populations and
the development of the epidemic focus. The number of breeding sites
is the only parameter tuned to the results in this work.
More precisely, the criteria adopted was to make the number of (normalized)
BS proportional to the number of houses per block taken from historic
records \cite{cens89}, adjusting the proportionality factor to the
observed dynamics. We introduce the notation BSxY to indicate
a multiplicative factor of Y.
The population of each police district was set to the density values
reported in the 1869 census \cite{cens69,cens89} and the police
districts geography was taken from police records \cite{roma66}
and referenced according to maps of the city at the time \cite{bsas87,mitr80,solv63,mitr62}.
Table {\ref{poblacion}} shows the average population per block,
initially estimated number of breeding sites and number of
houses for the district of the initial focus, San Telmo \#14 and nearby
districts (\# 16, 4, 2). A sketch of Buenos Aires police districts
according to a 1887 map \cite{bsas87} is displayed alongside with
the computer representation in Fig. \ref{districtos}.
It is a known feature of stochastic epidemic models \cite{ande00} that the
distribution of totals of infected people has two main contributions. One is that the
small epidemic outbreaks when none or a few secondary cases are produced and the
extinction time of the outbreak comes quickly. The otheris that the large epidemic
outbreaks which, if the basic reproductive number is large enough, present a
Gaussian shape separated by a valley of improbable epidemic sizes from the
small outbreaks.
While the present model does not fall within the class of models discussed
in Ref. \cite{ande00}, the general considerations applied to stochastic
SIR models qualitatively apply to the present study. Yet, simulations
started early during the summer season follow the pattern just described in
Ref. \cite{ande00}, but simulations started later do not present the probability
valley between large and small epidemics.
We have found useful to present the results disaggregated in the form:
epidemic size, daily percentage of mortality relative to the total
mortality and time to achieve half of the final mortality. This presentation
will let us realize that most of the fluctuation is concentrated in
the total epidemic size, while the daily evolution is relatively regular,
except, perhaps, in the time taken to develop up to 50\% of the mortality
(depending on the abundance of vectors and the initial number of infected
humans and chance).
\subsection{Total mortality (epidemic size)}
Since historical records include mostly the number of causalities,
it appears sensible for the purposes of this study to use the total
number of deaths as a proxy statistics for epidemic size.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[height=9cm,angle=-90]{Xhisto}
\caption{San Telmo. Total mortality histograms for different number of breeding
sites, computed after 100 simulations with the same initial condition
corresponding to 2 infectious people located in San Telmo on January
1, 1871, at the same location where the initial death happened in
the historical event. From top to bottom, multiplication factors (bin-width
: frequency of no-epidemic) BSx1 (126.2 : 0.23), BSx2 (209.8 : 0.09),
BSx3 (128.2 : 0.06) and BSx4 (50.6 : 0.02). The y-axis indicates frequency
in a set of 100 simulations.\label{muerte-bs}}
\end{figure}
The total mortality depends strongly on the stochastic nature of the
simulations, initial conditions and ecological parameters guessed.
Qualitatively, the results agree with the intuition, although this
is an a-posteriori statement, i.e., only after seeing the results
we can find intuitive interpretations for them.
The discussion assumes that the development of the epidemic outbreak
was regulated by either the availability of vectors (mosquitoes) or
the exhaustion of susceptible people, the first situation represents
a striking difference with standard SIR models without seasonal dependence
of the biological parameters. Actually, in Fig. \ref{muerte-bs},
we compare frequencies of epidemics binned in five bins by final epidemic
size for different sets of 100 simulations with different number of
breeding sites. The number of breeding sites is varied in the same
form all along the city, keeping the proportionality with housing,
and it is expressed as multiplicative factor (BSx1=1, BSx2=2, BSx3=3,
BSx4=4) presented in Table \ref{poblacion}. Notice also that the
width of the bins progresses as 126.2, 209.8, 128.2 and 50.6 indicating
how the dispersion of final epidemic sizes first increases with the
number of breeding sites but for larger numbers decreases.
We can see how for a factor 2 (BSx2) (and larger) the mortality saturates,
indicating the epidemic outbreaks are limited by the number of susceptible
people. For our original guess, factor 1, the epidemic is limited
by the seasonal presence/absence of vectors. However, for higher factors,
there is a substantial increase in large epidemic outbreaks with larger
probabilities for larger epidemics. Only for the factor 4 (BSx4) the
most likely bin includes the historical value of 1274 deaths.
A second feature, already shown in the Dengue model \cite{oter10},
is that outbreaks starting with the arrival of infectious people in
late spring will have a lesser chance to evolve into a major epidemic.
Yet, those that by chance develop are likely to become large epidemic
outbreaks since they have more time to evolve. On the contrary,
outbreaks started in autumn will have low chances to evolve and not
a large number of casualties. The corresponding histograms can be
seen in Fig. \ref{muerte-fecha}. Figure \ref{muerte-fecha} also
shows how the outbreaks that begin on December 16, as well as simulations
starting on January 1, present higher probabilities of large epidemics
than of small epidemics, but this tendency is reverted in simulations
of outbreaks that start by February 16. This transition is, again,
the transition between outbreaks regulated by the number of available
susceptible humans and those regulated by the presence or absence
of vectors.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[height=9cm,clip,angle=-90]{XHdate}
\caption{San Telmo. Total mortality histograms for different date of arrival
of infectious people. Computed after 100 simulations with the same
initial condition corresponding to 2 infectious people located in
San Telmo and a density factor BSx2.5. From top to bottom: December
16, 1870; January 1, January 16 and February 15, 1871.\label{muerte-fecha}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Mortality progression}
One of the most remarkable facts unveiled by the simulations is that
when the time evolution of the mortality is studied as a fraction
of the total mortality, much of the stochastic fluctuations are eliminated
and the curves present only small differences (see Fig. \ref{colapso}). The similarity of the normalized evolution allows us to focus on
the time taken to produce half of the mortality (labelled $T_{1/2}$).
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[height=9cm,clip,angle=-90]{norma}
\caption{Evolution of the mortality level for all the epidemics with three or more
fatal cases in a batch of 100 simulations (96 runs) differing only
in the pseudo-random series. The breeding sites number has a factor
4, and the initial contagious people were placed on January 1, 1871,
in San Telmo.\label{colapso}}
\end{figure}
We notice, in Fig. \ref{colapso}, that the $T_{1/2}$ in these runs
lay between 69--110, compared to the historic values of $T_{1/2}=$73.
\begin{figure}[hbt]
\includegraphics[height=9cm,clip,angle=-90]{T12}
\caption{San Telmo. Total mortality versus day when the mortality reached half
its final number for different number of breeding sites. The mortality
appears to be mainly a function of $T_{1/2}$ and roughly independent
of the number of breeding sites.\label{TvsZ}}
\end{figure}
The latter observation brings the attention to a remarkable fact of
the simulations: not only the normalized progression of the outbreaks
are rather similar but also, there is a correspondence between early
development and large mortality. Drawing $T_{1/2}$ against total-mortality
(Fig. \ref{TvsZ}), we see that even for different number of breeding
sites, all the simulations indicate that the final size is a noisy
function of the day when the mortality reaches half its final value.
This function is almost constant for small $T_{1/2}$ and becomes
linear with increasing dispersion when $T_{1/2}$ is relatively large.
Once again, the two different forms the outbreak is controlled.
\section{Real against simulated epidemic}
\label{Compara}
We would like to establish the credibility of the statement: the historic
mortality record for the San Telmo focus belongs to the statistics
generated by the simulations.
To achieve this goal, we need to compare the daily mortality in the
historical record and the simulations. Since, in the model, the mortality
proceeds day after day with independent random increments (as a consequence
of the Poisson character of the model), it is reasonable to consider
the statistics
\begin{equation}
\chi^{2}=\sum_{i}\left(\frac{HM(i)-MM(i)}{D(i)}\right)^{2}\label{chi2def}
\end{equation}
where $i$ runs over the days of the year, $HM(i)$ is the fraction
of the total death toll in the historic record for the day $i$, $MM(i)$
is the average of the same fraction obtained in the simulations and
$D(i)$ is the corresponding standard deviation for the simulations.
The sum runs over the number of days in which the variance is not
zero, for BSx3 and BSx4 in no case $D(i)=0$ and $(HM(i)-MM(i)\ne0 )$.
The number of degrees corresponds to the number of days with non-zero
mortality in the simulations minus one. The degree discounted accounts
for the fact that $\sum_{i}HM(i)=\sum_{i}MM(i)=1$.
\subsection{Tuning of the simulations}
Before we proceed, we have to find an acceptable number of breeding
sites, a reasonable day for the arrival of infected individuals (assumed
to be 2 individuals arbitrarily) and adjust for the uncertainty in
survival time. Actually, moving the day of arrival $d$ days earlier
and shortening the survival time by $d$ will have essentially the
same effect on the simulated mortality (providing $d$ is small), which
is to shift the full series by $d$ days. This is, assigning to the
day $i$ the simulated mortality $SM$ of the day $i+d$, ($SM(i+d)$).
Hence, only two of the parameters will be obtained from this data.
\begin{table}[hbt]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\hline \hline
BSxY & d & $\chi^{2}$ & degree & Probability\tabularnewline
\hline
2 & 8 & 490.2 & 177 & 0. \tabularnewline
3 & 7 & 191.7 & 173 & 0.15 \tabularnewline
4 & 3 & 151.9 & 168 & 0.80 \tabularnewline
4 & 4 & 143.8 & 168 & 0.91 \tabularnewline
4 & 5 & 145.6 & 168 & 0.89 \tabularnewline
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{$\chi^{2}$ calculations according to (\ref{chi2def}). We indicate
the multiplicative factor applied to the breeding sites described
in Table \ref{poblacion}, the shift applied to the statistics produce
with the parameters of Table \ref{parbo}, the value of the statistic $\chi^2$,
the number of degrees of
freedom, and the probability $P(x>\chi^{2})$ for a random variable
$x$ distributed as a $\chi^{2}$-distribution with the indicated
degrees of freedom. The standard reading of the $\chi^{2}$ test indicates
that, for BSx3 and BSx4, the statement ``the deviations from
the simulations mean of the historic record (deviations assumed to
be distributed as $\chi^{2}$ with the indicated degrees) belong to
the simulated set'' is not found likely to be false by
the test in the cases BSx3 and BSx4.\label{chi2}}
\end{table}
As we have previously observed, the total mortality presents a large variance
in the simulations. Moreover, in medical accounts of modern time \cite{jone72,seri68a},
the mortality ranges between $46\%$ and $100\%$ while in historical
accounts the percentage goes from $20$ to $70$ \cite{coop93}.
Hence, a simple adjustment of the mortality coefficient from our arbitrary
$50\%$ within such a wide range would suffice to eliminate the contributions
of the total epidemic size. The average simulated epidemic for BSx4
is of $\approx 1248$ deaths while the historic record is of $1274$ deaths. Hence,
to match the mean with the historic record, it would suffice to correct
the mortality from $50\%$ to $51\%$.
We can disregard the idea that the epidemic started before December
20, 1870 (Penna's conjecture), since it is not possible to simultaneously obtain
an acceptable final mortality and an acceptable evolution
of the outbreak. Our best attempt corresponds to an epidemic starting
by December 14, 1870, which averages $\approx 1212$ deaths and with a deviation
of the mortality of $\chi^{2}=219.1$ with 175 degrees, giving a probability
$P(x\ge219,1)=0.01$.
We focus on arrival dates around January 1, 1871. We can also disregard,
for this initial condition, the original guess BSx1 corresponding to
300 breeding sites per block in San Telmo, since it produces too small
epidemics. We present results for the epidemics corresponding to BSx2,
BSx3 and BSx4 in Table \ref{chi2} for different numbers of BS and
shift $d$.
\subsection{Comparison}
The conclusion of the $\chi^{2}$ tests is that the simulations performed
with BSx3 and beginning between December 24 1870 and January 1,
1871 (with a survival period shortened between 0 and 8 days) are compatible
with the historical record. However, the compatibility is larger when
BSx4 is considered and the beginning of the epidemic is situated between
December 28, 1870 and January 5, 1871 (with a survival period shortened
between 0 and 8 days respectively). We illustrate this comparison
with Fig. \ref{compare}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[viewport=0bp 0bp 565bp 842bp,clip,angle=-90,width=9cm]{compara}
\caption{The historic record of accumulated mortality as a function of the
day of the year 1871 is presented. The averaged accumulated mortality
as well as curves shifted one standard deviation are shown for comparison.
An acceptable look alike individual simulation chose by visual inspection
from a set of 100 simulations is included as well. Two exposed individuals
(not yet contagious) were introduced in the same blocks where the
historic epidemic started the day January 1, 1871, with BSx4. The
simulated mortality is anticipated in 4 days. Statistical estimates
were taken as averages over 96 runs which resulted in secondary mortality,
out of a set of 100 runs.\label{compare}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{The 1870 outbreak}
\label{1870}
The records for the 1870 outbreak are scarce. Of the recognized cases,
only 32 entered the Lazareto (hospital) and 19 of them were originated
in the same block that the first case. Secondary cases are registered
at the Lazareto' books starting on March 30 (two cases) and continuing
with daily cases. the final outcome of these cases and the cases not entered at the Lazareto \cite{penn95} are not clear.
Except for the precise initial condition, corresponding to one viremic
(infective) person located at the Hotel Roma (district 4 in Fig.
\ref{districtos}), the information is too imprecise to produce a
demanding test for the model.
We performed a set of 100 simulations introducing one viremic (infective)
person at the precise block where the Hotel Roma was, on February
17. The number of breeding sites was kept at the same factor 4 with
respect to the values tabulated in Table \ref{poblacion} that was used
for the best results in the study of the 1871 outbreak. Needless to
say, this does not need to be true, as the number of breeding sites may
change from season to season.
The distribution of the final mortality is shown in Fig. \ref{H1870}.
As we can see, relatively small epidemics of less than 200 deaths
cannot be ruled out, although there are much larger epidemics also
likely to happen.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[height=9cm,clip,angle=-90]{H1870}
\caption{Mortality distribution for the simulations beginning on February 17
with the incorporation of one infective (viremic) in the block of
the Hotel Roma and BSx4. The histogram is the result of 87 runs
which resulted in epidemics (13 runs did not result in epidemics). The
width of the bins is 322.2, and the first epidemic bin goes from 17
to 339 deaths with a frequency of 15/100. \label{H1870}}
\end{figure}
Actually, a slow start of the epidemic outbreak would favor a small
final mortality, as it can be seen in Fig. \ref{abril15}. Not only
there is a relation between a low mortality early during the outbreak
(such as April 15) and the final mortality, but we also see that
the sharp division between small and large epidemics is not present
in this family of epidemic outbreaks differing only in the pseudo-random
number sequence.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\includegraphics[height=9cm,clip,angle=-90]{abril15}
\caption{Final mortality against early mortality for two dates: March 30 and
April 15. A low early mortality ``predicts'' a low final mortality
as the outbreak does not have enough time to develop. Simulations
correspond to the conditions of the 1870 small epidemic. BSx4, one
infected arriving to the Hotel Roma on February 17. The historic
information indicates that secondary cases were recorded by March 30.
Hence, corresponding to a slow start. The final mortality is not known,
but it is believed it has been in the 100--200 range.\label{abril15}}
\end{figure}
For the smallest epidemics simulated, the secondary mortality starts
after March 30. Hence, the 1870 focus can be understood as a case
of relative good luck and a late start within more or less the same
conditions than the outbreak of 1871.
\section{Conclusions and final discussion}
\label{Discu} In this work, we have studied the development of the
initial focus in the YF epidemic that devastated Buenos Aires
(Argentina) in 1871 using methods that belong to complex systems epistemology
\cite{garc07}.
The core of the research performed has been the development of a model
(theory) for an epidemic outbreak spread only by the mosquito \emph{Aedes
aegypti} represented according to current biological literature such
as Christophers \cite{chri60} and others. The translation of the
mosquito's biology into a computer code has been performed earlier
\cite{oter06,oter08} and the basis for the spreading of a disease
by this vector has been elaborated in the case of Dengue previously
\cite{oter10}. The present model for YF is then an adaptation
of the Dengue model to the particularities of YF, and the
present attempt of validation (failed falsification) reflects also on
the validity of this earlier work.
The present study owes its existence to the work of anonymous police
officers \cite{acev73} that gathered and recorded epidemics statistics
during the epidemic outbreak, in a city that was not only devastated
by the epidemic, but where the political authorities left in the middle
of the drama as well \cite{scen74}.
We have gathered (and implemented in a model) entomological, ecological
and medical information, as well as geographic, climatological and
social information. After establishing the historical constraints
restricting our attempts to simulate the historical event, we have
adjusted the density of breeding sites to be the equivalent to 1200
half-liter pots as those encountered in today Buenos Aires cemeteries
(the number corresponds to San Telmo quarter). Perhaps a better idea
of the number of mosquitoes present is given by the maximum of the
average number of bites per person per day estimated by the model,
which results in 5 bites/(person day) (to be precise: the ratio between
the maximum number of bites in a block during a week and the population
of the block, divided by seven).
The population of the domestic mosquito \emph{Aedes aegypti} in
Buenos Aires 1870--1871 was large enough to almost assure the propagation
of YF during the summer season. The only effective measures
preventing the epidemic were the natural quarantine resulting from
the distance to tropical cities were YF was endemic (such
as Rio de Janeiro) and the relatively small window for large epidemics,
since the extinction of the adult form of the mosquito during the
winter months prevents the overwintering of YF. In this sense,
the relatively small outbreak of 1870 is an example of how a late
arrival of the infected individual combined with a touch of luck produced
only a minor sanitary catastrophe.
By 1871, as a consequence of the end of the Paraguayan war and the
emergence of YF in Asunción, the conditions for an almost
unavoidable epidemic in Buenos Aires were given. The intermediate step
taken in Corrientes, with the panic and partial evacuation of the
city, adding the lack of quarantine measures, was more than enough
to make certain the epidemic in Buenos Aires. On the contrary, Penna's
conjecture of an earlier starting during December, 1870 are inconsistent
with the biological and medical times as implemented in the model.
We can disregard this conjecture as highly improbable.
The historic mortality record is consistent with an epidemic starting
between December 28 and January 5, being the symptomatic period
(viremic plus remission plus toxic) of the illness between 13 and
5 days. Furthermore, the existence of non-fatal cases of YF
by January 6 mentioned by some sources \cite{more49} would be
consistent, provided the cases were imported.
In retrospect, the present research began as an attempt to validate/falsificate
the YF model and, in more general terms, the model for the transmission
of viral diseases by \emph{Aedes aegypti} using the historic data of this
large YF epidemic. As the research progressed, it became increasingly
evident that the model was robust. In successive attempts, every time the
model failed to produce a reasonable result, it forced us to revise the
epidemiological and historical hypotheses. In these revisions, we ended up
realizing that the accepted origin of the epidemic in imported cases from
Brazil, actually hides the central role that the epidemics in Corrientes had,
and the gruesome failure of not quarantining Corrientes once the mortality
started by December 16, 1870, about two weeks before the deducted beginning of
the outbreak in Buenos Aires.
The same study of inconsistencies between the data and the reconstruction
made us focus on the survival time of those clinically diagnosed
with YF that finally die. The form in which the illness
evolves anticipates the final result. Jones and Wilson \cite{jone72}
indicate the symptoms of cases with a bad prognosis including the
rapidity and degree of jaundice. This information suggests, in terms
of modeling, that death is not one of two possible outcomes at the
end of the ``toxic period'', as we have first thought.
Separation of to-recover and to-die subpopulations could (should?)
be performed earlier in the development of the illness, each subpopulation
having its own parameters for the illness. Yet, while in theory this
would be desirable, in practice it would have, for the time being,
no effect, since the characteristic periods of the illness have not
been measured in these terms.
Epidemics transmitted by vectors come to an end either when the susceptible
population has been sufficiently exposed so that the replication of
the virus is slowed down (the classical consideration in SIR models)
or when the vector's population is decimated by other (for example,
climatic) reasons. The model shows that both situations can be distinguished
in terms of the mortality statistics.
We have also shown that the total mortality of the epidemic is not
difficult to adjust by changing the death probability of the toxic
phase, and as such, it is not a demanding test for a model. The daily
mortality, when normalized, shows sensitivity to the mosquito abundance,
specially in the evolution times involved, since the general qualitative
shape appears to be fixed. In particular, the date in which the epidemic
reaches half the total mortality is advanced by larger mosquito populations.
However, only comparison of the simulated and historical daily mortality
put enough constraints to the free data in the model (date of arrival
of infected people and mosquito population) to allow for a selection
of possible combinations of their values.
As successful as the model appears to be, it is completely unable
to produce the total mortality in the city, or the spatial extension
of the full epidemic. The simulations produce with BSx4 less than
4500 deaths, while in the historic record, the total mortality in
the city is above 13000 cases. The historical account, and the recorded
data, show that after the initial San Telmo focus has developed, a
second focus in the police district 13 (see Fig. \ref{districtos})
developed, shortly several other foci developed that could not be
tracked \cite{penn95}. Unless the spreading of the illness by infected
humans is introduced (or some other method to make long jumps by the
illness), such events cannot be described. It is worth noticing that
the mobility patterns in 1871 are expected to be drastically different
from present patterns, and as such, the application of models with
human mobility \cite{barm11} is not straightforward and requires
a historical study.
One of the most important conclusions of this work is that the logical
consistency of mathematical modeling puts a limit to ad-hoc hypotheses,
so often used in a-posteriori explanations, as it forces to accept
not just the desired consequence of the hypotheses, but all other
consequences as well.
Last, eco-epidemiological models are adjusted to vector populations
pre-existing the actual epidemics and can therefore be used in prevention
to determine epidemic risk and monitor eradication campaigns. In the
present work, the tuning was performed in epidemic data only because
it is actually impossible to know the environmental conditions more
than one hundred years ago. Yet, our wild initial guess for the density
of breeding sites resulted sufficiently close to allow further tuning.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
We want to thank Professor Guillermo Marshall who has been very kind
allowing MLF to take time off her duties to complete this work. We
acknowledge the grant PICTR0087/2002 by the ANPCyT (Argentina) and
the grants X308 and X210 by the Universidad de Buenos Aires. Special
thanks are given to the librarians and personnel of the Instituto Histórico
de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Biblioteca Nacional del Maestro, Museo
Mitre and the library of the School of Medicine UBA.
|
\section{Introduction}
In the chiral limit of QCD, obtained by setting the light quark masses to
zero, the global symmetry of QCD is chiral $SU(2)\times SU(2)$. This is
homomorphic to a O(4) symmetry. The universality conjecture then leads us
expect that the critical indices and critical amplitude ratios in chiral
QCD should be the same as for O(4) magnetic systems \cite{pisarski}.
In recent times, the chiral condensate of QCD (which is equivalent to
the spontaneous magnetization of the magnet), its derivatives with
respect to the quark mass (equivalent to the magnetic susceptibility),
and their scaling towards the chiral limit, have been studied with
somewhat ambiguous results \cite{karsch}.
The scaling of the internal energy and the specific heat of O(N)
symmetric systems is intricate, as is known from the phenomenology of
liquid Helium. However, with the extensive lattice QCD computations now
available on quark number susceptibilities in QCD at zero baryon density
\cite{qns}, their important role in heavy-ion collisions \cite{ilgti},
and their connection with temperature derivatives of the free energy, it
is important to initiate the scaling analysis of these quantities. That
is the purpose of this talk.
\section{Scaling and the limits of universality}
The thermodynamics of QCD is characterized by a free energy, which
is a function of some number of intensive control parameters. These
could include the temperature, $T$, and the baryon chemical potential,
$\mu$. If the pion mass were exactly vanishing, then QCD would have
a O(4) global chiral symmetry. Since we are interested in real QCD,
where the pion is not massless, an explicit chiral symmetry breaking
parameter is needed. This is the quark mass, $m$, which plays the same
role in QCD as a magnetic field does for the O(4) magnet.
Near the critical point one can decompose the free energy, $F(T,m)$, into
the sum of two terms. One of these is a regular part, $F_r(T,m)$, and the
other is a singular part, $F_s(T,m)$. $F_r(T,m)$ is Taylor expandable around
the critical point, $T=T_c$ and $m=0$ with some large radius of convergence.
The modern theory of critical phenomena starts from the observation that the
most singular part is a scaling function
\beq
F_s(T,m) = t^{2-\alpha}\Phi(\tau), \quad{\rm where}\quad
t = \left|1-\frac T{T_c}\right|,\;
\tau = \frac t{(m/M_0)^{1/\Delta}},
\eeq{scaling}
where we have chosen the scaling variables $t$ and $\tau$ to be
dimensionless, $T_c$ is the critical temperature, $M_0$ is any
mass scale which remains finite in the chiral limit, and $\alpha$,
$\Delta=\beta\delta$ are critical exponents. The function $F_s(t,\tau)$,
defined so, is universal, in the sense that whether we examine an O(4)
Heisenberg magnet, QCD, a non-linear sigma model of pions, or the
Nambu-Jona-Lasinio (NJL) model, the $F_s(t,\tau)$ we obtain from all
of them are the same. As a result, the universal properties of thermal
QCD know nothing about QCD, aside from its chiral symmetry. However,
the various models differ in $F_r(T,m)$, so this is the piece which
gives information about the actual degrees of freedom involved in the
QCD phase transition.
\bet\begin{center}\begin{tabular}{|cc|ccc|c|}
\hline
Model & Example & $\beta$ & $\delta$ & $\alpha$ & Ref\\ \hline
O($\infty$) & & 1/2 & 5 & -1 & \cite{largen}\\
O(4) & chiral QCD & 0.380 & 4.86 & -0.2268 & \cite{engels4} \\
O(3) & ? & 0.365 & 4.79 & -0.115 & \cite{zinnjustin} \\
O(2) & liquid He & 0.349 & 4.78 & -0.0172 & \cite{engels2} \\
O(1) & liquid-gas & 0.325 & 4.8 & 0.11 & \cite{zinnjustin} \\ \hline
MFT & & 1/2 & 3 & 0 & \\ \hline
\end{tabular}\end{center}
\caption{Critical exponents of O(N) models in three spatial dimensions.
The exponent $\alpha$ is obtained from the other reported exponents using
scaling identities. O(1) should be taken to mean the Ising model. MFT
stands for mean field theory. There are no known examples of O(3) models,
since real ferromagnets have relevant terms which break this symmetry.}
\eet{on}
Even if the magnitude of $F_s$ is comparable to $F_r$, since it is
singular, its effect may be enhanced by taking sufficient number of
derivatives. For example, the specific heat, $\cv\propto t^{-\alpha}$,
and hence diverges at $T=T_c$, provided that $\alpha>0$. As one can
see from Table \ref{tb:on}, this is true of the Ising model. However,
for all other $O(N)$ models $\alpha<0$, and, as a result, the singular
contribution to the specific heat exactly vanishes for $T=T_c$.
This seems to contradict our knowledge of the specific heat of liquid He,
which is in the O(2) universality class and has a cusp at the critical
point. The resolution of this puzzle comes from noticing that the peak
of $\cv$ is only finite, and hence is regular. It is the shape which is
singular. So the specific heat has to arise through a playoff between
the singular and regular parts. In fact, a very precise microgravity
experiment has been done over the range $|T-T_c|\le2$ nK \cite{lipa},
and the results fitted to the formula
\beq
\cv = A_r + t^{-\alpha}(B+C t^{-\Delta'}),
\eeq{shape}
where $A_r$ comes only from $F_r$. $\Delta'$ is a possible
correction-to-scaling exponent. $A_r$ is positive and $B$ is
constrained to be negative. It can be shown that $B$ can be
negative without violating the thermodynamic consistency criterion
that $\cv>0$. A result of the microgravity experiment is that
$\alpha=-0.01285(38)$. Interestingly this is in disagreement with the
careful work of \cite{engels2}.
This mechanism also works for QCD and other O(N) symmetric models. For these
we may write
\beq
\cv(T,m) = A_r + \frac{t^{-\alpha}}{T_c}\Psi(t,\tau).
\eeq{cvqcd}
$T_c$ and $A_r$ are non-universal, and change from QCD to various
effective theories for it, but the exponent $\alpha$, and the regular
function $\Psi$ (which may be written in terms of the scaling function
$\Phi$, and its derivatives, $\Phi'$ and $\Phi''$, if desired) are
universal. So the shape of the specific heat cusp is universal but its
height and width must be determined in QCD. Furthermore, these two
parameters are good tests of possible effective models, since a bad
model of QCD will not reproduce its non-universal properties.
\bef
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=1.0]{cvNJL.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Data collapse obtained in an MFT treatment of the NJL model
when keeping only the data for $\tau>50$. Tiny violations of scaling
are visible; these can be controlled by increasing the cut on $\tau$.
The value of this cut depends on the choice of $M_0$ (here it was
taken to be $T_c$), and the renormalization scheme, when going beyond
MFT. Also, since this value is not universal, it could be different
in QCD. Only data for $T<T_c$ is used in this plot to avoid having to
subtract a large regular part, as discussed in the text.}
\eef{njl}
An interesting statement about the scaling of $\cv$ with mass arises
from this. Suppose we succeeded in measuring (on the lattice) $\cv$ for
QCD with various different light quark masses. By plotting the data as a
function of $t$ and scaling $\cv$ appropriately, can we observe scaling
in the form of data collapsing on to an universal curve? Clearly, there
are no singularities of the free energy if $T$ is varied around $T_c$
at fixed non-vanishing $m$. As a result, taking $t\to0$ and $\tau\to0$
simultaneously will not reveal scaling. Instead, one must take the limit
$m\to0$ first and $T\to T_c$ next, which means that one must take
$\tau\to\infty$ first and then $t\to0$ in order to see data collapse.
One can test this in the NJL model even at tree level, {\sl i.e.\/}, in the
MFT approximation. The high temperature limit of this model contains
weakly interacting quarks, so the regular contribution to $\cv$ actually
increases fairly rapidly with temperature. As a result, one may miss
the pseudo-critical behaviour in $\cv$ unless the temperature range is
scanned finely to discover a peak sitting over a rising background,
or the free quark contribution is subtracted to make the peak stand
out over a falling background. This difficulty would also occur in QCD
\cite{prasad}, but not in the O(4) Heisenberg magnet.
With this MFT one sees that data collapse is possible when one plots
$\cv$ against $t$ provided that one selects only $\tau>50$. This is
sufficient to ensure that for any finite $m$ one does not approach $t=0$
too closely. Figure \ref{fg:njl} shows that one may relax the condition
$\tau\to\infty$ provided one is willing to tolerate small enough violation
of scaling. Since experimental data or Monte Carlo computations come with
errors, it should be possible to tune the cutoff on $\tau$ in order to
find the scaling curve within the errors.
We end this section with a remark about the scaling fields. In making
use of effective models to study universal properties of QCD, most works
make the assumption that the scaling fields of the effective theory ($T$
and $m$) are identical to those of QCD. Whether or not this assumption
is correct can be tested, but, to the best of our knowledge, such tests
have not been performed.
\section{Relevance to the phase diagram of chiral QCD}
\bef
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=1.0]{c4scale.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Data collapse obtained for $\chi_B^4$ using the results of
\cite{pushan}, when keeping only the data for $\tau>0.04$ with O(4)
exponents. The data is plotted as a function of $1-T/T_c$ instead
of $t$ because the regular parts on the two sides of $T_c$ are have
not been removed. The colour coding corresponds to the values of
$m_\pi^2/m_\rho^2$ given in the figure legend.}
\eef{pushan}
The phase diagram of chiral QCD can be extended to finite baryon chemical
potential, $\mu$. Since this scaling field preserves the O(4) symmetry,
the critical point of chiral QCD at $\mu=0$ gets stretched into a line.
The global CP symmetry of QCD implies that $F(T,m=0,\mu)=F(T,m=0,-\mu)$, so
\beq
T_c(\mu) = T_c + \frac12\kappa\mu^2 + \cdots.
\eeq{kappa}
The curvature has been studied in lattice QCD for about a
decade. Different determinations agree roughly on its value \cite{kappa}.
If one assumes that $\mu$ enters the scaling function of eq.\
(\ref{scaling}) only through the dependence of $T_c$ on $\mu$ as given
in eq.\ (\ref{kappa}), then, as in \cite{krzystoff}, we can write
\beq
\left.\frac{\partial}{\partial T}\, g(t,\tau)\right|_{\mu=0} = -
\left.\frac{T_c}{T\kappa}\frac{\partial^2}{\partial\mu^2}\, g(t,\tau)
\right|_{\mu=0}.
\eeq{ders}
Qualitative evidence for this relation between derivatives was obtained
very long back \cite{patterns}. The relation above implies a connection
between $\cv$ and the fourth order baryon number susceptibility---
\beq
\chi_B^4(T,m) = \left.
\frac{\partial^4 P(T,m,\mu)}{\partial\mu^4}\right|_{\mu=0}
\simeq (\kappa T_c)^2\,\left(\frac T{T_c}\right)^4\,\frac{\cv}{T^3}.
\eeq{divs}
The last expression for $\chi_B^4$ comes from retaining only the most singular
contribution. This suggests a scaling test of $\chi_B^4$ similar to that for
$\cv$.
This test can be performed with the results of \cite{pushan}. For the
treatment of lattice QCD computations we may replace $m/M_0$ in the
definition of $\tau$ by $m_\pi^2/m_\rho^2$, so that $t$, $\tau$ and
$\chi_B^4$ are all renormalized quantities. In Figure \ref{fg:pushan} we
plot the full measured $T_c\chi_B^4/T$. Data collapse should be expected
in the region where the contribution from the singular part dominates.
The regular parts at temperatures well above and well below $T_c$ are
expected to be different, since effective theories in these two regions
are the hadron gas model ($T\ll T_c$) and the weak coupling
expansion of QCD ($T\gg T_c$). We have plotted Figure \ref{fg:pushan}
to show these two branches separately. It seems that in the region
$t\le0.1$, the differences in the regular parts may be neglected within
the precision of the data. One particular implication is that the
gas model should not work for $\chi_B^4$ within 10\% of $T_c$.
While this gives us a first test (in this sector) of scaling at $T=0$
at surprisingly large quark masses, the current errors are large.
Improvement in errors would allow us to test scaling better, and also
to test the importance of the variation of the regular part of these
quantities with approximately 10\% change in $t$. These requirements
set benchmarks for future measurements of $\chi_B^4$.
It is clear from eq.\ (\ref{scaling}) and the values of $\alpha$ in Table
\ref{tb:on} that derivatives of $\cv$ with respect to $T$ would diverge
in the vicinity of the critical point. As a result, one should be able
to observe scaling of the higher order baryon number susceptibilities.
For example, the sixth order quantity, $\chi_B^6$ would be universal, and
is likely to have a shape similar to that shown in Figure \ref{fg:chi6}.
It would be interesting to test this in future, when improvement in
statistics makes these tests significant.
\bef
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{chi6.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{In the chiral limit $\chi_B^6$ diverges with critical exponent
$1+\alpha$ and is proportional to the temperature derivative of $\cv$.
At finite $m_\pi^2/m_\rho^2$ these divergences would be rounded off
as shown.}
\eef{chi6}
\section{Some remarks}
It is interesting to recall that before the modern theory of critical
phenomena was developed, the Ehrenfest classification of phase transitions
was in vogue. This attempted to define orders of phase transitions
according to which derivative of the free energy diverged. In the case of
O(N) models one sees very clearly that such a classification runs into
trouble. On examining the chiral (magnetic) susceptibilities, one comes
to the conclusion that the QCD transition is of second order. However,
on examining $\cv$ one comes to the conclusion that the same transition
is of third order, since $\cv$ does not diverge, but its derivative with
respect to $T$ does. We realize today that the differences are due only
to the value of associated critical index.
We conclude by reiterating the importance of scaling tests such as that
suggested here. They constitute a new domain of tests of the universality
hypothesis in the context of QCD. Not only is this important in its own
right, but also serves to put bounds on the region of applicability of
models such as the hadron gas model. This model is a mixture of ideal
gases and hence contains no singular part, whereas O(4) universality is
based entirely on the singularity due to pions in the chiral limit. Since
these are mutually exclusive descriptions of the free energy, the success
of one rules out the other.
We thank Deepak Dhar for discussions.
|
\section{Introduction}
Fractals are measurable metric sets with non-integer
Hausdorff dimensions \cite{Fractal1,Fractal2}.
The main characteristic of fractal set is non-integer
Hausdorff dimension that should be observed on all scales.
The Hausdorff dimension is a local property, i.e. this dimension characterize
(measure) property of a set of distributed points in the limit
of a vanishing diameter, which is used to cover subset of the points.
By definition the Hausdorff dimension
requires the diameter of the covering sets to vanish.
In general, real materials have a characteristic smallest length scale $R_0$
such as the radius of a particle such as atom or molecule.
In fractal materials the fractal structure cannot be observed on all
scales but only those for which $R > R_0$, where
$R_0$ is the characteristic scale of the particles.
For real materials, a non-integer mass dimension can be
used instead of Hausdorff dimension.
The mass dimension described how the mass of a medium region
scales with the size of this region,
where we assume unchanged density.
For many cases, we have an asymptotic relation between
the mass $M(W)$ of a ball region $W$ of material,
and the radius $R$ of this ball.
The mass of fractal material
satisfies a power-law relation $M(W) \sim R^{D}$.
The parameter $D$ is called the non-integer mass dimension
of fractal material.
This parameter does not depend on the shape
of the region $W$, or on whether the packing of sphere
of radius $R_0$ is close packing, a random packing
or a porous packing with a uniform distribution of holes.
Therefore fractal material can be considered as
a medium with non-integer mass dimension.
Although, the non-integer dimension does not reflect
completely the geometrical and dynamical properties of
the fractal materials,
it nevertheless permits a number of important conclusions
about the behavior of materials.
It allows us to use effective models that take into
account non-integer dimensions.
We can distinguish the following approaches to
formulate models of fractal materials:
1) Approach based on methods of "Analysis on fractals"
\cite{Kugami,Strichartz-1,Strichartz-2,Harrison,Kumagai,DGV}
can be considered as the most rigorous approach to
describe fractal materials.
Unfortunately a possibility of application of the
"Analysis on fractals" to solve real problems of fractal material
now is very limited due to weak development of this area of mathematics.
2) To describe fractal material we can apply special continuum models suggested
in \cite{PLA2005-1,AP2005-2,IJMPB2005-2,MPLB2005-1}
and then developed in the works
\cite{MOS-1}-\cite{MOS-5b} and \cite{TarasovSpringer}.
These models can be called
the fractional-integral continuum models.
In this approach we use integrations of non-integer orders, and
two different notions such as density of states and
distribution function \cite{TarasovSpringer}.
The order of the fractional integrals is equal to
mass dimension of fractal materials.
The kernels of these integrals are defined by the power-law type
of density of states.
3) Fractional derivatives of non-integer orders
are used to describe some properties of fractal materials. This approach has been suggested
in papers \cite{CCC2001,CCC2002,CCC2003},
where so-called local fractional derivatives are used,
and then developed in the works
\cite{CCC2004a,CCC2004b,CCC2004c,CCC2004d,CCC2004e,CCSPZ2009,CCC2009}.
These models can be called the fractional-differential models.
4) Fractal materials can be described by using
the theory of integration and differentiation
for non-integer dimensional spaces
\cite{Collins,Stillinger,PS2004}.
Fractal materials are described as continuum
in non-integer dimensional spaces.
The dimension of the spaces are equal to the mass dimensions of fractal materials.
Unfortunately there are not enough differential equations
that are solved for various problems
for fractal materials
in the framework of the fractional-differential model
and by methods of "Analysis on fractals".
The fractional-integral continuum models
are used to solve differential equations
for various problems of
elasticity of fractal materials
\cite{MOS-3,MOS-4,MOS-4b,MOS-4c,MOS-5,MOS-5b}, and
thermoelasticity of fractal materials
\cite{MOS-TE1,MOS-TE2}.
Continuum models with non-integer dimensional spaces
are not currently used to describe elasticity of
fractal materials.
In this paper, we consider approach based on
the non-integer dimensional space
to describe elasticity of isotropic fractal materials.
The main difference of
the continuum models with non-integer dimensional spaces
and fractional-integral continuum models suggested in
\cite{PLA2005-1,AP2005-2,IJMPB2005-2,MPLB2005-1,TarasovSpringer}
may be reduced to the following:
(a) Arbitrariness in the choice of the numerical factor
in the density of states is fixed by the equation
of the volume of non-integer dimensional ball region.
(b) In the fractional-integral continuum models
the differentiations are integer orders whereas
the integrations are non-integer orders.
In the continuum models with non-integer dimensional spaces
the integrations and differentiations are defined for
the spaces with non-integer dimensions.
The power law $M \sim R^{D}$ can be naturally
derived by using the integrations
in non-integer dimensional space \cite{Collins},
where the dimension of this space is equal to
the mass dimension of fractal material.
A vector calculus for non-integer dimensional space proposed in this paper
allows us to use continuum models, which are based
on non-integer dimensional space, to describe fractal materials.
This is due to the fact that
although the non-integer dimension
does not reflect all geometrical and dynamical
properties of the fractal materials, it nevertheless allows us
to get important results about the behavior
of fractal materials.
Therefore continuum models with non-integer dimensional spaces
can describe a wide class of fractal materials.
Integration over non-integer dimensional spaces
are actively used in the theory of critical phenomena and
phase transitions in statistical physics
\cite{WilsonFisher,WK1974}, and
in the dimensional regularization of
ultraviolet divergences
in quantum field theory \cite{HV1972,Leibbrandt,Collins}.
The axioms for integrations in non-integer dimensional space are proposed in \cite{Wilson,Stillinger} and this type of integration is considered in the book by Collins \cite{Collins}
for rotationally covariant functions.
In the paper \cite{Stillinger} a mathematical basis of integration on non-integer dimensional space is given,
and a generalization of the Laplace operator
for non-integer dimensional spaces is suggested.
Using a product measure approach,
the Stillinger's methods \cite{Stillinger}
has been generalized by Palmer and Stavrinou \cite{PS2004}
for multiple variables case
with different degrees of confinement in orthogonal directions.
The scalar Laplace operators suggested
by Stillinger in \cite{Stillinger}
and by Palmer, Stavrinou in \cite{PS2004}
for non-integer dimensional spaces,
have successfully been used for
effective descriptions in physics and mechanics.
The Stillinger's form of Laplacian
for the Schr\"odinger equation in non-integer dimensional space
is used by He \cite{XFHe1,XFHe2,XFHe3} to describe
a measure of the anisotropy and
confinement by the effective non-integer dimensions.
Quantum mechanical models with non-integer (fractional)
dimensional space has been discussed in
\cite{Stillinger,PS2004,Thilagam1997b,MA2001a,MA2001b,QM1,QM5}
and \cite{Muslih2010,MA2012,QM8,QM9}.
Recent progress in non-integer dimensional space approach
also includes description of
the fractional diffusion processes in
non-integer dimensional space in \cite{LSTLRL}, and
the electromagnetic fields in non-integer dimensional space
in \cite{MB2007,BGG2010,MSBR2010}
and \cite{ZMN2010,ZMN2011a,ZMN2011b,ZMN2011c}.
Unfortunately, in the articles \cite{Stillinger,PS2004}
are proposed only the second order differential operators
for scalar fields in the form of the scalar Laplacian
for the non-integer dimensional space.
A generalization of the vector Laplacian \cite{VLap}
for the non-integer dimensional space is not suggested.
The first order operators such as gradient,
divergence, curl operators, and the vector Laplacian
are not considered in \cite{Stillinger,PS2004} also.
In the work \cite{ZMN}
the gradient, divergence, and curl operators
are suggested only as approximations of the square of
the Laplace operator.
Consideration only
the scalar Laplacian in non-integer dimensional space approach
greatly restricts us in application of continuum models
with non-integer dimensional space for fractal materials and material.
For example, we cannot use the Stillinger's form of Laplacian
for the displacement vector field ${\bf u}({\bf r},t)$ in
theory of elasticity and thermoelasticity of fractal materials,
for the velocity vector field ${\bf v}({\bf r},t)$
in hydrodynamics of fractal fluids,
for electric and magnetic vector fields
in electrodynamics of fractal media
in the framework non-integer dimensional space approach.
In this paper, we define
the first and second orders differential vector
operations such as gradient, divergence,
the scalar and vector Laplace operators
for non-integer dimensional space.
In order to derive the vector differential operators
in non-integer dimensional space
we use the method of analytic continuation in dimension.
For simplification we consider rotationally covariant
scalar and vector functions that are independent of angles.
It allows us to reduce differential equations
in non-integer dimensional space to
ordinary differential equations with respect to $r$.
The proposed operators
allows us to describe fractal materials
to describe processes in the framework of continuum models
with non-integer dimensional spaces.
In this paper we solve elasticity problems
for fractal hollow ball with inside and outside pressures,
for cylindrical fractal elastic pipe
with inside and outside pressures, and
for rotating cylindrical fractal pipe,
for gradient elasticity and thermoelasticity
of fractal materials.
\section{Differential and integral operators
in non-integer dimensional space}
To derive equations for vector differential operators
in non-integer dimensional space,
we use equations for the differential operators
in the spherical (and cylindrical) coordinates in $\mathbb{R}^n$
for arbitrary $n$ to highlight the explicit
relations with dimension $n$.
Then the vector differential operators
for non-integer dimension $D$
can be defined by continuation in
dimension from integer $n$ to non-integer $D$.
To simplify we will consider only scalar
fields $\varphi$ and vector fields ${\bf u}$
that are independent of angles
\[ \varphi({\bf r}) =\varphi(r) ,
\quad {\bf u}({\bf r})={\bf u} (r) = u_r\, {\bf e}_r , \]
where $r=|{\bf r}|$ is the radial distance,
${\bf e}_r={\bf r} /r$ is the local orthogonal unit
vector in the directions of increasing $r$,
and $u_r=u_r(r)$ is the radial component of ${\bf u}$.
We will work with rotationally covariant functions only.
This simplification is analogous to the simplification
for definition of integration over non-integer dimensional space
described in Section 4 of the book \cite{Collins}.
\subsection{Vector differential operators
for spherical and cylindrical cases}
Explicit definitions of differential operators
for non-integer dimensional space can be obtained
by using continuation from integer $n$
to arbitrary non-integer $D$.
We mote that the same expressions can be obtained by using
the integration in non-integer dimensional space
and the correspondent Gauss's theorem.
We define the differential vector operations
such as gradient, divergence, the scalar and
vector Laplacian for non-integer dimensional space.
For simplifications, we assume that
the vector field ${\bf u}={\bf u}({\bf r})$
be radially directed and the scalar and vector
fields $\varphi({\bf r})$, ${\bf u}({\bf r})$
are not dependent on the angles.
The divergence in non-integer dimensional space
for the vector field ${\bf u}={\bf u}(r)$ is
\be \label{Div-D}
\operatorname{Div}^{D}_{r} {\bf u} =
\frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} + \frac{D-1}{r} \, u_r.
\ee
The gradient in non-integer dimensional space
for the scalar field $\varphi=\varphi (r)$ is
\be \label{Grad-D}
\operatorname{Grad}^{D}_r \varphi = \frac{\partial \varphi}{\partial r} \, {\bf e}_r .
\ee
The scalar Laplacian in non-integer dimensional space
for the scalar field $\varphi=\varphi (r)$ is
\be \label{S-Delta-D}
^S\Delta^{D}_r \varphi=
\operatorname{Div}^{D}_r \operatorname{Grad}^{D}_{r} \varphi =
\frac{\partial^2 \varphi}{\partial r^2} + \frac{D-1}{r} \,
\frac{\partial \varphi}{\partial r} .
\ee
The vector Laplacian in non-integer dimensional space
for the vector field ${\bf u}=u_r(r) \, {\bf e}_r$ is
\be \label{V-Delta-D}
^V\Delta^{D}_r {\bf u} =
\operatorname{Grad}^{D}_r \operatorname{Div}^{D}_{r} {\bf u} =
\Bigl(
\frac{\partial^2 u_r}{\partial r^2} + \frac{D-1}{r} \,
\frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} - \frac{D-1}{r^2} \, u_r
\Bigr) \, {\bf e}_r.
\ee
If $D=n$, equations (\ref{Div-D}-\ref{V-Delta-D})
give the well-known formulas for
integer dimensional space $\mathbb{R}^n$.
We can consider materials with axial symmetry,
where the fields
$\varphi(r)$ and ${\bf u}(r)=u_r(r) \, {\bf e}_r$
are also axially symmetric.
Let the $Z$-axis be directed along the axis of symmetry.
Therefore we use a cylindrical coordinate system.
The divergence in non-integer dimensional space
for the vector field ${\bf u}={\bf u}(r)$ is
\be \label{Div-DC}
\operatorname{Div}^{D}_{r} {\bf u} =
\frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} + \frac{D-2}{r} \, u_r.
\ee
The gradient in non-integer dimensional space
for the scalar field $\varphi=\varphi (r)$ is
\be \label{Grad-DC}
\operatorname{Grad}^{D}_r \varphi =
\frac{\partial \varphi}{\partial r} \, {\bf e}_r .
\ee
The scalar Laplacian in non-integer dimensional space
for the scalar field $\varphi=\varphi (r)$ is
\be \label{S-Delta-DC}
^S\Delta^{D}_r \varphi =
\frac{\partial^2 \varphi}{\partial r^2} + \frac{D-2}{r} \,
\frac{\partial \varphi}{\partial r} .
\ee
The vector Laplacian in non-integer dimensional space
for the vector field ${\bf u}=v(r) \, {\bf e}_r$ is
\be \label{V-Delta-DC}
^V\Delta^{D}_r {\bf u} =
\Bigl(
\frac{\partial^2 u_r}{\partial r^2} + \frac{D-2}{r} \,
\frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} - \frac{D-2}{r^2} \, u_r
\Bigr) \, {\bf e}_r .
\ee
Equations (\ref{Div-DC}-\ref{V-Delta-DC}) can be
easy generalized for the case $\varphi=\varphi(r,z)$ and
${\bf u}(r,z)=u_r(r,z) \, {\bf e}_r+ u_r(r,z) \, {\bf e}_z$.
In this case the curl operator for ${\bf u}(r,z)$
is different from zero, and
\be \label{Curl-DC}
\operatorname{Curl}^{D}_r {\bf u} =
\left( \frac{\partial u_r}{\partial z} -
\frac{\partial v_z}{\partial r} \right) \, {\bf e}_{\theta} .
\ee
Equations (\ref{Div-D}) - (\ref{V-Delta-DC}) with $D=3$ and
(\ref{Curl-DC}) give the well-known
expressions for the gradient, divergence, curl operator,
scalar and vector Laplacian operators
The proposed operators for $0<D<3$ allows us to reduce
non-integer dimensional vector differentiations
(\ref{Div-D}) - (\ref{V-Delta-D}) and
(\ref{Div-DC}) - (\ref{V-Delta-DC})
to derivatives with respect to $r=|{\bf r}|$.
It allows us to reduce partial differential equations for
fields in non-integer dimensional space to
ordinary differential equations with respect to $r$.
For a function $\varphi=\varphi(r,\theta)$ of radial distance $r$
and related angle $\theta$ measured relative
to an axis passing through the origin,
the scalar Laplacian in a non-integer dimensional space
proposed by Stillinger \cite{Stillinger} is
\be \label{NI-1}
^{St}\Delta^{D} = \frac{1}{r^{D-1}} \frac{\partial}{\partial r} \left( r^{D-1} \,\frac{\partial}{\partial r} \right) +
\frac{1}{r^2 \, \sin^{D-2} \theta}
\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta}
\left( \sin^{D-2} \theta
\frac{\partial}{\partial \theta} \right) ,
\ee
where $D$ is the dimension of space ($0<D <3$),
and the variables $r \ge 0$, $0\le \theta \le \pi$.
Note that
$(\, ^{St}\Delta^{D} )^2 \ne \, ^{St}\Delta^{2D}$.
If the function depends on radial distance $r$
only ($\varphi=\varphi(r)$), then
\be \label{NI-R}
^{St}\Delta^{D} \varphi (r) = \frac{1}{r^{D-1}} \frac{\partial}{\partial r} \left( r^{D-1} \,\frac{\partial \varphi (r)}{\partial r} \right) =
\frac{\partial^2 \varphi (r)}{\partial r^2} +
\frac{D-1}{r} \, \frac{\partial \varphi (r)}{\partial r} .
\ee
It is easy to see that
the Stillinger's form of Laplacian $\, ^{St}\Delta^{D}$
for radial scalar functions $\varphi ({\bf r})=\varphi (r)$
coincides with the scalar Laplacian
$\, ^S\Delta^{D}_r$ defined by (\ref{S-Delta-D}), i.e.,
\be \label{NI-R-2}
^{St}\Delta^{D} \varphi (r) = \, ^S\Delta^{D} \varphi (r) .
\ee
The Stillinger's Laplacian can be applied
for scalar fields only. It cannot be used
to describe vector fields ${\bf u}=u_r(r) \, {\bf e}_r$
because this Laplacian for $D=3$ is not equal to
the usual vector Laplacian for $\mathbb{R}^3$,
\be
^{St}\Delta^{3} {\bf u}(r) \ne \, \Delta {\bf u}(r) =
\Bigl(
\frac{\partial^2 u_r}{\partial r^2} + \frac{2}{r} \,
\frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} - \frac{2}{r^2} \, u_r
\Bigr) \, {\bf e}_r .
\ee
The gradient, divergence, curl operator and vector Laplacian are not considered by Stillinger in paper \cite{Stillinger}.
\subsection{Integration over non-integer dimensional space}
Integration for non-integer values of dimension $D$
is defined by continuation in $D$ \cite{Leibbrandt,Collins}.
The following properties suggested in \cite{Wilson}
for integrals in $D$-dimensional space
are necessary for applications \cite{Collins}:
a) Linearity:
\be \label{Ax-1}
\int \Bigl( af_1({\bf r})+bf_2({\bf r}) \Bigr) \, d^D {\bf r} =
a \int f_1({\bf r}) \, d^D r + b \int f_2({\bf r}) \, d^D {\bf r} ,
\ee
where $a$ and $b$ are arbitrary real numbers.
b) Translational invariance:
\be \label{Ax-2}
\int f({\bf r}+{\bf r}_0) \, d^D {\bf r} =
\int f({\bf r}) \, d^D {\bf r}
\ee
for any vector ${\bf r}_0$.
c) Scaling property:
\be \label{Ax-3}
\int f(\lambda {\bf r} ) \, d^D {\bf r} =
\lambda^{-D} \int f({\bf r}) \, d^D {\bf r}
\ee
for any positive $\lambda$.
Note that linearity is true of any integration,
while translation and rotation invariance
are basic properties of a Euclidean space.
The scaling property embodies the $D$-dimensionality.
Not only the above three axioms are necessary,
but they also ensure that integration is unique,
aside from an overall normalization \cite{Wilson}.
These properties must be used in order to have
non-integer dimensional integrations \cite{Collins}.
These properties are natural
in application of dimensional regularization
to quantum field theory \cite{Collins}.
In general, we can consider any functions
of the components of its vector argument ${\bf r}$.
However, we do not know the meaning
of the components of a vector in non-integer dimensions.
In this paper, we will work
with rotationally covariant functions for simplification.
So we will assume that $f$ is a scalar or vector function
only of scalar products of vectors or of length of vectors.
For example, in the elasticity theory, we consider the case,
where the displacement vector ${\bf u} ({\bf r})$,
is independent of the angles
${\bf u} ({\bf r}) = {\bf u}(r)$, where $r=|{\bf r}|$.
The integration defined by equation (\ref{1-dimregint})
satisfies the properties (\ref{Ax-1}) - (\ref{Ax-3}).
The non-integer dimensional integration for
scalar functions $f({\bf r})=f(|{\bf r}|)$ can be defined
in terms of ordinary integration by the equation
\be \label{1-dimregint}
\int d^D {\bf r} \ f({\bf r})
= \int_{\Omega_{D-1}} d\Omega_{D-1}
\int^{\infty}_0 dr \; r^{D-1} \; f(r) ,
\ee
where
\be \label{SD-1}
\int_{\Omega_{D-1}} d\Omega_{D-1} =
\frac{2 \pi^{D/2}}{\Gamma(D/2)} =S_{D-1}. \ee
Equation (\ref{SD-1}) with integer $D=n$
gives the well-known area $S_{n-1}$
of $(n-1)$-sphere with unit radius.
As a result, we have \cite{Collins}
the explicit definition of the continuation of integration
from integer $n$ to arbitrary fractional $D$ in the form
\be \label{1-dim-reg}
\int d^D {\bf r} \ f(|{\bf r}|) = \frac{2 \pi^{D/2}}{\Gamma(D/2)}
\int^{\infty}_0 dr \; r^{D-1} \; f(r) . \ee
This equation reduced non-integer dimensional integration
to ordinary integration.
Therefore the linearity and translation invariance
follow from linearity and translation invariance
of ordinary integration.
The scaling and rotation covariance are explicit properties of the definition.
As an example of applications of equation (\ref{1-dim-reg}),
we can consider non-integer dimensional integration for
the function
\be \label{f-example}
f({\bf r}^2)= \frac{{\bf r}^2+a}{{\bf r}^2+b} , \ee
where $a$ and $b$ are real numbers.
The integral for (\ref{f-example}) can be explicitly computed
\be
\int d^D {\bf r} \, \frac{r^2+a}{r^2+b} =
(\pi b)^{D/2} \, (a/b-1) \, \Gamma(1-D/2) .
\ee
The other example is the non-integer dimensional integration is
\be
\int d^D {\bf r} \, \frac{r^{2 \alpha}}{(r^2+a^2)^{\beta}}=
\frac{\Gamma(\alpha+D/2) \,
\Gamma(\beta-\alpha-D/2)}{\Gamma(D/2) \Gamma(\beta)} \,
\pi^{D/2} \, a^{D+2\alpha -2\beta} ,
\ee
where $r=|{\bf r}|$.
\section{Mass and moment of inertia for fractal materials}
\subsection{Mass of fractal materials}
Fractal materials can be characterized by
the relation between
the mass $M(W)$ of a region $W$ of fractal material,
and the size $R$ of the region containing this mass:
\be \label{MDW}
M_D(W) =M_0 \ \left(\frac{R}{R_0}\right)^D ,
\quad R/R_0 \gg 1 . \ee
The parameter $D$ is called the non-integer mass dimension
of fractal material.
The parameter $D$, does not depend on the shape
of the region $W$, or on whether the packing of sphere
of radius $R_0$ is close packing, a random packing
or a porous packing with a uniform distribution of holes.
The cornerstone of fractal materials is the non-integer mass dimension.
The mass dimension of real fractal materials
can be measured by box-counting method,
which means drawing a box of size $R$
and counting the mass inside.
The fractality of material means than the mass of
the region $W \subset \mathbb{R}^3$
increases more slowly than the 3-dimensional volume of this region.
For the ball region of the fractal medium,
this property can be described by the power law $M_D(W) \sim R^{D}$,
where $R$ is the radius of the ball.
Fractal material is called homogeneous
if the power law $M_D(W) \sim R^{D}$ does not depend on
the translation of the region.
The homogeneity property of the material
can be formulated in the form:
For all two regions $W_1$ and $W_2$ of the homogeneous fractal material
with the equal volumes $V_D(W_1)=V_D(W_2)$,
the masses of these regions are equal $M_D(W_1)=M_D(W_2)$.
The power law (\ref{MDW}) can be naturally
derived by using the integration in the non-integer dimensional space such that the space dimensions is equal to
the mass dimension of the material.
The mass of the region $W$ of fractal material in $W$
can be calculated by the integral
in non-integer dimensional space
\be \label{1-MW3}
M_D(W) = \int_{W} \rho({\bf r}) \, d^D {\bf r} ,
\ee
where ${\bf r}$ is dimensionless vector variable.
For a ball region $W$ with radius $R$ and density
$\rho({\bf r})=\rho_0 =\operatorname{const}$, we get
the mass is defined by
\be \label{M-D}
M_D(W) = \rho_0 \, V_D =
\frac{\pi^{D/2} \, \rho_0}{\Gamma(D/2+1)} \, R^{D} .
\ee
This equation define the mass of the
fractal homogeneous ball.
For $D=3$, equation (\ref{M-D}) gives the well-known
equation for mass of non-fractal ball
$M_3 =(4 \rho_0 \pi)/3 R^3$ because
$\Gamma(3/2) =\sqrt{\pi}/2$ and $\Gamma(z+1)=z \, \Gamma(z)$.
\subsection{Moment of inertia of fractal materials}
Let us consider a calculation of scalar moment of inertia $I(t)$, which is used when the axis of rotation is known.
The scalar moment of inertia of a rigid body with density
$\rho^{\prime}({\bf r}^{\prime},t)$
with respect to a given axis is defined by the volume integral
\be \label{1-(1)}
I^{\prime}(t)=\int_W \rho^{\prime}({\bf r}^{\prime},t) \;
{\bf r}^{\prime \,2 }_{\perp} \; d^3 {\bf r}^{\prime},
\ee
where $({\bf r}^{\prime})^2_{\perp}$ is
the perpendicular distance from the axis of rotation, and
$dV^{\prime}_3=dx^{\prime}_1 dx^{\prime}_2 dx^{\prime}_3$.
We note that SI units of $I^{\prime}_{kl}$ is $kg \cdot m^2$.
To generalize equation (\ref{1-(1)}) for non-integer
dimensional space, we should
represent this equation through
the dimensionless coordinate variables.
We can introduce the dimensionless values
$x_k = x^{\prime}_k / R_0 , \quad {\bf r}={\bf r}^{\prime}/R_0$,
where $R_0$ is a characteristic scale, and the density
$\rho ({\bf r},t) = R^{3}_0 \, \rho^{\prime}( {\bf r} \, R_0 ,t)$.
SI units of $\rho$ is $kg$.
We define the following moments of inertia
$I(t)=R^{-2}_0 I^{\prime}(t)$.
As a result, we obtain
\be \label{1-(1)-2}
I=\int_{W_3} \rho ({\bf r}) \; {\bf r}^2_{\perp} \; d^3 {\bf r} ,
\ee
where $x_k$ ($k=1,2,3$) and ${\bf r}$ are dimensionless.
We note that SI units of $I_{kl}$ is $kg$.
This representation allows us to generalize
equation of the scalar moment of inertia for a fractal material
\be \label{1-(1)-3}
I^{(D)}(t)=\int_W \rho ({\bf r},t) \; {\bf r}^2_{\perp} \; dV_D ,
\ee
where $D$ is a mass dimension of fractal material.
\subsection{Moment of inertia of fractal solid ball}
Let us consider a fractal solid ball with radius $R$, and mass $M$.
Note that the component of the radius perpendicular is
\[ {\bf r}^2_{\perp} =(r \ \sin \theta)^2 . \]
Using the integration in a non-integer dimensional
space, we have
\be \label{I-D1}
I^{(D)} = \int_{W} d {\bf r}\, (r \ \sin \theta)^2 \rho(r,\theta)
= \frac{2 \pi^{(D-1)/2}}{\Gamma((D-1)/2)}
\int^{\infty}_0 dr \, r^{D-1} \,
\int^{\pi}_0 d \theta \, sin^{D-2}\theta \, (r \ \sin \theta)^2 \rho(r,\theta) .
\ee
For homogeneous materials $\rho({\bf r})=\rho_0$, we get
\[
I^{(D)} = \frac{2 \pi^{(D-1)/2} \, \rho_0}{\Gamma((D-1)/2)}
\int^{\infty}_0 dr \, r^{D+1} \,
\int^{\pi}_0 d \theta \, sin^{D}\theta =
\frac{2 \pi^{(D-1)/2} \, \rho_0}{\Gamma((D-1)/2)} \,
\frac{\pi^{1/2}\, \Gamma (D/2)}{\Gamma(D/2+1)}
\frac{R^{D+2}}{D+2} = \]
\be \label{I-D2}
=\frac{2 \pi^{D/2} \, \Gamma (D/2) \, \rho_0}{
\Gamma(D/2-1/2) \, \Gamma(D/2+1)} \,
\frac{R^{D+2}}{D+2} =
\frac{\pi^{D/2} \, (D-1) \, \rho_0}{
(D+2) \, \Gamma(D/2+1)} \, R^{D+2} ,
\ee
where we use
\be \int^{\pi}_0 d \theta \, sin^{D}\theta =
\frac{\pi^{1/2}\, \Gamma (D/2)}{\Gamma(D/2+1)} . \ee
Using the expression for mass (\ref{M-D}),
we can rewrite (\ref{I-D2}) as
\be \label{I-D4}
I^{(D)} =\frac{2 \, \Gamma (D/2)}{ (D+2) \,
\Gamma(D/2-1/2)} \, M_D \, R^{2}
=\frac{D-1}{D+2} \, M_D \, R^{2} ,
\ee
where we use $\Gamma (z)=(z-1)\Gamma(z-1)$.
For $D=3$, equation (\ref{I-D4}) gives the well-known
equation for moment of inertia of non-fractal ball
$I^{3}=(2/5) M R^2$.
\section{Elasticity theory of fractal material}
\subsection{Elasticity theory of non-fractal material}
The linear elastic constitutive relations for isotropic case
is the well-known Hooke's law that has the form
\be \label{H-0}
\sigma_{ij} = \lambda \varepsilon_{kk} \delta_{ij} + 2 \mu \varepsilon_{ij} ,
\ee
where $\lambda$ and $\mu$ are the Lame coefficients,
$\sigma_{ij}$ is the stress, $\varepsilon_{kl}$ is the strain tensor.
This expression determines the stress tensor in terms of the strain tensor for an isotropic material.
For homogenous and isotropic materials,
the constitutive relation (\ref{H-0}) gives
the equation for the displacement vector
fields ${\bf u}={\bf u}({\bf r},t)$ in the form
\be \label{EL-1}
\lambda \, \operatorname{grad} \operatorname{div} {\bf u}
+ 2 \mu \, \Delta \, {\bf u} + {\bf f} = \rho \, D^2_t {\bf u} ,
\ee
where ${\bf f}={\bf u}({\bf r},t)$ is the vector field of external force density.
If the deformation in the material is described by
${\bf u}({\bf r},t) = u(r,t) \, {\bf e}_r$, then
equation (\ref{EL-1}) has the form
\be \label{EL-2}
(\lambda + 2 \mu ) \, \Delta \, {\bf u}(r,t) + {\bf f}(r,t) =
\rho \, D^2_t {\bf u} (r,t) .
\ee
A formal generalization of equations (\ref{EL-2})
for fractal material in the framework of
non-integer dimensional models is
\be \label{F-1}
(\lambda+2 \mu ) \, ^V\Delta^{D}_r \,{\bf u}(r,t) +{\bf f}(r,t) =
\rho \, D^2_t {\bf u} (r,t) ,
\ee
where $^V\Delta^{D}_r$ is defined by (\ref{V-Delta-D}).
Equation (\ref{F-1}) described dynamics of
displacement vector for fractal elastic materials.
\subsection{Strain and stress in non-integer dimensional space}
Any deformation can be represented as the sum of a pure shear
and a hydrostatic compression.
To do so for fractal materials, we can use the identity
\be \label{dii-D}
\varepsilon_{kl} = \Bigl( \varepsilon_{kl} - \frac{1}{D} \delta_{kl} \, \varepsilon_{ii} \Bigr) + \frac{1}{D} \delta_{kl} \, \varepsilon_{ii} .
\ee
The first term on the right is a pure shear,
since the sum of diagonal terms is zero.
Here we use the equation $\delta_{ii}=D$ for non-integer dimensional space (for details see Property 4
in Section 4.3 of \cite{Collins}).
The second term is a hydrostatic compression.
For $D=3$, equation (\ref{dii-D}) has the well-known form
\be
\varepsilon_{kl} = \Bigl( \varepsilon_{kl} - \frac{1}{3} \delta_{kl} \, \varepsilon_{ii} \Bigr) + \frac{1}{3} \delta_{kl} \, \varepsilon_{ii} ,
\ee
where $\delta_{ii}=3$ is used.
The stress tensor can be represented as
\be
\sigma_{kl} = K \, \varepsilon_{ii} \, \delta_{kl}
+ 2 \mu \, \Bigl( \varepsilon_{kl} - \frac{1}{D} \delta_{kl} \, \varepsilon_{ii} \Bigr) ,
\ee
where the bulk modulus (modulus of hydrostatic compression)
is related to the Lame coefficients by
\be
K= \lambda + \frac{2 \, \mu}{D} .
\ee
In the hydrostatic compression of a body,
the stress tensor is
\be
\sigma_{kl} = - p \, \delta_{kl} .
\ee
Hence we have
\be
\sigma_{kk} =- p \, D .
\ee
If we use the Hooke's law for isotropic case in the form, then
\be
\sigma_{ii} = (\lambda \, D + 2\, \mu) \, \varepsilon_{ii} .
\ee
The components of the strain tensor is
\be \label{21a}
\varepsilon_{rr} = \frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} =
({\bf e}_r,\operatorname{Grad}^{D}_r u_r) .
\ee
Using (\ref{Div-D}), and the trace of the strain tensor
\be \label{21b}
e (r) = Tr[\varepsilon_{kl}] = \varepsilon_{kk} =
\operatorname{Div}^D_r {\bf u} =
\frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} + \frac{D-1}{r} \, u_r .
\ee
Note that we can consider
\[ e(r) - \varepsilon_{rr}(r)=
\operatorname{Div}^D_r {\bf u} - ({\bf e}_r,\operatorname{Grad}^{D}_r u_r)
= \frac{D-1}{r} \, u_r \]
as a sum of the angle diagonal components
in the spherical coordinates of the strain tensor.
For $D=3$, we have
the well-known sum of the angle diagonal components
in the spherical coordinates of the strain tensor
\[ \varepsilon_{\theta \theta} +
\varepsilon_{\varphi \varphi} =
\frac{2}{r} \, u_r . \]
When we consider the fractal medium distributed
in three-dimensional space
we can define the effective value of the
diagonal angular components of the strain tensor
\be \label{Eeff}
\varepsilon^{eff}_{\theta \theta} =
\varepsilon^{eff}_{\varphi \varphi} =
\frac{D-1}{2 r} \, u_r .
\ee
Using (\ref{21a}) and (\ref{21b}),
the components of the stress tensor $\sigma_{kl}=\sigma_{kl}(r)$
in the spherical coordinates is
\be \label{sigma-rr}
\sigma_{rr}(r) = 2 \, \mu \, \varepsilon_{rr}(r) +
\lambda \, e(r) =
(2\, \mu + \lambda) \, \frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} +
\lambda \, \frac{D-1}{r} \, u_r .
\ee
It is well-known that
the diagonal angular components of the stress tensor
for $D=3$ in spherical coordinates are
\be
\sigma_{\theta \theta} (r) =
2 \, \mu \, \varepsilon_{\theta \theta}(r) +
\lambda \, e(r) , \quad
\sigma_{\varphi \varphi} (r) =
2 \, \mu \, \varepsilon_{\varphi \varphi}(r) +
\lambda \, e(r) .
\ee
For the fractal medium distributed in three-dimensional space
we can define the effective value of
the diagonal angular components of the stress tensor
\be
\sigma^{eff}_{\theta \theta} (r) =
2 \, \mu \, \varepsilon^{eff}_{\theta \theta}(r) +
\lambda \, e(r) ,
\ee
\be
\sigma^{eff}_{\varphi \varphi} (r) =
2 \, \mu \, \varepsilon^{eff}_{\varphi \varphi}(r) +
\lambda \, e(r) .
\ee
Using the form of the effective components (\ref{Eeff}), we get
\be \label{sigma-eff}
\sigma^{eff}_{\theta \theta} (r) =
\sigma^{eff}_{\varphi \varphi} (r) =
\lambda \, \frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} +
(\lambda + \mu) \, \frac{D-1}{r} \, u_r .
\ee
This equation define the diagonal angular components
of the stress tensor for spherical coordinates.
\subsection{Equilibrium equation for fractal materials}
For static case, equation (\ref{F-1}), we have
\be \label{F-2}
^V\Delta^{D}_r \, {\bf u}(r) +
(\lambda+2 \mu )^{-1} \,{\bf f}(r) = 0 ,
\ee
where ${\bf u}= u_r \, {\bf e}_r$ and
${\bf f}= f (r)\, {\bf e}_r$.
Here $\lambda$ and $\mu$ are the Lame coefficients.
Using (\ref{V-Delta-D}), we represent equation (\ref{F-2})
in the form
\be \label{F-3}
\frac{\partial^2 u_r(r)}{\partial r^2} +
\frac{D-1}{r} \, \frac{\partial u_r(r)}{\partial r} -
\frac{D-1}{r^2} \, u_r(r)
+ (\lambda+2 \mu )^{-1} \, f (r) = 0.
\ee
The solution of (\ref{F-3}) is
\be
u_r(r) = C_1 \, r + C_2 \, r^{1-D} + I_f (D,r) ,
\ee
where $C_1$ and $C_2$ are constants defined by boundary conditions, and
\be
I_f (D,r) = \frac{r}{D \, (\lambda+2 \mu )} \,
\Bigl( \frac{1}{r^D} \, \int dr \, r^{D} \, f(r)
- \int dr \, r \, f(r) \Bigr) .
\ee
For $f(r)=f_0$, we get
\be
I_f (D,r) = - \frac{f_0 \, r^2}{2 \, (D+1) \, (\lambda+2 \mu)} ,
\ee
and the displacement is
\be
u_r(r) = C_1 \, r + C_2 \, r^{1-D} - \frac{f_0 \, r^2}{(D+1) \, (\lambda+2 \mu)} .
\ee
The components of the stress tensor $\sigma_{kl}=\sigma_{kl}(r)$
for the spherical coordinates can be calculated by equations
(\ref{sigma-rr}) and (\ref{sigma-eff}).
\subsection{Elasticity of fractal hollow ball
with inside and outside pressures}
Let us determine the deformation of a hollow fractal ball
with internal radius $R_1$ and external radius $R_2$
with the pressure $p_1$ inside and the pressure $p_2$ outside.
We can use the spherical polar coordinates
with the origin at the center of the ball.
The displacement vector ${\bf u}$ is everywhere radial,
and it is a function of $r=|{\bf r}|$ alone.
Then the equilibrium equation for fractal ball is
\be \label{F-2f0}
(\lambda+2 \mu ) \ ^V\Delta^{D}_r \, {\bf u}(r) = 0 ,
\ee
where ${\bf u}= u_r \, {\bf e}_r$.
Using (\ref{V-Delta-D}), we represent equation (\ref{F-2})
in the form
\be \label{F-3f0}
\frac{\partial^2 u_r(r)}{\partial r^2} +
\frac{D-1}{r} \, \frac{\partial u_r(r)}{\partial r} -
\frac{D-1}{r^2} \, u_r(r) = 0.
\ee
The solution of (\ref{F-3}) is
\be
u_r(r) = C_1 \, r + C_2 \, r^{1-D} .
\ee
The constants $C_1$ and $C_2$ are determined from
the boundary conditions for radial stress
\be
\sigma_{rr} (R_1) = - p_1 , \quad \sigma_{rr} (R_2) = - p_2 .
\ee
Using that the radial components of the stress is
\be
\sigma_{rr}(r) =
(2\, \mu + \lambda) \, \frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} +
\lambda \, \frac{D-1}{r} \, u_r ,
\ee
we get
\be
\sigma_{rr}(r) = (2\, \mu + D\, \lambda) \, C_1 +
2 \, (1-D) \, \mu \, C_2 \, r^{-D} .
\ee
Then we have
\be
(2\, \mu + D\, \lambda) \, C_1 +
2 \, (1-D) \, \mu \, R^{-D}_1 \, C_2 = - p_1 ,
\ee
\be
(2\, \mu + D\, \lambda) \, C_1 +
2 \, (1-D) \, \mu \, R^{-D}_2 \, C_2 = - p_2 .
\ee
As a result, the coefficients have the form
\be
C_1= \frac{- (p_1 \, R^{-D}_2 - p_2 \, R^{-D}_1) }{(2\, \mu + D\, \lambda) \, (R^{-D}_2 -R^{-D}_1)} =
\frac{-(p_2 \, R^{D}_2 - p_1 \, R^{D}_1) }{(2\, \mu + D\, \lambda) \, (R^{D}_2 -R^{D}_1)} ,
\ee
\be
C_2=\frac{- (p_2 - p_1) \, (R_1 \, R_2)^D }{ 2 \, (1-D) \, \mu \,
(R^{-D}_2 -R^{-D}_1)}
= \frac{p_2 - p_1}{ 2 \, (1-D) \, \mu \,
(R^{D}_2 -R^{D}_1)} .
\ee
Then the radial components of the stress is
\be \label{sigma-1}
\sigma_{rr}(r) =
\frac{-(p_2 \, R^{D}_2 - p_1 \, R^{D}_1) }{R^{D}_2 -R^{D}_1}
+ \frac{(p_2 - p_1) \, (R_1 \, R_2)^D }{R^{D}_2 -R^{D}_1} \, r^{-D} .
\ee
The stress distribution in a ball with pressure $p_1=p$ inside
and $p_2=0$ outside is gives by
\be
\sigma_{rr}(r) = \frac{ p \, R^{D}_1 }{R^{D}_2 -R^{D}_1}
- \frac{p}{R^{D}_2 -R^{D}_1} \, r^{-D}
= \frac{ p \, R^{D}_1 }{R^{D}_2 -R^{D}_1}
\left( 1 - \left(\frac{R_2}{r}\right)^D \right) .
\ee
The stress distribution in an infinite elastic material with spherical cavity with radius $R$ subjected to hydrostatic compression
\be
\sigma_{rr}(r) = -p \, \left( 1 - \left(\frac{R}{r}\right)^D \right) .
\ee
that can be obtained by putting $R_1=R$, $R_2 \to \infty$,
$p_1=0$ and $p_2=p$ in equation (\ref{sigma-1}).
\section{Elasticity of fractal material with radial distribution
in cylinder and pipe}
\subsection{Elasticity of fractal pipe and cylinder}
If we use the cylindrical coordinates with the $z$-axis
and the vector field ${\bf u}({\bf r},t)$ is a purely radial
\be
{\bf u}=u_r(r) \, {\bf e}_r,
\ee
where ${\bf e}_r={\bf r}/r$, then
\be \label{Pipe-1}
^V\Delta^D_r {\bf u} = \Bigl(
\frac{\partial^2 u_r(r)}{\partial r^2}
+ \frac{D-2}{r} \, \frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r}
- \frac{D-2}{r^2} u_r(r) \Bigr) \, {\bf e}_r.
\ee
Note that we have $(D-2)$ instead of $(D-1)$ in this equation.
For $D=3$, equation (\ref{Pipe-1}) gives
the well-known equation for elasticity of cylinder and pipe.
If ${\bf u}=u_r(r) \, {\bf e}_r$ is the displacement vector
for non-fractal materials in 3-dimensional case ($D=3$),
then the strain tensor $\varepsilon_{ij}({\bf r})$
has the following nonzero components that can be defined by
\be
\varepsilon_{rr} = ({\bf e}_r, \operatorname{grad} u_r)
= \frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} ,
\ee
\be
\varepsilon_{\varphi \varphi} = \operatorname{div} {\bf u} -
({\bf e}_r, \operatorname{grad} u_r) = \frac{u_r}{r} ,
\ee
and the invariant
\be
e= \varepsilon_{kk} = \operatorname{div} {\bf u} =
\frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} +\frac{u_r}{r} .
\ee
These equations with divergence and gradient
can be generalized for non-integer dimensional case
for ${\bf u}=u_r(r) \, {\bf e}_r$.
For non-integer dimensional model of fractal materials,
we can use the definitions for the components of
displacement vector in non-integer dimensional space
in the form
\be
\varepsilon_{rr} = ({\bf e}_r, \operatorname{Grad}^D_r u_r) ,
\ee
\be
\varepsilon_{\varphi \varphi} = \operatorname{Div}^D_r {\bf u} -
({\bf e}_r, \operatorname{Grad}^D_r u_r) ,
\ee
where we use the invariant
\be
e= \varepsilon_{kk} = \operatorname{Div}^D_r {\bf u} =
\frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} +\frac{D-2}{r} u_r.
\ee
As a result, we get
\be
\varepsilon_{rr} = \frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} ,
\ee
\be
\varepsilon_{\varphi \varphi} = \frac{D-2}{r} u_r .
\ee
Let us assume that the elastic constitutive relations
for fractal material in isotropic case has
the usual form
\be \label{H-0b}
\sigma_{ij} = \lambda \varepsilon_{kk} \delta_{ij} + 2 \mu \varepsilon_{ij} .
\ee
In this case, the non-zero components of stress tensor are
\be
\sigma_{rr} =2\, \mu \, \varepsilon_{rr} + \lambda \, e =
(2\mu+\lambda) \frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} +
\lambda \frac{D-2}{r} u_r,
\ee
\be
\sigma_{\varphi \varphi} = 2\mu \, \varepsilon_{\varphi \varphi} + \lambda \, e =
\lambda \frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} +
(2\mu+\lambda) \frac{D-2}{r} u_r,
\ee
\be
\sigma_{zz} =2\, \mu \, \varepsilon_{zz} + \lambda \, e = \
\lambda \frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} +
\lambda \frac{D-2}{r} u_r ,
\ee
where we use $\varepsilon_{zz}=0$.
For $D=3$, we have the usual constitutive relations
for isotropic case in cylindrical coordinates.
\subsection{Elasticity of cylindrical fractal pipe
with inside and outside pressures}
Let us consider the deformation of a fractal solid
cylindrical pipe with internal radius $R_1$ external radius $R_2$
with a inside pressure $p_1$ and outside pressure $p_2$.
We use the cylindrical coordinates with the $z$-axis
along the axis of the pipe.
When the pressure is uniform along the pipe,
the deformation is a purely radial displacement
${\bf u}=u_r(r) \, {\bf e}_r$, where ${\bf e}_r={\bf r}/r$.
The equation for the displacement $u_r(r)$
in fractal pine is
\be \label{Cyl-1.1}
\frac{\partial^2 u_r(r)}{\partial r^2} + \frac{D-2}{r} \,
\frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} - \frac{D-2}{r^2} \, u_r = 0 ,
\ee
where $0<D \le 3$.
If $D=3$, we get the usual (non-fractal) case.
The general solution of equation (\ref{Cyl-1.1}),
where $D \ne 1$ and $D \ne 2$, has the form
\be \label{Sol-P-1}
u_r(r) = C_1\, r + C_2\, r^{2-D} .
\ee
Equations (\ref{Cyl-1.1}) with $D=1$ has the general solution
\be
u_r(r) = C_1\, r + C_2\, r \, \ln (r) .
\ee
For $D=2$, equations (\ref{Cyl-1.1}) has the solution
\be
u_r(r) = C_1\, + C_2\, r .
\ee
Note that that fractal dimension of the pipe material
can be $D=1$ or $D=2$. These cases do not correspond
to the distribution of matter along the line and surface.
These fractal dimensions describe a distribution of matter
in 3-dimensional space (in the volume of pipe)
such that the mass dimension is equal to $D$.
The constants $C_1$ and $C_2$ are determined by
boundary conditions.
Using that inside pressure is $p_1$ and
outside pressure is $p_2$,
we get the boundary condition in the form
\be \label{BCond-1}
\sigma_{rr} (R_1) = - \, p_1 , \quad
\sigma_{rr} (R_2) = - \, p_2 .
\ee
Using (\ref{Sol-P-1}), we get
\be
\frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} = C_1 + (2-D) \, C_2\, r^{1-D} , \ee
\be
\frac{D-2}{r} u_r = (D-2) \, C_1 + (D-2)\, C_2\, r^{1-D} .
\ee
Then
\be
\sigma_{rr} =(2\mu+\lambda) \frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} +
\lambda \frac{D-2}{r} u_r = (2 \mu+ \lambda\, (D-1)) \, C_1
- 2 \, \mu \, (D-2)\, C_2\, r^{1-D} .
\ee
The boundary condition (\ref{BCond-1}) has the form
\be \label{BCond-1a}
(2 \mu+ \lambda\, (D-1)) \, C_1
- 2 \, \mu \, (D-2)\, C_2\, R^{1-D}_1 = - \, p_1 ,
\ee
\be \label{BCond-1b}
(2 \mu+ \lambda\, (D-1)) \, C_1
- 2 \, \mu \, (D-2) \, C_2\, R^{1-D}_2 = - \, p_2 .
\ee
As a result, we have
\be
C_1 = - \frac{ p_1 \, R^{1-D}_2 - p_2 \, R^{1-D}_1 }{
(2 \mu+ \lambda\, (D-1)) \, ( R^{1-D}_2 - R^{1-D}_1) } ,
\ee
\be
C_2 = \frac{ p_2 - p_1 }{2 \, \mu \, (D-2)
\, (R^{1-D}_2 - R^{1-D}_1) } .
\ee
The stress is
\be \label{stress-rr-1}
\sigma_{rr} = - \frac{ p_1 \, R^{1-D}_2 - p_2 \, R^{1-D}_1 }{
( R^{1-D}_2 - R^{1-D}_1) }
- \frac{ p_2 - p_1 }{ (R^{1-D}_2 - R^{1-D}_1) } \, r^{1-D} .
\ee
If $2<D<3$ or $1<D<2$, then we can rewrite
equation (\ref{stress-rr-1}) in the form
\be \label{stress-rr-2}
\sigma_{rr} = \frac{ p_1 \, R^{D-1}_1 - p_2 \, R^{D-1}_2 }{
( R^{D-1}_2 - R^{D-1}_1) }
- \frac{ p_2 - p_1 }{ (R^{D-1}_2 - R^{D-1}_1) } \,
\left( \frac{R_1\, R_2}{r} \right)^{D-1} .
\ee
For the boundary conditions
$\sigma_{rr}(R_2)=0$ and $\sigma_{rr}(R_1)=-p$,
i.e. $p_2=0$ and $p_1=p$ for (\ref{stress-rr-2}),
we have the solution of the form
\be \label{stress-rr-3}
\sigma_{rr} = \frac{ p \, R^{D-1}_1}{
( R^{D-1}_2 - R^{D-1}_1) } \left( 1 -
\left( \frac{R_2}{r} \right)^{D-1} \right) .
\ee
This is the deformation of cylindrical pipe
with a pressure $p$ inside and no pressure outside.
For ($D=3$) we have
\be \label{stress-rr-4}
\sigma_{rr} = \frac{ p \, R^{2}_1}{
( R^{2}_2 - R^{2}_1) } \left( 1 -
\left( \frac{R_2}{r} \right)^{2} \right)
\ee
that describes the stress of non-fractal material of pipe.
\subsection{Rotating cylindrical fractal pipe}
Let us consider the deformation of a fractal solid
that is describes by equation with external force $f(r)$
for the displacement field $u_r(r)$ in fractal pine
\be \label{Cyl-1.1f}
\frac{\partial^2 u_r(r)}{\partial r^2} + \frac{D-2}{r} \,
\frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} - \frac{D-2}{r^2} \, u_r +
\frac{1}{\lambda +2 \, \mu} f(r) =0 ,
\ee
where $D>0$.
The general solution of equation (\ref{Cyl-1.1f}) has the form
\be \label{Sol-P-1b}
u_r(r) = C_1\, r + C_2\, r^{2-D} -
\frac{1}{(D-1) \, (\lambda +2 \, \mu)}
\Bigl( \int^{R_2}_{R_1} f (r) \, r \, dr -
r^{2-D} \, \int^{R_2}_{R_1} f (r) \, r^{D-1}\, dr \Bigr).
\ee
Equations (\ref{Cyl-1.1f}) with $D=1$ has the general solution
\be
u_r(r) = C_1\, r + C_2\, r \, \ln (r) +
\frac{r}{\lambda +2 \, \mu}
\Bigl( \int^{R_2}_{R_1} f (r) \, \ln (r) \, dr +
\ln(r) \, \int^{R_2}_{R_1} f (r) \, dr \Bigr).
\ee
For $D=2$, equations (\ref{Cyl-1.1f}) has the solution
\be
u_r(r) = C_1\, + C_2\, r -
\frac{1}{\lambda +2 \, \mu}
\Bigl( \int^{R_2}_{R_1} f (r) \, r \, dr -
r \, \int^{R_2}_{R_1} f (r) \, dr \Bigr).
\ee
Let us consider the deformation of a fractal solid
cylindrical pipe with internal radius $R_1$ external radius $R_2$
rotating uniformly about its axis with angular velocity $\omega$.
Then the density of the centrifugal force is
\be
f_r (r) = \rho_0 \, \omega^2 \, r .
\ee
We use the cylindrical coordinates with the $z$-axis
along the axis of the cylinder.
When the pressure is uniform along the pipe,
the deformation is a purely radial displacement
${\bf u}=u_r(r) \, {\bf e}_r$, where ${\bf e}_r={\bf r}/r$.
The equation for the displacement $u_r(r)$
in fractal material is
\be \label{Cyl-2.1}
\frac{\partial^2 u_r(r)}{\partial r^2} + \frac{D-2}{r} \,
\frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} - \frac{D-2}{r^2} \, u_r =
- \frac{\rho_0 \omega^2}{\lambda + 2 \mu} \, r .
\ee
The general solution of equation (\ref{Cyl-2.1}) has the form
\be \label{Sol-P-2}
u_r(r) = C_1\, r + C_2\, r^{2-D} - A \, r^3 ,
\ee
where
\be \label{Adef}
A = \frac{\rho_0\, \omega^2}{2(D+1)(\lambda +2\mu)} .
\ee
Using the condition that external forces
do not act inside and outside the fractal pipe,
we have the boundary condition
\be \label{BCond-2}
\sigma_{rr} (R_1) = 0 , \quad \sigma_{rr} (R_2) = 0 .
\ee
Using (\ref{Sol-P-2}), we get
\be
\frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} = C_1 + (2-D) \, C_2\, r^{1-D} -3 \, A \, r^2 ,
\ee
\be
\frac{D-2}{r} u_r = (D-2) \, C_1 + (D-2)\, C_2\, r^{1-D}
- A \, (D-2)\, r^2 .
\ee
Then
\[
\sigma_{rr} = (2\mu+\lambda) \frac{\partial u_r}{\partial r} +
\lambda \frac{D-2}{r} u_r = \]
\be
= (2 \mu+ \lambda\, (D-1)) \, C_1
- 2 \, \mu \, (D-2)\, C_2\, r^{1-D}
- A\, ( 6 \, \mu + \lambda \, (D+1) )\, r^2 .
\ee
The boundary condition (\ref{BCond-2}) has the form
\be \label{BCond-2a}
(2 \mu+ \lambda\, (D-1)) \, C_1
- 2 \, \mu \, (D-2)\, C_2\, R^{1-D}_1=
A\, ( 6 \, \mu + \lambda \, (D+1) )\, R^2_1 ,
\ee
\be \label{BCond-2b}
(2 \mu+ \lambda\, (D-1)) \, C_1
- 2 \, \mu \, (D-2)\, C_2\, R^{1-D}_2=
A\, ( 6 \, \mu + \lambda \, (D+1) )\, R^2_2 .
\ee
Then
\be \label{C1b}
C_1 = \frac{ A\, ( 6 \, \mu + \lambda \, (D+1) )\,
(R^{D+1}_2 - R^{D+1}_1)}{ (2 \mu+ \lambda\, (D-1)) \,
( R^{D-1}_2 - R^{D-1}_1)} ,
\ee
\be \label{C2b}
C_2 = \frac{ A\, ( 6 \, \mu + \lambda \, (D+1) )\,
(R^2_2 - R^2_1) \, (R_1 \, R_2)^{D-1}}{ 2 \, \mu \, (D-2)\,
( R^{D-1}_2 - R^{D-1}_1)} .
\ee
Substitution of (\ref{C1b}) and (\ref{C2b}) into (\ref{Sol-P-2})
\[ u_r(r) =
\frac{ A\, ( 6 \, \mu + \lambda \, (D+1) )\,
(R^{D+1}_2 - R^{D+1}_1)}{ (2 \mu+ \lambda\, (D-1)) \,
( R^{D-1}_2 - R^{D-1}_1)} \, r +
\]
\be \label{Sol-P-2b}
+ \frac{ A\, ( 6 \, \mu + \lambda \, (D+1) )\,
(R^2_2 - R^2_1) \, (R_1 \, R_2)^{D-1}}{ 2 \, \mu \, (D-2)\,
( R^{D-1}_2 - R^{D-1}_1)}, \, r^{2-D} - A \, r^3 .
\ee
where $A$ is defined by (\ref{Adef}).
For the fractal cylinder ($R_1=0$, $R_2=R$), we have
\be \label{Sol-P-2c}
u_r(r) =
\frac{\rho_0\, \omega^2}{2(D+1)(\lambda +2\mu)} \,
\left(
\frac{ 6 \, \mu + \lambda \, (D+1) }{ 2 \mu+ \lambda\, (D-1)}
\, R^2 \, r - r^3 \right) .
\ee
For $D=3$, equation (\ref{Sol-P-2c}) gives
\be \label{Sol-P-2e}
u_r(r) =
\frac{\rho_0\, \omega^2}{8(\lambda +2\mu)} \,
\left(
\frac{ 3 \, \mu + 2 \, \lambda }{ \mu+ \lambda}
\, R^2 \, r - r^3 \right) .
\ee
Equation (\ref{Sol-P-2e}) describes the displacement field
for elastic cylinder with non-fractal material.
\section{Gradient elasticity model for fractal materials}
\subsection{Gradient elasticity theory of non-fractal material}
In the papers \cite{A1992,AA1992,RA1993} suggested
to generalize the constitutive relations (\ref{H-0}) by
the gradient modification that contains the Laplacian in the form
\be \label{H-1}
\sigma_{ij} = \Bigl( \lambda \varepsilon_{kk} \delta_{ij} + 2 \mu \varepsilon_{ij} \Bigr)
- l^2_s \, \Delta \, \Bigl( \lambda \varepsilon_{kk} \delta_{ij} + 2 \mu \varepsilon_{ij} \Bigr) ,
\ee
where $l_s$ is the scale parameter \cite{AA2011}.
For homogenous and isotropic materials equation for (\ref{H-1}) has the form
\be \label{EM-3}
\lambda \, \Bigl( 1 \pm l^2_s \Delta \Bigr) \, \operatorname{grad} \operatorname{div} {\bf u}
+ 2 \mu \, \Bigl( 1 \pm l^2_s \Delta \Bigr) \, \Delta \, {\bf u} + {\bf f} = \rho \, D^2_t {\bf u} ,
\ee
where ${\bf f}$ is the vector field of external force density.
Using relation
\be
\operatorname{grad} \, \operatorname{div} \, {\bf u} =
\operatorname{curl} \, \operatorname{curl} \, {\bf u} +
\, \Delta {\bf u} ,
\ee
we can rewrite equation (\ref{EM-3}) as
\be \label{EM-4}
\lambda \, \Bigl( 1 \pm l^2_s \, \Delta \Bigr) \,
\operatorname{curl} \, \operatorname{curl} \, {\bf u}
+ (\lambda+2 \mu ) \, \Bigl( 1 \pm
l^2_s \, \Delta \Bigr) \, \Delta {\bf u} + {\bf f}
= \rho \, D^2_t {\bf u} .
\ee
If we assume that the displacement vector ${\bf u}$
is everywhere radial and it is a function of $r=|{\bf r}|$
alone ($u_k=u_k(|{\bf r}|)$), then
\[ \operatorname{curl} \, {\bf u}=0 . \]
As a result, equation (\ref{EM-4}) has the form
\be \label{EM-5}
(\lambda+2 \mu ) \, \Bigl( 1 \pm l^2_s \, \Delta \Bigr)
\, \Delta \,{\bf u} +{\bf f}
= \rho \, D^2_t {\bf u} .
\ee
This is gradient elasticity equation
for homogenous and isotropic materials with
the spherical symmetry.
For the non-gradient model ($l^2_s =0$), equation (\ref{EM-5})
for the displacement gives (\ref{EL-2}).
\subsection{Gradient elasticity of fractal material}
A formal generalization of equations (\ref{EM-5})
for fractal material in the framework of continuum models with
non-integer dimensional space, where
the displacement vector ${\bf u}={\bf u}(r,t)$,
does not depend on the angles, has the form
\be \label{VL-1}
(\lambda+2 \mu ) \, \Bigl( 1 \pm l^2_s(D) \, ^V\Delta^{D}_r \Bigr)
\, ^V\Delta^{D}_r \,{\bf u} +{\bf f} = \rho \, D^2_t {\bf u} .
\ee
This is fractional gradient elasticity equation
for homogenous and isotropic materials with
the spherical symmetry.
Let us consider equation (\ref{VL-1})
for static case ($D^2_t {\bf u}=0$)
with a minus in front of Laplacian,
i.e. the GRADELA model for fractal materials \cite{AA2011},
\be \label{VL-2}
(\lambda+2 \mu ) \, \Bigl( 1 - l^2_s(D) \, ^V\Delta^{D}_r \Bigr)
\, ^V\Delta^{D}_r \,{\bf u} + {\bf f} = 0 .
\ee
We can rewrite this equation as
\be \label{VL-3}
(\, ^V\Delta^{D}_r )^2 \,{\bf u} -
l^{-2}_s(D) \, ^V\Delta^{D}_r \,{\bf u}
- (\lambda+2 \mu)^{-1} \, l^{-2}_s(D) \, {\bf f} = 0 .
\ee
Using the vector Laplacian (\ref{V-Delta-D}), we have
\be \label{VL-4}
^V\Delta^{D}_r {\bf u}(r)= \Bigl(
\frac{\partial^2 u_r(r)}{\partial r^2} +
\frac{D-1}{r} \, \frac{\partial u_r(r)}{\partial r}
- \frac{D-1}{r^2} \, u_r(r) \Bigr) \, {\bf e}_r .
\ee
and
\[ (\, ^V\Delta^{D}_r)^2 {\bf u}(r)
= \Bigl(
\frac{\partial^4 u_r(r)}{\partial r^4}
+ \frac{2(D-1)}{r} \, \frac{\partial^3 u_r(r)}{\partial r^3} +
\]
\be \label{VL-5}
+ \frac{(D-1)(D-5)}{r^2} \, \frac{\partial^2 u_r(r)}{\partial r^2}
- \frac{3(D-1)(D-3)}{r^3} \, \frac{\partial u_r(r)}{\partial r}
+ \frac{3(D-1)(D-3)}{r^4} \, u_r(r) \Bigr) \, {\bf e}_r .
\ee
Using (\ref{VL-4} - \ref{VL-5}) and
${\bf f}(r)=f(r) \, {\bf e}_r$, equation (\ref{VL-3})
gives
\[ \frac{\partial^4 u_r(r)}{\partial r^4}
+ \frac{2(D-1)}{r} \, \frac{\partial^3 u_r(r)}{\partial r^3} + \left(\frac{(D-1)(D-5)}{r^2} -
l^{-2}_s(D) \right) \, \frac{\partial^2 u_r(r)}{\partial r^2} -
\]
\[
- \left( \frac{3(D-1)(D-3)}{r^3} +
l^{-2}_s(D) \frac{D-1}{r}\right)
\, \frac{\partial u_r(r)}{\partial r} +
\]
\be \label{EM-9}
+ \left( \frac{3(D-1)(D-3)}{r^4} +
l^{-2}_s(D) \frac{D-1}{r^2}\right) \, u_r(r)
- (\lambda+2 \mu)^{-1} \, l^{-2}_s(D) \, f(r) = 0.
\ee
General solution for the case $f(r)=0$ is
\be
u_r(r) = C_1 \, r + C_2 r^{1-D} - C_3 \, I_I(D,r) - C_4 \, I_K(D,r) ,
\ee
where $I_I(D,r)$ and $I_K(D,r)$ are the integrals of the Bessel functions
\be
I_I(D,r) = D\, r\, \int dr \, r^{-D-1} \int dr \, r^{D/2+1} I_{D/2}(r/l_s(D)) ,
\ee
\be
I_K(D,r) = D\, r\, \int dr \, r^{-D-1} \int dr \, r^{D/2+1} K_{D/2}(r/l_s(D)) ,
\ee
where $I_{\alpha}(x)$ and $K_{\alpha}(x)$ are Bessel functions of the first and second kinds.
\section{Thermoelasticity of fractal material}
Let us consider a generalization of thermoelasticity
\cite{TE-1,TE-2,TE-3} for fractal material.
In this section we consider a non-integer-dimensional model
of thermoelasticity of fractal material.
Note that thermoelasticity of fractal materials
in the framework of the fractional-integral continuum model
\cite{AP2005-2,PLA2005-1,TarasovSpringer},
has been considered by Ostoja-Starzewski in \cite{MOS-TE1,MOS-TE2}.
\subsection{Thermoelastic constitutive relation
for fractal material}
If the isotropic material is non-uniformly heated, then
the constitutive relation for a thermoelastic material
must include \cite{LL} the term
\be \label{TECR-1}
\sigma_{ij} = \lambda \, \varepsilon_{kk} \, \delta_{ij} + 2 \, \mu \, \varepsilon_{ij}
- K\, \alpha \, (T-T_0) \, \delta_{ij} ,
\ee
where $\lambda$ and $\mu$ are the Lame coefficients,
$K$ is the bulk modulus or modulus of compression.
The third term in equation (\ref{TECR-1}) gives
the additional stresses caused by the change in temperature.
The bulk modulus for fractal materials is related to the Lame coefficients by
\be \label{Klm}
K= \lambda + \frac{2}{D} \mu .
\ee
In this formula, we use the dimension $D$ instead of 3 because
$\delta_{kk}=D$
for non-integer dimensional space (see Property 4 in Section 4.3 of \cite{Collins}).
If external forces being absent, then the stress is equal to zero $\sigma_{ij}=0$
and we have a free thermal expansion.
Using $\sigma_{ij}=0$, equation (\ref{TECR-1}) gives
\be
\lambda \varepsilon_{kk} \delta_{ij} + 2 \mu \varepsilon_{ij} - K\, \alpha \, (T-T_0) \, \delta_{ij} = 0 .
\ee
Using $\delta_{kk}=D$ and (\ref{Klm}), we obtain
\be
\varepsilon_{kk} = \alpha \, (T-T_0) .
\ee
Because the function $e=\varepsilon_{kk}$ describes the relative change
of volume caused by deformation, then $\alpha$
is the thermal expansion coefficient of the material \cite{LL}.
The constitutive relation (\ref{TECR-1}) for fractal material
can be represented in the form
\be \label{TECR-2}
\sigma_{ij} = \lambda \varepsilon_{kk} \delta_{ij} + 2 \mu \varepsilon_{ij} -
(D\, \lambda +2 \mu)\, \alpha_T \, (T-T_0) \, \delta_{ij} ,
\ee
where we use the dimension $D$ instead of 3
since $K=(D\, \lambda +2\, \mu)/D$.
\subsection{Thermoelastic equations for fractal material}
For homogenous and isotropic non-fractal materials,
we have the thermoelasticity equation
\be \label{TE-1}
\lambda \, \operatorname{grad} \operatorname{div} {\bf u}
+ 2 \mu \, \Delta \, {\bf u} + {\bf f}
- (3 \lambda +2 \mu)\, \alpha \, \operatorname{grad} T = \rho \, D^2_t {\bf u} ,
\ee
where ${\bf f}$ is the external force density vector field.
For the case ${\bf u}={\bf u}(r,t)$ and ${\bf f}={\bf f}(r,t)$,
equation (\ref{TE-1}) gives
\be \label{TE-2}
(\lambda + 2 \mu) \, \Delta \, {\bf u} + {\bf f}
- (3 \lambda +2 \mu)\, \alpha \, \operatorname{grad} T = \rho \, D^2_t {\bf u} .
\ee
The thermoelasticity equation for fractal materials
in the framework of models with
non-integer dimensional space has the form
\be \label{TE-3}
(\lambda + 2 \mu) \, ^V\Delta^{D}_r \, {\bf u}(r,t) + {\bf f}(r,t)
- (D\, \lambda +2 \mu)\, \alpha \, \operatorname{Grad}^D_r T(r,t) = \rho \, D^2_t {\bf u}(r,t) ,
\ee
where we assume ${\bf f}=f_r(r,t) \, {\bf e}_r$
and ${\bf u}=u_r(r,t) \, {\bf e}_r$.
Using (\ref{V-Delta-D}), equation (\ref{TE-3})
can be represented in the form
\[
\frac{\partial^2 u_r(r,t)}{\partial r^2} + \frac{D-1}{r} \,
\frac{\partial u_r(r,t)}{\partial r} - \frac{D-1}{r^2} \, u_r (r,t) + \]
\be \label{TE-4}
+ \frac{1}{\lambda + 2 \mu} f_r(r,t) - \,
\frac{\alpha \, (D\, \lambda +2 \mu)}{\lambda + 2 \mu}
\frac{\partial T(r,t)}{\partial r} =
\frac{\rho}{\lambda + 2 \mu} \, D^2_t u_r(r,t) .
\ee
If the fractal material is non-uniformly heated, then
the equation of equilibrium has the form
\be \label{TE-5}
\frac{\partial^2 u_r(r)}{\partial r^2} + \frac{D-1}{r} \,
\frac{\partial u_r(r)}{\partial r} - \frac{D-1}{r^2} \, u_r(r) =
\frac{(D\, \lambda +2 \mu)\, \alpha}{\lambda + 2 \mu} \,
\frac{\partial T(r)}{\partial r} .
\ee
This is thermoelasticity equation in spherical coordinates
for pure radial deformation of fractal materials with
fractal dimension $D$.
For $D=3$, we get the usual equation for thermoelasticity
of solid ball \cite{LL}.
General solution of equation (\ref{TE-5}) has the form
\be
u_r(r) = C_1 \, r + \frac{c_2}{r^{D-1}}
+
\frac{(D\, \lambda +2 \mu)\, \alpha}{D \, (\lambda + 2 \mu)}
\Bigl( r \, T(r) -
\frac{D}{r^{D-1}} \int r^D\, T(r) \, dr \Bigr) ,
\ee
where $C_1$ and $C_2$ are defined by boundary conditions.
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, continuum models
with non-integer dimensional space
are suggested to describe isotropic fractal materials.
A generalization of differential vector operators
for non-integer dimensional space is proposed
to describe elasticity of fractal materials
in the framework of continuum models.
The differential operators of first and second orders
for non-integer dimensional space
are suggested for rotationally covariant scalar
and vector functions.
We consider applications for elasticity theory
in the case of spherical and axial symmetries of
the fractal material.
Elastic properties of
fractal hollow ball and cylindrical fractal pipe
with inside and outside pressures,
rotating cylindrical fractal elastic pipe are described.
Equations for thermoelasticity and gradient elasticity
of fractal materials are solved.
Although the non-integer dimension
does not reflect all properties
of the fractal material,
the suggested models
with non-integer dimensional space
nevertheless allows us to derive
a number of important conclusions about the behavior
of fractal materials.
Therefore continuum models with non-integer dimensional spaces
can be successfully used to describe elasticity
and thermoelasticity of fractal materials.
The proposed continuum models of fractal materials
can be extended to more complex fractal materials:
(1) We assume that continuum models
with non-integer dimensional space
can be generalized for anisotropic
fractal materials \cite{JMP2014};
(2) The non-integer dimensional models
of fractal elastic materials
can easily be generalized for
the boundary dimensions $d \ne D-1$ \cite{CNSNS2015}.
(3) We also assume that differential and
integral operators of fractional orders
can also be defined for non-integer dimensional spaces
to take into account non-locality of fractal materials.
Note that dimensional continuation of
the Riesz fractional integrals and derivatives \cite{KST}
to generalize differential and integrals of fractional
orders for non-integer dimensional space
has been considered in \cite{MA2010}.
|
\section{Introduction}
High precision, high duty time-series photometry from \textit{Kepler} has contributed to numerous fundamentally new discoveries in the exoplanet field (e.g. \citet{Borucki2010,Burke2014}). The primary mission ended in 2014 after finding thousands of planets and candidates \citep{Mullally2015}, with the technical failure of two reaction wheels. The extended \textit{K2} mission \citep{Howell2014} continues to deliver data and new planets \citep{Vanderburg2015,Foreman2015}. After this huge success, the next spacecraft photometry missions with improved technology are expected for 2017 (Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite, \textit{TESS} \citep{Ricker2014}) and 2024 (Planetary Transits and Oscillations of stars, \textit{PLATO 2.0} \citep{Rauer2014}). We asked the obvious question: What can we expect from these missions in the very best case? And ultimately: Assuming near-perfect photometric technology at some point in the future, what can we expect from photometry as such? Where are the fundamental limits?
To begin, we will examine and define instrumental and stellar noise (section~\ref{sec:instruments}). Afterwards, we will discuss the \textit{Kepler}, \textit{TESS} and \textit{PLATO 2.0} mission designs and limitations (section~\ref{sec:sim}). We will not focus on the high numbers of discoveries, but on the very best cases with respect to their instrumental noise. In section~\ref{sec:inject}, we will present the view of a distant observer at \textit{our} planets transiting \textit{our} Sun, assuming near-perfect photometry. Inversely, this is what we can expect from future space missions when it comes to finding solar system analogues.
We will conclude with an outlook to the limits of photometry.
\section{Examining the noise}
\label{sec:instruments}
Noise in data is often the limiting factor of data analysis. Noise in exoplanet transit photometry is caused by instrumental imperfections ($N_{I}$) and stellar jitter ($N_{S}$). In the following, we will discuss both parts separately. The total noise $N$, assuming Gaussian distribution, is then calculated as:
\begin{equation}
N=\sqrt{N_{I}^{2}+N_{S}^{2}}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Stellar noise characterization}
\label{sub:stellarnoise}
Stellar noise occurs with different characteristics on all time scales. First considerations for the \textit{Kepler} mission by \citet{Batalha2002} were theoretical, due to the lack of precise data for other stars. In our sun, there is the 11-year solar activity cycle \citep{Schwabe1843,Usoskin2009}, a phenomenon we also find on different time scales in other stars \citep{Garcia2010}. The solar rotation of $\sim$27 days \citep{Bartels1934,Beck2000} introduces noise from spots, first noted by Galileo Galilei in 1612 \citep{Scheiner2010}. It has also been argued that the solar activity is modulated by planetary gravitational and electromagnetic forces acting on the sun, namely those by Mercury, Venus, Earth and Jupiter \citep{Scafetta2013}.
In the following, we will ignore trends longer than a few days, and assume they can be removed using filters such as \citet{Savitzky1964} used by \citet{Gilliland2011} to analyze \textit{Kepler} noise, median filtering (e.g. \citet{Carter2012,TalOr2013}) or polynomial fitting (e.g. \citet{Santerne2014,Gautier2012}). Instead, we focus on the jitter on time scales of planetary transits, mostly 1--10 hours \citep{Koch2010}. This jitter originates mainly from stellar oscillation modes, granulation at the surface of the star, and rotational activity \citep{Andersen2015}.
Our sun's noise varies by a factor of $\sim$2 during the 11-year solar cycle, from 7.8ppm (2007.77, quiet period) in 6.5hrs bins to 14.7ppm (2002.39, active period) \citep{Gilliland2011,Frohlich1997}. This is at the quiet side of G-type stars, of which the most quiet 1\% have 6ppm, with a total cut-off at 5ppm \citep{Christiansen2012,Basri2013}. Although the noise measures and results differ slightly between these authors, it can also be seen from Figure~\ref{fig:jittersun} that there are few stars more quiet than our sun. There is a strong dependence of stellar noise to temperature: Cooler stars are usually more active, so that among M-dwarfs only very few are as quiet as our sun, and most are around $\sim$50ppm. However, there might be a few extremely quiet (1--4ppm) G-dwarfs \citep{Hall2007}, theorized to exhibit a time of almost no spots, as was the case for our Sun during the Maunder Minimum \citep{Maunder1912,Zolotova2015}. The detection of such a fortunate case, where mainly granulation (1ppm) contributes to stellar noise, would allow for extreme observations, given near-perfect technology. As we have not detected such a very-low noise star yet, we will instead concentrate on the known quiet end of G- and M-dwarfs.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig_cddp.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:jittersun}\textit{Kepler} instrumental noise (straight line) depends on the brightness of the star. This plot shows only the brightest end, and only G-dwarfs. Our sun would exhibit a total noise (instrumental plus stellar) in between the dashed lines, which give the limits for the active (upper) and quiet (lower) sun. Few other stars are more quiet than our sun, and many are more active.\\}
\end{figure}
Noise in sun-like stars, on this timescale, originates mostly from asteroseismic oscillations. Solar-like oscillations, mostly acoustic or pressure (p) modes, are reported with their highest amplitudes at frequencies between 29.9$\mu$Hz (10 hours) and 3619$\mu$Hz (4 minutes) among \textit{Kepler} stars \citep{Huber2012}. Regarding the solar noise properties on time scales of $\sim$hours, it can clearly be seen from Figure~\ref{fig:sunjitter} (top) that the jitter is not Gaussian. Clearly, there are trends, mostly from oscillations and spots, lasting a few hours, showing spots appearing and disappearing on the disc. This is the same timescale on which exoplanet transits occur, so that these trends cannot easily be filtered out. Time-correlated red (Brownian) noise becomes more and more Gaussian with stacks from different epochs, because the correlation of the total noise decreases (\citet{Barnes1966} and references therein). This will be explained in more detail in section~\ref{sub:red}.
Another noise source is contamination of the starlight from background (or foreground) stars in the aperture, which can occur when the angular separation of the contaminator is smaller than the spatial resolution of the instrument. For \textit{Kepler}'s (low) spatial resolution, this is a problem in some cases, but not in general: ``The overall increase of median and mean noise (...) are only 0.2 and 0.1 ppm'' \citep{Gilliland2011}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig_injection}
\caption{\label{fig:sunjitter}Data for the sun from \textit{VIRGO/DIARAD} \citep{Frohlich1997} shows trends on time scales of hours and longer (top). We inject synthetic transit shapes into these raw data (middle). To retrieve the transit, we fit a long-time sliding median while masking the times of transit (bottom). Instrumental noise ($\sim$0.4ppm) is smaller than the symbol size.\\}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Stellar noise modeling}
\label{sub:noisemodel}
Stars show brightness variations on different time scales, with different amplitudes, and characteristics. On the extreme side, there are for example RRab Lyrae with an amplitude of $\sim$50\% over 0.5d, but near-perfect repetition in some cases \citep{Smith2004,Szabo2014}. On the quiet side, there are stars like our Sun, or Kepler-197 \citep{Rowe2014}, which show very low (0.1\%) long-time (months) variation, but stochastic trends on an hour to day timescale. Intermediate cases are most common, e.g. Kepler-264b \citep{Rowe2014,Hippke2015} with strong short-time trends, or Kepler-96 \citep{Marcy2014} with prominent long-time trends. We show these examples in Figure~\ref{fig:stellartrends} and use them for the following discussion of suitable noise models.
The most fortunate case is to have trends that are on a much longer timescale than the transit signature. Kepler-96 is an example for this behavior, where a ``stellar noise model'' using splines or polynomials will successfully remove the trends which are induced mostly by stellar rotation. The short transit times can be masked for the detrending, and the transit analysis can be done afterwards. A simultaneous fit would only complicate the process, and have no additional benefit. The limits of this method are reached in cases where the trends are less sinusoidal, as is the case for CoRoT-7b \citep{Haywood2014,Barros2014}. Then, Gaussian Processes (GPs) are suitable to treat these systematics. Their main advantage is to naturally handle correlations irrespective of their origin, by specifying high-level properties of the covariance \citep{Evans2015}. Commonly used correlations are radial-velocity measurements \citep{Haywood2014}, different wavelengths \citep{Evans2015}, or instrumental systematics such as the drift in the roll-angle of \textit{Kepler's} K2 mission \citep{Aigrain2015,Foreman2015}.
When the noise timescale gets closer to the transit duration, other methods must be chosen. Most prominently, the wavelet-based formalism described in \citet{Carter2009} is being used, e.g. by \citet{Huber2013b} in their analysis of spin-orbit misalignment in the multiplanet system Kepler-56, or by \citet{Barclay2015} in their confirmation of Kepler-91 being a ``giant planet orbiting a giant star''. Using wavelets, the noise is modeled by the sum of two stationary (Gaussian) processes; one is uncorrelated in time, and the other has a spectral power density as $1/f^\gamma$.
In any such model, parameters must be estimated and validated individually for each star, using Monte-Carlo simulations. This is also true for competing methods, such as the ``time-averaging'' method \citep{Pont2006}, or the ``residual-permutation'' method (e.g., \citet{Jenkins2002}). Consequently, stellar noise modeling is not applied to the large number (thousands) of planets found with automatic pipelines. For interesting individual cases, however, stellar noise modeling can and should be used. It is important to note that these cases have, beforehand, been detected \textit{without} modeling, so that any detection must pass this initial threshold\footnote{Further advantages in computer algorithms might introduce methods that can self-adjust to individual cases and validate the result.}. In the course of this paper, we choose the same approach: We use the ``standard'' pipeline without noise modeling, but introduce it after the detection of the Earth, which can be assumed to be of distinguished interest for any distant observer. Noise modeling reaches its current limits for signals so small that they become indistinguishable from permanent noise features; for our Sun, this would be the case for signals on ppm-level as for Earth's moon. Therefore, we limit our example to Earth itself.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig_stellartrends}
\caption{\label{fig:stellartrends}After removing instrumental trends, different characteristics in stellar noise are evident. Kepler-96 (top, black) shows strong long-time (weeks) variations, but is as quiet as the other examples on hours to days timescale. Kepler-197 (middle, red) is a star with low noise on all time scales, like our Sun. Kepler-264b (bottom, blue) is as quiet long-time, but shows more prominent short-time (hours, days) trends. All stars have been centered to exhibit a transiting planet at T=5d.\\}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Instrumental noise}
\label{sub:instrumentalnoise}
Even the most perfect instrument will produce \textit{some} noise. Fundamentally, this originates from the fact that photons (starlight) and electrons (detector) are quantized \citep{Einstein1905}, so that only a finite number can be counted in a given time. This phenomenon is the \textit{shot noise} \citep{Schottky1918}, which is correlated mostly to the brightness of the target. In addition, noise occurs from the readout of the CCD, when the small signal gets amplified. On a timescale of 6.5hrs (13 bins of $\sim$30min), the \textit{Kepler} instrumental noise for a $K_{P}$=12 star from Poisson (shot) and readout is 16.8ppm. Two other instrumental noise sources have been quantified for the Kepler spacecraft: Intrinsic detector variations (10.8ppm), and a quarter-dependent term (7.8ppm) \citep{Gilliland2011}. The total instrumental noise is then 20.4ppm. For reference, the design of the spacecraft expected instrumental noise of 17.0ppm.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{fig_snratio1}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{fig_snratio2}
\caption{\label{fig:snratio}S/N ratio for transits that can be achieved with real red-noise solar data, when compared to theoretical pure white Gaussian noise. Left: Observed (data points, straight line) and simulated Gaussian noise (dashed line). Right: O-C for the noise. The structural break at 7hrs is evident. For Earth-long transits, the achieved S/N is 49\%, and higher for longer transit durations.}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Signal-to-noise definition and noise characterization}
\label{sub:red}
It is a common practice in exoplanet science \citep{Jenkins2002,Rowe2014} to define the signal-to-noise ratio as the depth of the transit model, compared to the out-of-transit noise:
\begin{equation}
{\rm S/N} = \sqrt{N_{T}}\frac{T_{dep}}{\sigma_{OT}}
\end{equation}
with $N_{T}$ as the number of transit observations, $T_{dep}$ the transit depth and $\sigma_{OT}$ the standard deviation of out-of-transit observations. This measure overestimates S/N for large planet-to-star radius ratios, and large impact parameters, but these configurations will be neglected in the present work. As pointed out by \citet{Fressin2013}, the detection of KOIs becomes unreliable for a S/N $\lesssim$ 10. This assumes Gaussian noise -- the noise distribution of our Sun, even during the quiet year 2007, is distinctly not Gaussian. It has strong time-correlated (red) noise features and a ``long tail''. Two statistical methods should be employed to quantify this. First of all, we recommend a skewness and Kurtosis tests for normality, e.g. by \citet{Shapiro1965}. For our sun, as expected, the difference to Gaussian noise is significant, at the 0.1\% level. After establishing that the noise is not Gaussian, we propose to measure the ``redness'' per bin length $L$, as described by \citet{Steves2010}:
\begin{equation}
\sigma_{binned}=\sigma_{unbinned}^{L^{\beta}}
\end{equation}
For completely uncorrelated noise, $\beta=-1/2$, while for Gaussian noise $\beta=0$. Instead of giving $\beta$-values for each bin length, we chose to calculate the achieved percentage (where Gaussian noise is 100\%), and show the result in Figure~\ref{fig:snratio}. This gives the recoverable S/N of transits, when compared to Gaussian noise. As shown in the figure, the S/N in solar red noise is significantly lower. This issue originates from the simple fact that subsequent data points are time-correlated, and are thus more likely to have (nearly) \textit{the same error} (positive or negative) when binned together on the time axis. In other words: Red noise data doesn't bin as well as white noise data. The penalty of this noise characteristic is also time-correlated, because, over time, it diminishes. For an Earth-analogue transit (13.2hrs), only 49\% of the expected S/N can be achieved; 60\% for a Jupiter (33hrs) and 71\% for a Neptune (76hrs) (Figure~\ref{fig:snratio}). When stacking different years (of similar noise), the penalty is zero, as there is no time-correlation any more. The original intra-transit penalty cannot be recovered, of course, but stacking different epochs brings the expected (like Gaussian) stacking bonus.
As shown in Figure~\ref{fig:snratio}, the expected power law when binning data (for mainly Gaussian noise) begins at $\sim$7hrs. For shorter times, the best-fit is given by a linear correlation ($R^2=0.99$; best-fit power law gives lower $R^2=0.87$). The location of the structural break can be calculated using the test by \citet{Chow1960}, asking the question whether the coefficients in two regressions for different data sets are equal. The result is a clear structural break at the 0.1\% level, with a best-fit location at 7$\pm1$hrs. To sum up, our sun produces Gaussian noise on long ($\gg$1d) timescales, but suffers red noise punishment on shorter timescales.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{fig_inner}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{fig_outer}
\caption{\label{fig:planets}Transit light curves for solar system inner (left) and outer planets (right, with Earth for comparison). Impact factor has been set to 0, so that the transit duration is maximized. These artificial curves are used for the injections.}
\end{figure*}
\section{Method: Preparing the telescopes}
\label{sec:sim}
In this section, we will discuss the instrumental performance of the future \textit{TESS} and \textit{PLATO 2.0} missions. We will define the properties for two ``telescopes'' to use: The best-case \textit{PLATO 2.0} performance, and a theoretical near-perfect instrument, dubbed \textit{PERFECT}. These instruments will then be used in section~\ref{sec:inject} to inject and retrieve transits.
\subsection{Observations with \textit{TESS}}
The longest observing intervals for \textit{TESS} \citep{Ricker2014} during its 2-year mission will be one year (for parts of ths sky near the ecliptic pole). It will focus on the brightest ($I_{c}=4-13$) stars, suitable for follow-up observations with the \textit{James Webb Space Telescope} \citep{Gardner2006} (the areas of the sky with one year coverage from \textit{TESS} will also fall into the continuous viewing zone for \textit{JWST}) . As such, its mission design is not targeted at the very best photometric performance, although it is expected to be on par with \textit{Kepler} (\citet{Ricker2014}, their Figure 8). In this paper, we strive for best possible photometry, and are interested in solar system analogues, so that we will neglect \textit{TESS}, as it does ``not address the science case of characterizing rocky planets at intermediate orbital distances (a$>$0.3au, including the HZ) around solar-like stars, which remains unique for \textit{PLATO 2.0}.'' \citep{Rauer2014}.
\subsection{Observations with \textit{PLATO 2.0}}
Instrumental noise from \textit{PLATO 2.0} is expected to be as low as 10ppm on 30min timescale for bright (V=9) stars \citep{Zima2006}, or 8ppm in 1hr integrations \citep{Rauer2014}, when observed by many (up to 36) cameras simultaneously, thus producing $\sim$3ppm of instrumental noise on the same 6.5hrs timescale. While \textit{Kepler} observed $\sim$30 bright (V$<$8) stars, \textit{PLATO 2.0} will collect data for $\sim$3,000 -- giving a good chance for a useful share of quiet stars among them. Observing our sun through \textit{PLATO 2.0} would then give a stellar noise fraction of 74\% (quiet sun) to 84\% (active sun), making such an observation strongly limited by intrinsic stellar noise. For smaller, but generally more active M-dwarfs (with noise levels around 50ppm \citep{Basri2013}), this ratio can reach 95\% to 99\%, making the technology near-perfect and observations only limited by intrinsic stellar noise. This shows the ultimate limits of photometry as such, and the importance of understanding (and modeling) stellar noise. \textit{PLATO 2.0} has an expected lifetime of 6 years, giving a useful duration for multiple transits of Earth and Mars analogues.
For simulating realistic data as expected from \textit{PLATO 2.0}, an end-to-end simulator\footnote{\url{https://fys.kuleuven.be/ster/Software/PlatoSimulator}} evolved over the last decade \citep{Zima2006,MarcosArenal2014}. It takes into account effects down to the sub-pixel matrix, satellite orientation jitter, PSF convolution and all CCD-related noise sources. Using this simulator, we have created a flat lightcurve for a bright (V=9) star, resulting in Gaussian noise at $\sim$10ppm in 30min bins. These data are the instrumental basis of our \textit{PLATO 2.0} simulations in section~\ref{sec:inject}.
\subsection{The \textit{PERFECT} telescope}
\textit{PLATO 2.0} is expected to launch in 2024 and end its nominal operation in 2030 \footnote{ \url{http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/physics/research/astro/plato-science/pre-launch/}}. For the following decade (the 2030s), one might imagine a successor mission, with even better instruments. We should assume that many noise sources can be reduced (or eliminated completely) using the knowledge and expertise gained throughout previous missions, such as pointing jitter and thermal variations. Sensor sensitivity, for instance, has improved over the decades and approaches $>$80\% quantum efficiency today, over the wavelength range 0.6--2.5$\mu$m (e.g., \citet{McGurk2014}.
For those stars where the photon flux (shot noise) is not the limiting factor, instrumental noise will be dominated by these other sources. As we have seen, total instrumental noise from \textit{Kepler} is at $\sim$20ppm, whereas we expect $\sim$10ppm from \textit{PLATO 2.0}. It will be interesting to check the perfect telescope with zero instrumental noise. As explained in section~\ref{sub:instrumentalnoise}, this is in principle unphysical, but a noise floor down to 0.4ppm as for \textit{VIRGO/DIARAD} might be achievable. We will keep (adopt) this 0.4ppm of instrumental noise for the virtual \textit{PERFECT} telescope. In section~\ref{sub:earth}, we will see that the difference between \textit{PLATO 2.0} and \textit{PERFECT} is negligible for the standard quiet G-dwarf, as stellar noise is the dominating noise source. For a very quiet M-dwarf, however, this can make an improvement of up to 50\% in S/N.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig_mbin}
\caption{\label{fig:mbin}Noise characterization of KIC7842386, the most quiet M-star out of 1015 (for which CDDP data is available) from \textit{Kepler}, with stellar noise CDDP=6.7ppm on 6.5hrs timescale. The dashed line represents (theoretical) pure Gaussian noise on a straight line in this log-log plot. Measured noise in bins (dots with error bars) is consistent with Gaussian noise.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Target stars and planetary systems}
\label{sub:target}
As host stars, we choose a very quiet G2-dwarf like our sun -- in fact, we will simply use our sun's data from \textit{VIRGO/DIARAD} \citep{Frohlich1997,Appourchaux1997}. Its bandpass is comparable to the photometry space telescopes, and its instrumental noise is $<$0.4ppt and can thus be neglected. The performance is better than \textit{Kepler} or \textit{PLATO 2.0} due to the high flux the instrument can receive from our nearby Sun, when compared to stars many parsecs away. We have interpolated the data to 30min bins (analog to \textit{Kepler} long cadence data) and added aforementioned $\sim$10ppm instrumental noise to these data in order to simulate a best-case observation by \textit{PLATO 2.0}.
The other reference star is a 0.5$R_{\odot}$ M1-dwarf on the very quiet end of the distribution, exhibiting 7ppm of Gaussian (not time correlated) noise. From 1015 characterized \textit{Kepler} M-stars, two exhibit stellar (CDDP, \citet{Christiansen2012}) noise $<$7ppm. We have taken the most quiet one, KIC7842386 (6.7ppm on 6.5hrs timescale) and analyzed its noise characteristics. As can be seen in Figure~\ref{fig:mbin}, the noise is Gaussian within the errors. While the number of quiet M-stars might be low, we take the noise level of this fortunate example for our injections.
Due to their smaller radii, M1-dwarfs are particularly suitable to observe transits. Their absolute luminosity is smaller at $\sim3.5$\% of that of G-dwarfs, so that they need to be closer to the observer by a factor of $L_{\odot}/L_{*}^2$ to have the same apparent brightness for the same \textit{PLATO 2.0} instrumental noise.
Using these virtual instruments, we will observe different bodies transiting the G2-dwarf and the M1-dwarf. We inject planet transits following the standard \citet{Mandel2002} model, including quadratic limb-darkening with stellar metallicity \citep{Claret2011}, as implemented by \textsc{PyAstronomy}\footnote{\url{https://github.com/sczesla/PyAstronomy}}. For the G2-dwarf, we observe the planets of our own solar system, exhibiting a wide range of transit depths and -durations (Figure~\ref{fig:planets}). We set the impact parameter to zero, in order to maximize the transit duration. Special focus is on our Earth, including Earth's moon (section~\ref{sub:earth}), and the Jupiter system (section~\ref{sub:jupiter}). Finally, we will explore Saturn, including the flux gain caused by the forward-scattering of its rings (section~\ref{sub:saturn}), as well as Uranus and Neptune (section~\ref{sub:uranus}). To sum up, this section asks the question what we would see of \textit{our own} solar system if we were placed somewhere else in the galaxy, with near-perfect photometric equipment.
For the M1-dwarf, we selected to test a 2.0$R_{\oplus}$ Super-Earth with Ganymede-sized (0.4$R_{\oplus}$) moon (section~\ref{sub:mdwarf}).
For all cases, we will use 30min integrations as the shortest bin available. This is comparable to \textit{Kepler}'s long-cadence (LC) bins, and guarantees sufficient sampling for all transits in this work. Only for Saturn's rings we find that a finer time resolution would be (marginally) beneficial.
\subsection{Injection and retrieval of transits}
We use the raw data from \textit{VIRGO/DIARAD} \citep{Frohlich1997} and inject the synthetic transit shapes as described in section~\ref{sub:target} and shown in Figure~\ref{fig:planets}. An exemplary step-by-step injection and retrieval is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:sunjitter}, here neglecting instrumental noise for clarity. To retrieve the transits, we apply a sliding median with boxcar length of $\sim$2 days, while masking the data points affected by the transit. For the longer transit durations of the outer planets, the boxcar length was increased accordingly, leaving slightly larger residuals. This method has the advantage that we can use solar data with negligible ($<$0.4ppm) instrumental noise, but fully preserving stellar noise. To these data, we add instrumental noise as described in section~\ref{sub:target}. This method allows us to control and modify noise sources separately.
\subsection{Transit probability}
The transit probability of any planet is low, so that many stars need to be observed, in order to collect a useful sample (Kepler observed $>$100,000 stars). For circular orbits, the transit probability can be calculated as \citep{Borucki1984}:
\begin{equation}
P_{tr}=\frac{R_{*}}{a}
\end{equation}
where $R_{*}$ is the radius of the host star and $a$ is the semi-major axis of the planet's orbit. This gives transit probabilities e.g. for Earth as 0.47\%, and Jupiter 0.041\%: In order to potentially detect one Earth-analogue, one must on average survey 213 G-dwarfs that host an Earth like planet, and 2,439 that host a Jupiter. Assuming $\eta_{\oplus}=0.1$ \citep{Burke2015}, one must survey 2130 G-dwarfs to detect an Earth-analogue. Therefore, observing a large number of (dimmer and dimmer) stars is required at high sensitivity. The instrumental performance of \textit{PLATO 2.0} is expected to be sufficient for the detection of $\sim$150 Earth-sized planets on 365d-orbits (\citet{Rauer2014}, their Figure 5.5).
\section{Results: Observing transits with \textit{PLATO 2.0} and \textit{PERFECT}}
\label{sec:inject}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig_mercury}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig_venus}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig_mars}
\caption{\label{fig:mercury}Transits of Mercury, Venus, and Mars with six years of \textit{PLATO 2.0} coverage and a quiet sun. Due to the decreasing transit frequency, the error bars get larger in this order. Transits of Venus are clearly detected, but Mercury and Mars are not recoverable. For better comparison, all axes are identical and the same as for the Earth transits in Figure~\ref{fig:earth}.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Mercury, Venus and Mars}
Mercury is the smallest (0.38$R_{\oplus}$) planet in the solar system with a transit depth of only 13.1ppm. On the other hand, its short period of 87.97 days allows for the greatest number of observed transits for a given observation time. When collecting six years of \textit{PLATO 2.0} data, and no data loss occurs during transit, a total of 25 transits can be recorded. We expect a nominal S/N=7.0 from this stack, but as can be seen in Figure~\ref{fig:mercury}, this is not sufficient for a detection due to the red noise characteristics. We conclude that Mercury analogues will likely not be found with photometry around normal G-dwarfs, when neglecting noise-modelling.
The next planet, Venus, is somewhat more interesting, as it is roughly (0.95$R_{\oplus}$, 80.6ppm) Earth-size, and transits more frequently due to its smaller orbit. On the other hand, its transit duration is also shorter than Earth's (0.46d vs. 0.55d), giving roughly similar detection S/N (Venus: 23.8; Earth: 28.6) for both when using six years of \textit{PLATO 2.0} observations. Venus orbits inside of the inner edge of the habitable zone \citep{Kopparapu2013}, but if orbiting a slightly less luminous stars, it might be habitable.
Mars detectability, then, suffers from smaller size (0.53$R_{\oplus}$, 25.4ppm) and longer orbit (only 3 transits in 6 years). Its transit duration (0.67d) helps only marginally with the transit detection, giving an insufficient S/N=7.2, comparable to Mercury.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{fig_earth_kepler_quiet}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{fig_earth_plato_loud}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{fig_earth_plato_quiet}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{fig_earth_perfect_quiet}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{fig_noisemodel}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{fig_perfect_earth_noisemodel}
\caption{\label{fig:earth}Earth observations after collecting data of six transits. Upper left: \textit{Kepler} observing the $K_{P}$=12 quiet sun (total noise: 26ppm). Middle left: The same observation for \textit{PLATO 2.0} (16ppm). Upper right: \textit{PLATO} 2.0 with the loud sun (29ppm). Middle right: \textit{PERFECT} observing the quiet sun (15ppm). The bottom panels show the result including our noise model, as explained in section~\ref{sub:noisemodelapplied}. The blue symbols on the bottom left, and the panel on the bottom right, are created using a \textit{simultaneous} fit of noise model and transit curve. The value for the quiet sun differs slightly from section~\ref{sub:instrumentalnoise} at this specific transit time. For better comparison, all axes are the same as in Figure~\ref{fig:mercury} for Mercury, Venus and Mars.}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig_luna}
\caption{\label{fig:luna}Orbital sampling effect (dashed line) for Earth's moon using \textit{PLATO 2.0} and the six quiet years of the solar cycle (2005--2010). Luna cannot be recovered due to (mainly stellar) noise. To achieve a 2$\sigma$ detection, $\sim$180 transits would be required.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{fig_jupitermoons}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{fig_jupitermoons_flux}
\caption{\label{fig:jupisys}Left: Transit configuration of Jupiter system, with all moons at maximum separation on the ingress side. When Ganymede is at mid-transit, Jupiter has not started its transit yet, and Europa has already completed its own. Right: Flux for this configuration (line). Dots are real data LC bins (30min), data points with error bars binned in 6.5hrs. Note how the Callisto egress occurs before planetary ingress, and before Io's ingress. At no time, all four moons are transiting simultaneously, when at maximum separation.}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Earth and moon}
\label{sub:earth}
As explained in section~\ref{sub:stellarnoise} and shown in Figure~\ref{fig:sunjitter}, red noise from stellar variation prevents the secure detection of an Earth-sized planet around a quiet G2-dwarf \textit{in a single observation}, no matter how good the photometer is. Also, single transit-like events can occur from sudden instrumental sensitivity drops, as described for the false-positive moon of Kepler-90g \citep{Kipping2015}. The situation improves when stacking a few transits. For an expected mission duration of six years for \textit{PLATO 2.0}, six transits could be observed of an Earth-analogue in the best case. As can be seen in Figure~\ref{fig:earth}, the detection is then possible at high confidence for both the active (S/N=15.5) and quiet (S/N=28.6) sun.
This finding is in agreement with the results of \citet{Aigrain2004}, who found that a single Earth transit cannot be detected, but a stack of six transits finds the planet at ``high'' S/N. While this result was achieved from synthetic data, \citet{Carpano2008} have also used \textit{VIRGO/DIARAD} data and concluded that planets smaller 2$R_{\oplus}$ cannot be detected in a single observation. This shows that our method is valid and consistent with previous findings.
The situation is equally promising for radial-velocity measurements (RV), assuming favorable conditions (single planet edge-on in circular orbit). As discussed by \citet{Lagrange2010} and \citet{Meunier2010}, an Earth analogue can be detected with 1\% false alarm probability after collecting $>200$ epochs spread over 4 years.
For the detection of Earth's moon, however, prospects are much worse. The tiny dip (6.6ppm) caused by Luna ($R_{\leftmoon}=0.27R_{\oplus}$) is invisible in a single transit. The transit timing variation (TTV) amplitude is 112 seconds, and the transit duration variation (TDV) only 14 seconds \citep{Kipping2009}. Errors from \textit{Kepler} are on the order of 400 to 800 seconds (S/N$\sim$0.3), making a detection of this configuration impossible. As TDVs, and their detection sensitivity, are a function of the impact parameter, there might be a few cases that are more fortunate. As explained by \citet{Kipping2009b}, for very high impact parameters $b>1$, i.e. grazing transits, TDVs are several times higher, up to 350s for realistic cases (see their Figure 2). Such candidates are hard to find, as the V-shaped transit curves are usually rejected by the automatic routines as eclipsing binaries. This possibility however, together with shorter integration times to improve timing sensitivity, might make the detection of exomoons, based on timings, possible with \textit{PLATO 2.0}. It seems crucial to have integration times as low as technically possible (ideally less than a minute), and improvements in algorithms are required to \textit{not} reject all V-shaped transits.
Without noise modeling, finding an Earth's moon analogue is also difficult using the \textit{orbital sampling effect} (OSE) as first described by \citet{Heller2014}. In short, when adding up many randomly sampled observations, a photometric flux loss appears in the phase-folded transit light curve, reflecting the moon's blocking of light. The effect depends mostly on the moon's radius and planetary distance. The OSE can be used to detect a significant flux loss \textit{before and after} the actual transit (if present), which might be indicative of an exomoon in transit. The basic idea is that at any given transit the moon(s) must be somewhere: They might transit before the planet, after the planet, or not at all -- depending on the orbit configuration. But by stacking many such transits, one gets, on average, a flux loss before and a flux loss after the exoplanet transit. While the OSE has shown to be useful when stacking many transits \citep{Hippke2015}, the sheer number of $\sim$180 transits required in this case (for a 2$\sigma$ detection) renders the method useless for Earth and moon (Figure~\ref{fig:luna}).
\subsection{Earth transit with noise modeling}
\label{sub:noisemodelapplied}
To explore the benefits of a tailor-made noise modeling, we have implemented a standard wavelet-based filter as presented by \citet{Carter2009} and explained in section~\ref{sub:noisemodel}. We simulate our Sun's noise as a stationary process plus a time-correlated process of spectral power density $1/f^\gamma$. To estimate the best global parameters, we used Monte-Carlo runs to minimize the post-model squared residals, but also restricted the parameters to not fit trends on times $<2$hrs in order to avoid over-fitting. The danger of such noise models is that with enough and sufficiently small parameters, one can fit out anything perfectly, be it a small transit (e.g. a moon), or a spot. For solar data, we find that the noise model is robust to filter out trends on timescales longer than a few hours, and more than a few 10s of ppm, so that an Earth-like transit signal benefits from noise modeling. Blindly recovering Earth's moon, however, doesn't work even with such a noise model, as the moon's transit signal (6.3ppm) is either still buried in noise, or has been removed altogether by too aggressive over-fitting.
We show the application of our noise model in the bottom left panel of Figure~\ref{fig:earth}. The uppermost (red) symbols show the raw data without an injection, and the simulated (modeled) wavelet-filter as the black line behind the datapoints. After injection of the transit signal, we have then performed a \textit{simultaneous} fit to the transit curve and noise-model (blue symbols). The residuals (green) are shown in the bottom; these can be compared the the raw data (red). We have used the same solar data as in Figure~\ref{fig:sunjitter}, so that one can visually compare the benefit of the noise model.
In the bottom right panel of Figure~\ref{fig:earth}, then, we zoom into a single transit, offering $\sim2\times$ improved S/N. This shows the benefit of a noise model: It removes most of the time-correlated noise, and increases S/N at the same time. However, it is also suspect to removing smaller signals, such as moons. Also, it requires considerable effort to implement a model, validate its parameters, and apply it to the data. In the future, we must hope to achieve further theoretical advantages so that such models can be created automatically during planet-searches.
\subsection{Jupiter and moons}
\label{sub:jupiter}
A single Jupiter transit produces a deep (1.125\% = 11,250ppm), long (33hrs) transit dip, resulting in a highly significant (S/N=4,360) detection. Due to its long period of 11.86 years, we can not expect to observe a second transit with \textit{PLATO 2.0} during the spacecraft's expected 6-year lifetime. Assuming that the single transit itself is spotted in the data, we can search for accompanying moons. In the case of Jupiter, all of its larger moons are almost sky-coplanar and would thus also be transiting. In this example, we examine the case of all moons being at maximum separation, as this case is usually expected to yield the highest detection probability \citep{Hippke2015}. For our Jupiter, this is not the case: due to the large ($25R_{P}$) separation of Callisto, this moon finishes its transit (just) before Io goes into transit; there is no cumulative dip of all moons transiting simultaneously (when at maximum separation). We neglect all other small moons, as they contribute less than 1\% of additional transit depth.
As can be seen in Figure~\ref{fig:jupisys}, the whole transit ensemble can be detected with marginal confidence at S/N=8.6. Individual moons are not discernible, and it cannot be decided whether a single (large) moon, or a multiple moon configuration is observed. Such an observation would constitute a strong moon \textit{candidate} worth follow-up observations, but likely no clear detection.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{fig_saturn1}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{fig_saturn2}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{fig_saturn3}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\linewidth]{fig_saturn4}
\caption{\label{fig:saturnring}Upper left: Saturn transit without ring (black line) and theoretical ring solo transit (grey line). Upper right shows zoom. Higher than nominal flux is caused by diffractive forward-scattering of the rings. Lower left: Saturn including ring (black line) and data for \textit{PLATO 2.0} during quiet sun (errors as dot size). Lower right: Zoom into egress, where the ring is clearly detected. Data points are 30min LC bins.}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Saturn with rings}
\label{sub:saturn}
In this section, we examine \textit{our} Saturn transiting \textit{our} quiet Sun observed through \textit{PLATO 2.0}. A simplified test for this configuration has been performed by \citet{Tusnski2013}, using synthetic \textit{Kepler} data and a dark Saturn-model. In the following, we use the real solar data and the model from \citet{Barnes2004}, which includes diffractive forward-scattering \citep{Dyudina2005}. For our Saturn, data are available from the 1989 occultation of 28 Sgr by Saturn \citep{French2000}, to adjust the model to the rings' complex nature (see Figure 8 in \citet{Barnes2004}). The main difference to the pure black transit is the flux \textit{gain} due to scattered light. We inject these data, together with the standard transit shape, and show the result in our Figure~\ref{fig:saturnring}. We neglect any moons, as they have been treated in the previous section. As can be seen in the graph, the rings are clearly recovered, with the flux gain prominently seen. As can be seen in the figure, a time resolution of at least 30min is required, to avoid smearing of the light curve features. The out-of-transit features alone account for a S/N=21.5, fully sufficient to claim a detection without modeling. Full modeling is however encouraged, as $\sim$50\% of the flux delta occurs during transit, and most of it during ingress/egress. As pointed out by \citet{Zuluaga2015}, rings cause an increase in transit depth that ``may lead to misclassification of ringed planetary candidates as false-positives and/or the underestimation of planetary density''. By comparing results from astrodensity profiling \citep{Kipping2014} to those from astroseismology \citep{Huber2013}, such anomaly low density planets could be detected.
Saturn itself produces a highly significant S/N=3,575 in a single transit.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig_uranus}
\caption{\label{fig:uranusneptune}Uranus and Neptune transits with data as 30min LC bins. Neptune's transit is slightly shallower but longer. Just before Neptune's transit, a spot-induced 105ppm flux-drop occurs, which could be mistaken for a 1.1$R_{\oplus}$ exomoon.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Uranus and Neptune}
\label{sub:uranus}
Uranus and Neptune produce deep (1,382ppm, 1,354ppm), long (2.45d, 3.07d) transits. The S/N for Neptune (783 vs. 714) is slightly higher, due to its longer transit duration. As can be seen in Figure~\ref{fig:uranusneptune}, the transit is visually compelling, but stellar noise may mimic moons where there are none. For a test, we have injected Neptune's largest moon, Triton (0.21$R_{\oplus}$, 4ppm), which is unrecoverable in the noise. Furthermore, Triton is usually not seen in transit, due to its inclination of 129.6$^\circ$ \citep{Agnor2006} with respect to the Laplacian plane of the solar system. In such cases, even the largest moons would remain unnoticed.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{singletransit}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig_ose1}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig_ose2}
\caption{\label{fig:m-dwarf}2.0$R\oplus$ planet and Ganymede-sized (0.4$R_{\oplus}$) moon orbiting a 0.5$R_{\odot}$ M-dwarf with P=23.97d, resembling Kepler-236c, but with low noise properties (stellar noise CDPP=7ppm). Top: Single transit with \textit{PERFECT} giving a clear dip for the planet (S/N=22.8), but low S/N=3.9 for the moon at maximum separation. Middle: After stacking 6yrs (100 orbits) with \textit{PLATO 2.0}, the orbital sampling effect clearly recovers the moon. The gain from \textit{PERFECT} is in this case $\sim$50\% (bottom).}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=1.1\linewidth]{fig_riverscale}
\caption{\label{fig:river}River plot of moon injection, compare Figure~\ref{fig:m-dwarf}, using the \textit{PERFECT} data. Dark colors are lower flux levels and indicate the transits. The horizontal axis of each plot represents one transit event, with the vertical dark stripe being caused by the planetary transit. Each of the 100 rows is one period. Top: Calculated injections. Middle: One-minute sampling. Bottom: 30-minute sampling.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Super-Earth and moon transiting the M-dwarf}
\label{sub:mdwarf}
We have now completed the tour through our solar system, and have seen that detecting planets and rings is possible for many scenarios. Exomoons, however, are more difficult to observe, making a detection unlikely for solar system analogues, as explained in sections \ref{sub:earth} and \ref{sub:jupiter}. We will thus try a more promising configuration: A very quiet M-dwarf (0.5$R_{\odot}$, stellar noise: 7ppm CDDP), assumed to have a transiting planet of Super-Earth size (2.0$R_{\oplus}$) in a P=23.97d orbit, with an accompanying Ganymede-sized (0.4$R_{\oplus}$) moon. This system is inspired by Kepler-236c and shares its stellar and planetary size, and their separation. The stellar noise properties are as described in section \ref{sub:target}, resembling the M-dwarf KIC7842386 with 6.7ppm Gaussian noise on 6.5hrs timescale. As can be seen in Figure~\ref{fig:m-dwarf}, a single transit is clearly detected for the planet, but not for the moon. With \textit{PLATO 2.0} photometry and 6 years of data (100 orbits), the moon dip is clearly retrieved through its orbital sampling effect (middle plot). The gain from \textit{PERFECT} (bottom plot) is in this case $\sim$50\%, thanks to the high share of instrumental noise (7ppm stellar, 10ppm \textit{PLATO 2.0}). Interestingly, \textit{PLATO 2.0} photometry allows for the detection of the ``cap'' in the OSE. This feature represents the relative flux gain before and after planetary transit, when a large-orbit moon goes into stacked ingress (egress) before (after) the planet transits. Detecting this feature gives more of a ``shape'' to the OSE, in contrast to a pure instrumental decrease in luminosity. To give an impression of the unfolded photometry, we show a riverplot \citep{Carter2012, Nesvorny2013} in Figure~\ref{fig:river}. With 100 transits (each row is one period) of \textit{PERFECT} data, the moon transit signature is visually evident even without folding. With \textit{PLATO 2.0} data, it is also visible when stretching the gray- scale. Such plots can be used for a sanity check of moons with \textit{PLATO 2.0} data.
\subsection{Oblate planets}
\label{sub:oblate}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig_oblate}
\caption{\label{fig:oblate}Delta (line) between a spherical and an oblate Jupiter-sized planet, using Saturn-like ($f=0.1$) oblateness, spin obliquity of 45$^{\circ}$ and a 87-day (Mercury) orbit. Data points are for 6 years of quiet solar observations using \textit{PLATO 2.0}. No noise modeling.}
\end{figure}
Planets are never perfect spheres, but show oblateness to varying degrees. Measuring the oblateness of exoplanets will help our understanding of planetary formation, rotation, and internal structure \citep{Carter2010}. The transit light curve of an oblate planet is different from that of a spherical, with the main delta during ingress and egress. \citet{Zhu2014} have performed a search in \textit{Kepler} data and find the hot-Jupiter \mbox{HAT-P-7b} to be a good candidate. Their analysis shows that \textit{Kepler}-level photometry is sufficient to detect ``Saturn-like oblateness ($f=0.1$) for giant planets ($R_{P}/R_{*}=0.1$) around relatively bright (12 mag) stars''.
To analyze the prospects of \textit{PLATO 2.0} in this regard, we have injected a Jupiter-sized planet including Saturn-like ($f=0.1$) oblateness with a 87-day (Mercury) period into 6yrs of quiet solar data. The calculated oblateness delta is the one from \citet{Zhu2014} and has kindly been provided by the author (Wei Zhu 2015, priv. comm.). We chose a configuration that generates a large oblateness signal, using a projected planet spin obliquity of 45$^{\circ}$. As can be seen in Figure~\ref{fig:oblate}, the signal is clearly retrieved, at S/N=16. As for planetary transits, the signal-to-noise ratio will be higher for shorter periods, larger oblateness, and larger planet-to-star ratios. On the other hand, it will be harder to detect planets with smaller oblateness, longer periods, and smaller radii (for a constant projected planet spin obliquity). Using the large sample expected from \textit{PLATO 2.0}, we can hope to measure the oblateness of hundreds of planets, and create an insightful distribution statistic.
\section{Discussion}
After examining these transits, we should summarize the learnings. It is clear that future photometry will allow for many more discoveries, and we should prepare to get most out of these data.
\subsection{Observation strategies for \textit{PLATO 2.0}: Single transits}
\label{strategies}
While transit detections of medium-sized, short-orbit planets such as Earth and Venus will be feasible with future photometry, the stellar noise will put limits to planet sizes and configurations for Mercury and Mars analogues. The greatest challenge will be longer-orbit transits (cold gas giant analogues), for which only one transit can be observed in a reasonable ($<$10 years) time span. With their long periods of 84 years (Uranus) and 165 years (Neptune), the observation of a single transit for any given solar system analogue is unlikely ($P_{tr}=0.024\%$ for Uranus, $P_{tr}=0.014\%$ for Neptune). The occurrence rate of such planets is currently not well constrained, as only a few examples have been found through gravitational microlensing \citep{Furusawa2013,Sumi2010}, but is believed to be $\ge$16\% at 90\% confidence \citep{Gould2006}. \textit{PLATO 2.0} will observe 85,000 bright (V$<$11) stars \citep{Rauer2014}, and all of these can be expected to yield high (S/N$>500$) detection potential for cold Uranus and Neptune analogues. For the full sample of $>$1bn stars, one might expect at least half of them to give sufficient S/N ($>20$) for a clear detection of such planets. Consequently, it can be expected to detect a considerable number of single-transits events for such planets with \textit{PLATO 2.0}: With an occurrence rate of 16\%, and 0.024\% transit probability, and observing 6 out of 84 orbital years, we can expect to find one Uranus analogue among 365,217 stars. For a 500mn sample of \textit{PLATO 2.0} data, we can thus expect to find 1,369 Uranuses (and not a single one among \textit{Kepler's} 150,000 stars).
The frequency of Jupiter analogues at distances of \mbox{3-6 AU} has been estimated as $5\pm2$\% by \citet{Lineweaver2003}, or $3.3\pm1.4$\% \citep{Wittenmeyer2011}. Assuming a 5\% frequency, we can expect to find $\sim$5,000 Jupiters and $\sim4,000$ Saturns, accounting for their higher transit probability (compared to Neptunes or Uranuses).
It is clear that these numbers are only very rough estimates, and might be subject to change by an order of magnitude. Through the very high number of stars observed with \textit{PLATO 2.0}, however, it will be possible to observe single-transit events of all solar system analogues. Current exoplanet science relies on multiple transits to determine periods, and confirm transit signals. It will be the challenge of these large-sample future missions to treat single events in a way that allow for their detection and confirmation. This will put our own solar system in perspective: Is a configuration of rocky inner, and gaseous outer planets common, or exotic?
\subsection{Validation of transit signals}
\label{sub:disc}
There are three principle ways to validate transit-like signals. The first is to check if they are, at all, astrophysically possible. If this is the case, we can try to eliminate those that are more likely to be caused by instrumental or stellar artifacts.
The first check should be whether a putative star-planet-moon (or ring) configuration is astrophysically possible, plausible and stable over the long time. While the possibility of any configuration is essential, the situation is less clear for the plausibility: Before the discovery of Hot Jupiters, such planets would have seemed implausible, and their discovery \citep{Mayor1995} was challenged as they were found to be incompatible with theories of planetary formation \citep{Rasio1996}.
This is also true for the stability. For example, we should assume that most moons are stable over long (Gyr) times, but there might be configurations for which this is not the case. A related example are Saturn's rings, which are known to be unstable on timescales of $<$100 Myr \citep{Dougherty2009}. Thus, instability should raise doubts about the presence of a moon (and less so about the presence of a ring), but does not proof their non-existence.
To check the plausibility of moons, we can require that prograde moons are within $\sim$39\% of their Hill radius, and retrograde moons to be within 93\% to be stable \citep{Domingos2006}. Also, they cannot have their orbit inside the Roche lobe, otherwise they would be torn apart and create a ring system. Similar arguments can be made for ring systems: When a flux increase (through diffractive forward-scattering) favours a ring composition of ice over rock, then such a ring planet cannot be too close to its host star, otherwise the ice would evaporate. Furthermore, we can count the fraction of transits that exhibit \textit{no} moon-like signals (assuming a coplanar moon), and compare this to the theoretical upper limit of $\sim$6.4\%, as derived by \citet{Heller2012} using the Roche stability criterion.
Sometimes, however, the situation is less clear. Recently, a single moon-like transit signal was reported by \citet{Cabrera2014} in the photometry of Kepler-90g. The best-fit parameters were a physically possible $7.96\pm0.65R_{\oplus}$ planet orbited by a $1.88\pm0.21R_{\oplus}$ exomoon. As reported by \citet{Kipping2015}, the signal is well explained by an instrumental sensitivity drop of a single pixel on the CCD. The authors introduce a method dubbed ``centroid map'', which compares the sensitivity of neighboring CCD pixels over time. This method allows to attribute probabilities to instrumental changes in sensitivities, for example caused by cosmic ray hits.
While such sensitivity drops are severe, but usually short events, there might also be instrumental trends on timescales longer than the actual transit(s). It has proven effective to remove these by cross-correlating them with their physical originator (when the data is available), for example temperature drifts, or shifts on the CCD have been corrected with proxy data for Hubble Space Telescope data \citep{Demory2015}, and in the \textit{Kepler} K2 mission \citep{Vanderburg2015,Foreman2015}.
When it comes to stellar noise, such proxy data is usually not available, but could be obtained from observations in multiple wavelengths through filters, or spectra. Stellar rotation can be measured \citep[e.g.][]{McQuillan2013} and used to apply a suitable noise model. A few cases have been reported where transit depth variations might be explained by the stellar rotation phase which causes the transiting planet to occult star spots on a highly spotted star \citep{Croll2015}. With a combined detection of TTVs and rotation, it is also possible to distinguish between prograde and retrograde motion \citep{Holczer2015}.
These measurements make actual use of the otherwise unwanted stellar variation. In order to only distinguish between stellar flux variation and a transit signal, statistical tools can be used. We suggest to compare the occurrence rate of the signal(s) in question, including their shape, to the whole dataset in suitably chosen time bins. Ideally, there should be no other features in the whole dataset compared to the one in question. To validate exomoon signals, \citet{Hippke2015} argued that a test should be made, checking whether it is possible to shift the (virtual) folded transit time (to any other position), and then still have a significant dip. A variation of this test can check the uniqueness of any given signal.
\subsection{Data handling burdens}
Given the required detection techniques, it will be another challenge to efficiently mine the large data volume expected by \textit{PLATO 2.0}. When extrapolating the \textit{Kepler} data volume ($\sim$16 MByte per star and year in 1min integrations), we will have to search 48 PByte ($48\times10^{15}$ Byte) of data. The storage of these data alone costs $\sim$480,000 USD, in 2015 storage prices. Hard disk capacities have increased by a factor of 16 (for constant nominal prices)\footnote{\url{http://www.jcmit.com/diskprice.htm}, retrieved 09-Mar 2015} between 2004 and 2014. Extrapolating to the \textit{PLATO 2.0} mission in 2024 will estimate storage requirements of $\sim$30,000 USD. Clearly, most analyses will have to be done remotely, with the data stored in central facilities such as the Mikulski Archive for Space Telescopes (MAST)\footnote{\url{https://archive.stsci.edu/}}. Searches in \textit{Kepler} data today can be done on the researcher's own machine, as the total volume of the dataset is $<1$TB, i.e. less than 100 USD in 2015 prices. Depending on the computational demands of a specific research, processing is done on single computers, University Clusters, or the NASA Supercomputer. We expect that most or all large-scale searches in \textit{PLATO 2.0} data will need to be performed remotely, using super-computer facilities.
\begin{table}
\small
\caption{S/N for solar system transit objects, using \textit{PLATO 2.0} and 6yrs of quiet sun data\label{tab:sntable}}
\begin{tabular}{lccl}
\tableline
Object & \# transits & S/N & Comment \\
\tableline
$\mercury$ Mercury & 25 & 7.0 & \\
$\venus$ Venus & 9 & 23.8 & \\
$\oplus$ Earth & 6 & 28.6 & \\
\noindent\hspace*{1mm} $\leftmoon$ Luna & 6 & 2.1 & \\
$\mars$ Mars & 3 & 7.2 & \\
$\jupiter$ Jupiter & 1 & 4,360 & \\
\noindent\hspace*{1mm} $^{....}$ Galilean moons & 1 & 8.6 & out-of-transit \\
$\saturn$ Saturn & 1 & 3,575 & \\
\noindent\hspace*{1mm} $\ominus$ Saturn's rings & 1 & 21.5 & out-of-transit \\
$\uranus$ Uranus & 1 & 714 & \\
$\neptune$ Neptune & 1 & 783 & \\
\tableline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fig_sn}
\caption{\label{fig:snmap}Period-radius parameter space for planet transit detectability. The threshold (line) is discussed in section~\ref{sub:radiusperiod}.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Planets interior to Mercury}
\label{sub:radiusperiod}
Our solar system does not have any planets interior to Mercury, but this is not the norm: It is estimated that $\sim$5\% of stars host (multiple) tightly-packed inner planets \citep{Lissauer2011}, and $\sim$50\% of stars have at least one $0.8-2R_{\oplus}$ planet within Mercury's orbit \citep{Fressin2013}. The latest simulations indicate that our solar system also possessed such planets, but these have been destroyed in catastrophic collisions, leaving only Mercury \citep{Volk2015}. To better characterize these configurations of solar system analogues, it would be helpful to be able to detect them in future missions. As we will see in the next section, we can expect to find most or all planets $>0.5R_{\oplus}$ within Mercury-sized orbits with \textit{PLATO 2.0}, answering interesting questions on planetary formation.
\subsection{Ultimate limits of photometry}
To determine the actual limits of detection in the radius/period parameter space, we have created a diagram of achievable S/N using a series of injections and blind retrievals. We used our Sun's data with its red noise, and injected series of transits on circular orbits with central transits, i.e. impact parameter $b=0$. Limb darkening parameters were fixed (``known'') for simplicity, as we found that their typical uncertainties account for $<1$\% of transit depth/duration variation. To check this, we have used typical uncertainties in stellar parameters and recalculated the transits with varying limb darkening coefficients from \citep{Claret2011}. For example, in the recent characterization of Kepler-138 by \citet{Jontof2015}, the stellar parameters were given as $T_{eff}=3841\pm49$K, [Fe/H]=0.280$\pm$0.099, and log(g)=4.886$\pm$0.055. With these uncertainties, the transit depth varies by $<0.5$\%.
We only varied the radius of the injected planet, and the period. Retrieval was done blindly, and considered a success if both parameters were within $10$\% of the true values.
We required the likelihood of a noise-based dip of the same depth and shape as the transits to be $<1:1,000$ in 6yrs of data, using blind recovery and our noise model, plus the \textit{PLATO 2.0} instrumental noise. With this limit, one false positive among 1,000 real planet detections is found. The measured S/N as described in section~\ref{sub:red} for such a borderline detection is $\sim$10. If the noise model is neglected, one false positive among 300 real detections occurs; to achieve the same false positive rate, the threshold would need to be increased to S/N$\sim$14. The result in Figure~\ref{fig:snmap} shows that planets $>0.5R_{\oplus}$ within Mercury-sized orbits can be detected. What is more, we can expect to detect all planets in the habitable zone of a quiet G2-dwarf, i.e. on 200--600 days periods and radii $>0.7R_{\oplus}$. This result can easily be transferred to other stellar radii. Given sufficient brightness and the same low stellar noise, the transit depth scales as $R_P^2/R_*^2$. For example, a Mars-sized planet of $0.53R_{\oplus}$ around a $0.5R_{\odot}$ M-dwarf would cause a transit dip of $\sim$97ppm, which is about the depth of Earth's transit orbiting our Sun. Consequently, and helped by shorter periods (more transits), we can expect to detect all potentially habitable planets orbiting M, K and G stars with 6yrs of \textit{PLATO 2.0} data.
It is also worth noting that the detectability function in Figure~\ref{fig:snmap} has a step at $P>1/2 T_{obs}$ (not shown in the Figure), i.e. when only one transit is observed during the mission duration. Then, all else equal, longer periods are \textit{preferred} due to their longer transit duration which makes the detection easier. For comparison, Neptune has a transit duration of 3.1d, and Jupiter ``only'' 1.4d, giving a S/N advantage of $\sqrt{3.1/1.4} \sim 1.5 \times$ from transit duration. Of course, the occurrence rate of Neptunes and Jupiters is likely different (see section~\ref{strategies}), as is their transit probability. It is important, however, that the S/N differences are taken into account when calculating population statistics with \textit{PLATO 2.0} data.
On the other side, to answer the question of what near-perfect photometry can deliver in the future, we have repeated our injections without the instrumental noise. The results for the G2 star are very similar, as most of the noise already comes from stellar trends in the \textit{PLATO 2.0} scenario. As has been shown in section~\ref{sub:earth}, the improvements towards \textit{PERFECT} are only $\sim$10\%, and up to $\sim$50\% for the smaller M-dwarfs. According to our blind retrieval simulations, even with the inclusion of standard noise models, a detection of Mercury or Mars analogues is beyond the photometric limits. This, however, is not necessarily the \textit{ultimate} limit of photometry (as asked in the introduction); we might improve noise models using proxy data from radial velocity, spectroscopy, hydrodynamical modeling, and other methods yet to be developed.
\section{Conclusion}
In this work, we have shown that future photometry will be able to detect Earth- and Venus-analogues when transiting G-dwarfs like our Sun (Table~\ref{tab:sntable}). Larger sized planets ($>2R_{\oplus}$) will be detected in a single transit around G-dwarfs, in low stellar noise cases, and assuming one can find them in the first place. The search techniques for such single transits will require further research and validation, and will likely be performed remotely, due to the large storage requirements.
While the detection of moons in a solar system configuration will remain problematic in the next decades, the situation is better for rings, and for moons in M-dwarf systems.
For source stars with strong red noise characteristics, such as our Sun, we suggest to shift the usual S/N limit from 7 to 14, in order to prevent too many false positives. This limit can be set individually for each star in question, by multiply injecting and retrieving artificial signals to the one that is in question. Alternatively, we recommend to model the noise and set an appropriate threshold for the noise model using simulations. We release all data used in this paper, plain and injected, for the community\footnote{\url{http://www.jaekle.info/injections.zip}} and encourage testing different (and also blind) retrieval techniques in preparation for \textit{PLATO 2.0} and other missions.
Despite these challenges, we believe that the era of transit planet detection is still in its infancy, and photometry will have a bright future in the coming decades.
\acknowledgements
\section*{Acknowledgements}
\begin{CJK*}{UTF8}{gkai}
We thank Jason W. Barnes and Jorge Zuluaga for their help with understanding diffractive forward-scattering during the transit of Saturn's rings, and Wei Zhu \mbox{(祝伟)} for providing data for modeling oblateness.
Daniel Angerhausen's research was supported by an appointment to the NASA Postdoctoral Program at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center administered by Oak Ridge Associated Universities through a contract with NASA.
|
\section*{Introduction}
Flagellated bacteria such as \textit{Escherichia coli} are able to move up concentration gradients of chemical attractants, and down gradients of repellents, in a process called chemotaxis~\cite{Adler66}. The motion of these bacteria comprises periods of straight swimming called ``runs'', and random changes of direction called ``tumbles''. Run lengths are modulated to yield a three-dimensional random walk biased toward the preferred direction~\cite{Berg72}. Runs occur when flagella rotate counterclockwise and bundle together, while tumbles occur when one or more rotate clockwise and disrupt the bundle~\cite{Turner00}.
In \textit{E. coli}, transmembrane chemoreceptors form large and highly ordered arrays at the cell poles. Chemoreceptors are organized into trimers of dimers, and linked by CheW and CheA into a honeycomb lattice~\cite{Kentner06,Briegel09,Briegel12,Briegel14}, with a 6:1:1 receptor:CheA:CheW stoichiometry in terms of monomers~\cite{Briegel14}. Receptors control the activity of the histidine kinase CheA, which phosphorylates the cytoplasmic response-regulator protein CheY. Phosphorylated CheY (CheY-P) binds to FliM in the flagellar motor to induce clockwise rotation and tumbles. CheA also phosphorylates and activates CheB, a deaminase/methylesterase, that together with the methyltransferase CheR, reversibly modifies specific residues on the receptors to produce adaptation, i.e., to return to a baseline activity level when chemoeffector concentrations stay constant~\cite{Hazelbauer07,Hazelbauer10,Sourjik12}. Upon an increase in the concentration of chemoattractant, the activity of CheA decreases, which leads to fewer tumbles. Conversely, upon a decrease in the concentration of chemoattractant, the activity of CheA increases, yielding more tumbles. This biases the cell's motion toward climbing the gradient of chemoattractant.
\textit{E. coli} chemotaxis is a model for signal transduction, and is a member of the family of two-component signaling systems that enable bacteria to sense and respond to various features of their environment~\cite{Goulian10,Krell10,Hazelbauer10}. However, the chemotaxis pathway has unique features. First, chemotaxis calls for very fast response times. We demonstrate that this requirement necessitates high abundances of chemotaxis proteins. Second, chemotaxis involves large-scale multi-protein complexes, namely flagellar motors~\cite{Macnab03,Sowa08} and chemoreceptor arrays~\cite{Kentner06,Briegel09,Briegel12,Briegel14}. We show that the consequent self-assembly requirements impose additional constraints on the abundances of chemotaxis proteins. Because of these specific constraints, we hypothesize that chemotaxis proteins will be more highly expressed than their homologs in other pathways. Published data are consistent with this prediction, but more data would be required to definitively confirm it. In addition, using a model of the chemotaxis pathway, we show that the gain of the chemotaxis pathway at the level of CheY-P increases with overall chemotaxis protein abundances. This is consistent with the fact that artificially overexpressing chemotaxis proteins in a concerted manner increases chemotactic efficiency, measured by a swarm assay~\cite{Kollmann05}. Moreover, it may help explain why the abundance of all the chemotaxis proteins can be up to nine-fold higher in nutrient-poor versus rich medium~\cite{Li04}. We also demonstrate that the pathway is particularly robust to abundance variations of the motor protein FliM, in line with other robustness features of the chemotaxis pathway~\cite{Barkai97,Levin98,Alon99,Kollmann05}.
\section*{Models and methods}
\subsubsection*{Chemotaxis pathway model}
We model the \textit{E. coli} chemotaxis signaling pathway by the following system of ordinary differential equations for the average cellular concentrations of each protein in the pathway:
\begin{align}
[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}&=[\textrm{CheA}]+[\textrm{CheA-P}]\,, \label{mod1}\\
[\textrm{CheY}]_\textrm{tot}&=[\textrm{CheY}]+[\textrm{CheY-P}]+[\textrm{FliM}\cdot\textrm{CheY-P}]+[\textrm{CheZ}\cdot \textrm{CheY-P}]\,,\\
[\textrm{FliM}]_\textrm{tot}&=[\textrm{FliM}]+[\textrm{FliM}\cdot\textrm{CheY-P}]\,,\\
[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}&=[\textrm{CheZ}]+[\textrm{CheZ}\cdot \textrm{CheY-P}]\,,\\
[\textrm{CheB}]_\textrm{tot}&=[\textrm{CheB}]+[\textrm{CheB-P}]\,,\label{consb}\\
\frac{d[\textrm{CheA-P}]}{dt} &= \alpha k_\textrm{cat}^A [\textrm{CheA}] - [\textrm{CheA-P}] (k_a^Y [\textrm{CheY}]+ k_a^B [\textrm{CheB}])\,, \label{modalpha}\\
\frac{d[\textrm{CheY-P}]}{dt} &=k_a^Y [\textrm{CheA-P}] [\textrm{CheY}] -[\textrm{CheY-P}]\left(k_a^Z[\textrm{CheZ}]+k_a^M[\textrm{FliM}]+k_h^Y\right)\nonumber\\
& + k_d^Z[\textrm{CheZ}\cdot \textrm{CheY-P}]+ k_d^M [\textrm{FliM}\cdot\textrm{CheY-P}]\,,\\
\frac{d[\textrm{FliM}]}{dt} &= (k_d^M+k_h^Y) [\textrm{FliM}\cdot\textrm{CheY-P}]-k_a^M [\textrm{CheY-P}] [\textrm{FliM}] \,,\label{modflim}\\
\frac{d[\textrm{CheZ}]}{dt} &= (k_d^Z+ k_\textrm{cat}^Z) [\textrm{CheZ}\cdot \textrm{CheY-P}]-k_a^Z [\textrm{CheZ}] [\textrm{CheY-P}] \,,\label{modz}\\
\frac{d[\textrm{CheB-P}]}{dt} &= k_a^B [\textrm{CheA-P}] [\textrm{CheB}] - k_h^B [\textrm{CheB-P}] \label{modf}\,.
\end{align}
Here, concentrations are denoted by square brackets, and total concentrations by ``tot''. Phosphorylated species are denoted by ``-P'', and complexes by a dot between the two species names (e.g., $\textrm{FliM}\cdot\textrm{CheY-P}$). The first five equations express conservation of matter for each protein, while the other ones convey the kinetics of the chemical reactions in the pathway. These reactions are depicted in Eqs.~\ref{eqch1}-\ref{eqchf} of the Supporting Material.
We focus on the adapted state of the pathway and on its initial response to attractant or repellent, without explicitly modeling the slower dynamics of adaptation. In the adapted state, the active fraction $\alpha$ of CheA is modeled as~\cite{Meir10}:
\begin{equation}
\alpha=\frac{k_\textrm{cat}^R[\textrm{CheR}]_\textrm{tot}}{k_\textrm{cat}^R[\textrm{CheR}]_\textrm{tot}+k_\textrm{cat}^B[\textrm{CheB-P}]}\,,\label{alpha}
\end{equation}
which follows if CheR methylates inactive receptors and CheB-P demethylates active receptors. This active fraction is taken into account in the system of differential equations in Eqs.~\ref{mod1}-\ref{modf} through the reduction of the time-averaged autocatalytic rate of CheA from $k_\textrm{cat}^A$ to $\alpha k_\textrm{cat}^A$ (see Eq.~\ref{modalpha}), as in Ref.~\cite{Sourjik02}.
\paragraph*{Parameter values.}
We use experimentally-determined values for the reaction rates $k$ in Eqs.~\ref{mod1}-\ref{alpha}, except for $k_a^Z$ and $k_\textrm{cat}^Z$ (Table~\ref{KinValues}). Indeed, while the reaction rates for CheY-P dephosphorylation by CheZ have been measured \textit{in vitro} in the absence of CheA~\cite{Silversmith08}, it is known that CheZ binds to CheA-short, a translational variant of CheA that cannot autophosphorylate, and that this binding significantly activates CheZ~\cite{Wang96,OConnor04,Vaknin04}. We thus adjusted $k_a^Z$ and $k_\textrm{cat}^Z$ in order to obtain a fraction of CheZ bound to CheY-P of $\sim 30\%$, consistent with \textit{in vivo} FRET measurements in the adapted steady state~\cite{Sourjik02,Shimizu10}.
We use the average copy numbers of each chemotaxis protein per cell measured in Ref.~\cite{Li04} for strain RP437 in rich medium for all proteins but FliM, and those in Refs.~\cite{Tang95,Delalez10} for FliM, also in rich medium (Fig.~\ref{Fig1}). Importantly, the autocatalytic rate $k_\mathrm{cat}^A$ of the histidine kinase CheA is increased about 100-fold when CheA is in complex with chemoreceptors and CheW~\cite{Levit99}, so only CheA in signaling complexes has significant kinase activity. Receptors are limiting~\cite{Li04,Endres08} for signaling complexes with a 6:1:1 receptor:CheA:CheW stoichiometry~\cite{Briegel14}. Hence, we consider that the total number of CheA proteins per cell that can be active (setting $[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}$) is one-sixth the total number of receptor monomers. It is also observed that less than 30\% of FliM is found in complete flagellar motors~\cite{Tang95,Zhao96,Delalez10}, and that only 16\% is in the soluble fraction~\cite{Zhao96}, while more than 25\% of FliM~\cite{Zhao96,Delalez10}, probably all the rest, is found in partially assembled structures (see Supporting Material). Isolated FliM molecules have a much lower affinity for CheY-P than FliM in motors, with a dissociation constant of 27~$\mu\textrm{M}$~\cite{McEvoy99} versus 3.5~$\mu\textrm{M}$~\cite{Cluzel00,Sourjik02,Sagi03,Yuan13}, which leads us to disregard isolated FliM. In the absence of any data to the contrary, we assume that CheY-P binds FliM in partly and fully-assembled motors with the same affinity. For each chemotaxis pathway protein, we derive the corresponding effective total cellular concentration using the standard \textit{E. coli} cell volume of 1.4~fL~\cite{Sourjik02,Kollmann05} (Table~\ref{Conc}).
\begin{figure}[h t b]
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Fig1}}
\caption{\label{Fig1}Schematic of the chemotaxis signaling pathway in \textit{E. coli}. The number of copies per cell is indicated for each protein in the pathway. These numbers correspond to the measurements on strain RP437 in rich medium in Ref.~\cite{Li04} for all proteins but FliM, and to the measurements in Refs.~\cite{Tang95,Delalez10} for FliM, also in rich medium.}
\end{figure}
\paragraph*{Numerical solution.}
We solve Eqs.~\ref{mod1}-\ref{alpha} at steady state numerically using `NSolve' (Wolfram Mathematica). The initial response to saturating attractant (or repellent) is obtained by abruptly decreasing the CheA active fraction $\alpha$ to 0 (or increasing it to 1) from its adapted value. Hence, we solve Eqs.~\ref{mod1}-\ref{modf} numerically with $\alpha=0$ (or 1), with the adapted concentrations as initial conditions, using `NDSolve' (Wolfram Mathematica).
\paragraph*{Pathway gain.}
We are interested in the gain of the chemotaxis pathway. The input is the active fraction $\alpha$ of CheA, which directly depends on receptor states and hence on chemoeffector concentrations. We consider two different outputs: the concentration $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ of phosphorylated CheY, and the fraction $\psi$ of FliM molecules bound to CheY-P, with corresponding gains defined by
\begin{equation}
G_\textrm{CheY-P}=\frac{\Delta[\textrm{CheY-P}]/[\textrm{CheY-P}]}{\Delta\alpha/\alpha}\,, \label{GYP}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
G_\psi=\frac{\Delta\psi/\psi}{\Delta\alpha/\alpha}\,. \label{Gpsi}
\end{equation}
In practice, gains in the linear-response regime are computed for the pre-adaptation response to a 1\% increase of the CheA active fraction $\alpha$ from its adapted value determined by Eq.~\ref{alpha}.
\clearpage
\section*{Results}
\subsubsection*{Fast response imposes constraints on the abundances of chemotaxis proteins}
Chemotactic trajectories are composed of straight ``runs'' and random changes of directions or ``tumbles'' (Fig.~\ref{Fig2}A). The mean run time of \textit{E. coli} cells under adapted conditions is about one second~\cite{Alon98}. Hence, in practice, cells must make a decision whether to change direction in less than a second. The observed timescale of response to a saturating attractant is $\sim0.3$~seconds~\cite{Sourjik02}. Fig.~\ref{Fig2}B shows the timescales of the different molecular events involved in this response. The longest one is the dephosphorylation time $\sim0.3\,\textrm{s}$ of the cellular pool of CheY-P by the phosphatase CheZ~\cite{Sourjik02}. Here, we show that this timescale implies lower bounds on the dissociation constant of FliM and CheY-P and on the abundances of several proteins in the chemotaxis pathway.
\begin{figure}[h t b]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{Fig2}
\caption{\label{Fig2}Response timescales in the chemotactic pathway. \textbf{A.} Schematic of a chemotactic trajectory: the bacterium swims straight during ``runs'' (lines with arrows), and randomly changes direction during ``tumbles'' (dots), resulting in a three-dimensional random walk. The mean run time under adapted conditions is about 1 s~\cite{Alon98}. \textbf{B.} Schematic of the timescales involved in the initial (pre-adaptation) response to saturating attractant. The longest timescale corresponds to CheY-P dephosphorylation by CheZ~\cite{Sourjik02}: it is much longer than receptor switching~\cite{Skoge11,Lan12}, motor switching~\cite{Bai10}, and unbinding of CheY-P from FliM (see main text), and slightly longer than CheY-P diffusion~\cite{Elowitz99,Nenninger10}.}
\end{figure}
The CheY-P molecules bound to FliM proteins need to unbind and to be dephosphorylated within this 0.3~s for the pool of CheY-P to reflect the current chemoeffector concentration, thus ensuring an appropriate response. The unbinding timescale is $1/k_d^M$, where $k_d^M$ is the dissociation rate of FliM and CheY-P (see Eq.~\ref{modflim}), so $1/k_d^M\lesssim0.3~\textrm{s}$ implies $k_d^M\gtrsim 3.3~/\textrm{s}$. Since the binding of FliM and CheY-P is diffusion-limited, i.e. as fast as it can be, with a rate constant $k_a^M=5~/\textrm{s}/\mu\textrm{M}$~\cite{Sourjik02, Northrup92}, the dissociation constant of FliM and CheY-P must satisfy $K_d^M\equiv k_d^M/k_a^M\gtrsim 0.7~\mu\textrm{M}$. In reality, $K_d^M=3.5~\mu\textrm{M}$~\cite{Cluzel00,Sourjik02,Sagi03,Yuan13}, and the associated unbinding timescale is 0.06~s. Hence, our lower bound on $K_d^M$ is satisfied.
In the adapted state, the fraction $\psi$ of FliM molecules that are bound to CheY-P should be in the intermediate range, in order to respond readily to both increases and decreases of the free CheY-P concentration $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$. Assuming an adapted $\psi\gtrsim 0.25$, which is in the lower range of the region where the motor can switch rotation direction~\cite{Sourjik02}, we obtain $[\textrm{CheY-P}]\gtrsim K_d^M/3=1.17~\mu\textrm{M}$, and $[\textrm{FliM}\cdot\textrm{CheY-P}]\gtrsim 0.25\, [\textrm{FliM}]_\textrm{tot}= 0.35~\mu\textrm{M}$, where we used the total FliM concentration in Table~\ref{Conc} (see Methods and Models). Hence, the total cellular concentration of CheY-P is $C_\textrm{CheY-P}=[\textrm{CheY-P}]+[\textrm{FliM}\cdot\textrm{CheY-P}]\gtrsim1.5~\mu\textrm{M}$. Note that here we do not take into account the CheY-P that are bound to CheZ and thus essentially sure to be dephosphorylated (since $k_\mathrm{cat}^Z\gg k_d^Z$, see Table~\ref{KinValues}). In practice, about 30\% of CheY is phosphorylated~\cite{Alon98}, yielding $C_\textrm{CheY-P}=3~\mu\textrm{M}$ (using the total CheY concentration in Table~\ref{Conc}). Hence, our lower bound on $C_\textrm{CheY-P}$ is satisfied, with the actual value being only twice as large.
We now focus on the dephosphorylation of CheY-P, whose steady-state rate is (Eq.~\ref{modz})
\begin{equation}
\left.\frac{d[\textrm{CheY-P}]}{dt}\right|_\textrm{dephos}=-k_\mathrm{cat}^Z [\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot} \,\frac{[\textrm{CheY-P}]}{\frac{k_\mathrm{cat}^Z+k_d^Z}{k_a^Z}+[\textrm{CheY-P}]}\,. \label{vdephos}
\end{equation}
The whole cellular pool of non-CheZ-bound CheY-P, with concentration $C_\textrm{CheY-P}$, needs to be dephosphorylated within 0.3~s. Using the minimal values of $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ and $C_\textrm{CheY-P}$ calculated above and rate constants in Table~\ref{KinValues}, this requirement yields $ [\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}\gtrsim 2.3~\mu\textrm{M}$. Note that using the experimental values for $k_\mathrm{cat}^Z$ and $k_a^Z$ from Ref.~\cite{Silversmith08}, which disregard CheZ activation by CheA-short, gives a similar result: $ [\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}\gtrsim 1.8~\mu\textrm{M}$. Experiments yield $[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}=3.8~\mu\textrm{M}$ (Table~\ref{Conc}), so here too, our lower bound is satisfied, with the actual value being less than twice as large.
For turnover to occur within 0.3~s, ensuring that $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ reflects the current chemoeffector concentration, the whole cellular pool of non-CheZ-bound CheY-P also needs to be (re)phosphorylated within this time. Phosphotransfer from CheA-P to CheY being very fast, the limiting step is CheA autophosphorylation~\cite{Mayover99}. Hence, the steady-state CheY phosphorylation rate is simply $\alpha k_\textrm{cat}^A[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}$ (Eq.~\ref{modalpha}). Using the minimal values of $C_\textrm{CheY-P}$ and of $ [\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}$ calculated above, and $k_\textrm{cat}^A=20\,/\textrm{s}$ (Table~\ref{KinValues}), we obtain $\alpha[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}\gtrsim 0.25~\mu\textrm{M}$. The total concentration of CheA in arrays (determined from the receptor concentration and the stoichiometry, see Models and methods and Table~\ref{Conc}), $[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}=3.0~\mu\textrm{M}$, is substantially larger than this lower bound. This hints at a low active fraction $\alpha$, consistent with previous estimates, which range from a few percent~\cite{Sourjik02,Neumann14} to about 30\%~\cite{Sourjik02b,Shimizu10}.
Hence, the requirements of fast signaling impose lower bounds on the cellular concentrations of CheY-P, CheZ, and active CheA, as well as on the dissociation constant $K_d^M$ of CheY-P and FliM. These lower bounds are satisfied by experimental values, and are consistent with a low adapted CheA active fraction.
\subsubsection*{Pathway model accounts for observed concentrations and response times}
While the above simple arguments enabled us to derive constraints on the abundances of chemotaxis proteins, a more detailed comparison to observed concentrations and response times requires a mathematical model. Here we present results from the pathway model given by Eqs.~\ref{mod1}-\ref{alpha}. Similar models have been productively employed previously to investigate various aspects of the chemotaxis network~\cite{Levin98,Sourjik02,Kollmann05,Oleksiuk11}. Our focus is on the impact of protein abundances on gain.
The adapted steady-state of the chemotaxis pathway is obtained by solving Eqs.~\ref{mod1}-\ref{alpha} at steady-state with the parameter values in Tables~\ref{KinValues} and~\ref{Conc} (see Models and methods). It yields $[\textrm{CheY-P}]+[\textrm{FliM}\cdot\textrm{CheY-P}]=3.0\,\mu \textrm{M}$, in agreement with Ref.~\cite{Cluzel00}, and a proportion of phosphorylated CheY-P of 31\%, in agreement with Ref.~\cite{Alon98}. Besides, we obtain a fraction $\psi$ of FliM molecules that are bound to CheY-P of 41\% in the adapted state, which is in the functional range where the flagellar motor is able to switch~\cite{Sourjik02}. We also obtain a fraction $\alpha$ of active CheA of 25\% in the adapted state, within the range of previous estimates~\cite{Sourjik02,Neumann14,Sourjik02b,Shimizu10}.
The initial (pre-adaptation) response of the pathway to instantaneous addition of saturating attractant (or repellent) is obtained by solving Eqs.~\ref{mod1}-\ref{modf} with the adapted steady-state concentrations as initial conditions, setting the CheA active fraction $\alpha$ to 0 (or 1) (see Models and methods). Upon addition of attractant, $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ is found to decrease to 0 with a half-time of 0.13~s, and the fraction $\psi$ of FliM proteins bound to CheY-P decreases with a half-time of 0.23~s (Fig.~\ref{Fig3}). This is in reasonable agreement with Ref.~\cite{Sourjik02}, where the half-time for the decay of CheY-P bound to FliM, observed experimentally by FRET, is 0.32~s. Note that the difference between the timescales obtained for $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ and for $\psi$ from our pathway model indicates that the unbinding time of CheY-P from FliM is not negligible, contrary to the usual assumption~\cite{Sourjik02}. Addition of repellent yields a faster response, with half-times of 0.07~s and 0.08~s for the respective increases of $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ and of $\psi$ (Fig.~\ref{Fig3}). This is in reasonable agreement with the experimental value of 0.03~s for the half-time of the increase of $\psi$~\cite{Sourjik02}. Response to saturating repellent is faster because it relies on CheY phosphorylation by CheA, which is very fast when $\alpha=1$, while CheY-P dephosphorylation is limiting in response to attractant (Fig.~\ref{Fig2}).
The good agreement of the model with observations, obtained by adjusting only $k_\textrm{cat}^Z$ and $k_a^Z$ to match the fraction of CheZ bound to CheY-P (see Models and methods), encourages us to further study the model's implications.
\newpage
\begin{figure}[h t b]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Fig3}
\caption{\label{Fig3}Response to addition of saturating attractant or repellent, obtained from the pathway model (Eqs.~\ref{mod1}-\ref{modf}). \textbf{A.} Concentration of free CheY-P ($[\textrm{CheY-P}]$) versus time after a step addition of saturating attractant (blue curve) or repellent (red dashed curve). Addition of saturating attractant (repellent) is modeled by changing instantaneously the CheA active fraction, $\alpha$, from its adapted value (cf. Eq.~\ref{alpha}) to 0 (1). Dots indicate half-maximal response. \textbf{B.} Fraction $\psi$ of FliM proteins bound to CheY-P versus time after a step addition of saturating attractant (blue curve) or repellent (red dashed curve). Dots indicate half-maximal response. }
\end{figure}
\subsubsection*{Effect of a concerted increase of protein abundances}
The overall abundances of chemotaxis signaling proteins (Che proteins and chemoreceptors) are variable across \textit{E. coli} strains and growth conditions, but relative proportions are well-conserved~\cite{Li04}. Strikingly, these proteins are more highly expressed in minimal medium than in rich medium~\cite{Li04}. When the abundances of chemotaxis signaling proteins were varied in a concerted fashion~\cite{Kollmann05}, the chemotactic efficiency of cells (measured by a swarm assay) was found to increase sharply up to wild-type abundance, and then to continue increasing much more gradually while progressively leveling off. Here, to mimic the experiment of Ref.~\cite{Kollmann05}, we vary the abundances of CheA, CheY, CheZ, CheB and CheR, while keeping their proportions and the FliM abundance fixed, as in Table~\ref{Conc}. (We checked that varying the abundance of FliM in a concerted fashion with the rest does not affect our conclusions.) Solving our pathway model Eqs.~\ref{mod1}-\ref{alpha} in the adapted steady state, we find that when protein abundances are increased, $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ and $\psi$ both increase sharply up to about reference abundances, and the increase then progressively levels off (Fig.~\ref{Fig4}A). Our reference abundances (one-fold in Fig.~\ref{Fig4}) correspond to those measured in Ref.~\cite{Li04} for strain RP437 in rich medium (see Models and methods and Table~\ref{Conc}).
The effect of a concerted variation of protein abundances on $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ was previously modeled in Ref.~\cite{Levin98}. Our results (Fig.~\ref{Fig4}A) are mostly consistent with Ref.~\cite{Levin98}, but using one adaptation model Ref.~\cite{Levin98} obtained a maximum in $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ versus fold abundance. In our framework too, modifying details of the adaptation model (Eq.~\ref{alpha}) can result in such a maximum, but above one-fold expression (for realistic parameter values), so our main conclusions are not affected. In Ref.~\cite{Kollmann05}, clockwise bias was found to be monotonic versus concerted fold expression, which is consistent with our results (Fig.~\ref{Fig4}A). Building on a similar framework to Ref.~\cite{Levin98}, we include CheZ saturation by CheY-P, which has now been measured~\cite{Sourjik02,Shimizu10}, and we discuss FliM occupancy $\psi$ and gain, and provide analytical insight for simple regimes.
For reference abundances and higher, the steady-state phosphorylated fraction of CheA is very small, because of the rapidity of phosphotransfer from CheA-P to CheY~\cite{Mayover99}. In this ``fast phosphotransfer regime'', it is possible to solve analytically a simplified version of the pathway (see Supporting Material): if the auto-phosphorylation rate of CheA is less than the maximal dephosphorylation rate of CheY-P by CheZ, i.e. if
\begin{equation}
\alpha<\frac{k_\textrm{cat}^Z[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}}{k_\textrm{cat}^A[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}}\,,\label{cdnFPmt}
\end{equation}
then
\begin{equation}
[\textrm{CheY-P}]=\frac{\alpha \frac{k_\textrm{cat}^A}{k_a^Z}}{\frac{[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}}{[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}}-\alpha\frac{k_\textrm{cat}^A}{k_\textrm{cat}^Z}}\,,\label{ypFPmt}
\end{equation}
and $\psi$ is given by Eq.~\ref{psiFP}. These expressions only depend on abundance ratios, on kinetic rate constants, and on $\alpha$, which converges to a constant value at high abundances (see Supporting Material). Hence, in the high-abundance limit, these steady-state values of $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ and $\psi$, which arise from the equilibration of phosphorylation and dephosphorylation of CheY, converge to plateaus invariant to concerted variations of the overall abundances. Conversely, if the condition in Eq.~\ref{cdnFPmt} is violated, CheZ is saturated, and $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ increases with overall abundances. The conditions for the fast phosphotransfer regime are satisfied with the standard abundances used here and with higher overall abundances (see Supporting Material). The plateaus of $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ (Eq.~\ref{ypFPmt}) and $\psi$ (Eq.~\ref{psiFP}) are indicated by thin lines in Fig.~\ref{Fig4}A.
In the opposite limit of low abundances, two-molecule encounters become unlikely, including the binding of CheY to CheA-P, so the phosphorylated fraction of CheA becomes high, and only a small fraction of CheZ and of FliM are bound to CheY-P. Using the simplified pathway model presented in the Supporting Material, we show that if $[\textrm{CheY}]_\textrm{tot}\ll \min(\alpha k_\textrm{cat}^A/k_a^Y,\,k_\textrm{cat}^Z/k_a^Z,\,K_d^M)$ and $[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}\ll k_\textrm{cat}^Z/k_a^Z$, then
\begin{equation}
[\textrm{CheY-P}]=\frac{[\textrm{CheY}]_\textrm{tot}}{1+\frac{k_a^M}{k_d^M}[\textrm{FliM}]_\textrm{tot}+\frac{k_a^Z}{k_a^Y}\frac{[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}}{[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}}}\,. \label{sollowmt}
\end{equation}
Hence, in the low-abundance limit, $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ grows in proportion with the overall abundances of the Che proteins. The same is true for $\psi$ (Eq.~\ref{sollowb}). The low-abundance asymptotes Eqs.~\ref{sollowmt} and~\ref{sollowb} are plotted as thin dotted lines in Fig.~\ref{Fig4}A.
\begin{figure}[h t b]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Fig4}
\caption{\label{Fig4}Effects of fold-change of expression of all chemotaxis signaling proteins (as in Ref.~\cite{Kollmann05}), obtained from the pathway model in the adapted state (Eqs.~\ref{mod1}-\ref{alpha}). One-fold expression corresponds to the abundances in Table~\ref{Conc}, i.e. to those measured in Ref.~\cite{Li04} for strain RP437 in rich medium. In the same rich medium, the fold expression for strain OW1 is about 0.22, while in minimal medium, the fold expression is about 1.1 for strain RP437 and 2.0 for strain OW1~\cite{Li04} (values averaged over all chemotaxis signaling proteins). \textbf{A.} Adapted free CheY-P concentration ($[\textrm{CheY-P}]$) versus fold expression of the chemotaxis proteins. Inset: adapted fraction $\psi$ of FliM proteins bound to CheY-P versus fold expression. Thin horizontal lines: analytical high-abundance limit in the fast-phosphotransfer regime (Eqs.~\ref{ypFPmt} and~\ref{psiFP}). Thin dotted lines: analytical low-abundance limit (Eqs.~\ref{sollowmt} and~\ref{sollowb}).
\textbf{B.} Corresponding gain in the linear-response regime. Blue curve: gain for CheY-P, $G_\textrm{CheY-P}$ (Eq.~\ref{GYP}). Red (dashed) curve: gain for $\psi$, $G_\psi$ (Eq.~\ref{Gpsi}). Thin horizontal lines: analytical high-abundance asymptotic gains in the fast-phosphotransfer regime (Eqs.~\ref{GS1mt} and~\ref{GS2}). Dotted curve: ratio of total CheZ concentration to free CheZ concentration, $[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}/[\textrm{CheZ}]$; in the simplified-pathway fast-phosphotransfer regime, $G_\textrm{CheY-P}=[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}/[\textrm{CheZ}]$ (see Supporting Material).}
\end{figure}
Our pathway model also yields the gain $G_\textrm{CheY-P}$ of the pathway at the level of the response regulator. This gain grows with overall abundance of chemotaxis proteins, and plateaus in the high-abundance limit (Fig.~\ref{Fig4}B). The corresponding asymptotic value can be determined analytically within the simplified pathway model in the fast-phosphotransfer regime: $G_\textrm{CheY-P}$ (Eq.~\ref{GYP}) can be obtained from Eq.~\ref{ypFPmt}. It yields
\begin{equation}
G_\textrm{CheY-P}=\frac{\frac{[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}}{[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}}}{\frac{[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}}{[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}}-\alpha\frac{k_\textrm{cat}^A}{k_\textrm{cat}^Z}}\,,\label{GS1mt}
\end{equation}
which becomes independent of overall abundances as $\alpha$ converges to its high-abundance limit. Besides, in this regime, it can be shown that $G_\textrm{CheY-P}=[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}/[\textrm{CheZ}]$ (see Supporting Material). Thus, the gain in $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ arises from the saturation of the phosphatase CheZ by CheY-P: increasing the active fraction $\alpha$ of CheA increases phosphotransfer to CheY, and hence $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$, but this increase is larger than that of $\alpha$ because, at the same time, CheZ becomes more saturated, reducing the rate of dephosphorylation of CheY-P (see also Ref.~\cite{vanAlbada09}). In Fig.~\ref{Fig4}B, the thin horizontal blue line represents the plateau for $G_\textrm{CheY-P}$ (Eq.~\ref{GS1mt}), and the dotted curve shows $[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}/[\textrm{CheZ}]$: at sufficiently high abundances, it closely approximates the gain derived from numerical solution of the full pathway. Similarly, $G_\psi$ (Eq.~\ref{Gpsi}) can be determined analytically within the simplified pathway model in the fast-phosphotransfer regime (Eq.~\ref{GS2}, thin horizontal red line in Fig.~\ref{Fig4}B).
We conclude that the gain in CheY-P increases with overall abundances, up to about reference levels. Moreover, chemotactic signaling is robust with respect to concerted overexpression of the chemotaxis proteins (see also Ref.~\cite{Kollmann05}), as $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ remains lower than $K_d^M=3.5~\mu\textrm{M}$, so that $\psi<0.5$ remains in the functional range, below the threshold value (about 0.57) above which the motor only rotates clockwise~\cite{Sourjik02}.
\subsubsection*{Effect of separately varying the concentration of each protein in the pathway}
To study the effect of varying the abundance of each protein separately on the adapted steady state of the pathway, we separately varied CheY, FliM, CheA, CheZ, CheR, or CheB abundances, while keeping the abundances of all others fixed (values in Table~\ref{Conc}). Specifically, we calculated the gains $G_\textrm{CheY-P}$ and $G_\psi$ (Fig.~\ref{Fig5}), as well as the fraction $\psi$ of FliM molecules bound to CheY-P (Fig.~\ref{FigS2}) and the concentration $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ of free CheY-P (Fig.~\ref{FigS2_yp}).
The effect on $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ of protein abundance variations was investigated in Ref.~\cite{Levin98}. In addition to the differences mentioned above, this previous study did not include FliM, but included CheW and receptors. Our results (Fig.~\ref{FigS2_yp}) are consistent with those of Ref.~\cite{Levin98} for abundance variations of CheY, CheZ, CheR, and CheB. However, Ref.~\cite{Levin98} obtained a weak maximum of $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ upon CheA abundance variation, arising from their model of CheA interactions with CheW and receptors. We focus on gain, and on the stability of the pathway to FliM abundance variation, which were not included in Ref.~\cite{Levin98}.
\begin{figure}[h t b]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Fig5}
\caption{\label{Fig5}Effect of fold-change of expression of each chemotaxis signaling protein separately, obtained from the pathway model in the adapted state (Eqs.~\ref{mod1}-\ref{alpha}). One-fold expression corresponds to the abundances in Table~\ref{Conc}, i.e. to those measured in Ref.~\cite{Li04} for strain RP437 in rich medium, as in Fig.~\ref{Fig4}. \textbf{A}-\textbf{F} (linear-log plots). Blue curves: gain for CheY-P, $G_\textrm{CheY-P}$ (Eq.~\ref{GYP}), versus fold expression of each protein, keeping all others at their one-fold level. Red dashed curves: gain for $\psi$, $G_\psi$ (Eq.~\ref{Gpsi}). In the shaded zones, $\psi$ is either smaller than 0.11 or larger than 0.57 (Fig.~\ref{FigS2}), in which case the flagellar motor should rotate only counterclockwise or only clockwise, respectively, in the adapted state~\cite{Sourjik02}.}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{Fig5} shows that the gain of the chemotaxis pathway is robust to moderate individual variations of the abundances of each protein. Variations of $G_\psi$ are even weaker than those of $G_\textrm{CheY-P}$, due to the mitigating effect of FliM saturation by CheY-P.
Fig.~\ref{Fig5}A shows that $G_\textrm{CheY-P}$ increases with CheY abundance. Indeed, increased CheY abundance (at constant total CheB and CheA levels) results in less CheB phosphorylation, due to competition for CheA-P. Reduced $[\textrm{CheB-P}]$ in turn results in an increase of the adapted $\alpha$ (Eq.~\ref{alpha}), and hence of $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ and $\psi$ (Fig.~\ref{FigS2}A). Higher $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ (at constant total CheZ level) means that CheZ becomes more saturated, increasing $G_\textrm{CheY-P}$ (see above). Consistently, in the fast phosphotransfer regime, Eq.~\ref{GS1mt} shows that $G_\textrm{CheY-P}$ is an increasing function of $\alpha$, which itself increases with CheY abundance, for the above-mentioned reasons.
Fig.~\ref{Fig5}B shows that the gains are almost independent of the abundance of FliM, and Fig.~\ref{FigS2}B shows that the same is true for $\psi$. In addition, solving our simplified pathway model in the fast phosphotransfer regime gives expressions for $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$, for $\psi$, and for the gains that are entirely independent of FliM abundances (Eqs.~\ref{ypFPmt} and~\ref{psiFP},~\ref{GS1mt} and~\ref{GS2}). This robustness of the pathway to FliM abundance variation arises from the fact that, in contrast to the free CheY-P molecules, the ones that are bound to FliM cannot be dephosphorylated by CheZ (they can auto-dephosphorylate, but this process is much slower than dephosphorylation by CheZ). This is analogous to the case of transcription factors studied in Ref.~\cite{Burger10}: if transcription factors (or in our case CheY-P) can be degraded (or in our case dephosphorylated) only when they are not bound to their DNA targets (bound to FliM), then the concentration of non-bound transcription factors is independent of the number of DNA targets (FliM molecules).
In Fig.~\ref{Fig5}C, $G_\textrm{CheY-P}$ features a weak maximum at about two-fold abundance of CheA. Increasing CheA abundance raises the level of phosphorylation of CheY, which yields an increase of $\psi$ (Fig.~\ref{FigS2}C), and moreover increases saturation of CheZ, which increases $G_\textrm{CheY-P}$. However, once the CheA abundance is so high that almost all CheY is phosphorylated and almost all CheZ is saturated, increasing $\alpha$ primarily increases $[\textrm{CheA-P}]$ and not $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$: hence, in this regime, the gain decreases with CheA abundance. The maximum in $G_\textrm{CheY-P}$ is smoothed out in $G_\psi$ due to FliM saturation (Fig.~\ref{Fig5}C).
Increasing CheZ abundance has the opposite effect of increasing CheA abundance, since these two enzymes have an antagonistic role in the pathway. Accordingly, $G_\textrm{CheY-P}$ features a weak maximum at about 0.5-fold abundance of CheZ (Fig.~\ref{Fig5}D), with $\psi$ decreasing when CheZ abundance increases (Fig.~\ref{FigS2}D). Increasing CheR abundance yields an increase of the active fraction $\alpha$ of CheA (Eq.~\ref{alpha}). Hence, it is effectively similar to increasing CheA abundance (Figs.~\ref{Fig5}E and~\ref{FigS2}E). Finally, increasing CheB abundance has the opposite effect, i.e. a similar effect to increasing CheZ abundance (Figs.~\ref{Fig5}F and~\ref{FigS2}F).
\section*{Discussion}
\subsubsection*{Fast signaling requirements impose strong constraints on the chemotaxis pathway}
The chemotaxis pathway is a member of the family of two-component signaling systems that enable bacteria to sense and respond to various features of their environment. This pathway is widely studied as a model signaling system. However, it faces specific constraints. Chemotaxis regulates cell swimming with response times of a fraction of a second. Longer response timescales would directly increase the lag between detection of a chemoeffector concentration and change in motion, with potentially deleterious consequences in extreme environments (e.g. in steep repellent gradients), but also in fast-changing ones. The latter case could be particularly important evolutionarily as motility peaks at the entry into stationary phase, when bacteria are competing for scarce resources~\cite{Celani10}. In contrast, the output of most other two-component systems lies in transcriptional regulation~\cite{Goulian10,Krell10,Hazelbauer10}. These systems feature overall \textit{in vivo} response times of minutes to hours~\cite{Rosenfeld02}, and their signaling involves phosphorylation reactions with \textit{in vitro} timescales of minutes~\cite{Yamamoto05}.
We have shown that the requirements of fast signaling impose lower bounds on the dissociation constant $K_d^M$ between CheY-P and FliM, and hence on CheY-P abundance, as well as on CheZ, and CheA abundances. These lower bounds are satisfied by experimental values, giving the right order of magnitude for $K_d^M$, CheY-P, and CheZ, and indicating a low active fraction $\alpha$ of CheA in the adapted state. In practice, our pathway model gives $\alpha=0.25$ in the adapted state, within the range of previous estimates, which vary from a few percent~\cite{Sourjik02,Neumann14} to about 30\%~\cite{Sourjik02b,Shimizu10}. Note that similar constraints might exist on the abundance of CheR and CheB, since they control the dynamics of adaptation~\cite{Alon99}. However, rapidity constraints are less obvious on the adaptation timescales than on the fast response timescales studied here.
Several other features of the chemotaxis pathway reflect a pressure towards rapidity. First, the existence of a dedicated phosphatase for the response regulator CheY, which is uncommon for two-component systems, suggests the importance of fast turnover of the CheY-P pool. Second, CheA is an extremely fast histidine kinase: when incorporated in signaling complexes containing chemoreceptors and CheW, the autocatalytic rate of CheA is $k_\mathrm{cat}^A=20~/\textrm{s}$ for \textit{E. coli}~\cite{Levit02a,Francis02,Shrout03} and \textit{Salmonella typhimurium}~\cite{Levit99}, which makes it \textit{four to five orders of magnitude} faster than other kinases in two-component systems (Table~\ref{kinases}). Another possible signature of the pressure towards rapidity is that the response timescale of the chemotaxis pathway is only slightly larger than the diffusion time of CheY-P across the cytoplasm (Fig.~\ref{Fig2}B), estimated using measured diffusion coefficients~\cite{Elowitz99,Nenninger10} and a characteristic cell size of $\sim 1~\mu\textrm{m}$. Hence, the response of the chemotaxis pathway is almost as fast as it can be. Note that our model, which focuses on average concentrations, should slightly underestimate response timescales due to the neglect of diffusion. Thus, a full spatial model~\cite{Lipkow05} should yield slightly more stringent lower bounds on protein abundances.
One can wonder why the adapted CheA active fraction $\alpha$ is low ($<30\%$) while CheA is pushed towards extremely high rapidity of autophosphorylation. Ref.~\cite{Neumann14} shows that a low $\alpha$ makes the dynamics of the pathway response robust to slowly varying multiplicative noise. The pathway output is assumed to be proportional to $\alpha$, with the proportionality factor fluctuating, but more slowly than the response timescales of the pathway. In Ref.~\cite{Neumann14}, the output is chosen to be the fraction of CheZ bound to CheY-P, which is measurable by FRET. The noisy proportionality factor then involves the ratio of total CheA abundance to total CheZ abundance (see Eq.~\ref{zyp}). The robustness of the dynamics to such multiplicative noise arises from the fact that at low $\alpha$, the signal amplification at the receptor level is exponential, via the Boltzmann factor for CheA to be in its active state~\cite{Neumann14}. Since rapidity constraints imply $\alpha[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}\gtrsim 0.25~\mu\textrm{M}$, requiring in addition an adapted $\alpha<30\%$ implies $[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}\gtrsim 0.83~\mu\textrm{M}$, which is only $\sim 3-4$ times lower than the experimental value. Note that this would also entail a lower bound on receptor concentration of $5.0~\mu\textrm{M}$, given the stoichiometry of the array.
Since the requirement of fast signaling calls for high abundances of chemotaxis proteins, it follows that these protein levels should be higher than in homologous systems with different outputs. Many bacteria with chemotaxis pathways similar to that of \textit{E. coli}~\cite{Wuichet10}, and for which similar timescales are expected~\cite{Stocker08}, possess multiple gene clusters encoding Che proteins. Some of these paralogs regulate twitching motility based on type IV pili, while others are involved in very different cellular functions, such as development, biofilm formation, cell morphology, cell-cell interactions, and flagellar biosynthesis~\cite{Wuichet10,He14}. In the Supporting Material, we compare expression of the Che proteins involved in chemotaxis to the expression of those from paralog clusters, in five different bacteria (\textit{Pseudomonas aeruginosa}, \textit{Vibrio cholerae}, \textit{Caulobacter crescentus}, \textit{Sinorhizobium meliloti}, \textit{Rhodobacter sphaeroides}), using data from published microarray studies. We find that homologous non-chemotactic genes are significantly less expressed (at the mRNA level) than the ones actually involved in chemotaxis (Tables~\ref{PA}-\ref{RS}), with the exception of the CheY involved in twitching motility in \textit{P. aeruginosa}, which might also be subject to rapidity constraints (see Supporting Material).
It is also interesting to compare the cellular abundances of CheA and CheY to those of the histidine kinases (HKs) and response regulators (RRs) in other two-component signaling systems. Table~\ref{twocompo} provides such a comparison for \textit{E. coli}. The protein abundance data come from several published studies and show significant variability, which may be explained by differences in media, growth phases, strains, and techniques, and the comparison should thus be taken with caution. However, it appears that CheA proteins are orders of magnitude more highly expressed than all the other HKs for which data are available (Table~\ref{twocompo}). The comparison is less striking for CheY, since it does not appear to be particularly highly expressed among RRs in the data from Ref.~\cite{Taniguchi10}, but the protein abundance measured in Ref.~\cite{Li04} is much higher, and would place CheY among the most highly expressed RRs (Table~\ref{twocompo}). While in \textit{E. coli}, CheA and CheY are expressed at comparable levels~\cite{Li04}, a number of other RRs are one or two orders of magnitude more highly expressed than their cognate HKs (Table~\ref{twocompo}). In two-component systems with bifunctional HKs that also dephosphorylate their cognate RRs, high RR abundances enable the level of phosphorylated RR to be insensitive to variations in the HK and RR abundances~\cite{Russo93,Batchelor03}. The \textit{E. coli} chemotaxis pathway is different since it possesses a dedicated phosphatase, CheZ. However, the condition for obtaining a plateau of $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ at high abundances (Eq.~\ref{cdnFPmt}) and the corresponding adapted value of $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ (Eq.~\ref{ypFPmt}) both depend on the ratio of CheZ to CheA abundances, which may fluctuate. Additional mechanisms provide robustness with respect to this ratio. First, CheZ is activated upon interaction with CheA-short~\cite{Wang96,OConnor04}, and most phosphatase activity takes place at the receptor arrays~\cite{Vaknin04}, which keeps phosphatase activity coupled to kinase abundance. Second, CheZ oligomerizes in the presence of CheY-P~\cite{Blat96}, and this increases its activity~\cite{Blat98}. Finally, the dependence of $\alpha$ on $[\textrm{CheB-P}]$ (Eq.~\ref{alpha}), together with the competition between CheB and CheY for CheA-P, are thought to couple kinase and phosphatase activities since CheZ and CheY abundances are strongly coupled~\cite{Neumann14}.
Hence, high chemotaxis protein abundances appear to arise from the specific rapidity constraints on the chemotaxis pathway. Supporting this view, we note that chemotaxis protein abundances similar to those in \textit{E. coli} are found in the Gram positive bacterium \textit{Bacillus subtilis}, which has even more chemoreceptors~\cite{Cannistraro11}.
\subsubsection*{Self-assembly requirements yield additional constraints}
Apart from the constraint of fast signaling, the chemotaxis pathway is also unusual among two-component systems in that it involves two types of large self-assembled multiprotein complexes: the chemoreceptor arrays, which allow for signal amplification via cooperativity~\cite{Sourjik02b,Hazelbauer07,Endres08,Hansen10}, and the rotary flagellar motors, which enable the cell to swim. The self-assembly requirements of these complexes also contribute constraints on the abundances of chemotaxis proteins.
First, inclusion in receptor arrays increases the autocatalytic rate of CheA by two orders of magnitude~\cite{Levit99}, so only CheA in arrays is functionally relevant (see Models and methods, and Table~\ref{Conc}). However, overall cellular proportions reveal a significant excess of CheA with respect to the precise 6:1:1 receptor:CheA:CheW stoichiometry of the receptor arrays~\cite{Briegel14}; for instance, overall proportions are 2.2:1:1 for strain RP437 in rich medium~\cite{Li04}. Ref.~\cite{Endres08} shows that overexpressing receptors up to $\sim 7$-fold wild-type level at native CheA level leads to a stronger response to repellent, i.e. to a stronger kinase activity, which shows that CheA is strongly in excess in these conditions too. Besides, \textit{in vitro} assembly of receptors alone leads to the formation of non-functional structures, called zippers, while adding CheA and CheW in excess to stoichiometric array proportions yields arrays~\cite{Briegel14}. Hence, in \textit{E. coli}, the correct self-assembly of the receptor arrays seems to require an excess of CheA. Note however that overall cellular proportions appear to be different in \textit{B. subtilis}, but this bacterium also expresses soluble (non-transmembrane) chemoreceptors~\cite{Cannistraro11}.
Second, self-assembly of the flagellar motor appears to constrain the abundance of the protein FliM. In the motor, FliM forms a ring of $\sim 32$ subunits~\cite{Delalez10} which bind CheY-P to mediate switching of the direction of motor rotation. Studies~\cite{Tang95,Zhao96,Sourjik02,Delalez10} reveal that only a small fraction of FliM ($<30\%$), is part of complete motors (see Supporting Material, esp. Table~\ref{flim}). Nevertheless, underexpression and overexpression experiments indicate that FliM constitutes a limiting resource for proper motor assembly~\cite{Tang95}. Consistent with this observation, more than 25\% of FliM is found in partially assembled structures~\cite{Zhao96,Delalez10}, with only about 16\% of FliM copies free in the cytoplasm~\cite{Zhao96}. Since it is likely that FliM in partially assembled structures binds CheY-P with an affinity comparable to FliM in complete motors, these additional FliM contribute to the lower bound on the total cellular concentration of CheY-P, $C_\textrm{CheY-P}=[\textrm{CheY-P}]+[\textrm{FliM}\cdot\textrm{CheY-P}]$, yielding the second term, which accounts for 23\% of the total CheY-P lower bound. Hence, motor self-assembly requirements on FliM abundance provide a separate lower bound on CheY-P abundance only a factor of $\sim 4$ lower than our complete lower bound, which involves the actual value of $K_d^M$.
Since FliM is in excess of the requirement for complete motors, one can ask if the FliM level is constrained by signaling requirements. However, our study demonstrates that the gain, as well as the output of the pathway, are very robust to variations of the abundance of FliM (Fig.~\ref{Fig5}B). The gene encoding FliM does not belong to either of the \textit{meche} and \textit{mocha} operons that encode the Che proteins~\cite{Kollmann05,Lovdok09,Sourjik12}. Hence, FliM expression levels are likely to feature non-negligible abundance fluctuations with respect to other proteins in the pathway, making robustness to FliM abundance variations a useful feature.
\subsubsection*{Gain and cooperativity are increased by a concerted increase of protein abundances}
The abundances of chemotaxis proteins were measured in two different \textit{E. coli} strains considered wild-type for chemotaxis, in both rich and minimal growth media, in Ref.~\cite{Li04}. Strikingly, chemotaxis proteins tend to be more expressed in minimal medium than in rich medium. While this increase is modest for the reference strain RP437, where Che protein abundances increase from 1 fold to 1.1 fold, it is very strong for strain OW1, where Che protein abundances increase 9.4 times, from 0.22 fold to 2.0 fold.
Proportions are well-conserved despite this high variability of abundances~\cite{Li04}. The Che proteins are expressed from two adjacent operons in the \textit{E. coli} genome, the \textit{meche} operon, which encodes CheR, CheB, CheY, CheZ, as well as two types of chemoreceptors, and the \textit{mocha} operon, which encodes CheA and CheW~\cite{Kollmann05,Lovdok09,Sourjik12}. Both \textit{meche} and \textit{mocha} operons are in the same regulon: they are under transcriptional control of the sigma factor $\sigma^{28}$ and of the anti-sigma factor FlgM~\cite{Kollmann05}. In addition to this transcriptional coupling, these genes also feature translational coupling~\cite{Lovdok09}. This enables the expression levels of the Che proteins to be correlated and their proportions to be stable~\cite{Kollmann05,Sourjik12}. In Ref.~\cite{Kollmann05}, where the abundances of chemotaxis proteins were varied in a concerted fashion by modulating the expression of FlgM, the chemotactic efficiency of cells (measured by a swarm assay) was found to increase sharply up to about wild-type abundance, and then to keep increasing much more gradually while progressively leveling off.
We find that the gain at the level of the response regulator CheY-P increases substantially for concerted increases of the abundances up to about reference levels, and more moderately above reference levels, reaching a plateau in the high-abundance limit. This dependence of the gain on protein abundances (Fig.~\ref{Fig4}B) is consistent with the swarm assay results of Ref.~\cite{Kollmann05}. Gain is a crucial quantity since drift velocity in a shallow chemoeffector gradient is proportional to gain~\cite{Oleksiuk11}. Moreover, an increase of the gain could further sensitize cells to small changes of attractant concentration~\cite{Sourjik02b}, which may be beneficial in poor media. This effect is strong for strain OW1, where we find that the gain in $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ is increased by a factor $\sim 5$ in minimal medium vs. rich medium (even more if the small variations in abundance ratios~\cite{Li04} are accounted for). The small gain obtained for 0.22-fold abundance, corresponding to the expression level for strain OW1 in rich medium (Fig.~\ref{Fig4}B) arises from the small non-phosphorylated CheY reserve in this case (only $\sim 5\%$ of total CheY in adapted conditions), which entails a small response to an increase of $\alpha$. Note in addition that CheY and CheZ abundances in strain OW1 in minimal medium are smaller than our lower bounds derived from rapidity constraints, indicating slower response times.
In addition to the increase of gain, receptor overexpression has been shown to increase cooperativity among receptors by increasing the size of receptor signaling teams~\cite{Sourjik04,Endres08,Hansen10}. This additional cooperativity can also increase sensitivity to low attractant concentrations. Together, these increases of sensitivity help explain why the proteins of the chemotaxis pathway are overexpressed in minimal medium compared to rich medium~\cite{Li04}, despite the cost of additional protein expression.
\section*{Author contributions}
Designed research: AFB and NSW; performed research: AFB; wrote the paper: AFB and NSW.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
AFB thanks Sophia Hsin-Jung Li for helpful discussions.
This work was supported in part by National Institutes of Health Grant R01 GM082938 and National Science Foundation Grant PHY-1305525. AFB acknowledges the support of the Human Frontier Science Program.
\clearpage
\phantom{hi}
\vspace{1cm}
\centerline{\LARGE{SUPPORTING MATERIAL}}
\vspace{1cm}
\normalsize
\renewcommand{\thefigure}{S\arabic{figure}}
\setcounter{figure}{0}
\renewcommand{\theequation}{S\arabic{equation}}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
\renewcommand{\thetable}{S\arabic{table}}
\setcounter{table}{0}
\renewcommand\thesubsubsection{\thesection.\arabic{subsubsection}}
\begin{spacing}{1}
\tableofcontents
\end{spacing}
\clearpage
\section{Chemotaxis pathway model: chemical reactions and parameter values}
The chemical reactions corresponding to our \textit{E. coli} chemotaxis pathway model in Eqs.~\ref{mod1}-\ref{modf} of the main text are:
\begin{align}
&\ce{\textrm{CheA} ->[\alpha k_\mathrm{cat}^A] \textrm{CheA-P}} \label{eqch1}\,,\\
&\ce{\textrm{CheA-P} + \textrm{CheY} ->[k_a^Y] \textrm{CheA} + \textrm{CheY-P}}\,,\label{eqch2}\\
&\ce{\textrm{CheA-P} + \textrm{CheB} ->[k_a^B] \textrm{CheA} + \textrm{CheB-P}}\,,\label{eqch3}\\
&\ce{\textrm{CheZ} + \textrm{CheY-P} <=>[k_a^Z][k_d^Z] \textrm{CheZ} \cdot \textrm{CheY-P} ->[k_\mathrm{cat}^Z] \textrm{CheY} + \textrm{CheZ}}\,,\label{eqch4}\\
&\ce{\textrm{CheY-P} ->[k_h^Y] \textrm{CheY}}\,,\label{eqch5}\\
&\ce{\textrm{FliM} \cdot \textrm{CheY-P} ->[k_h^Y] \textrm{FliM} + \textrm{CheY}}\,,\label{eqch6}\\
&\ce{\textrm{FliM} + \textrm{CheY-P} <=>[k_a^M][k_d^M] \textrm{FliM} \cdot \textrm{CheY-P}}\,,\label{eqch7}\\
&\ce{\textrm{CheB-P} ->[k_h^B] \textrm{CheB}}\label{eqchf}\,.
\end{align}
As in the main text, phosphorylated species are denoted by ``-P'', and complexes by a dot between the two species names (e.g., $\textrm{FliM}\cdot\textrm{CheY-P}$). Eq.~\ref{eqch1} corresponds to autophosphorylation of the histidine kinase CheA, and the fraction $\alpha$ of active CheA is accounted for by an effective reduction of the autocatalytic rate from $k_\mathrm{cat}^A$ to $\alpha k_\mathrm{cat}^A$. Eq.~\ref{eqch2} and Eq.~\ref{eqch3} represent phosphotransfer from CheA-P to CheY and CheB, respectively. Eq.~\ref{eqch4} expresses dephosphorylation of the phosphorylated response regulator CheY-P by the phosphatase CheZ, and Eq.~\ref{eqch5} the (much slower) auto-dephosphorylation of CheY-P. Similarly, Eq.~\ref{eqch6} corresponds to auto-dephosphorylation of the $\textrm{FliM} \cdot \textrm{CheY-P} $ complex, and Eq.~\ref{eqchf} to auto-dephosphorylation of CheB-P. Finally, Eq.~\ref{eqch7} represents the binding of the phosphorylated response regulator CheY-P to the FliM protein, which is a part of the flagellar motor, as well as their unbinding.
The values of the rate constants used are presented in Table~\ref{KinValues}, and the values of the effective total cellular concentrations are presented in Table~\ref{Conc}. These concentration values are used as references when abundances are varied in model calculations.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering
\caption{Values of the rate constants of the \textit{E. coli} signaling pathway used in our model. Note that a comprehensive list of experimental values is available online at `http://www.pdn.cam.ac.uk/groups/comp-cell/Data.html'. $k_a^Z$ and $k_\mathrm{cat}^Z$ were adjusted to yield consistency with FRET data (see Models and methods).}
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\hline
Constant&Value&Notes and references\\
\hline
$k_\mathrm{cat}^A$ & 20 /s &\cite{Levit02a,Francis02,Shrout03}\\
$k_a^Y$ & 40 /s/$\mu$M &\cite{Mayover99}\\
$k_a^B$ & 15 /s/$\mu$M &\cite{Stewart00,Pontius13}\\
$k_a^Z$ &2.3 /s/$\mu$M & Adjusted; 5.6 /s/$\mu$M in the absence of CheA \cite{Silversmith08}.\\
$k_d^Z$ & 0.04 /s & in the absence of CheA \cite{Silversmith08}\\
$k_\mathrm{cat}^Z$ &12.3 /s& Adjusted; 4.9 /s in the absence of CheA \cite{Silversmith08}.\\
$k_h^Y$ & 0.04 /s &\cite{Silversmith01,Stewart04,Thomas08}\\
$k_a^M$ & 5 /s/$\mu$M &Diffusion-limited~\cite{Sourjik02, Northrup92}.\\
$k_d^M$ & 18 /s &From $K_d^M=3.5~\mu\textrm{M}$~\cite{Cluzel00,Sourjik02,Sagi03,Yuan13} and $k_a^M$.\\
$k_h^B$ & 0.37 /s &\cite{Kentner09,Stewart93}\\
$k_\mathrm{cat}^R$ &0.12 /s &For \textit{S. typhimurium} CheR~\cite{Simms87}.\\
$k_\mathrm{cat}^B$ &0.29 /s &\cite{Barnakov02}\\
\hline
\end{tabular
\label{KinValues
\end{table
\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering
\caption{Values of the effective total cellular concentrations of the chemotaxis proteins used in our pathway model (Eqs.~\ref{mod1}-\ref{alpha}). These values derive from the total numbers of each chemotaxis protein per cell measured in Ref.~\cite{Li04} for strain RP437 in rich medium for all proteins but FliM, and from those in Refs.~\cite{Tang95,Delalez10} for FliM, also in rich medium. For CheA and FliM, we take into account additional constraints imposed by the assembly of chemoreceptor arrays and flagellar motors, respectively, as explained in Models and methods in the main text. We use the standard \textit{E. coli} cell volume of 1.4~fL~\cite{Sourjik02,Kollmann05}. }
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\hline
Protein&Total concentration ($\mu$M)&Notes and references\\
\hline
CheA & 2.97 &1/6 of the chemoreceptor concentration, 17.8~$\mu$M~\cite{Li04}.\\
CheY & 9.73 &\cite{Li04}\\
CheZ & 3.80 &\cite{Li04}\\
CheB & 0.28 &\cite{Li04}\\
CheR & 0.17 &\cite{Li04}\\
FliM & 1.43 &\cite{Tang95,Delalez10}. The 16\% of FliM that are free~\cite{Zhao96} are discounted. \\
\hline
\end{tabular
\label{Conc
\end{table
\clearpage
\section{Simplified pathway model}
\subsubsection{Assumptions and model}
The full pathway model, corresponding to the chemical reactions in Eqs.~\ref{eqch1}-\ref{eqchf}, is written in Eqs.~\ref{mod1}-\ref{modf} in the main text. Here, we present an analytically tractable simplified version for steady state. Our simplifying assumptions are the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item With regard to CheA-P levels, we neglect phosphotransfer to CheB with respect to phosphotransfer to CheY, i.e., we assume $k_a^Y [\textrm{CheY}]\gg k_a^B [\textrm{CheB}]$ (see Eq.~\ref{modalpha}). Indeed, the total concentration of CheY is much larger than that of CheB (Table~\ref{Conc}), and in addition $k_a^Y > k_a^B$ (Table~\ref{KinValues}). Moreover, CheY-P is dephosphorylated much faster than CheB-P, due to the existence of the dedicated phosphatase CheZ, so its turnover is much faster.
\item We treat the active fraction $\alpha$ of CheA as a parameter, without explicitly relating it to the CheB-P concentration (e.g., as in Eq.~\ref{alpha}). Thanks to this simplification, and to the previous one, CheB decouples from the rest of the system, and can thus be ignored.
\item We neglect auto-dephosphorylation of CheY-P, as it is much slower than dephosphorylation by CheZ.
\item We neglect auto-dephosphorylation of CheY-P in the complex $\textrm{FliM}\cdot\textrm{CheY-P}$, as it is much slower than dissociation of this complex ($k_h^Y\ll k_d^M$, see Table~\ref{KinValues}).
\item We neglect dissociation in the complex $\textrm{CheZ}\cdot\textrm{CheY-P}$, as it is much slower than dephosphorylation ($k_d^Z\ll k_\textrm{cat}^Z$, see Table~\ref{KinValues}).
\end{itemize}
Under these assumptions, at steady state (i.e., when all time derivatives vanish), the pathway model in Eqs.~\ref{mod1}-\ref{modf} becomes:
\begin{align}
[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}&=[\textrm{CheA}]+[\textrm{CheA-P}]\,, \label{modS1}\\
[\textrm{CheY}]_\textrm{tot}&=[\textrm{CheY}]+[\textrm{CheY-P}]+[\textrm{FliM}\cdot\textrm{CheY-P}]+[\textrm{CheZ}\cdot \textrm{CheY-P}]\,,\\
[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}&=[\textrm{CheZ}]+[\textrm{CheZ}\cdot \textrm{CheY-P}]\,,\label{consZ}\\
[\textrm{FliM}]_\textrm{tot}&=[\textrm{FliM}]+[\textrm{FliM}\cdot\textrm{CheY-P}]\,,\\
\alpha k_\textrm{cat}^A [\textrm{CheA}] &= k_a^Y [\textrm{CheY}][\textrm{CheA-P}]\,, \label{modSalpha}\\
k_\textrm{cat}^Z [\textrm{CheZ}\cdot \textrm{CheY-P}] &= k_a^Y [\textrm{CheY}][\textrm{CheA-P}] \,,\label{hou}\\
k_\textrm{cat}^Z [\textrm{CheZ}\cdot \textrm{CheY-P}] &= k_a^Z [\textrm{CheZ}] [\textrm{CheY-P}]\,,\label{modSz}\\
k_a^M [\textrm{CheY-P}] [\textrm{FliM}] &= k_d^M [\textrm{FliM}\cdot\textrm{CheY-P}]\,.\label{modflimS}
\end{align}
In this system, Eqs.~\ref{modSalpha}-\ref{modSz} simply express the equality of the phosphorylation and dephosphorylation speeds of CheY at steady state.
\subsubsection{Fast phosphotransfer limit}
Given the rapidity of phosphotransfer from CheA-P to CheY at standard cellular concentrations~\cite{Mayover99}, a relevant limit is the ``fast phosphotransfer limit'', where CheA-P very rapidly undergoes phosphotransfer. In this limit,
\begin{equation}
[\textrm{CheA}]\approx[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}\gg[\textrm{CheA-P}]\,. \label{FPeq}
\end{equation}
The simplified system Eqs.~\ref{modS1}-\ref{modflimS} can be solved analytically in the fast phosphotransfer limit, yielding successively:
\begin{align}
[\textrm{CheZ}\cdot \textrm{CheY-P}]&=\alpha \frac{k_\textrm{cat}^A}{k_\textrm{cat}^Z}[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}\,,\label{zyp}\\
[\textrm{CheY-P}]&=\frac{\alpha \frac{k_\textrm{cat}^A}{k_a^Z}}{\frac{[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}}{[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}}-\alpha\frac{k_\textrm{cat}^A}{k_\textrm{cat}^Z}}\,,\label{ypFP}\\
\psi\equiv\frac{[\textrm{FliM}\cdot\textrm{CheY-P}]}{[\textrm{FliM}]_\textrm{tot}}&=\frac{\alpha \frac{k_\textrm{cat}^A}{k_a^Z}}{\frac{k_d^M}{k_a^M}\left(\frac{[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}}{[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}}-\alpha\frac{k_\textrm{cat}^A}{k_\textrm{cat}^Z}\right)+\alpha \frac{k_\textrm{cat}^A}{k_a^Z}}\label{psiFP}\,.
\end{align}
One necessary condition for the fast phosphotransfer limit to apply is that $[\textrm{CheZ}\cdot \textrm{CheY-P}]$ obtained under it (see Eq.~\ref{zyp}) should be smaller than $[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}$. This gives the following condition on the active fraction $\alpha$ of CheA:
\begin{equation}
\alpha<\frac{k_\textrm{cat}^Z[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}}{k_\textrm{cat}^A[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}}\,.\label{cdnFP}
\end{equation}
In other words, to be in the fast phosphotransfer regime, the velocity of the autophosphorylation of CheA needs to be slower than the maximal velocity of the dephosphorylation of CheY-P by CheZ. Eqs.~\ref{ypFP}-\ref{psiFP} show that, in the fast phosphotransfer limit, both $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ and $\psi$, which can be considered as the outputs of the pathway, depend only on the kinetic rates, on the active fraction $\alpha$ of CheA, and on the \textit{ratio} of the total concentrations of CheZ and CheA. Hence, if $\alpha$ is constant, both $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ and $\psi$ are invariant to concerted variation of the abundances of all the proteins in the pathway, keeping the abundance ratios constant (as in Ref.~\cite{Kollmann05}).
These results can be used to obtain the gain for the simplified pathway in the fast phosphotransfer limit. The gain in $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$, defined in Eq.~\ref{GYP}, can be obtained from Eq.~\ref{ypFP} by differentiating $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ with respect to $\alpha$, yielding
\begin{equation}
G_\textrm{CheY-P}=\frac{\frac{[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}}{[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}}}{\frac{[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}}{[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}}-\alpha\frac{k_\textrm{cat}^A}{k_\textrm{cat}^Z}}\,.\label{GS1}
\end{equation}
Using Eqs.~\ref{consZ} and~\ref{zyp}, we can express this gain as
\begin{equation}
G_\textrm{CheY-P}=\frac{[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}}{[\textrm{CheZ}]}\,.\label{GS1b}
\end{equation}
This expression demonstrates that the gain in $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ arises from saturation of the phosphatase CheZ. Similarly, the gain in $\psi$, defined in Eq.~\ref{Gpsi}, can be obtained from Eq.~\ref{psiFP} by differentiating $\psi$ with respect to $\alpha$, yielding
\begin{equation}
G_\psi=\frac{\frac{[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}}{[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}}}{\frac{[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}}{[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}}+\alpha\left(\frac{k_\textrm{cat}^A}{k_a^Z}\frac{k_a^M}{k_d^M}-\frac{k_\textrm{cat}^A}{k_\textrm{cat}^Z}\right)}=\frac{[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}}{[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}}\frac{\psi}{\alpha}\frac{k_a^Z}{k_\textrm{cat}^A}\frac{k_d^M}{k_a^M}\,. \label{GS2}
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Comparison with results from the full pathway}
The validity of the fast phosphotransfer limit in Eq.~\ref{FPeq}, and of the assumptions in our simplified pathway model (see above), can be tested against the results from the full pathway. We find that the results agree well at reference expression levels and higher of the chemotaxis signaling proteins, for the parameter values used here (kinetic rates in Table~\ref{KinValues} and abundance ratios equal to those in Table~\ref{Conc}).
In our full pathway model, $\alpha$ is coupled to the rest of the pathway through $[\textrm{CheB-P}]$ (see Eq.~\ref{alpha}). Solving the full pathway yields $\alpha$ as a function of the expression level of all chemotaxis signaling proteins (Fig.~\ref{FigS1}). At high expression levels, $\alpha$ reaches a plateau. The asymptotic value of $\alpha$ at high expression levels can be calculated within the fast-phosphotransfer limit of our simplified pathway. For this, we express $[\textrm{CheB-P}]$ as a function of $\alpha$, using Eq.~\ref{consb} and Eq.~\ref{modf} at steady state, and use the solutions of the simplified pathway in the fast phosphotransfer limit for $[\textrm{CheA-P}]$. We then use Eq.~\ref{alpha} together with this expression for $[\textrm{CheB-P}]$ in order to solve for $\alpha$. In the limit of high abundances (keeping abundance ratios constant), this amounts to solving a second-degree equation, which yields the asymptotic value of $\alpha$. With the parameter values used here (kinetic rates in Table~\ref{KinValues} and abundance ratios equal to those in Table~\ref{Conc}), we obtain $\alpha=0.27$, close to the value $\alpha=0.26$ obtained for 2.5-fold overexpression from the full pathway model (Fig.~\ref{FigS1}).
\begin{figure}[h t b]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Alpha}
\caption{\label{FigS1}Adapted active fraction $\alpha$ of CheA versus fold expression of all chemotaxis signaling proteins, obtained from the pathway model in the adapted state (Eqs.~\ref{mod1}-\ref{alpha}). Thick curve: result from the full pathway model. Thin line: asymptotic high-abundance result from the simplified pathway model in the fast phosphotransfer regime. One-fold expression corresponds to the abundances measured in Ref.~\cite{Li04} for strain RP437 in rich medium. In the same rich medium, the fold expression for strain OW1 is about 0.22, while in minimal medium, the fold expression is about 1.1 for strain RP437 and 2.0 for strain OW1~\cite{Li04} (values averaged over all the chemotaxis signaling proteins). See also Fig.~\ref{Fig4} in the main text. }
\end{figure}
Hence, the results from our simplified pathway model in the fast phosphotransfer limit are relevant at high abundances, and account for the observed plateaus of $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ and $\psi$ in Fig.~\ref{Fig4}A, and of the gain in Fig.~\ref{Fig4}B. Using the high-abundance asymptotic value $\alpha=0.27$, Eq.~\ref{ypFP} yields $[\textrm{CheY-P}]=2.8~\mu\textrm{M}$, and Eq.~\ref{psiFP} yields $\psi=0.44$. These values are close to those obtained for high overexpression (specifically, $[\textrm{CheY-P}]=2.6~\mu\textrm{M}$, and $\psi=0.43$ for 2.5-fold overexpression, see Fig.~\ref{Fig4}A). Similarly, Eq.~\ref{GS1} yields $G_\textrm{CheY-P}=1.5$ here, and Eq.~\ref{GS2} yields $G_\psi=0.84$, extremely close to the values obtained for high overexpression (Fig.~\ref{Fig4}B). These asymptotic high-abundance values from our simplified pathway model in the fast phosphotransfer limit are plotted as thin lines in Fig.~\ref{Fig4}A-B. In addition, the CheZ concentration from the full pathway solution is used to plot the ratio in Eq.~\ref{GS1b}, which is the dotted line in Fig.~\ref{Fig4}B. It gives a good approximation to the actual gain in $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ for sufficiently high abundances, of order one-fold and above.
\subsubsection{Low-abundance limit}
While the fast phosphotransfer regime is the relevant one for standard cellular abundances and higher, the pathway's behavior is very different in the limit of low abundances. Indeed, since autophosphorylation of CheA is autonomous, while phosphotransfer to CheY involves a two-molecule encounter between CheA-P and CheY, the fraction of phosphorylated CheA becomes high in the limit of low overall abundances. More precisely, if $[\textrm{CheY}]_\textrm{tot}\ll \alpha k_\textrm{cat}^A/k_a^Y$, then Eq.~\ref{modSalpha} ensures that
\begin{equation}
[\textrm{CheA}]\ll[\textrm{CheA-P}]\approx[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}\,.
\end{equation}
Provided that $[\textrm{CheY}]_\textrm{tot}\ll k_\textrm{cat}^Z/k_a^Z$ and that $[\textrm{CheY}]_\textrm{tot}\ll K_d^M\equiv k_d^M/k_a^M$, small proportions of CheZ and of FliM are bound to CheY-P. We obtain, using Eqs.~\ref{modSz} and~\ref{modflimS},
\begin{align}
[\textrm{CheZ}\cdot \textrm{CheY-P}] &\approx\frac{k_a^Z}{k_\textrm{cat}^Z } [\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot} [\textrm{CheY-P}]\,,\label{modSzb}\\
[\textrm{FliM}\cdot\textrm{CheY-P}]&\approx \frac{k_a^M}{k_d^M } [\textrm{FliM}]_\textrm{tot} [\textrm{CheY-P}] \,.\label{modflimb}
\end{align}
In this regime, if in addition $[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}\ll k_\textrm{cat}^Z/k_a^Z$, whic implies that a small fraction of CheY-P is bound to CheZ (see Eq.~\ref{modSzb}), Eqs.~\ref{hou} and~\ref{modSz} yield
\begin{equation}
[\textrm{CheY-P}]\approx\frac{[\textrm{CheY}]_\textrm{tot}}{1+\frac{k_a^M}{k_d^M}[\textrm{FliM}]_\textrm{tot}+\frac{k_a^Z}{k_a^Y}\frac{[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}}{[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}}}\,. \label{sollow}
\end{equation}
Given that we vary the overall abundances of CheA, CheY, CheZ, CheB, and CheR, while keeping their proportions and the FliM abundance fixed (see main text), Eq.~\ref{sollow} shows that in the low-abundance limit, $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ grows in proportion to the overall abundances of the Che proteins (indeed it shows that $[\textrm{CheY-P}]\propto[\textrm{CheY}]_\textrm{tot}$).
Eqs.~\ref{modflimb} and~\ref{sollow} yield an expression for $\psi$ in this limit:
\begin{equation}
\psi\approx\frac{[\textrm{CheY-P}]}{K_d^M}\approx\frac{[\textrm{CheY}]_\textrm{tot}}{K_d^M+[\textrm{FliM}]_\textrm{tot}+K_d^M\frac{k_a^Z}{k_a^Y}\frac{[\textrm{CheZ}]_\textrm{tot}}{[\textrm{CheA}]_\textrm{tot}}}\,. \label{sollowb}
\end{equation}
These asymptotic low-abundance expressions from our simplified pathway model are plotted as thin dotted lines in Fig.~\ref{Fig4}A.
Note that here, we have just studied the low-abundance limit of our simplified pathway model. In practice, additional effects might come into play, for instance the formation of the chemoreceptor array and of the flagellar motor would likely be impaired at too low abundances.
\clearpage
\section{Effect of a variation of the level of each protein of the pathway}
The effect of varying the level of each protein of the chemotaxis pathway is discussed in the main text, and Fig.~\ref{Fig5} shows how the gain is affected by these individual variations of protein levels. Here, we present results regarding the direct outputs of the pathway, namely the adapted fraction $\psi$ of FliM proteins bound to CheY-P (Fig.~\ref{FigS2}) and the adapted free CheY-P concentration, $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ (Fig.~\ref{FigS2_yp}).
These results, especially Fig.~\ref{FigS2_yp}, enable a direct comparison with Ref.~\cite{Levin98}, where $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$ was considered, but not the gain of the pathway.
\begin{figure}[h t b]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{FigS2}
\caption{\label{FigS2}Effect of fold-change of expression of each chemotaxis signaling protein separately, obtained from the pathway model in the adapted state (Eqs.~\ref{mod1}-\ref{alpha}). One-fold expression corresponds to the abundances in Table~\ref{Conc}, i.e. to those measured in Ref.~\cite{Li04} for strain RP437 in rich medium, as in Fig.~\ref{Fig4}. \textbf{A}-\textbf{F.} Blue curves: adapted fraction $\psi$ of FliM proteins bound to CheY-P versus fold expression of each protein, keeping all others at their one-fold level. Blue dots: one-fold expression case. In the shaded zones, $\psi$ is either smaller than 0.11 or larger than 0.57, in which case the flagellar motor should rotate only counterclockwise or only clockwise, respectively, in the adapted state~\cite{Sourjik02}.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h t b]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{FigS2_yp}
\caption{\label{FigS2_yp}Adapted free CheY-P concentration, $[\textrm{CheY-P}]$, versus fold expression of each protein, keeping all others at their one-fold level. Same conventions as in Fig.~\ref{FigS2}. Here too, in the shaded zones, $\psi$ is either smaller than 0.11 or larger than 0.57 (see Fig.~\ref{FigS2}).}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\section{Comparison of the autocatalytic rates of different histidine kinases}
Table~\ref{kinases} lists experimental values from the literature for the autocatalytic rates of different histidine kinases involved in bacterial two-component signaling systems. CheA is much faster than all of these, with an autocatalytic rate $k_\textrm{cat}^A=2.6\times 10^{-2}~/\textrm{s}$ in \textit{E. coli}~\cite{Tawa94} and $k_\textrm{cat}^A=0.24~/\textrm{s}$ in \textit{S. typhimurium}~\cite{Levit99} when isolated, and $k_\mathrm{cat}^A=23~/\textrm{s}$ in \textit{S. typhimurium}~\cite{Levit99} when in complex with chemoreceptors and CheW.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering
\caption{Autocatalytic rate $k_\textrm{cat}$ for various histidine kinases (from different bacteria). }
\begin{tabular}{lllll}
\hline
Organism & Function & Histidine kinase & $k_\textrm{cat}$ (/s) & Ref. \\
\hline
\textit{Enterococcus faecium} & Antibiotic resistance& VanS & $2.83\times 10^{-3}$ & \cite{Wright93} \\
\textit{Bacillus subtilis} & Sporulation & KinA& $1.90\times 10^{-3}$ & \cite{Grimshaw98}\\
\textit{Bacillus subtilis} & Cold shock response & DesK & $2.80\times 10^{-3}$ & \cite{Trajtenberg10}\\
\textit{Thermotoga maritima } & & HpkA & $4.23\times 10^{-4}$ & \cite{Foster04}\\
\textit{Streptococcus pneumoniae} & Virulence, etc. & WalKSpn (C)-His & $1.40\times 10^{-3}$ & \cite{Gutu10}\\
\textit{Streptococcus pneumoniae} & Virulence, etc. & WalKSpn (N)-Sumo & $3.60\times 10^{-3}$ & \cite{Gutu10}\\
\textit{Escherichia coli} & Response to nitrite & NarX & $5.00\times 10^{-5}$ & \cite{Noriega08}\\
\textit{Escherichia coli} & Response to nitrate & NarQ & $2.20\times 10^{-4}$ & \cite{Noriega08}\\
\textit{Synechocystis} & Light signaling system & Cph1 holo & $2.00\times 10^{-4}$ & \cite{Psakis11}\\
\textit{Synechocystis} & Light signaling system & Cph1 apo & $3.00\times 10^{-4}$ & \cite{Psakis11}\\
\textit{Myxococcus xanthus} & Aggregation; sporulation & RodK & $1.67\times 10^{-4}$ & \cite{Rasmussen06}\\
\hline
\end{tabular
\label{kinases
\end{table}
\newpage
\section{Expression levels of various paralogs of the chemotaxis gene clusters}
\setcounter{subsubsection}{0}
Here, we compare the expression levels of \textit{che} genes actually involved in chemotaxis to those of non-chemotactic \textit{che} genes in bacteria that have multiple \textit{che} gene clusters in their genome. For this comparison, we use data from published microarray studies.
\subsubsection{\textit{Pseudomonas aeruginosa}}
The genome of \textit{P. aeruginosa} includes four main clusters of \textit{che} genes~\cite{Wuichet10}. Among these, two are involved in chemotaxis, with one, PA1456-1464 (+ PA3348-3349 containing \textit{cheR}), being essential for chemotaxis, and the second one (PA0180-0173) being non-essential. Ref.~\cite{Hong04} showed that strains deleted for the latter cluster exhibit positive chemotactic response (to peptone and phosphate). In Ref.~\cite{Ferrandez02}, this cluster was found to be required for an optimal chemotactic response (in addition to the main cluster), but the authors state that they cannot exclude that its major output is some other function. Among the two remaining clusters, one (PA0408-0415) is involved in twitching motility based on type IV pili~\cite{Whitchurch04}, and the last one (PA3708-3702) regulates biofilm formation through modulation of c-diGMP levels~\cite{Hickman05}.
In Ref.~\cite{Chang05}, a microarray analysis of \textit{P. aeruginosa} was conducted to study its response to hydrogen peroxide. The full microarray data are available both in the absence (control) and in the presence of hydrogen peroxide. Table~\ref{PA} corresponds to the microarray results (i.e., the abundance of mRNA) in the control data, for \textit{cheY}, \textit{cheA}, \textit{cheW}, \textit{cheR}, and \textit{cheB} from all chemotaxis clusters. It gives the ratio of the expression levels of the genes from the main chemotaxis cluster to those of the corresponding genes from each other cluster.
\begin{table}[h t b p]
\centering
\caption{Microarray expression data for \textit{P. aeruginosa}, from controls in Ref.~\cite{Chang05}. The numbers given are ratios of the expression levels of the genes from each of the three clusters of \textit{che} genes that are non-essential to chemotaxis, to those of the corresponding genes from the essential chemotaxis cluster, PA1456-1464 (+ PA3348-3349 containing \textit{cheR}). The indication ``(2)'' means that two genes of this type are present in the cluster considered (two \textit{cheW} genes exist in the main chemotaxis cluster, as well as in the twitching-associated one and in the biofilm-associated one, and two \textit{cheY} genes exist in the twitching-associated cluster). In these cases, the results obtained for each of the gene copies within the cluster considered were summed.\protect\\
*Note that the response regulator encoded by the biofilm-associated cluster, WspR, is classified as non-CheY~\cite{Wuichet10}. }
\begin{tabular}{llll}
\hline
&Chemotaxis II&Twitching&Biofilm formation\\
& PA0180-0173&PA0408-0415&PA3708-3702\\
\hline
\textit{cheY}&0.22&\textbf{5.34 (2)}&0.22*\\
\textit{cheA}&0.09&0.93&0.23\\
\textit{cheW} (2)&0.02&0.58 (2)&0.24 (2)\\
\textit{cheR}&0.15&0.52&0.21\\
\textit{cheB}&0.02&0.30&0.31\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{PA
\end{table
Table~\ref{PA} shows that genes from the main chemotaxis cluster are significantly more highly expressed than those of the second cluster involved in chemotaxis. They are also more expressed than genes from the biofilm-associated one. However, the \textit{cheA} and \textit{cheW} genes from the twitching-associated cluster have similar levels of expression as those of the main chemotaxis cluster, and the two copies of \textit{cheY} in the twitching-associated cluster are together five times more expressed than the \textit{cheY} involved in chemotaxis. This twitching motility-associated \textit{che} gene cluster is known to modulate the activity of an adenylate cyclase involved in virulence, and to have additional roles in transcriptional regulation, but this pathway is complex and not fully elucidated yet~\cite{He14}. Chemosensing for directed twitching motility (on surfaces) has to be fast as in swimming, and the twitching-motility system is known to mediate chemotaxis towards phospholipids~\cite{Miller08}. Hence, the abundance of these motility-associated proteins might partly arise from rapidity constraints, as in the case of swimming chemotaxis. In addition, Ref.~\cite{Whitchurch04} suggests a possible role of (one of) the CheYs of this system as a phosphate sink (as in the chemotaxis systems of \textit{Rhodobacter sphaeroides}, which include no CheZ): this might explain the very high expression of the two \textit{cheY} genes in the \textit{P. aeruginosa} twitching motility-associated cluster.
Notably, the main chemotaxis cluster is the only one that includes CheZ, whose role is to dephosphorylate CheY rapidly.
\subsubsection{\textit{Vibrio cholerae}}
The genome of \textit{V. cholerae} includes three main clusters of \textit{che} genes~\cite{Wuichet10}. Among these, only one, VC2059-2065 (+ VC2201-2202 containing \textit{cheR}) is involved in chemotaxis. The functions of the other two clusters (VC1394-1406 and VCA1088-1096) are not known yet. In fact, neither deletion nor overexpression of the genes in these clusters has been found to produce any detectable phenotype~\cite{Nishiyama12}.
In Ref.~\cite{Xu03}, the transcriptome of \textit{V. cholerae} was studied both for bacteria grown \textit{in vitro} and during intraintestinal growth (in the latter case, the bacteria were harvested from rabbit ileal loops). The full microarray data are available in both of these conditions. Table~\ref{VC}(a) and (b) gives the ratio of the expression levels of the genes from the actual chemotaxis cluster to those of the corresponding genes from each other cluster, calculated from the microarray data of Ref.~\cite{Xu03}.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering
\caption{Similar data as in Table~\ref{PA}, for \textit{V. cholerae}. (a) and (b): Microarray expression data from controls in Ref.~\cite{Xu03} -- (a): harvested from rabbit ileal loops; (b): grown \textit{in vitro}. }
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\hline
\textbf{(a)}&VC1394-1406&VCA1088-1096\\
\hline
\textit{cheY}&0.45 (2)&0.29\\
\textit{cheA}&0.70&0.25\\
\textit{cheW}&0.30&0.53 (2)\\
\textit{cheR}&0.63&0.62\\
\textit{cheB}&0.14&0.20\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\hline
\textbf{(b)}&VC1394-1406&VCA1088-1096\\
\hline
\textit{cheY}&0.22 (2)&0.11\\
\textit{cheA}&0.89&0.10\\
\textit{cheW}&0.16&0.42 (2)\\
\textit{cheR}&0.33&0.44\\
\textit{cheB}&0.14&0.24\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{VC
\end{table
In spite of some variability between conditions, the data in Table~\ref{VC} consistently show that the actual chemotaxis cluster is more expressed than the other two \textit{che} gene clusters. Here too, the actual chemotaxis cluster is the only one that includes CheZ, whose role is to dephosphorylate CheY rapidly.
\subsubsection{\textit{Caulobacter crescentus}}
\textit{C. crescentus} has two different \textit{che} gene clusters, and only one of them is known to be involved in chemotaxis. Here we compare the expression levels of the second \textit{che} cluster (CCNA00625-00634) to those of the genes involved in chemotaxis (CCNA00439-00450). Ref.~\cite{Fang13} investigated gene expression in different phases of the cell cycle of \textit{C. crescentus}, and reported a full microarray study of \textit{C. crescentus} in these different phases.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering
\caption{Similar data as in Table~\ref{PA}, for \textit{C. crescentus}. Microarray expression data from Ref.~\cite{Fang13}. Phases of the cell cycle: swarmer (SW), stalk (ST), early predivisional (EPD), predivisional
(PD), and late predivisional (LPD).}
\begin{tabular}{llllll}
\hline
&CCNA00625-00634&&&&\\
&SW & ST & EPD & PD & LPD \\
\hline
\textit{cheY} (3)&0.24 (3)&1.17 (3)&0.10 (3)&0.06 (3)&0.14 (3)\\
\textit{cheA}&Below detection level&Below detection level&0.03&0.03&0.04\\
\textit{cheW}&0.17&0.11&0.06&0.06&0.06\\
\textit{cheR}&0.27&1.00&0.13&0.06&0.14\\
\textit{cheB}&0.02&Below detection level&0.01&0.02&0.02\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{CC
\end{table
\subsubsection{\textit{Sinorhizobium meliloti}}
\textit{S. meliloti} has two different \textit{che} gene clusters, and only one of them is known to be involved in chemotaxis. There are also two isolated \textit{cheW} genes (one being close to an MCP-coding gene). Here we compare the expression levels of the second chemotaxis cluster (SMa1550-1561) to those of the genes of the main cluster involved in chemotaxis (SMc03004-03012). We do not consider the isolated \textit{cheW} gene because it is not known whether it is involved in chemotaxis. Ref.~\cite{Tiricz13} investigated the influence of antimicrobial nodule-specific cysteine-rich peptides, and reported full microarray study of \textit{S. meliloti}.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering
\caption{Similar data as in Table~\ref{PA}, for \textit{S. meliloti}. Microarray expression data from controls in Ref.~\cite{Tiricz13} (10 or 30 min incubation with shaking in modified LSM medium, after the addition of sterile water -- instead of antimicrobial peptide).\protect\\
*Note that the response regulator encoded by the second cluster, CheO, is classified as non-CheY~\cite{Wuichet10}.}
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\hline
& SMa1550-1561 (10 min)&SMa1550-1561 (30 min)\\
\hline
\textit{cheY} (2)&0.52$^*$&0.78$^*$\\
\textit{cheA}&0.33&0.31\\
\textit{cheW}&0.30&0.27\\
\textit{cheR}&0.54&0.57\\
\textit{cheB}&0.30&0.27\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{SM
\end{table
\subsubsection{\textit{Rhodobacter sphaeroides}}
\textit{R. sphaeroides} has three different \textit{che} gene clusters, and two of them are known to be involved in chemotaxis. There is in addition one isolated \textit{cheY}, which is also essential to chemotaxis. Here we compare the expression levels of the third \textit{che} cluster to those of the genes involved in chemotaxis. Ref.~\cite{Peuser12} investigated the role of a protein in the iron metabolism of \textit{R. sphaeroides}, and reported full microarray studies of \textit{R. sphaeroides} in different conditions. Here we report the results obtained for the wild-type strain in the presence and in the absence of iron. Similarly, Ref.~\cite{Metz12} used microarrays to investigate the role of a light, oxygen, voltage domain protein in blue light-dependent and singlet oxygen-dependent gene regulation in \textit{R. sphaeroides} and reported full microarray data.
Note that these data are to be interpreted with caution, first because of the complication of \textit{R. sphaeroides} having two essential chemotaxis systems, and second because the expression level of many of the genes considered here were found to be below the threshold of significance defined in the original publications. Note also that the non-chemotactic \textit{che} cluster encodes a putative CheX, and that CheX plays the part of a CheY phosphatase in \textit{Borrelia burgdorferi}~\cite{Motaleb05}.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering
\caption{Similar data as in Table~\ref{PA}, for \textit{R. sphaeroides}. (a): Microarray expression data from controls in Ref.~\cite{Peuser12}. (b): Microarray expression data from controls in Ref.~\cite{Metz12}.}
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\hline
\textbf{(a)} & RSP2433-2443 (WT+Fe) & RSP2433-2443 (WT$-$Fe) \\
\hline
\textit{cheY} (3) &1.40 (3) & 0.53 (3) \\
\textit{cheA} (3) & 0.04 & 0.01 \\
\textit{cheW} (3) & Below detection level & 0.04 \\
\textit{cheR} (2) & 0.09 & 0.25 \\
\hline
\end{tabular
\begin{tabular}{ll}
\hline
\textbf{(b)} & RSP2433-2443 (WT)\\
\hline
\textit{cheY} (3) & 0.92 (3)\\
\textit{cheA} (3) & 0.34\\
\textit{cheW} (3) & 0.13 \\
\textit{cheR} (2) & 0.30 \\
\hline
\end{tabular
\label{RS
\end{table
\newpage
\section{Expression levels of genes coding for two-component systems in \textit{E. coli} }
The genome of \textit{E. coli} comprises 29 sensor histidine kinases and 32 response regulators involved in two-component signaling systems~\cite{Oshima02,Krell10}, which are involved in the cell's sensing and response to its environment. It is interesting to compare the expression levels of the chemotaxis genes to those of other two-component signaling systems. In Table~\ref{twocompo}, we present the number of protein copies per cell for the histidine kinases and response regulators of various two-component systems in \textit{E. coli}. The variability across estimates from different studies may be explained by the differences in media, growth phases, and strains of \textit{E. coli}, which are known to yield significant variations of abundances~\cite{Li04,Cai02,Ishihama08}, and also perhaps by the different techniques used:
\begin{itemize}
\item In Ref.~\cite{Taniguchi10}, the proteome of \textit{E. coli} was quantified at the single-cell level using single-molecule fluorescence, thanks to a yellow-fluorescent-protein fusion library. \textit{E. coli} BW25993 cells were grown in LB media and then inoculated into M9 media supplemented with glucose, amino acids, and vitamins. The optical density was 0.1-0.5.
\item Ref.~\cite{Ishihama08} used mass spectrometry (more precisely, emPAI) to quantify the abundance of proteins in \textit{E. coli}, focusing mostly on cytoplasmic proteins. \textit{E. coli} MC4100 cells were grown in rich or minimum medium to exponential phase (optical density $\sim$0.4), but the datasets obtained with the two different media were combined in the final analysis.
\item Ref.~\cite{Masuda09} used the emPAI technique as Ref.~\cite{Ishihama08}, but this work also quantified the abundances of membrane proteins, first extracting them with the aid of a removable phase transfer surfactant (PTS). In this reference, \textit{E. coli} BW25113 cells were grown in LB medium and harvested at stationary phase.
\item Ref.~\cite{Li04} used quantitative immunoblotting, focusing only on chemotaxis proteins. Several conditions were studied. Here we report the values obtained for strain RP437 in Tryptone broth (rich medium) with cells grown to an optical density of 0.5.
\item Ref. \cite{Cai02} focused on the levels of EnvZ and OmpR proteins using quantitative Western blot analysis. The \textit{E. coli} strain used was MC4100. The values reported here were obtained during exponential growth in L-broth medium.
\end{itemize}
\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering
\caption{Cellular abundances of the proteins from various two-component systems in \textit{E. coli}. Data from several proteomic studies (see also `http://ecoliwiki.net/colipedia'). All values are in copy numbers per cell.}
\footnotesize
\begin{tabular}{l|llll|llll}
\hline
Two-component system &\multicolumn{4}{l|}{Histidine kinase} & \multicolumn{4}{l}{Response regulator}\\
(Histidine kinase / response regulator) &\cite{Taniguchi10} &\cite{Ishihama08} & \cite{Masuda09}&Other & \cite{Taniguchi10} & \cite{Ishihama08}& \cite{Masuda09} & Other\\
\hline
CheA/ CheY: Chemotaxis & & & &6,700~\cite{Li04}&12& & & 8,200~\cite{Li04}\\
EnvZ / OmpR: Osmolarity sensing& & &1.3&100~\cite{Cai02}&81 & 613 & 238& 3,500~\cite{Cai02}\\
NarX / NarL: Response to nitrite& & &1.3& & &229 &522&\\
PhoR / PhoB: Phosphate regulation&11& & & & & & & \\
EvgS / EvgA: Drug resistance&5&82& & & &198&26& \\
CusS / CusR: Copper response&2& &1.4& & & & & \\
YedV / YedW&3& &0.8& &1.5& & & \\
KdpD / KdpE: Potassium transport&9& &6/0.7& &6& & & \\
BaeS / BaeR& & & & &12&167& & \\
HydH / HydG&1& & & & & & & \\
PhoQ / PhoP: Response to magnesium&7& &1.2& & &786&113& \\
BasS / BasR: Polymyxin resistance&0.7& &1.3& &65& & & \\
CpxA / CpxR: Response to cell envelope stress& & &1.8& &33&664&316& \\
TorS / TorR&3& & & & & & & \\
DcuS / DcuR& & &1.1 & &0.6& & &\\
RcsC / RcsB: Capsular synthesis&9& &1.1& &369&1,490&597& \\
CitA / CitB& & & & &1& & &\\
ArcB / ArcA: Respiratory control&56&100&32/1.5& & &2,660&550& \\
BarA / UvrY: Hydrogen peroxide sensitivity&2& &1.3& &29& & 18&\\
\hline
\end{tabular
\normalsize
\label{twocompo
\end{table}
\newpage
\section{Cellular localization of the protein FliM}
The protein FliM is a constituent of the cytoplasmic ring of the rotor that mediates rotation-direction switching in response to binding of CheY-P. Several studies reveal that only a small fraction of FliM is part of complete motors (Table~\ref{flim}):
\begin{itemize}
\item In Ref.~\cite{Tang95}, the relative abundances of FliM in the membrane and cytoplasmic fractions were estimated by lysing the cells and separating the membranes from the cytoplasm by centrifugation. It was found that $\sim$1,100 copies of FliM out of 1,400, i.e., $\sim$78\% of FliM copies, were in the cytoplasmic fraction, and thus not in complete motors.
\item In Ref.~\cite{Delalez10}, the abundance and localization of FliM were studied by fluorescence microscopy. There were 24 $\pm$ 6 spots, corresponding to assemblies of multiple FliM, per cell. The distribution of the number of molecules per spot showed two peaks, one at 32 molecules (in agreement with previously measured numbers of FliM per flagellar motor) accounting for about 40\% of the spots, and one at 18 molecules, which may correspond to partly assembled cytoplasmic rings, accounting for about 45\% of the spots~\cite{Delalez10}. The remaining $~15\%$ of the spots fell outside these peaks, corresponding to structures not independently resolved. Hence, $40-55\%$ of the FliM in spots were part of full cytoplasmic rings. In addition, background fluorescence showed the presence of $630 \pm 290$ FliM molecules not associated with spots, and the total number of FliM copies per cell was estimated to be $1,450 \pm 360$. These data yield a fraction from $0.4\times (1450-630)/1450=0.23$ to $0.55\times (1450-630)/1450=0.31$ of FliM copies that may actually be inside full cytoplasmic rings. In other words, $69-77\%$ of FliM copies were outside complete motors. Besides, a fraction from $0.45\times (1450-630)/1450=0.25$ to $0.60\times (1450-630)/1450=0.34$ of FliM copies appeared to belong to partly assembled rings.
\item In Ref.~\cite{Zhao96} (which studied \textit{S. typhimurium} while the other references studied \textit{E. coli}), whole-cell lysates were separated into three fractions by sedimentation: $16\% \pm 3$\% of FliM was found to be in the soluble fraction and was thus not part of motors. Gel filtration enabled separation of the larger basal body structures into full flagellar motors and incomplete precursors. Among these large structures, about 31\% of the FliM was found to be part of precursors. At the end of their analysis, the authors also stated that ``about half of FliM remained unaccounted for [in the gel filtration results], suggesting that FliM may form presently uncharacterized, particulate aggregates in addition to being part of flagellar basal bodies". They suggested that those correspond to ``dissociable FliM assembly intermediates that either get stuck on or elute very late from the column'', thus not appearing in the gel filtration results. Combining this, we may estimate that a fraction $0.5+0.16+0.31\times(1-0.5-0.16)=0.76$ of FliM copies is not part of complete motors.
\end{itemize}
\begin{table}[htbp]
\centering
\caption{Number of FliM copies per cell and partition.}
\begin{tabular}{lllllll}
\hline
Organism & Total per cell & Outside complete motors & In partly-assembled structures & Ref. \\
\hline
\textit{E. coli} & 1,400 $\pm$ 200 & 78\% & Not evaluated &\cite{Tang95}\\
\textit{E. coli} & 1,450 $\pm$ 360 & 69-77\%&25-34\% &\cite{Delalez10}\\
\textit{S. typhimurium} & 1,640 $\pm$ 300 & 76\%&31-81\% &\cite{Zhao96}\\
\hline
\end{tabular
\label{flim
\end{table}
We can also estimate the number of FliM that actually belong to functional flagella. In wild-type \textit{E. coli}, Ref.~\cite{Tang95} reports on average 2.6 flagella per cell, and Ref.~\cite{Turner00} reports about $3\pm1.5$ flagella per cell. In \textit{S. typhimurium}, there are about 6-10 flagella per cell~\cite{Rosu06}. Studies of the stoichiometry of the motor report $37 \pm 13$ FliM copies per motor~\cite{Zhao96, Macnab03} (in \textit{S. typhimurium}), and about 32~\cite{Delalez10} (in \textit{E. coli}). This would give a number of order 100 FliM that actually belong to functional flagella in \textit{E. coli} (about 7\%), and about 300 in \textit{S. typhimurium} (about 18\%). This is even less than what would be expected from the results above (Table~\ref{flim}), especially for \textit{E. coli}. This difference may indicate that some complete or almost complete cytoplasmic rings or motors do not belong to flagella. These might be in the last stages of assembly.
In spite of the high fraction of FliM that are not in functional flagellar motors, the number of flagella per cell increases when FliM is (not too highly) overexpressed, which indicates that FliM constitutes a limiting resource in flagellar assembly~\cite{Tang95}. Besides, underexpression of FliM reduces the number of flagella per cells and their efficiency. Consistently, in Ref.~\cite{Sourjik02}, the number of FliM per cell necessary for optimum motility was about 4900 (about 3.5 times higher than in the wild-type cells), and only about $20-30\%$ of these FliM were found in functional or incomplete flagellar motors (note that these FliM were fluorescently labeled).
Recent work indicates that the FliM proteins present in motors exchange with the cytoplasmic pool, and that the number of FliM per motor is variable~\cite{Delalez10,Yuan12,Lele12,Yuan13}. The number of FliM copies per motor depends on the concentration of CheY-P~\cite{Yuan12}, through the direction of rotation of the motor~\cite{Lele12}. This allows for adaptation of the motor to the concentration of CheY-P, by shifting the range of CheY-P concentration over which the clockwise bias of the motor changes~\cite{Yuan12}, which is very narrow~\cite{Yuan13}. The fraction of FliM that exchanges depends on the direction of rotation too~\cite{Lele12}. Hence, cytoplasmic FliM seems to have a function in motor adaptation.
|
\section{Introduction}
This paper continues the study initiated in \cite{LPS2} of the fractional Korteweg-de Vries equation (fKdV)
\begin{equation}\label{fKdV}
u_t+uu_x-D^\alpha u_x=0,\quad u(\cdot,0)=u_0 \, ,
\end{equation}
and of its Benjamin-Bona-Mahony counterpart (fBBM)
\begin{equation}\label{fBBM}
u_t+u_x+uu_x+D^\alpha u_t=0 \, ,
\end{equation}
where $D^\alpha=(-\partial_x^2)^{\frac{\alpha}2}$ and $0<\alpha <1$. $D^{\alpha}$ is defined via Fourier transform by
\begin{displaymath}
\big(D^{\alpha}f\big)^{\wedge}(\xi)=|\xi|^{\alpha}\widehat{f}(\xi) \, .
\end{displaymath}
The fKdV equation is a toy model to understand the interaction between nonlinearity and dispersion. The choice is here to fix the quadratic nonlinearity which appears \lq\lq generically\rq\rq \, in many physical contexts and to vary (lower) the dispersion (see \cite{LPS2, KS}).
Equations like \eqref{fKdV} but with an inhomogeneous symbol can be derived rigorously as water waves models (in the small amplitude, long wave regime) \cite {La,LS}. For instance the so-called Whitham equation \cite{W} is of fKdV type with a weak dispersion, that is
\begin{equation}\label{Whit}
u_t+uu_x+\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}k(x-y)u_x(y,t)dy=0 \, .
\end{equation}
This equation can also be written on the form
\begin{equation}\label{Whibis}
u_t+uu_x-Lu_x=0 \, ,
\end{equation}
where the Fourier multiplier operator $L$ is defined by
$$\widehat{Lf}(\xi)=p(\xi)\hat{f}(\xi) \, ,$$
with $p=\hat{k}.$
In the original Whitham equation, the kernel $k$ was given by
\begin{equation}\label{tanh}
k(x)=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_\mathbb{R} \left( \frac{\tanh \xi}{\xi} \right)^{\frac12} e^{ix\xi} d\xi,
\end{equation}
that is $p(\xi)=\left( \frac{\tanh \xi}{\xi} \right)^{\frac12} $ which behaves like $|\xi|^{-\frac12}$ for large frequencies and like $1-\frac{\xi^2}{6}$ for small frequencies.
When surface tension is included the symbol $p$ above has to be changed to $p_S(\xi)=(1+\beta|\xi|^2)^{\frac12}\left( \frac{\tanh \xi}{\xi} \right)^{\frac12},$ where $\beta\geq 0$ measures the surface tension effects. This leads to the {\it extended Whitham equation} where the symbol $p_S(\xi)$ behaves as $\beta|\xi|^{\frac12}$ for large frequencies and as $1-(\frac{1}{6}-\beta)\xi^2$ for small frequencies.
\vspace{0.3cm}
The equation \eqref{fKdV} is invariant under the scaling transformation
\begin{displaymath}
u_{\lambda} (x,t)=\lambda^{\alpha}u(\lambda x,\lambda^{\alpha+1}t),
\end{displaymath}
for any positive number $\lambda$. A straightforward computation shows that $\|u_{\lambda}\|_{\dot{H}^s}$ $=\lambda^{s+\alpha-\frac{1}{2}}\|u\|_{\dot{H}^s}$, in particular the value $\alpha =\frac{1}{2}$ corresponds to the $L^2$ critical case.
One associates to \eqref {fKdV}, \eqref{fBBM} the energy space $H^{\frac{\alpha}2}(\mathbb{R}), $ motivated by their conservation laws. The following quantities are formally conserved by the flow associated to \eqref{fKdV},
\begin{equation} \label{M}
M(u)=\frac{1}{2}\int_{\mathbb R}u^2(x,t)dx,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation} \label{H}
E(u)=\int_{\mathbb R}\big( \frac{1}{2} |D^{\frac{\alpha}2}u(x,t)|^2-\frac{1}{6}u^3(x,t)\big) dx.
\end{equation}
Note that by the Sobolev embedding $H^{\frac{1}{6}}(\mathbb{R})\hookrightarrow L^3(\mathbb{R})$, $H(u)$ is well-defined if and only if $\alpha \geq \frac{1}{3}, $ in other words $\alpha=\frac{1}{3}$ is the energy critical exponent.
On the other hand, there is no energy critical exponent $\alpha$ in the case of the fBBM equation \eqref{fBBM} since the momentum $$N(u)=\frac{1}{2}\int_{\mathbb{R}}(u^2+|D^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}u|^2) dx$$
makes obviously always sense for $u\in H^{\frac{\alpha}2}(\mathbb{R})$. Another conserved quantity for \eqref{fBBM} is the Hamiltonian $$F(u)=\int_\mathbb{R} \left(\frac{u^2}{2}+\frac{u^3}{6}\right) \, ,$$
which makes sense when $u\in H^{\frac{\alpha}2}(\mathbb{R}), \alpha \geq \frac{1}{3}.$
\vspace{0.3cm}
There is apparently no published result on the orbital stability for solitary waves of fractional KdV equations (fKdV) \eqref{fKdV} or fractional BBM equations \eqref {fBBM} in the range $0<\alpha<1.$ The known existence proofs (see \cite{FL, FLS} and also \cite{ABS}) use M. Weinstein's argument, looking for the best constant in the fractional Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequality
\begin{equation}\label{GN}
\int_\mathbb{R}|u|^3dx\leq C\left(\int_\mathbb{R} |D^{\frac{\alpha}2} u|^2 dx\right)^{\frac1{2\alpha}}\left(\int_\mathbb{R} u^2 dx\right)^{\frac{3\alpha -1}{2\alpha}} \, .
\end{equation}
This gives the existence in the energy sub-critical case $\alpha>\frac{1}{3}$, but of course not any kind of stability, which should be true only in the $L^2$ subcritical case, $\alpha>\frac{1}{2}.$
Orbital stability issues for the fractional Schr\"{o}dinger equations has been considered in \cite{CHHO}.
We will restrict to the fKdV equation \eqref{fKdV} with {\it homogeneous } dispersion, (but the method extends obviously to the non homogeneous case).
\smallskip
The solitary waves are solutions of \eqref{fKdV} of the form $u(x,t)=Q_c(x-ct), c>0$ where $Q_c$ belongs to the energy space $H^{\frac{\alpha}2}(\mathbb{R}) $ and they should thus satisfy the equation
\begin{equation}\label{sol}
D^{\alpha} Q_c+cQ_c-\frac{1}{2}Q_c^2=0 \, .
\end{equation}
The energy identity
\begin{equation} \label{EnergyIdentity}
\int_\mathbb{R} |D^{\frac{\alpha}2}Q_c|^2dx+c\int_\mathbb{R} Q_c^2 dx-\frac{1}{2}\int_\mathbb{R} Q_c^3 dx=0
\end{equation}
and the Pohojaev identity
\begin{equation} \label{PohojaevIdentity}
\frac{\alpha-1}{2}\int_\mathbb{R} |D^{\frac{\alpha}2}Q_c|^2dx-\frac{c}{2}\int_\mathbb{R} Q_c^2 dx+\frac{1}{6}\int_\mathbb{R} Q_c^3 dx=0
\end{equation}
which in turn is a consequence of the identity (see for instance Lemma 3 in \cite{KMR})
\begin{equation} \label{Poh}
\int_{\mathbb R}(D^{\alpha}\phi)x\phi'dx=\frac{\alpha-1}2\int_{\mathbb R}|D^{\frac{\alpha}2}\phi|^2dx,
\end{equation}
imply
\begin{equation}\label{nonex}
(3\alpha-1)\int_\mathbb{R} |D^{\frac\alpha2} Q_c|^2 dx-c\int_\mathbb{R} Q_c^2dx=0
\end{equation}
proving that no finite energy solitary waves exist in the energy subcritical case $\alpha>1/3$ when $c\leq 0$ (see \cite{LPS2}).
\vspace{0.3cm}
J. Albert has considered in \cite{A} the case $\alpha\geq 1,$ for \eqref{fKdV} so we will focus on the case $1/2<\alpha<1,$ which is $L^2$ sub-critical for \eqref{fKdV}. In his notation, $s= \alpha/2.$ The proof in \cite{A} is inspired by an old idea of Boussinesq, revisited by Benjamin \cite{B} (and by Cazenave-Lions \cite{CL} for NLS type equations) and consists in using the concentration-compactness method of P.-L. Lions to prove the existence of a minimizer of the Hamiltonian (energy) with fixed momentum ($L^2$ norm). The proof gives nearly for free the orbital stability of the set of minimizers, assuming that the corresponding Cauchy problem is globally well-posed in the energy space, at least for initial data close to a solitary wave (a fact which is conjectured but still unproved in the case of fKdV when $1/2<\alpha <1.)$
Uniqueness and positivity properties of a class of solitary waves (ground states) have been investigated in \cite{FQT, F, FL,FLS} among others.
We recall that existence of solitary waves of arbitrary positive velocities has been established in the {\it energy subcritical case}, that is when $\alpha >\frac{1}{3}$ while no localized solitary waves exist when $0<\alpha <\frac{1}{3}$ (see the argument above), that is in the energy supercritical case. It is worth noticing that existence of solitary waves for the original Whitham equation has been established in \cite{EGW} by exploiting that the dispersion approaches that of the KdV equation in the long wave limit.
On the other hand, numerical simulations (\cite{KS}) suggest that the Cauchy problem for \eqref{fKdV} is globally well-posed for $\alpha >\frac{1}{2},$ a typical solution decomposing into solitary waves plus radiation, which would give a positive answer to the {\it soliton resolution conjecture} (\cite{Tao}). One aim of this note is to provide a (small) step towards this conjecture, namely to prove that the solitary waves are orbitally stable for this range of $\alpha$'s.\footnote{Actually we prove a {\it conditional} stability result since we do not know that the solutions of the Cauchy problem are global in this case.}
\vspace{0.3cm}
The paper is organized as follows. In the following section we consider the fKdV equation. The next section deals with the fBBM equation. Lastly we initiate an extension to fractional Kadomtsev-Petviashvili I (fKPI) equations.
\vspace{0.3cm}
\noindent{\bf Notations.} We will denote $|\cdot|_p$ the norm in the Lebesgue space $L^p(\mathbb{R}),\; 1\leq p\leq \infty$ and $\|\cdot\|_s$ the norm in the Sobolev space $H^s(\mathbb{R}),\; s\in \mathbb{R}.$ We will denote $\hat {f}$ or $\mathcal F(f)$ the Fourier transform of a tempered distribution $f.$ For any $s\in \mathbb{R},$ we define $D^s f$ by its Fourier transform $\widehat{D^s f}(\xi)=|\xi|^s \hat{f}(\xi).$
\section{The fKdV}
We will follow closely the strategy of \cite{A}, which was used to prove the orbital stability of the KdV solitary waves and the (conditional) orbital stability for \eqref{fKdV} in the case $\alpha \geq1$ and related equations. We just indicate the differences. We will assume in this section that $\frac12<\alpha<1$. We recall that
$$E(u)=\frac{1}{2}\int_\mathbb{R}[|D^{\frac{\alpha}2}u|^2-\frac{1}{3}u^3]dx \quad\text{and}\quad M(u)=\frac{1}{2}\int_\mathbb{R} u^2 dx \, .$$
For $q>0$ fixed, we set
\begin{equation}\label{min}
I_q=\inf_{u\in H^{\frac{\alpha}2}(\mathbb{R})}\lbrace E(u) \ : \ M(u)=q\rbrace.
\end{equation}
We will denote by $G_q$ the set (possibly empty) of minimizers.
\begin{lemma}\label{inf}
For any $q>0$ one has $-\infty<I_q<0.$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By Sobolev and a standard interpolation inequality, one has for any $\epsilon >0$ and $v \in H^{\frac{\alpha}2}(\mathbb R)$ such that $M(v)=q$,
$$\left|\int_\mathbb{R} v^3dx\right|\leq \|v\|_{\frac16}^3\leq C\|v\|_0^{\frac{3\alpha-1}\alpha}\|v\|_{\frac\alpha2}^{\frac1\alpha}\leq\epsilon\|v\|_{\frac\alpha2}^2+C_\epsilon \|v\|_0^{\frac{2(3\alpha-1)}{2\alpha-1}} \, .$$
Now we write as in the proof of Lemma 3.4 in \cite{A}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
E(v)&=E(v)+M(v)-M(v)\\
&=\frac{1}{2}\int_\mathbb{R} [|D^{\frac{\alpha}2}v|^2+v^2]dx-\frac{1}{6}\int_\mathbb{R} v^3dx-M(v)\\
&\geq\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{\epsilon}{6}\right) \|v\|^2_{\frac{\alpha}2}-q-C'_\epsilon q^{(3\alpha-1)/(2\alpha-1)}\\
&\geq -q-C'_\epsilon q^{(3\alpha-1)/(2\alpha-1)}>-\infty.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The fact that $I_q<0$ is easily checked by scaling as in the proof of Lemma 3.4 in \cite{A}.
\end{proof}
So $I_q$ exists and is finite, and the concentration-compactness method is used to prove that it is achieved. A first step is to prove that the minimizing sequences are bounded.
\begin{lemma}\label{bound}
If $\{v_n\}$ is a minimizing sequence for $I_q$ then there exist positive constants $C$ and $\delta$ such that
1. $\|v_n\|_{\frac{\alpha}2}\leq C$ for all $n$ and
2. $|v_n|_3\geq \delta$ for all $n$ sufficiently large.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\{v_n\}$ be a minimizing sequence for $I_q.$ Firstly, one has by a previous estimate
$$\frac{1}{2}\|v_n\|^2_{\frac{\alpha}2}=E(v_n)+\frac{1}{2}\int_\mathbb{R} v_n^2 dx+\frac{1}{6}\int_\mathbb{R} v_n^3 dx\leq |E(v_n)|+\epsilon\|v_n\|^2_{\frac{\alpha}2}+ C(q) \, ,$$
proving 1.
In order to prove 2, we argue by contradiction, assuming that for any $k\in\mathbb{N}$ there exists a subsequence $v_{n_k}$ such that $|v_{n_k}|_3\leq 1/k, \forall k.$ This implies
$$I_q=\lim_{k\to \infty}\left(\frac{1}{2}\int_\mathbb{R} |D^{\frac{\alpha}2}v_{n_k}|^2-\frac{1}{6}\int_\mathbb{R} v_{n_k}^3 dx\right)\geq - \lim_{k\to \infty}\frac{1}{6}\int_\mathbb{R} v_{n_k}^3 dx=0 \, ,$$
in contradiction with Lemma \ref{inf}.
\end{proof}
The next step is to prove the sub-additivity of $I_q,$ (see \cite{PLL1,PLL2}).
\begin{lemma}\label {subadd}
For all $q_1,q_2>0,$ one has
$$ I_{q_1+q_2}<I_{q_1}+I_{q_2} \, .$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
As in Lemma 2.4 in \cite{A} the proof follows from a homogeneity argument which we give by sake of completeness. For all $\theta >0$ and $q>0$ we claim that
\begin{equation}\label{claim}
I_{\theta q}=\theta^{(3\alpha-1)/(2\alpha-1)} I_q.
\end{equation}
To prove the claim, we set for any function $v\in H^{\frac\alpha2}(\mathbb{R}),$
$$v_\theta(x)=\theta^{\alpha/(2\alpha-1)} v(\theta^{1/(2\alpha -1)}x) \, .$$
Then
$$M(v_\theta)=\theta M(v) , $$
and
$$E(v_\theta)=\theta^{(3\alpha-1)/(2\alpha -1)}E(v) \, .$$
Hence
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
I_{\theta q}&=\inf \lbrace E(v_\theta) : M(v_\theta)=\theta q\rbrace\\
&=\inf \lbrace E(v_\theta) : M(v)= q\rbrace\\
&=\inf \lbrace \theta^{(3\alpha-1)/(2\alpha-1)} E(v) : M(v)=q \rbrace\\
&=\theta^{(3\alpha-1)/(2\alpha-1)} I_q \, .
\end{split}
\end{equation}
It follows then (by choosing $q=1$ and $\theta=q_1+q_2$ in \eqref{claim}) that
\begin{displaymath}
\begin{split}
I_{q_1+q_2}&=(q_1+q_2)^{(3\alpha-1)/(2\alpha-1)}I_1 \\
&<\left(q_1^{(3\alpha-1)/(2\alpha-1)}+q_2^{(3\alpha-1)/(2\alpha-1)}\right)I_1=I_{q_1}+I_{q_2} \, .
\end{split}
\end{displaymath}
\end{proof}
As usual in the concentration compactness method, we associate to any minimizing sequence $\{v_n\}$ the sequence of nondecreasing functions
$\mathfrak M_n: \lbrack 0, \infty) \to \lbrack 0,q\rbrack$ defined by
$$\mathfrak M_n(r)=\sup_{y\in \mathbb{R}}\int_{y-r}^{y+r} |v_n|^2 dx.$$
By an elementary argument, $\lbrace \mathfrak M_n\rbrace$ has a subsequence, still denoted by $\lbrace \mathfrak M_n\rbrace$, which converges uniformly on compact sets to a nondecreasing function $\mathfrak M : \lbrack 0, \infty) \to \lbrack 0,q\rbrack.$ Let
$$\lambda=\lim_{r\to \infty} \mathfrak M(r),\quad \text{so that}\quad 0\leq \lambda\leq q.$$
We will examine successively the three (mutually exclusive) possibilities, $\lambda =q$ (compactness), $\lambda =0$ (vanishing), $0<\lambda<q$ (dichotomy).
The compactness case is the good one in virtue of the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{compact}
Assume that $\lambda=q.$ Then there exists a sequence of real numbers $\{y_n\}_{n\in \mathbb{N}}$ such that
1. For every $z<q$ there exists $r=r(z)$ such that
$$\int_{y_n-r}^{y_n+r} |v_n|^2>z$$
for all sufficiently large $n.$
2. The sequence $\lbrace\tilde{v}_n\rbrace$ defined by
$$\tilde{v}_n(x)=v_n(x+y_n)\quad \text{for all}\quad x\in \mathbb{R}$$
has a subsequence which converges in $H^{\frac\alpha2}(\mathbb{R})$ to a function $g\in G_q.$ In particular, $G_q$ is not empty.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof is classical and follows exactly that of Lemma 2.5 in \cite{A}, replacing $H^1(\mathbb{R})$ by $H^{\frac{\alpha}2}(\mathbb{R}).$
\end{proof}
The next technical lemma will be use to prove that vanishing does not occur.
\begin{lemma}\label{tech}
Suppose that $B>0$ and $\delta >0$ are given. Then there exists $\eta=\eta(B,\delta)$ such that if $v\in H^{\frac\alpha2}(\mathbb{R}), \alpha >1/3,$ with $\|v\|_{\frac\alpha2}\leq B$ and $|v|_3\geq \delta,$ then
$$\sup_{y\in\mathbb{R}}\int_{y-2}^{y+2}|v(x)|^3dx \geq \eta.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof follows exactly that of Lemmas 3.7, 3.8, 3.9 in \cite{ABS} (see also Lemma 3.3 in \cite{A}) in the case $\alpha =1.$ \end{proof}
The following key lemma shows that dichotomy occurs when $0<\lambda<q.$
\begin{lemma}\label{dicho}
We still consider a minimizing sequence $\{v_n\}.$ Then for every $\epsilon>0$ there exist $N\in \mathbb{N}$ and sequences $\lbrace g_N, g_{N+1},...\rbrace$ and $\lbrace h_N, h_{N+1},...\rbrace$ of functions in $H^{\frac{\alpha}2}(\mathbb{R})$ such that for every $n\geq N,$
1. $|M(g_n)-\lambda|<\epsilon$
2. $|M(h_n)-(q-\lambda)|<\epsilon$
3. $E(v_n)\geq E(g_n)+E(h_n)-\epsilon.$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Statements 1 and 2 are pretty general and a proof can be found for instance in that of Lemma 2.6 in \cite{A} (see also a sketch of the proof below). Statement 3 is more delicate because of the non locality of $D^\alpha.$
To prove 3, we follow closely the proof of Lemmas 2.6 and 3.8 in \cite{A}. Let $\phi\in C_0^\infty\lbrack -2,2\rbrack$ be such that $\phi\equiv 1$ on $\lbrack -1,1\rbrack,$ and let $\psi\in C^\infty(\mathbb{R})$ be such that $\phi^2+\psi^2\equiv 1$ on $\mathbb{R}.$ For each $r\in \mathbb{R},$ define $\phi_r(x)=\phi(x/r)$ and $\psi_r(x)=\psi(x/r).$ Coming back to the definition of $\mathfrak M$, $\epsilon >0$ being fixed, for all sufficiently large values of $r$ one has
$$\lambda-\epsilon<\mathfrak M(r)\leq \mathfrak M(2r)\leq \lambda \, .$$
Such a value of $r$ being fixed, one can choose $N$ so large that
$$\lambda-\epsilon<\mathfrak M_n(r)\leq \mathfrak M_n(2r)\leq \lambda+\epsilon$$
for all $n\geq N.$ Hence for each $n\geq N,$ one can find $y_n$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq1}
\int_{y_n-r}^{y_n+r} |v_n|^2 dx >\lambda -\epsilon
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq2}
\int_{y_n-2r}^{y_n+2r} |v_n|^2 dx <\lambda +\epsilon
\end{equation}
Define $g_n(x)=\phi_r(x-y_n)v_n(x)$ and $h_n(x)=\psi_r(x-y_n)v_n(x).$ Clearly $g_n$ and $h_n$ satisfy statements 1 and 2.
We now write
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
E(g_n)+E(h_n)&=\frac{1}{2}\left\lbrack \int\phi_r^2v_nD^\alpha v_n dx+\int\phi_rv_n\lbrack D^\alpha, \phi_r\rbrack v_n dx \right\rbrack\\
&+\frac{1}{2}\left\lbrack \int\psi_r^2v_nD^\alpha v_n dx+\int\psi_rv_n\lbrack D^\alpha, \psi_r\rbrack v_n dx \right\rbrack\\
&-\frac{1}{6}\int \phi_r^2v_n^3 dx -\frac{1}{6}\int \psi_r^2v_n^3 dx\\
&+\frac{1}{6}\int (\phi_r^2-\phi_r^3)v_n^3 dx+\frac{1}{6}\int (\psi_r^2-\psi_r^3)v_n^3 dx\\
&=E(v_n)+\int\phi_rv_n\lbrack D^\alpha, \phi_r\rbrack v_n dx \int\psi_rv_n\lbrack D^\alpha, \psi_r\rbrack v_n dx\\
&+\frac{1}{6}\int (\phi_r^2-\phi_r^3)v_n^3 dx+\frac{1}{6}\int (\psi_r^2-\psi_r^3)v_n^3 dx \, ,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where we have used that $\phi^2+\psi^2\equiv 1.$
As in \cite{A} we want to prove that the sum of the two commutators is $O(1/r^\beta)$ for some $\beta >0$ and that the sum of the two other terms is $O(\epsilon).$ For the later this is exactly as in \cite{A}. For the commutator, since in his case $\alpha =1$, Albert uses that $|\lbrack |D|,\theta\rbrack f|_2\leq C|\theta '|_\infty |f|_2$ and this is fine since $|\phi'_r|_\infty=1/r|\phi'|_\infty.$
For $\alpha<1,$ we will use instead the fractional Leibniz rule of Kenig, Ponce and Vega (\textit{cf} Theorem A.8 and A.12 in the appendix of \cite{KPV}).
\begin{lemma}[Fractional Leibniz Rule]
Let $0<\alpha<1$, $1<p, \, p_1, \, p_2<+\infty$ and $\alpha_1, \, \alpha_2 \in [0,\alpha]$ be such that
$\frac1p=\frac1{p_1}+\frac1{p_2}$ and $\alpha=\alpha_1+\alpha_2$. Then
\begin{equation} \label{LR.1}
\big| D^{\alpha}(fg)-fD^{\alpha}g-gD^{\alpha}f\big|_p \lesssim |D^{\alpha_1}f|_{p_1}|D^{\alpha_2}g|_{p_2} \, .
\end{equation}
Moreover if $\alpha_1=0$, then $p_1=+\infty$ is allowed.
\end{lemma}
First, we estimate $|[D^{\alpha},\phi_r]v_n |_2$.
Observe that
\begin{equation} \label{eq1}
|[D^{\alpha},\phi_r]v_n |_2 \le \big| D^{\alpha}(\phi_r v_n)-\phi_rD^{\alpha}v_n-v_nD^{\alpha}\phi_r\big|_2+|v_nD^{\alpha}\phi_r|_2
\end{equation}
Thus, by using \eqref{LR.1} with $f=v_n$, $g=\phi_r$, $p=2$, $p_1=p_2=4$ and $\alpha_2=\alpha$, $\alpha_1=0$, we get that
\begin{equation} \label{eq2}
|[D^{\alpha},\phi_r]v_n |_2
\lesssim |v_n|_4 |D^{\alpha}(\phi_r)|_4 \, .
\end{equation}
On the one hand due to the Sobolev embedding $H^{\frac14}(\mathbb R) \hookrightarrow L^4(\mathbb R)$ and the fact that $\{v_n\}$ is bounded in $H^{\frac{\alpha}2}(\mathbb R)$ with $\frac{\alpha}2 >\frac14$, there exists $C>0$ such that
\begin{equation} \label{eq3}
|v_n|_4 \le C \, .
\end{equation}
On the other hand, a direct computation yields
\begin{equation} \label{eq4}
|D^{\alpha}(\phi_r)|_4 =r^{\frac14-\alpha}|D^{\alpha}\phi|_4=\mathcal{O}(r^{\frac14-\alpha}) \, ,
\end{equation}
since $\phi \in C_0^{\infty}(\mathbb R) \subset \mathcal{S}(\mathbb R)$.
Thus, we conclude gathering \eqref{eq2}--\eqref{eq4} that
\begin{equation} \label{eq5}
|[D^{\alpha},\phi_r]v_n |_2 =\mathcal{O}(r^{\frac14-\alpha}) \, ,
\end{equation}
which is fine since $\alpha>\frac12$.
We use the same strategy to estimate $|[D^{\alpha},\psi_r]v_n |_2$. From the definition of $\psi$, we have $\phi^2+\psi^2=1$, so that we can write
$$\psi=1-\chi \quad \text{where} \quad \chi=1-\sqrt{1-\phi^2} \in C_0^{\infty}(\mathbb R) \subset \mathcal{S}(\mathbb R). $$
Moreover, it holds that $\big(D^{\alpha}(1)\big)^{\wedge}(\xi)=c|\xi|^{\alpha}\delta_0=0$ in $\mathcal{S}'(\mathbb R)$ . Then
\begin{displaymath}
|D^{\alpha}(\psi_r)|_4=|D^{\alpha}(\chi_r)|_4 =r^{\frac14-\alpha}|D^{\alpha}\chi|_4=\mathcal{O}(r^{\frac14-\alpha}) \, .
\end{displaymath}
Therefore, we conclude arguing as above that
\begin{equation} \label{eq5}
|[D^{\alpha},\psi_r]v_n |_2 =\mathcal{O}(r^{\frac14-\alpha}) \, .
\end{equation}
Finally we have established that
$$E(g_n)+E(h_n)=E(v_n)+\mathcal {O}(r^{\frac14-\alpha})+\mathcal {O}(\epsilon),$$
which achieves the proof of 3.
\end{proof}
As in \cite{A} Corollary 2.7, one deduces from Lemma \ref{dicho}
\begin{corollary}\label{cor1}
If $0<\lambda <q,$ then
$$I_q\geq I_\lambda+I_{q-\lambda}.$$
\end{corollary}
Corollary \ref{cor1} shows why dichotomy cannot hold.
We now prove that vanishing does not occur.
\begin{lemma}\label{vanish}
For every minimizing sequence, $\lambda>0.$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By Lemmas \ref{bound} and \ref{tech} there exist $\eta >0$ and a sequence $\lbrace y_n\rbrace$ such that
$$\int_{y_n-2}^{y_n+2} |v_n|^3 dx\geq \eta \quad \text{for all}\;n.$$
Hence,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\eta&\leq \left(\int_{y_n-2}^{y_n+2}|v_n|^2dx\right)^{1/2}\left(\int_{y_n-2}^{y_n+2}|v_n|^4dx\right)^{1/2}\\
&\leq \left(\int_{y_n-2}^{y_n+2}|v_n|^2dx\right)^{1/2}\left(\int_\mathbb{R}|v_n|^4dx\right)^{1/2}\\
&\leq C\left(\int_{y_n-2}^{y_n+2}|v_n|^2dx\right)^{1/2},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where we have used the embedding $H^{\frac{\alpha}2}(\mathbb{R})\hookrightarrow L^4(\mathbb{R})$ when $\alpha \geq \frac{1}{2}.$
Thus
$$\lambda=\lim_{r\to\infty}M(r) \geq M(2)=\lim_{n\to \infty}M_n(2)\geq \frac{\eta}{C}>0.$$
\end{proof}
We can now state and prove our main result. We first recall (see \cite{LPS2}) that the Cauchy problem for \eqref{fKdV} is locally well-posed in $H^s(\mathbb{R}),\; s> s_\alpha=\frac{3}{2}-\frac{3\alpha}{8}$ in the sense that for any $u_0\in H^s(\mathbb{R})$ with $s$ as above, there exists a maximal time of existence $T_s \in (0,+\infty]$ and a unique solution $u$ to \eqref{fKdV} such that $u\in C(\lbrack 0,T_s);H^s(\mathbb{R}))$ satisfying $Q(u(\cdot,t))=Q(u_0)$ and $E(u(\cdot,t))=E(u_0), \, t \in\lbrack 0, T_s).$
\begin{theorem}\label{main}
Let $\frac{1}{2}<\alpha <1.$
1. For every $q>0$ there exists a nonempty set $G_q$ of minimizers of \eqref{min} consisting of solitary waves of \eqref{fKdV} with positive velocity. Moreover, if $\{v_n\}$ is a minimizing sequence for $I_q,$ then the following assertions are true.
2. There exist a sequence $\lbrace y_1,y_2,...\rbrace$ and an element $g\in G_q$ such that $\{v_n(\cdot+y_n)\}$ has a subsequence converging strongly in $H^{\frac{\alpha}2}(\mathbb{R})$ to $g.$
3. $$\lim_{n\to \infty}\inf_{g\in G_q, y\in \mathbb{R}}\|v_n(\cdot+y)-g\|_{\frac{\alpha}2}=0.$$
4. $$\lim_{n\to \infty}\inf_{g\in G_q}\|v_n-g\|_{\frac{\alpha}2}=0.$$
5. The set $G_q$ is stable in the following sense. For any $ \epsilon >0$ there exists $\delta >0$ such that if $u_0\in H^s(\mathbb{R}), s>s_\alpha,$ with
$$\inf_{g\in G_q}\|u_0-g\|_{\frac{\alpha}2}<\delta,$$
then the corresponding solution $u$ emanating from $u_0$ of \eqref{fKdV} satisfies
$$\inf_{g\in G_q}\|u(\cdot,t)-g\|_{\frac{\alpha}2}<\epsilon,\quad \forall \, 0<t<T_s \, .$$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The proof is a classical application of the concentration-compactness method. By Lemmas \ref{subadd}, \ref{dicho}, \ref{vanish} and Corollary \ref{cor1} we deduce that $\lambda =q.$
We prove 2 by contradiction, assuming that there exist a subsequence $\lbrace v_{n_k}\rbrace$ of $\lbrace v_n\rbrace$ and $\epsilon >0$ such that
$$\inf_{g\in G_q, y\in \mathbb{R}}\|v_{n_k}(\cdot+y)-g\|_{\frac{\alpha}2}\geq \epsilon$$
for all $k\in \mathbb{N}.$ Since $\{v_{n_k}\}$ is also a minimizing sequence for $I_q,$ statement 1 implies that there exist a sequence $\lbrace y_k\rbrace$ and $g_0\in G_q$ such that
$$\liminf_{k\to \infty} \|v_{n_k}(\cdot + y_k)-g_0\|_{\frac{\alpha}2}=0,$$
and this contradiction proves 2.
The stability statement 5 is classically proven by contradiction from 4.
\end{proof}
We now relate the set $G_q$ of minimizers to $I_q$ to the {\it ground states} as defined in \cite{FL}, Definition 2.1.
\begin{definition} \label{GroundState}\cite{FL}
Let $\alpha>\frac13$. A {\it ground state solution} of
\begin{equation} \label{FrLe.2}
D^{\frac{\alpha}2}Q+Q -Q^2=0 \, ,
\end{equation}
is a positive and even solution that solves the minimization problem
\begin{equation} \label{FrLe.3}
J^\alpha (Q)=\inf \big\{ J^\alpha (u) \ : \ u\in H^{\frac{\alpha}2}(\mathbb{R})\setminus \lbrace 0\rbrace\big\} \, ,
\end{equation}
where $J^{\alpha}$ is the Weinstein functional defined by
\begin{equation} \label{FrLe.4}
J^\alpha (u)= \left(\int_\mathbb{R}|u|^3dx\right)^{-1}\left(\int_\mathbb{R} |D^{\frac{\alpha}2} u|^2 dx\right)^{\frac1{2\alpha}}\left(\int_\mathbb{R} u^2 dx\right)^{\frac{3\alpha -1}{2\alpha}} \, .
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
\begin{lemma} \label {FrLe}
Let $q>0$ and $\frac{1}{2}<\alpha <1$. Any minimizer $\psi$ of $I_q$ writes
\begin{equation} \label{FrLe.1}
\psi=c Q\big(c^{\frac1\alpha}(\cdot+y)\big)
\end{equation}
for some $y\in \mathbb{R}$ and $c>0$ chosen to ensure that $\frac{1}{2}\int_\mathbb{R} \psi^2 dx=q$ holds and $Q$ is a ground state solution of \eqref{FrLe.2}.
\end{lemma}
In order to prove Lemma \ref{FrLe}, we recall the fundamental result\footnote{stated here in our context.} of Frank and Lenzmann in Theorem 2.4 of \cite{FL}.
\begin{theorem} \label{FrLetheo}
Let $\alpha>\frac13$. Then, the ground state solution $Q=Q(|x|)>0$ of equation \eqref{FrLe.2} is unique.
Furthermore, every minimizer $v \in H^{\frac{\alpha}2}(\mathbb R)$ for the Weinstein functional $J^{\alpha}$ defined in \eqref{FrLe.4} is of the form $v=\beta Q(\lambda(\cdot+y))$ for some $\beta \in \mathbb C$, $\beta \neq 0$, $\lambda>0$ and $y \in \mathbb R$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{FrLe}] Assume that $q>0$ is fixed. Let $Q$ be a ground state of \eqref{FrLe.2} defined as above. Observe that for any $c>0$, $Q_c=cQ(c^{\frac1\alpha}\cdot)$ is a solution to \eqref{sol}. It follows from\eqref{EnergyIdentity} and \eqref{PohojaevIdentity} that
\begin{equation} \label{FrLe.5}
\int_{\mathbb R} |D^{\frac{\alpha}2}Q_c|^2dx=\frac{c}{3\alpha-1} \int_{\mathbb R} Q_c^2 dx
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation} \label{FrLe.6}
\int_{\mathbb R} Q_c^3dx=\frac{6\alpha c}{3\alpha-1} \int_{\mathbb R} Q_c^2 dx \, .
\end{equation}
Therefore, a straightforward computation gives that
\begin{equation} \label{FrLe.7}
J^{\alpha}(Q_c)=\frac{(3\alpha-1)^{1-\frac1{2\alpha}}}{6\alpha} c^{\frac1{2\alpha}-1} \|Q_c\|_{L^2}
=\frac{(3\alpha-1)^{1-\frac1{2\alpha}}}{6\alpha} \|Q\|_{L^2} \, .
\end{equation}
Note in particular that the minimum of $J^{\alpha}$ is attained for every $Q_c$ with $c>0$. Moreover, we choose $c_{\star}>0$ such that
\begin{equation} \label{FrLe.7a}
M(Q_{c_{\star}})=q \quad \Leftrightarrow \quad c_{\star}=\left(\frac{2q}{\|Q\|_{L^2}^2} \right)^{\frac{\alpha}{2\alpha-1}} \, .
\end{equation}
Another easy computation yields
\begin{equation} \label{FrLe.7b}
E(Q_{c_{\star}})=\frac{c_{\star}}{3\alpha-1}(\frac12-\alpha) 2q \, .
\end{equation}
Now, let $\psi \in G_q$, \textit{i.e.} $\psi$ is a minimizer of $I_q$. By the Lagrange multipliers theory, there exists $\theta_q \in \mathbb R$ such that
\begin{equation} \label{FrLe.8}
D^{\alpha}\psi-\frac12\psi^2+\theta_q \psi=0 \, .
\end{equation}
By using the energy and Pohojaev identities, we deduce exactly as in \eqref{FrLe.5} and \eqref{FrLe.6} that
\begin{equation} \label{FrLe.9}
\int_{\mathbb R} |D^{\frac{\alpha}2}\psi|^2dx=\frac{\theta_q}{3\alpha-1} \int_{\mathbb R} \psi^2 dx=\frac{2q\theta_q}{3\alpha-1}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation} \label{FrLe.9a}
\int_{\mathbb R} \psi^3dx=\frac{6\alpha \theta_q}{3\alpha-1} \int_{\mathbb R} \psi^2 dx= \frac{12q\alpha \theta_q}{3\alpha-1} \, .
\end{equation}
Identities \eqref{FrLe.9} and \eqref{FrLe.9a} imply in particular that $\theta_q>0$ and $\int_{\mathbb R} \psi^3dx>0$, since $\alpha>\frac13$.
Next, we prove that $\psi$ must be positive. Indeed, recall that
\begin{displaymath}
|D^{\frac\alpha2}(|\psi|)|_2 \le |D^{\frac\alpha2}\psi|_2 \, ,
\end{displaymath}
for $\frac12<\alpha<1$. This claim follows for example from estimate (2.10) in \cite{FQT}. Therefore, we deduce that
$E(|\psi|) \le E(\psi)$ and $M(|\psi|)=q$, since we also have
\begin{equation} \label{FrLe.9b}
\int_{\mathbb R} \psi^3dx=\left| \int_{\mathbb R} \psi^3dx \right| \le \int_{\mathbb R} |\psi|^3dx \, .
\end{equation}
Moreover, if $\psi$ is not positive on $\mathbb R$, then the inequality in \eqref{FrLe.9b} is strict, so that $E(|\psi|)<E(\psi)$, which is a contradiction since $\psi \in G_q$.
We compute as above that
\begin{displaymath}
J^{\alpha}(\psi)=\frac{(2q)^{\frac12}}{\theta_q^{1-\frac1{2\alpha}}} \frac{(3\alpha-1)^{1-\frac1{2\alpha}}}{6\alpha} \, .
\end{displaymath}
On the one hand, since $J^{\alpha}(\psi) \ge J^{\alpha}(Q_{c_{\star}})$, it follows from \eqref{FrLe.7} and the definition of $c_{\star}$ in \eqref{FrLe.7a} that
\begin{equation} \label{FrLe.10}
\theta_q \le c_{\star} \, .
\end{equation}
On the other hand, another simple computation gives that
\begin{displaymath}
E(\psi)=\frac{\theta_q}{3\alpha-1}(\frac12-\alpha) 2q \, .
\end{displaymath}
Since $\psi \in G_q$, we have $E(\psi) \le E(Q_{c_{\star}})$ which implies from \eqref{FrLe.7b} that
\begin{equation} \label{FrLe.11}
\theta_q \ge c_{\star} \, ,
\end{equation}
in the case $\alpha>\frac12$. We conclude gathering \eqref{FrLe.10} and \eqref{FrLe.11} that
\begin{equation} \label{FrLe.12}
\theta_q=c_{\star} \, .
\end{equation}
Therefore $J^{\alpha}(\psi)=J^{\alpha}(Q)$ and we conclude from the uniqueness result in Theorem \ref{FrLetheo} that $\psi=Q_{c_{\star}}(\cdot-y)$, for some $y \in \mathbb R$.
\end{proof}
Finally, as a consequence of Theorem \ref{main} and Lemma \ref{FrLe}, we get the orbital stability of the ground states.
\begin{theorem} \label{OrbStab}
Let $\frac12<\alpha<1$, $c>0$ and $Q_c=cQ(c^{\frac1{\alpha}}\cdot)$, where $Q$ is the ground state solution of \eqref{FrLe.2}.
For every $\epsilon>0$, there exists $\delta>0$ such that if $u_0 \in H^s(\mathbb R)$, $s> s_\alpha=\frac{3}{2}-\frac{3\alpha}{8}$, satisfy
\begin{equation} \label{OrbStab.1}
\|u_0-Q_c\|_{\frac{\alpha}2} < \alpha \, ,
\end{equation}
then the corresponding solution $u$ emanating from $u_0$ of \eqref{fKdV} satisfies
\begin{equation} \label{OrbStab.2}
\inf_{y \in \mathbb R}\|u(\cdot,t)-Q_c(\cdot+y)\|_{\frac{\alpha}2}<\epsilon
\end{equation}
for all $t \in [0,T_s)$, where $T_s$ is the maximal time of existence of $u$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
The (orbital) stability statement in Theorem \ref{main} is a conditional one. It would become {\it unconditional} provided one establishes the {\it global} well-posedness of the Cauchy problem for data in the space $H^s(\mathbb{R}),$ $s\leq \frac{\alpha}{2}$ when $\alpha>1/2.$ As previously mentioned, the best known result (\cite{LPS2}) establishes the local well-posedness of the Cauchy problem in $H^s(\mathbb{R}), s>\frac{3}{2}-\frac{3\alpha}{8},$ for any $\alpha >0.$ On the other hand it is proved in \cite{GV} that when $\alpha>\frac{1}{2},$ global weak $L^2$ solutions exist, as well as global $H^{\frac{\alpha}2}$ weak solutions, uniqueness being unknown. Also the numerical simulations of \cite{KS} suggest that no finite time blow-up occurs when $\alpha >\frac{1}{2}$, at least for smooth and localized initial data. Recall that when $1< \alpha <2$ the Cauchy problem is globally well-posed for initial data in $L^2(\mathbb{R})$ (\cite{HeIoKeKo}).
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}\label{linstab}
It has been established in \cite{KaSt} that the ground state is spectrally stable when $\alpha>\frac{1}{2}.$
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
The results above extend {\it mutatis mutandis} to the generalized fractional KdV equation
\begin{equation}
\label{GfKdV}
u_t+u^pu_x-D^\alpha u_x=0,\quad u(.,0)=u_0
\end{equation}
in the $L^2$ subcritical case, that is $\alpha>\frac{p}{2}.$
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
It would be interesting to prove the {\it asymptotic stability} of the ground states of \eqref{fKdV} and also the existence (and stability) of {\it multisoliton solutions} of \eqref{fKdV}. Such solutions have been proven to exist and to be stable (in the subcritical case) for the generalized Korteweg-de Vries equations (see \cite{Ma, MMT}).\end{remark}
\subsection{Remarks on instability}
Instability of solitary wave solutions of the gKV equation
\begin{equation}\label{gKdV}
u_t+u_x+u^pu_x+u_{xxx}=0,
\end{equation}
has been established in \cite{BSS} when $p> 4$ and in \cite{MM2} for $p=4.$
\vspace{0.3cm}
The mechanism of instability and the links with finite type blow-up are now well understood in the $L^2$ critical case $p=4$ (see \cite{MM}, \cite{MMR1, MMR2, MMR3} for theoretical studies and \cite{KP} for numerical simulations).
However a precise description of the instability in the super critical case $p>4$ and in particular the proof of finite type blow-up are not known. Note that the link between instability and finite type blow-up is strongly suggested by the numerical simulations in \cite{BDKM} and \cite{KP} (where the $L^2$ critical case is also considered).
We now turn to the expected instability of the fKdV solitary waves when $\frac{1}{3}<\alpha\leq\frac{1}{2}.$ The numerical simulations in \cite{KS2} suggest that the instability mechanism is via finite time blow-up, similar to the KdV $L^2$ critical when $\alpha =1/2$ and to the KdV $L^2$ supercritical case when $ 1/3<\alpha <1/2.$ Proving such results appears to be out of reach, and we should restrict to the mere instability proof. As in \cite{BSS} the first step is to give a sense to the formal conserved quantity
\begin {equation}\label{I}
I(u)=\int_\mathbb{R} u dx.
\end{equation}
Exactly as in Proposition 2.1 in \cite{BSS}, one checks that if $u_0\in H^s(\mathbb{R}), s\geq 1+\alpha$ is such that $\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} u_0(x) dx$ converges as a generalized Riemann integral, then $I(u(t))$ converges for any $t\in [0,T_s(u_0))$ and is constant, where $T_s(u_0)$ is the lifespan of the solution $u$ of the corresponding Cauchy problem.
Again as in \cite{BSS} one has to estimate how fast the tail of $I(u)$ near infinity grows with $t$. This cannot be deduce directly from Theorem 2.2 in \cite{BSS} since
$$G_\alpha(x)=\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{i(x\xi-\xi|\xi|^\alpha)} d\xi$$
is not a bounded function of $x$ when $\alpha<1. $
Actually, (see \cite{SSS}), $G_\alpha(x)=O(x^{-(\alpha+2)})$ as $x\to +\infty$ and oscillates when $x\to -\infty,$ growing as $|x|^{(1-\alpha)/2\alpha}.$
In order to prove the equivalent of Theorem 2.2 in \cite{BSS}, one would need to impose a (one sided) decay property to $u_0$ insuring that the resulting solution of the Cauchy problem decays sufficiently to the left to compensate the growth of the fundamental solution.
\section {The fBBM equation}
As previously noticed an alternative to the toy model \eqref{fKdV} is the fractional Benjamin-Bona-Mahony equation (fBBM) \eqref{fBBM}.
A solitary wave solution $u_c(x,t)=\phi(x-ct), c>0$ of \eqref {fBBM} satisfies the equation
\begin{equation}\label{SWfBBM}
(c+D^\alpha)u-\frac{u^2}{2}=0.
\end{equation}
Existence and stability issues for \eqref{SWfBBM} have been considered in \cite{Z} when $\alpha >1$ but the proofs therein extend readily to the case $\alpha<1.$
More precisely, Zeng considers the minimization problem
\begin{equation}\label{min}
I_q=\inf\lbrace F(u) : u\in H^{\frac\alpha2}(\mathbb{R})\;\text{and}\; N(u)=q\rbrace,
\end{equation}
where
$$F(u)=\int_\mathbb{R} (u^2+|D^{\alpha/2}u|^2)$$
and
$$N(u)=\int_\mathbb{R} \left(\frac{u^2}{2}+\frac{u^3}{6}\right).$$
He thus considers the set of {\it ground state solutions} of \eqref{fBBM}, that is
$$G_q= \lbrace u\in H^{\frac\alpha2}(\mathbb{R}) : N(u)=q\;\text{and}\; F(u)=I_q \rbrace.$$
The results established in \cite{Z} for $\alpha\geq 1$ and general nonlinearities $u^pu_x$ extends without any noticeable change in our case and imply the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}\label {Zeng}\
1. Assume that $\frac{1}{2}<\alpha <1.$ Then the set $G_q$ is not empty and orbitally stable in $H^{\frac\alpha2}(\mathbb R).$
2. Assume that $\frac{1}{3}<\alpha <\frac{1}{2}.$Then there exists $q_0=q_0(\alpha)$ such that for all $q>q_0,$ $G_q$ is not empty and orbitally stable in $H^{\frac\alpha2}(\mathbb R).$
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
1. Again, the orbital stability results in Theorem \ref{Zeng} are conditional ones. A complete one would necessitate to prove a {\it global} well-posedness for the Cauchy problem associated to \eqref{fBBM}, when $\alpha>1/3.$ Due to the invariance of the $H^{\frac\alpha2}(\mathbb R)$ norm, it would be sufficient to get a {\it local} well-posedness result in the same space. We recall that the best known result so far is given in \cite{LPS2} where local well -posedness is proven for initial data in $H^s(\mathbb{R}), s>\frac{3}{2}-\alpha.$
Note that the conservation of $E(u)$ implies by standard compacteness methods the global existence of weak solutions in $H^{\frac\alpha2}(\mathbb R),$ without uniqueness.
It is worth noticing that the numerical simulations in \cite{KS} suggest that a finite type blow-up may occur when $0<\alpha\leq \frac{1}{3}$ but not when $\alpha >\frac{1}{3}.$
2. In the case of the generalized BBM equation \eqref{gBBM}, the critical value $q_0$ is associated to a critical velocity for the solitary waves, \lq\lq fast\rq\rq \, solitary waves are stable (see more details below). This fact relies strongly on the {\it explicit} formulas for the solitary waves. No such link seems to be known for fractional BBM equations.
\end{remark}
As noticed in \cite{BMcR} for the generalized BBM equation
\begin{equation}\label{gBBM}
u_t+u_x+u^pu_x-u_{xxt}=0,
\end{equation}
the stability theory of solitary waves is \lq\lq a little more complex\rq\rq \, than for the corresponding generalized KdV equation \eqref{gKdV} for which any solitary wave of {\it arbitrary} positive velocity is unstable when $p\geq 4.$
In fact (see \cite{SS}) solitary waves of \eqref{gBBM} of arbitrary positive velocity are stable when $p<4$ but when $p\geq 4$ there exists $c*=c*(p)$
such that the solitary waves of velocity $c<c*$ are unstable while those of velocity $c>c*$ are stable.
Furthermore the mechanism of instability is different since the Cauchy problem for gBBM is globally well posed in $H^1(\mathbb{R})$ for any $p.$ The numerical simulations in \cite{BMcR} suggest that an unstable solitary wave will jump to a stable, faster one. No rigorous proof of this fact exists to our knowledge.
Instability results for generalized fBBM type equations are provided in \cite{SS} when $\alpha\geq 1$ in our notations. The proof does not extend easily to the case $\alpha<1$ (they use properties of the multiplier $
m(\xi)=1+|\xi|^\alpha$ that are no more valid when $\alpha<1).$
\section{Remarks on the KP case}
We consider now briefly the KP I version of \eqref{fKdV}, that is
\begin{equation} \label{fKPI}
u_t+uu_x-D_x^\alpha u_x+\epsilon\partial_x^{-1} u_{yy}=0,\quad \text{in}\; \mathbb{R}^2\times \mathbb{R}_+,\quad u(\cdot,0)=u_0,
\end{equation}
where $\epsilon =1$ corresponds to the fKP II equation and $\epsilon =-1$ to the fKP I equation. Here $D^{\alpha}_x$ denotes the Riesz potential of order $-\alpha$ in the $x$ direction, \textit{i.e.} $D^{\alpha}_x$ is defined via Fourier transform by $\big(D^{\alpha}_xf\big)^{\wedge}(\xi,\eta)=|\xi|^{\alpha}\widehat{f}(\xi,\eta)$.
In addition to the $L^2$ norm, \eqref{fKPI} conserves formally the energy (Hamiltonian)
\begin{equation}\label{HamfKP}
H_\alpha(u)=\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} (\frac{1}{2}|D_x^{\frac\alpha2} u|^2-\epsilon\frac{1}{2}|\partial_x^{-1}u_y|^2-\frac{1}{6} u^3).
\end{equation}
The corresponding energy space is
$$Y_\alpha= \lbrace u\in L^2(\mathbb{R}^2) \ : \ D^{\frac\alpha2}_x u, \ \partial_x^{-1}u_y\in L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)\rbrace.$$
The first question is to which values of $\alpha$ correspond to the $L^2$ and the energy critical cases?
For the generalized KP-I equations
\begin{equation}\label{gKPI}
u_t+u^pu_x+u_{xxx}-\partial_x^{-1}u_{yy}=0,
\end{equation}
the corresponding values of $p$ are respectively $p=4/3$ and $p=4$ (see \cite{deBS, deBS1,deBS2}).
One checks readily that the transformation
$$u_\lambda(x,y,t)=\lambda^\alpha u(\lambda x, \lambda ^{\frac{\alpha+2}{2}} y, \lambda^{\alpha+1} t)$$ leaves \eqref{fKPI} invariant.
Moreover, $|u_\lambda|_2=\lambda^{\frac{3\alpha -4}{4}}|u|_2$, so that $\alpha=\frac{4}{3}$ is the $L^2$ critical exponent.
The energy critical value of $\alpha$ is obviously related to the non existence of localized solitary waves. One has :
\begin{proposition}\label{nonex}
Assume that $0<\alpha\leq \frac{4}{5} $ when $\epsilon =-1$ or that $\alpha$ is arbitrary when $\epsilon =1.$Then \eqref{fKPI} does not possess non trivial solitary waves in the space $Y_\alpha \cap L^3(\mathbb{R}^2).$
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
It is handy to write \eqref{fKPI} as
\begin{equation} \label{BBMBsq}
\left\{ \begin{array}{l} -cu_x+uu_x-D_x^\alpha u_x+\epsilon v_y=0 \\
v_x=u_y,
\end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
Adapting the method in \cite{deBS}, we multiply successively the first equation by $xu$ and $yv.$ After some integrations by parts (which can be justified by a standard truncation in space procedure and a truncation of low frequencies as in \cite{Mol}) one obtains the two identities:
\begin{equation}\label{po1}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} \left(\frac{c}{2}u^2-\frac{1}{3}u^3+\epsilon \frac{1}{2}v^2+\frac{\alpha +1}{2}|D_x^{\frac\alpha2}u|^2\right)=0,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{po2}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} \left(-\frac{c}{2}u^2+\frac{1}{6}u^3-\epsilon \frac{1}{2}v^2-\frac{1}{2}|D_x^{\frac\alpha2}u|^2\right)=0.
\end{equation}
On the other hand, the energy identity yields
\begin{equation}\label{energ}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} \left(-cu^2+\frac{1}{2}u^3+\epsilon v^2-|D_x^{\frac\alpha2}u|^2\right)=0.
\end{equation}
Substracting \eqref{po2} from \eqref{po1} the cubic term from \eqref{po1} yields
\begin{equation}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^2}\left(cu^2-\frac{1}{2} u^3+\epsilon v^2+\frac{\alpha +2}{2}|D_x^{\frac\alpha2}u|^2\right)=0,
\end{equation}
and adding with \eqref{energ} we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{defoc}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^2}\left(2\epsilon v^2+\frac{\alpha}{2}|D_x^{\frac\alpha2}u|^2\right)=0,
\end{equation}
proving that no solitary wave exists, whatever $\alpha$ in the defocusing case $\epsilon =1.$
In the focusing, fKP I, case $\epsilon=-1,$ we use \eqref{defoc} successively in \eqref{po1} and \eqref{energ} to get
\begin{equation}\label{po3}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^2}\left(\frac{c}{2} u^2-\frac{1}{3}u^3+ \frac{3\alpha+4}{2\alpha}v^2\right)=0,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{po4}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^2}\left(-c u^2+\frac{1}{2}u^3- \frac{\alpha+4}{\alpha}v^2\right)=0.
\end{equation}
Eliminating $v$ we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{po5}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^2}\left(c\alpha u^2+\frac{4-5\alpha}{12}u^3\right)=0.
\end{equation}
On the other hand, adding \eqref{po1} and \eqref{po2} yields
\begin{equation}\label{po6}
\frac{1}{3}\int_{\mathbb{R}^2}u^3=\alpha\int_{\mathbb{R}^2}|D_x^{\frac\alpha2}u|^2,
\end{equation}
which with \eqref{po5} implies
\begin{equation}\label{po7}
\int_{\mathbb{R}^2}\left(cu^2+\frac{4-5\alpha}{4}|D_x^{\frac\alpha2}u|^2\right)=0,
\end{equation}
which proves that no solitary waves exist in this case when $\alpha\leq \frac{4}{5}.$
\end{proof}
To go further it might be useful to consider the situation for the generalized KPI equation \eqref{gKPI}. Existence of solitary waves is established in \cite{deBS} in the energy subcritical case $1\leq p<4,$ by solving the variational problem $I_\lambda$ consisting in minimizing the energy norm with the constraint
$$\int_{\mathbb{R}^2} u^{p+2}=\lambda.$$
To define the notion of {\it ground state} for \eqref{gKPI}, we introduce the energy
$$E_{KP}(\psi) = \frac{1}{2} \int_{\mathbb{R}^2} (\partial_x \psi)^2 + \frac{1}{2} \int_{\mathbb{R}^2} (\partial_x^{-1}\partial_y \psi)^2 - \frac{1}{2(p+2)} \int_{\mathbb{R}^2} \psi^{p+2},$$
and we define the action
$$S(N) = E_{KP}(N) + \frac{c}{2} \int_{\mathbb{R}^2} N^2.$$
We term {\it ground state}, a solitary wave $N$ which minimizes the action $S$ among all finite energy non-constant solitary waves of speed $c$ of \eqref{gKPI} (see \cite{deBS} for more details). It is proven in \cite{deBS} that when $1\leq p<4$, the solutions of the minimization problem $I_\lambda$ are ground states. Moreover (see \cite{deBS2}) , when $1\leq p<\frac{4}{3},$ the ground states are minimizers of the Hamiltonian $E_{KP}$ with prescribed mass ($L^2$ norm). This implies (by an argument {\it \`a la Cazenave-Lions}) the orbital stability of the set of ground states (see also \cite{LW}). The {\it uniqueness}, up to the trivial symmetries of the ground states is a challenging open question.\footnote{The stability result in \cite{deBS2} is a {\it conditional one} when $p\neq 1$ by lack of the {\it global} well-posedness of the corresponding Cauchy problem. Recall that the Cauchy problem for the KPI equation itself ($p=1$) is globally well-posed in appropriate spaces!
, including the energy space (see \cite{MST2,IKT}).} It is furthermotre proven in \cite{deBS2} that any ground state (and in fact any cylindrically symmetric solitary wave) is unstable when $p>\frac{4}{3}.$
The instability result was improved by Liu \cite{L1} who used invariant sets of the generalized KP I flow together with the virial argument above to prove the existence of initial data leading to blow-up in finite time of $|u_y(.,t)|_{2}$ when $p\geq \frac{4}{3}$. This leads to a strong instability result (by finite time blow-up of $|u_y(.,t)|_{2}$ ) of the solitary waves when $2<p<4.$
\medskip
In order to check to what extent the above results could be extended to the fKP equation one has as a first step to establish a fractionary Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequality that allows for the Sobolev embedding of the energy space $Y_\alpha$ into $L^p(\mathbb{R}^2), \, p\leq3.$
The following inequality is a special case of Lemma 2.1 in \cite{BLT} which considers only $1\leq \alpha\leq 2$ but a close inspection at the proof reveals that it is still valid when $\frac{4}{5}<\alpha <1.$
\begin{lemma}\label{BLT}
Let $\frac{4}{5}<\alpha < 1.$ For any $f\in Y_\alpha$ one has
$$|f|_3^3\leq c|f|_2^{\frac{5\alpha-4}{\alpha+2}}\|f\|_{H^{\frac\alpha2}_x}^{\frac{18-5\alpha}{2(\alpha+2)}}|\partial_x^{-1}f_y|_2^{\frac12} \, ,$$
where $\|\cdot\|_{H^{\frac{\alpha}2}_x}$ denotes the natural norm on the space $$H_x^{\frac\alpha2}(\mathbb{R}^2)=\lbrace f\in L^2(\mathbb{R}^2) \ : \ D^{\frac\alpha2}_xf \in L^2(\mathbb{R}^2)\rbrace.$$
\end{lemma}
Lemma \ref{BLT} implies obviously the embedding $Y_\alpha \hookrightarrow L^3(\mathbb{R}^2)$ if $\frac{4}{5}<\alpha<1$
and is the starting point for an existence theory of solitary waves to fKPI equations which will be developed elsewhere \cite{LPS3}. Note that some results for the case $\alpha=1$ (the KPI-Benjamin-Ono equation) are given in \cite{Esf, PS}.
\vspace{0.5cm}
\begin{remark}
Concerning the Cauchy problem for fKPI, one could conjecture a {finite time blow-up of $|u_y|_0$} when $\frac{4}{5}<\alpha <\frac{4}{3}$ as Liu proved for the gKPI, explaining for instance the (expected) instability of KPI-BO ground states.
We refer to a subsequent work \cite{LPS3} for a study of global {\it weak solutions} to fKP equations.
\end{remark}
\vspace{0.3cm}
\vspace{0.3cm}
\section{Final remarks}
As already noticed, the precise description of the (expected) instability mechanism of the solitary waves of \eqref{fKdV} when $\frac{1}{3}<\alpha\leq\frac{1}{2}$ seems out of reach for the moment. According to the numerical simulations in \cite{KS}, the instability seems to be due to blow-up. Recall that this issue is still open for the generalized KdV equation (that is \eqref{GfKdV} with $\alpha=2$) when $p>4,$ the critical case $p=4$ being treated in \cite {MM}.
Similarly, the description of the (expected) instability of slow solitary waves of the fBBM equation when $\frac{1}{3}<\alpha\leq\frac{1}{2}$ is not known. Recall that a corresponding rigorous description of solitary waves of the gBBM when $p>4$ is still an open problem.
On the other hand, the computations in \cite{KS2} seem to indicate that the {\it soliton resolution conjecture} (see \cite{Tao}) is true for both the fKdV and fBBM equations in the stable range $\frac{1}{2}<\alpha\leq 1.$
\begin{merci}
The Authors were partially supported by the Brazilian-French program in mathematics. J.-C. S. acknowledges support from the project ANR-GEODISP of the Agence Nationale de la Recherche. F.L and D.P. were partially supported by CNPq and FAPERJ/Brazil.
\end{merci}
\bibliographystyle{amsplain}
|
\section{\setcounter{equation}{0}\Section}
\sf
\def\Swiech
{{\accent"13S}wie{\hbox{\kern -0.21em\lower
0.79ex\hbox{$\textfont1=\scriptfont1
\lhook$}}}ch}
\def\SWIECH
{{\accent"13S}WIE{\hbox{\kern -0.26em\lower
0.77ex\hbox{$\textfont1=\scriptfont1
\lhook$}}}CH}
\begin{document}
\title{{\bf Semiconcavity of viscosity solutions for a class of degenerate elliptic integro-differential equations in $\mathbb R^n$
}}
\author{
\textsc{Chenchen Mou}\\
\textit{School of Mathematics, Georgia Institute of Technology}\\
\textit{
Atlanta, GA 30332, U.S.A.}\\
\textit{E-mail: <EMAIL>} }
\date{}
\maketitle
\begin{abstract}
This paper is concerned with semiconcavity of viscosity solutions for a class of degenerate elliptic integro-differential equations in $\mathbb R^n$. This class of equations includes Bellman equations containing operators of L\'evy-It\^o type. H\"{o}lder and Lipschitz continuity of viscosity solutions for a more general class of degenerate elliptic integro-differential equations are also provided.
\end{abstract}
\vspace{.2cm}
\noindent{\bf Keywords:} viscosity
solution, integro-PDE, Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman-Isaacs equation, H\"{o}lder continuity, Lipschitz continuity, semiconcavity.
\vspace{.2cm}
\noindent{\bf 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification}: 35R09, 35D40, 35J60, 47G20, 45K05, 93E20.
\section{Introduction}
In this paper, we study semiconcavity of viscosity solutions of integro-differential equations of the type
\begin{equation}\label{eq1.1}
G(x,u,Du,D^2u,I[x,u])=0\quad\text{in}\,\,\mathbb R^n,
\end{equation}
where $\mathbb R^n$ is an $n$-dimensional Euclidean space and $I[x,u]$ is a L\'evy-It\^o operator. The function $u$ is real-valued and the L\'evy-It\^o operator $I$ has the form
\begin{equation*}
I[x,u]:=\int_{\mathbb R^n}[u(x+j(x,\xi))-u(x)-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi) Du(x)\cdot j(x,\xi)]\mu(d\xi),
\end{equation*}
where $\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}$ denotes the indicator function of the unit ball ${B_1(0)}$, $j(x,\xi)$ is a function that determines the size of the jumps for the diffusion related to the operator $I$, and $\mu$ is a L\'evy measure. The L\'evy measure $\mu$ is a Borel measure on $\mathbb R^n\setminus\{0\}$ satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{eq:1.5}
\int_{\mathbb R^n\setminus\{0\}}\rho(\xi)^2\mu(d\xi)<+\infty,
\end{equation}
where $\rho:\mathbb R^n\setminus\{0\}\to\mathbb R^+$ is a Borel measurable, locally bounded function satisfying $\lim_{\xi\to 0}\rho(\xi)=0$ and $\inf_{\xi\in B_r^c(0)}\rho(\xi)>0$ for any $r>0$. We extend $\mu$ to a measure on $\mathbb R^n$ by setting $\mu(\{0\})=0$. Our assumption on $\mu$ implies that $\mu(B_r^c(0))<+\infty$ for any $r>0$. The nonlinearity $G:\mathbb R^n\times \mathbb R\times \mathbb R^n\times \mathbb S^n\times\mathbb R\to \mathbb R$ is a continuous function which is coercive, i.e., there is a positive constant $\gamma$ such that, for any $x,p\in \mathbb R^n$, $r\geq s$, $X\in\mathbb S^n$, $l\in \mathbb R$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq1.3}
\gamma(r-s)\leq G(x,r,p,X,l)-G(x,s,p,X,l),
\end{equation}
and degenerate elliptic in a sense that, for
any $x,p\in \mathbb R^n$, $r,l_1,l_2\in \mathbb R$, $X,Y\in\mathbb S^n$
\begin{equation}\label{eq1.2}
G(x,r,p,X,l_1)\leq G(x,r,p,Y,l_2)\quad\text{if}\,\, X\geq Y,\,l_1\geq l_2.
\end{equation}
Here $\mathbb S^n$ is the set of symmetric $n\times n$ matrices equipped with its usual order.
We will also be interested in equations of Bellman type
\begin{equation}\label{eq1.7}
\sup_{\alpha\in \mathcal A}\big\{-Tr\big(\sigma_{\alpha}(x)\sigma_{\alpha}^T(x)D^2u(x)\big)-I_{\alpha}[x,u]+b_{\alpha}(x)\cdot Du(x)+c_{\alpha}(x)u(x)+f_{\alpha}(x)\big\}=0,\quad \text{in}\,\,\mathbb R^n,
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_{\alpha}:\mathbb R^n\to\mathbb R^{n\times m}$, $b_{\alpha}:\mathbb R^n\to \mathbb R^n$, $c_{\alpha}:\mathbb R^n\to\mathbb R$, $f_{\alpha}:\mathbb R^n\to\mathbb R$ are continuous functions,
\begin{equation*}
I_{\alpha}[x,u]=\int_{\mathbb R^n}[u(x+j_{\alpha}(x,\xi))-u(x)-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi) Du(x)\cdot j_{\alpha}(x,\xi)]\mu(d\xi)\,\,\text{and}\,\,c_{\alpha}\geq\gamma>0\,\,\text{in}\,\,\mathbb R^n.
\end{equation*}
The proof of semiconcavity of viscosity solutions is done in two steps. We first prove Lipschitz continuity of viscosity solutions. We then adapt to the nonlocal case the approach from \cite{IL,I} for obtaining semiconcavity of viscosity solutions of elliptic partial differential equations. In recent years, regularity theory of viscosity solutions of integro-differential equations has been studied by many authors under different types of ellipticity assumptions. It is impossible for us to make a complete review of all the related literature. However, the following are what we have in mind. Regularity results were initiated by assuming nondegenerate ellipticity of second order terms such as \cite{BL,GM,GL,MP1,MP2,MP3,MP4,MP5,MP6,MP7} for both elliptic and parabolic integro-differential equations. More recently, striking regularity results were obtained under uniform ellipticity assumption for nonlocal terms. This assumption, introduced by L. A. Caffareli and L. Silvestre, is defined using nonlocal Pucci operators. Several H\"{o}lder, $C^{1,\alpha}$ and Shauder estimates for nonlocal fully nonlinear equations were obtained by various authors \cite{CS1,CS2,CS3,CD1,CD2,CD3,JX,Kri,Se1,Se,Si} under this uniform ellipticity assumption. The other notion of uniform ellipticity was defined by G. Barles, E. Chasseigne and C. Imbert. It requires either nondegeneracy of the nonlocal terms, or nondegeneracy of nonlocal terms in some directions and nondegeneracy of second order terms in the complementary directions. It was used to obtain H\"{o}lder and Lipschitz continuity for a class of mixed integro-differential equations, see \cite{BCCI,BCI}.
In Section 3, we study H\"{o}lder and Lipschitz continuity of viscosity solutions for ($\ref{eq1.1}$) and equations of Bellman-Issacs type, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{eq..1.6}
\sup_{\alpha\in \mathcal A}\inf_{\beta\in \mathcal B}\big\{-Tr\big(\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(x)\sigma_{\alpha\beta}^T(x)D^2u(x)\big)-I_{\alpha\beta}[x,u]+b_{\alpha\beta}(x)\cdot Du(x)+c_{\alpha\beta}(x)u(x)+f_{\alpha\beta}(x)\big\}=0,\,\, \text{in}\,\,\mathbb R^n
\end{equation}
where $I_{\alpha\beta}[x,u]=\int_{\mathbb R^n}[u(x+j_{\alpha\beta}(x,\xi))-u(x)-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi) Du(x)\cdot j_{\alpha\beta}(x,\xi)]\mu(d\xi)$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq.1.7}
c_{\alpha\beta}\geq\gamma>0\quad \text{in}\,\,\mathbb R^n.
\end{equation}
Our H\"{o}lder and Lipschitz continuity results are different from these of \cite{BCCI,BCI,Si} since we allow both the nonlocal terms and the second order terms to be degenerate. However, to compensate for degeneracy, we need to assume that the constant $\gamma$ appearing in ($\ref{eq1.3}$) and ($\ref{eq.1.7}$) is sufficiently large. The reader can consult \cite{jk2} for continuous dependence and continuity estimates for viscosity solutions of nonlinear degenerate parabolic integro-differential equations.
Having the Lipschitz continuity results, in section 4 we derive the main results of this manuscript, i.e., semiconcavity of viscosity solutions of equations ($\ref{eq1.1}$) and ($\ref{eq1.7}$). To our knowledge, the only available results in this direction are about semiconcavity of viscosity solutions of time dependent integro-differential equations of Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman (HJB) type whose proofs are based on probabilistic arguments. In \cite{J}, the authors proved joint time-space semiconcavity of viscosity solutions of time dependent integro-differential equations of HJB type with terminal condition, using a representation formula based on forward and backward stochastic differential equations. However, the proof there depended on a restrictive assumption that the L\'evy measure $\mu$ is finite. In another paper \cite{F}, it was shown that the value function of an abstract infinite dimensional optimal control problem is $w$-semiconcave, if the data in the state evolution equation are $C^{1,w}$ and the data in the cost functional are $w$-semiconcave. The method was then applied to the finite dimensional Euclidean space providing semiconcavity result for the value function of a stochastic optimal control problem associated with a time dependent version of ($\ref{eq1.7}$). Our result for ($\ref{eq1.7}$) extends results of \cite{F} to the time independent case and provide a different purely analytical approach. The result for ($\ref{eq1.1}$) is totally new since the solution may not have an explicit probabilistic representation formula and thus the analytical proof seems to be the only available method. Finally we remark that regarding semiconcavity of viscosity solutions of PDEs of HJB type, in addition to the already mentioned analytical proofs of \cite{IL,I}, other proofs by probabilistic methods can be found in \cite{FS,Kry,L1,L,LS,YZ}.
\section{Notation and Definitions}
\label{sec:defassumptions}
We will write $B_\delta(x)$ for the open ball centered at $x$ with radius $\delta>0$, $USC(\mathbb R^n)$ $(LSC(\mathbb R^n))$ for the space
of upper (lower) semi-continuous functions in $\mathbb R^n$ and $BUC(\mathbb R^n)$ for the space of bounded and uniformly continuous functions in $\mathbb R^n$. If $\Omega'$ is an open set, for each non-negative integer $k$ and $0<\alpha\leq1$, we denote by $C^{k,\alpha}(\Omega')$ ($C^{k,\alpha}(\bar{\Omega}')$) the subspace of $C^k(\Omega')$ ($C^{k}(\bar {\Omega}')$) consisting functions whose $k$th partial derivatives are locally (uniformly) $\alpha$-H\"older continuous in $\Omega'$. We will use the standard notation
\[
\left[u\right]_{k,\alpha;\Omega'}:=\sup_{x,y\in\Omega',x\not=y,|j|=k}\frac{|\partial^ju(x)-\partial^ju(y)|}{|x-y|^\alpha},\quad \text{if}\,\,0<\alpha\leq1,
\]
and
\[
|u|_{k;\Omega'}:=\sup_{x\in\Omega',|j|=k}|\partial^ju(x)|,
\]
where $j=(j_1,j_2,\cdots,j_n)\in\mathbb N^n$, $|j|:=j_1+j_2+\cdots+j_n$ and $\partial^j u:=\frac{\partial^{|j|}u}{(\partial x_1)^{j_1}(\partial x_2)^{j_2}\cdots(\partial x_n)^{j_n}}$. For any $1<\theta'\leq 2$ and any convex open set $\Omega''$, we say a set of functions $\{f_\alpha\}_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}$ is uniformly $\theta'$-semiconvex with constant $C$ in $\Omega''$ if, for any $x,y\in\Omega''$, $\alpha\in\mathcal{A}$,
\begin{equation*}
2f_{\alpha}(\frac{x+y}{2})-f_\alpha(x)-f_\alpha(y)\leq C|x-y|^{\theta'}.
\end{equation*}
We say a set of functions $\{f_\alpha\}_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}$ is uniformly $\theta'$-semiconcave with constant $C$ in $\Omega''$ if $\{-f_\alpha\}_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}$ is uniformly $\theta'$-semiconvex with constant $C$ in $\Omega''$. If the set $\mathcal{A}$ is a unit set, i.e., $\mathcal{A}=\{\alpha_0\}$, then we just simply say that $f_{\alpha_0}$ is $\theta'$-semiconvex ($\theta'$-semiconcave) in $\Omega''$.
We then recall the definition of a
viscosity solution
of ($\ref{eq1.1}$). In order to do it, we introduce two associated operators $I^{1,\delta}$ and
$I^{2,\delta}$,
\begin{equation*}
I^{1,\delta}[x,p,u]=\int_{|\xi|<\delta}[u(x+j(x,\xi))-u(x)-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi) p\cdot j(x,\xi)]\mu(d\xi),
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
I^{2,\delta}[x,p,u]=\int_{|\xi|\geq\delta}[u(x+j(x,\xi))-u(x)-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi) p\cdot j(x,\xi)]\mu(d\xi).
\end{equation*}
\begin{definition}\label{de2.1}
A bounded function $u\in USC(\mathbb R^n)$ is a viscosity subsolution of ($\ref{eq1.1}$) if whenever $u-\varphi$ has a maximum over
$B_\delta(x)$ at $x\in \mathbb R^n$ for a test function $\varphi\in C^2(B_\delta(x))$, $\delta>0$, then
\begin{equation*}\label{eqq2.1}
G\big(x,u(x),D\varphi(x),D^2\varphi(x),I^{1,\delta}[x,D\varphi(x),\varphi]+I^{2,\delta}[x,D\varphi(x),u]\big)\leq 0.
\end{equation*}
A bounded function $u\in LSC(\mathbb R^n)$ is a viscosity supersolution of ($\ref{eq1.1}$) if whenever $u-\varphi$ has
a minimum over $B_\delta(x)$ at $x\in \mathbb R^n$ for a test function $\varphi\in C^2(B_\delta(x))$, $\delta>0$, then
\begin{equation*}\label{eqq2.2}
G\big(x,u(x),D\varphi(x),D^2\varphi(x),I^{1,\delta}[x,D\varphi(x),\varphi]+I^{2,\delta}[x,D\varphi(x),u]\big)\geq 0.
\end{equation*}
A function $u$ is a viscosity solution of ($\ref{eq1.1}$) if it is both a viscosity subsolution and viscosity supersolution
of ($\ref{eq1.1}$).
\end{definition}
\section{H\"{o}lder and Lipschitz continuity}
\label{sec:gammapositive}
In this section we prove the H\"{o}lder and Lipschitz continuity of viscosity solutions of ($\ref{eq1.1}$) and ($\ref{eq..1.6}$). We start with equation ($\ref{eq1.1}$). We make the following assumptions on the nonlinearity $G$ and the function $j(x,\xi)$.
\\
\\
($H1$) There are a constant $0<\theta\leq 1$, a non-negative constant $\Lambda$ and two positive constants $C_1,C_2$ such that, for any $x,y\in \mathbb R^n$, $r,l_x,l_y\in \mathbb R$, $X,Y\in\mathbb S^n$ and $L,\eta>0$, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&G(y,r,L\theta|x-y|^{\theta-2}(x-y),Y,l_y)-G(x,r,L\theta|x-y|^{\theta-2}(x-y)+2\eta x,X,l_x)\\
&\leq&\Lambda(l_x-l_y)+C_1(1+L)|x-y|^\theta+C_2\eta(1+|x|^2),
\end{eqnarray*}
if
\begin{equation*}
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
X & 0\\
0 &-Y
\end{array}
\right)\leq L|x-y|^{\theta-2}
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
I & -I\\
-I & I
\end{array}
\right)+2\eta
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
I & \,\,0\\
0 &\,\, 0
\end{array}
\right).
\end{equation*}
($H2$) For any $x,y\in \mathbb R^n$, we have
\begin{equation*}
|j(x,\xi)-j(y,\xi)|\leq |x-y|\rho(\xi)\quad\text{for}\,\,\xi\in \mathbb R^n,
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
|j(0,\xi)|\leq \rho(\xi)\quad\text{for}\,\,\xi\in \mathbb R^n.
\end{equation*}
The following lemma is a nonlocal version of the Jensen-Ishii lemma we borrow from \cite{jk1}, Theorem $4.9$. The reader can consult \cite{BI} for a more general Jensen-Ishii lemma for integro-differential eqations, which allows for arbitrary growth of solutions at infinity. Before giving the lemma, we notice that our Definition \ref{de2.1} corresponds to the alternative definition of a viscosity solution in \cite{jk1}, see Lemma $4.8$.
\begin{lemma}\label{le3.1}
Suppose that the nonlinearity $G$ in ($\ref{eq1.1}$) is continuous and satisfies ($\ref{eq:1.5}$)-($\ref{eq1.2}$). Let $u,v$ be bounded functions and be respectively a viscosity subsolution and a viscosity supersolution of
\begin{equation*}
G(x,u,Du,D^2u,I[x,u])= 0\,\,\,\,\text{and}\,\,\,\,G(x,v,Dv,D^2v,I[x,v])= 0\quad\text{in}\,\,\mathbb R^n.
\end{equation*}
Let $\psi\in C^2(\mathbb R^{2n})$ and $(\hat x,\hat y)\in\mathbb R^n\times\mathbb R^n$ be such that
\begin{equation*}
(x,y)\mapsto u(x)-v(y)-\psi(x,y)
\end{equation*}
has a global maximum at $(\hat x,\hat y)$. Furthermore, assume that in a neighborhood of $(\hat x,\hat y)$ there are continuous functions $g_0:\mathbb R^{2n}\to \mathbb R$, $g_1:\mathbb R^n\to\mathbb S^n$ with $g_0(\hat x,\hat y)>0$, satisfying
\begin{equation*}
D^2\psi(x,y)\leq g_0(x,y)\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
I & -I\\
-I & I
\end{array}
\right)+
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
g_1(x) & 0\\
0 & 0
\end{array}
\right).
\end{equation*}
Then, for any $0<\delta<1$ and $\epsilon_0>0$, there are $X,Y\in\mathbb S^n$ satisfying
\begin{equation*}
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
X & 0\\
0 & -Y
\end{array}
\right)-\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
g_1(\hat x) & 0\\
0 & 0
\end{array}
\right)
\leq (1+\epsilon_0)g_0(\hat x,\hat y)\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
I & -I\\
-I & I
\end{array}
\right),
\end{equation*}
such that
\begin{equation*}
G\big(\hat x,u(\hat x),D_x\psi(\hat x,\hat y),X,I^{1,\delta}[\hat x,D_x\psi(\hat x,\hat y),\psi(\cdot,\hat y)]+I^{2,\delta}[\hat x,D_x\psi(\hat x,\hat y),u(\cdot)]\big)\leq 0,
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
G\big(\hat y,v(\hat y),-D_y\psi(\hat x,\hat y),Y,I^{1,\delta}[\hat y,-D_y\psi(\hat x,\hat y),-\psi(\hat x,\cdot)]+I^{2,\delta}[\hat y,-D_y\psi(\hat x,\hat y),v(\cdot)]\big)\geq 0.
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{remark}\label{re3.1}
The statement of Lemma $\ref{le3.1}$ is weaker than Theorem $4.9$ in \cite{jk1}. By Theorem $4.9$ in \cite{jk1}, the same result as Lemma $\ref{le3.1}$ is also true for Bellman-Isaacs equations ($\ref{eq..1.6}$).
\end{remark}
\begin{lemma}\label{le..3.2}
Suppose that a L\'{e}vy measure $\mu$ satisfies ($\ref{eq:1.5}$) and $j(x,\xi)$ satisfies assumption ($H2$). Then we have
\begin{eqnarray}
M_1:&=&\sup_{x\not=y}\Big\{|x-y|^{-\theta}\int_{\mathbb R^n}\Big[|x-y+j(x,\xi)-j(y,\xi)|^\theta-|x-y|^\theta\nonumber\\
&&-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)\theta|x-y|^{\theta-2}(x-y)\cdot\big(j(x,\xi)-j(y,\xi)\big)\Big]\mu(d\xi)\Big\}<+\infty.\label{eq,3.1}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We first define
\begin{equation}\label{eq..3.2}
\phi(x,y)=|x-y|^\theta.
\end{equation}
By calculation, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:3.2}
D\phi(x,y)=\theta|x-y|^{\theta-2}\left(
\begin{array}{c}
x-y \\
y-x
\end{array}
\right),
\end{equation}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:3.3}
D^2\phi(x,y)&=&\theta|x-y|^{\theta-2}\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
I & -I\\
-I & I
\end{array}
\right)+
\theta(\theta-2)|x-y|^{\theta-4}\left(
\begin{array}{c}
x-y \\
y-x
\end{array}
\right)\otimes\left(
\begin{array}{c}
x-y \\
y-x
\end{array}
\right)\nonumber\\
&\leq&\theta|x-y|^{\theta-2}\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
I & -I\\
-I & I
\end{array}
\right).
\end{eqnarray}
Since $\lim_{\xi\to 0}\rho(\xi)=0$, there exists a positive constant $\delta_1<1$ such that $\sup_{\xi\in B_{\delta_1}(0)}\rho(\xi)\leq \frac{1}{2}$. By ($\ref{eq:1.5}$), ($\ref{eq:3.2}$), ($\ref{eq:3.3}$) and ($H2$), we have, for any $x,y\in\mathbb R^n$ and $x\not=y$
\begin{eqnarray}
&&|x-y|^{-\theta}\int_{\mathbb R^n}\Big[|x-y+j(x,\xi)-j(y,\xi)|^\theta-|x-y|^\theta\nonumber\\
&&-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)\theta|x-y|^{\theta-2}(x-y)\cdot\big(j(x,\xi)-j(y,\xi)\big)\Big]\mu(d\xi)\nonumber\\
&\leq&|x-y|^{-\theta}\theta \int_{B_{\delta_1}(0)}\Big(\sup_{0\leq t\leq 1}|x-y+t(j(x,\xi)-j(y,\xi))|^{\theta-2}|j(x,\xi)-j(y,\xi)|^2\Big)\mu(d\xi)\nonumber\\
&&+|x-y|^{-\theta}\int_{\mathbb R^n\setminus B_{\delta_1}(0)}\Big[|x-y+j(x,\xi)-j(y,\xi)|^{\theta}-|x-y|^\theta\nonumber\\
&&-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)\theta|x-y|^{\theta-2}(x-y)\cdot\big(j(x,\xi)-j(y,\xi)\big)\Big]\mu(d\xi)\nonumber\\
&\leq&2^{2-\theta}\theta\int_{B_{\delta_1}(0)}\rho(\xi)^2\mu(d\xi)+\int_{\mathbb R^n\setminus B_{\delta_1}(0)}\rho(\xi)^\theta\mu(d\xi)+\theta\int_{B_1(0)\setminus B_{\delta_1}(0)}\rho(\xi)\mu(d\xi)<+\infty.\label{eq,,3.10}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{th2.1}
Suppose that the nonlinearity $G$ in ($\ref{eq1.1}$) is continuous, and satisfies ($\ref{eq:1.5}$)-($\ref{eq1.2}$) and ($H1$). Suppose that $j(x,\xi)$ satisfies assumption ($H2$). Then, if $u\in BUC(\mathbb R^n)$ is a viscosity solution of ($\ref{eq1.1}$) and $\gamma>\Lambda M_1+C_1$ where $M_1$ is defined in ($\ref{eq,3.1}$), we have $u\in C^{0,\theta}(\bar{\mathbb R}^n)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\Phi(x,y)=u(x)-u(y)-\psi(x,y)$ where $\psi(x,y)=L\phi(x,y)+\eta|x|^2$ and $\phi(x,y)$ is defined in ($\ref{eq..3.2}$). We want to prove, for any $\eta>0$, we have $\Phi(x,y)\leq 0$ for all $x,y\in\mathbb R^n$ and some fixed sufficiently large $L$. Otherwise, there exists a positive constant $\eta_0$ such that $\sup_{x,y\in\mathbb R^n}\Phi(x,y)>0$ if $0<\eta<\eta_0$. By boundedness of $u$, there is a point ($\hat x,\hat y$) such that $\Phi(\hat x,\hat y)=\sup_{x,y\in\mathbb R^n}\Phi(x,y)>0$. Therefore, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq3.1}
\max\{\eta|\hat x|^2,L|\hat x-\hat y|^{\theta}\}< u(\hat x)-u(\hat y).
\end{equation}
By ($\ref{eq:3.2}$) and ($\ref{eq:3.3}$), we obtain
\begin{equation*}
D^2\psi(\hat x,\hat y)\leq \theta L|\hat x-\hat y|^{\theta-2}\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
I & -I\\
-I & I
\end{array}
\right)+2\eta\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
I & \,\,0\\
0 & \,\,0
\end{array}
\right).
\end{equation*}
By Lemma $\ref{le3.1}$, since $u\in BUC(\mathbb R^n)$ is a viscosity solution of ($\ref{eq1.1}$), for any $0<\delta<1$ and $\epsilon_0>0$, there are $X,Y\in\mathbb S^n$ satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{eq:3.4}
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
X & 0\\
0 & -Y
\end{array}
\right)-2\eta\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
I & \,\, 0\\
0 & \,\,0
\end{array}
\right)
\leq (1+\epsilon_0)\theta L|\hat x-\hat y|^{\theta-2}\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
I & -I\\
-I & I
\end{array}
\right),
\end{equation}
such that
\begin{equation*}
G\big(\hat x,u(\hat x),LD_x\phi(\hat x,\hat y)+2\eta\hat x,X,l_{\hat x}\big)\leq 0,
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
G\big(\hat y,u(\hat y),-LD_y\phi(\hat x,\hat y),Y,l_{\hat y}\big)\geq 0,
\end{equation*}
where
\begin{equation*}
l_{\hat x}=I^{1,\delta}[\hat x,LD_x\phi(\hat x,\hat y)+2\eta\hat x,L\phi(\cdot,\hat y)+\eta|\cdot|^2]+I^{2,\delta}[\hat x,LD_x\phi(\hat x,\hat y)+2\eta\hat x,u(\cdot)],
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
l_{\hat y}=I^{1,\delta}[\hat y,-LD_y\phi(\hat x,\hat y),-L\phi(\hat x,\cdot)]+I^{2,\delta}[\hat y,-LD_y\phi(\hat x,\hat y),u(\cdot)].
\end{equation*}
Thus, by ($\ref{eq1.3}$), ($\ref{eq3.1}$) and ($H1$), we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\gamma L|\hat x-\hat y|^{\theta}&\leq&\gamma \big(u(\hat x)-u(\hat y)\big)\nonumber\\
&\leq&G\big(\hat y,u(\hat y),-LD_y\phi(\hat x,\hat y),Y,l_{\hat y}\big)-G\big(\hat x,u(\hat y),LD_x\phi(\hat x,\hat y)+2\eta\hat x,X,l_{\hat x}\big)\nonumber\\
&\leq&\Lambda(l_{\hat x}-l_{\hat y})+C_1(1+L)|\hat x-\hat y|^\theta+C_2\eta(1+|\hat x|^2).\label{eq::3.5}
\end{eqnarray}
Now we focus on estimating the integral term $l_{\hat x}-l_{\hat y}$. Thus,
\begin{eqnarray*}
l_{\hat x}-l_{\hat y}&=&L\int_{B_\delta(0)}\Big[|\hat x-\hat y+j(\hat x,\xi)|^\theta-|\hat x-\hat y|^\theta-\theta|\hat x-\hat y|^{\theta-2}(\hat x-\hat y)\cdot j(\hat x,\xi)\Big]\mu(d\xi)\\
&&+L\int_{B_\delta(0)}\Big[|\hat y-\hat x+j(\hat y,\xi)|^\theta-|\hat y-\hat x|^\theta-\theta|\hat y-\hat x|^{\theta-2}(\hat y-\hat x)\cdot j(\hat y,\xi)\Big]\mu(d\xi)\\
&&+\eta\int_{B_\delta(0)}\Big(|\hat x+j(\hat x,\xi)|^2-|\hat x|^2-2\hat x\cdot j(\hat x,\xi)\Big)\mu(d\xi)\\
&&+\int_{B_{\delta}^c(0)}\Big[u(\hat x+j(\hat x,\xi))-u(\hat x)-u(\hat y+j(\hat y,\xi))+u(\hat y)\\
&&-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)\big(\theta L|\hat x-\hat y|^{\theta-2}(\hat x-\hat y)\big)\cdot\big(j(\hat x,\xi)-j(\hat y,\xi)\big)-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)2\eta\hat x\cdot j(\hat x,\xi)\Big]\mu(d\xi).
\end{eqnarray*}
Since $\Phi(x,y)$ attains a global maximum at ($\hat x,\hat y$), we have, for any $\xi\in\mathbb R^n$,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq3.5}
&&u(\hat x+j(\hat x,\xi))-u(\hat x)-u(\hat y+j(\hat y,\xi))+u(\hat y)\nonumber\\
&\leq& L\Big(|\hat x-\hat y+j(\hat x,\xi)-j(\hat y,\xi)|^\theta-|\hat x-\hat y|^\theta\Big)+\eta\Big(|\hat x+j(\hat x,\xi)|^2-|\hat x|^2\Big).
\end{eqnarray}
Thus, by ($\ref{eq:3.3}$) and ($\ref{eq3.5}$), we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq::::3.7}
l_{\hat x}-l_{\hat y}&\leq&\theta L\int_{B_{\delta}(0)}\Big(\sup_{0\leq t\leq1}|\hat x-\hat y+tj(\hat x,\xi)|^{\theta-2}|j(\hat x,\xi)|^2+\sup_{0\leq t\leq1}|\hat y-\hat x+tj(\hat y,\xi)|^{\theta-2}|j(\hat y,\xi)|^2\Big)\mu(d\xi)\nonumber\\
&&+\eta\int_{\mathbb R^n}\Big(|\hat x+j(\hat x,\xi)|^2-|\hat x|^2-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)2\hat x\cdot j(\hat x,\xi)\Big)\mu(d\xi)\nonumber\\
&&+L\int_{B_\delta^c(0)}\Big[|\hat x-\hat y+j(\hat x,\xi)-j(\hat y,\xi)|^\theta-|\hat x-\hat y|^\theta\nonumber\\
&&-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)\theta|\hat x-\hat y|^{\theta-2}(\hat x-\hat y)\cdot\big(j(\hat x,\xi)-j(\hat y,\xi)\big)\Big]\mu(d\xi).
\end{eqnarray}
We claim that $\eta|\hat x|^2\to 0$ as $\eta\to 0$. Since $u$ is bounded in $\mathbb R^n$, for any positive integer $k$, let $(x_k,y_k)$ be a point such that
\begin{equation*}
u(x_k)-u(y_k)-L\phi(x_k,y_k)\geq M-\frac{1}{k},
\end{equation*}
where $M:=\sup_{x,y\in\mathbb R^n}\{u(x)-u(y)-L\phi(x,y)\}<+\infty$. Thus,
\begin{equation}\label{e3.11}
M-\frac{1}{k}-\eta|x_k|^2\leq \Phi(x_k,y_k)\leq\Phi(\hat x,\hat y)\leq M.
\end{equation}
Letting $\eta\to 0$ and then letting $k\to +\infty$ in ($\ref{e3.11}$), we have $\lim_{\eta\to 0}\Phi(\hat x,\hat y)=M$. If we notice that
\begin{equation*}
\Phi(\hat x,\hat y)+\eta|\hat x|^2=u(\hat x)-u(\hat y)-L\phi(\hat x,\hat y)\leq M,\quad\forall \eta>0,
\end{equation*}
the claim follows. Since $u\in BUC(\mathbb R^n)$ and ($\ref{eq3.1}$) holds, we have
\begin{equation*}
\epsilon_1\leq|\hat x-\hat y|\leq \epsilon_1^{-1},
\end{equation*}
where $\epsilon_1$ is a positive constant independent of $\eta$. Letting $\delta\rightarrow 0$ and then letting $\eta\rightarrow 0$ in ($\ref{eq::3.5}$), we have, by ($\ref{eq:1.5}$), ($\ref{eq::::3.7}$) and ($H2$),
\begin{eqnarray*}
\gamma L|\hat x-\hat y|^{\theta}&\leq&\Lambda L\int_{\mathbb R^n}\Big[|\hat x-\hat y+j(\hat x,\xi)-j(\hat y,\xi)|^\theta-|\hat x-\hat y|^\theta\\
&&-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)\theta|\hat x-\hat y|^{\theta-2}(\hat x-\hat y)\cdot\big(j(\hat x,\xi)-j(\hat y,\xi)\big)\Big]\mu(d\xi)+C_1(1+L)|\hat x-\hat y|^\theta.
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore, by Lemma $\ref{le..3.2}$,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq,,3.9}
\gamma&\leq&\Lambda|\hat x-\hat y|^{-\theta}\int_{\mathbb R^n}\Big[|\hat x-\hat y+j(\hat x,
\xi)-j(\hat y,\xi)|^\theta-|\hat x-\hat y|^\theta\nonumber\\
&&-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)\theta|\hat x-\hat y|^{\theta-2}(\hat x-\hat y)\cdot\big(j(\hat x,\xi)-j(\hat y,\xi)\big)\Big]\mu(d\xi)+C_1(1+\frac{1}{L})\nonumber\\
&\leq&\Lambda M_1+C_1(1+\frac{1}{L})<+\infty,
\end{eqnarray}
where $M_1$ is defined in ($\ref{eq,3.1}$). It is now obvious from ($\ref{eq,,3.9}$) that, if $\gamma>\Lambda M_1+C_1$, we can find a sufficiently large $L$ such that we have a contradiction. Therefore, we have $u\in C^{0,\theta}(\bar{\mathbb R}^n)$.
\end{proof}
Let us consider another important fully nonlinear integro-PDE appearing in the study of stochastic optimal control and stochastic differential games for processes with jumps, namely the Bellman-Isaacs equation ($\ref{eq..1.6}$). Equation ($\ref{eq..1.6}$) is not of the same form as ($\ref{eq1.1}$), which means that the following theorem is not a corollary of Theorem $\ref{th2.1}$.
\begin{theorem}\label{th2.2}
Suppose that $c_{\alpha\beta}\geq\gamma$ in $\mathbb R^n$ uniformly in $\alpha\in\mathcal{A},\beta\in\mathcal{B}$. Suppose that the L\'evy measure $\mu$ satisfies ($\ref{eq:1.5}$), and the family $\{j_{\alpha\beta}(x,\xi)\}$ satisfies assumption ($H2$) uniformly in $\alpha\in \mathcal A,\beta\in\mathcal B$. Suppose moreover that there exist a positive constant $C$ and $0<\theta\leq 1$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq::3.8}
\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A},\beta\in\mathcal{B}}\max\{|\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(0)|,|b_{\alpha\beta}(0)|\}<C,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq::3.9}
\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A},\beta\in\mathcal{B}}\max\{[\sigma_{\alpha\beta}]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n},[b_{\alpha\beta}]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n},[c_{\alpha\beta}]_{0,\theta,\mathbb R^n},[f_{\alpha\beta}]_{0,\theta,\mathbb R^n}\}<+\infty.
\end{equation}
Then, if $u\in BUC(\mathbb R^n)$ is a viscosity solution of ($\ref{eq..1.6}$) and $\gamma>N_1$ where
\begin{eqnarray}
N_1:&=&\sup_{x\not=y}\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A},\beta\in\mathcal{B}}\Big\{\theta |x-y|^{-2}Tr\Big[\big(\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(x)-\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(y)\big)(\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(x)-\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(y)\big)^T\Big]\nonumber\\
&&+\theta |x-y|^{-2}\Big(b_{\alpha\beta}(y)-b_{\alpha\beta}(x)\Big)\cdot(x-y)+|x-y|^{-\theta}\int_{\mathbb R^n}\Big[|x-y+j_{\alpha\beta}(x,\xi)-j_{\alpha\beta}(y,\xi)|^\theta\nonumber\\
&&-|x-y|^\theta-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)\theta|x-y|^{\theta-2}(x-y)\cdot\big(j_{\alpha\beta}(x,\xi)-j_{\alpha\beta}(y,\xi)\big)\Big]\mu(d\xi)\Big\}<+\infty,\label{eq,3.12}
\end{eqnarray}
we have $u\in C^{0,\theta}(\bar{\mathbb R}^n)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
At the beginning of the proof, we will show that the constant $N_1$ has an upper bound. By ($\ref{eq::3.9}$) and the estimates in ($\ref{eq,,3.10}$), we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
N_1&\leq&\theta\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A},\beta\in\mathcal{B}}[\sigma_{\alpha\beta}]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}^2+\theta\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A},\beta\in\mathcal{B}}[b_{\alpha\beta}]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}+2^{2-\theta}\theta\int_{B_{\delta_1}(0)}\rho(\xi)^2\mu(d\xi)\\
&&+\int_{\mathbb R^n\setminus B_{\delta_1}(0)}\rho(\xi)^\theta\mu(d\xi)+\theta\int_{B_1(0)\setminus B_{\delta_1}(0)}\rho(\xi)\mu(d\xi)<+\infty,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\delta_1$ was chosen in Lemma $\ref{le..3.2}$.
Then we want to prove that, for any $\eta>0$, we have $\Phi(x,y)=u(x)-u(y)-\psi(x,y)\leq 0$ for all $x,y\in\mathbb R^n$ and some fixed sufficiently large $L$ where $\psi(x,y)$ is given in Theorem $\ref{th2.1}$. Otherwise, there exists a positive constant $\eta_0$ such that $\sup_{x,y\in\mathbb R^n}\Phi(x,y)>0$ if $0<\eta<\eta_0$. By boundedness of $u$, there is a point ($\hat x,\hat y$) such that $\Phi(\hat x,\hat y)=\sup_{x,y\in\mathbb R^n}\Phi(x,y)>0$. Therefore, we have ($\ref{eq3.1}$). By Remark $\ref{re3.1}$, since $u\in BUC(\mathbb R^n)$ is a viscosity solution of ($\ref{eq..1.6}$), for any $0<\delta<1$ and $\epsilon_0>0$, there are $X,Y\in\mathbb S^n$ satisfying ($\ref{eq:3.4}$) such that
\begin{equation*}
\sup_{\alpha\in \mathcal A}\inf_{\beta\in \mathcal{B}}\big\{-Tr\big(\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x)\sigma_{\alpha\beta}^T(\hat x)X\big)-l_{\hat x,\alpha\beta}+b_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x)\cdot D_x\psi(\hat x,\hat y)+c_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x)u(\hat x)+f_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x)\big\}\leq0,
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
\sup_{\alpha\in \mathcal A}\inf_{\beta\in \mathcal{B}}\big\{-Tr\big(\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y)\sigma_{\alpha\beta}^T(\hat y)Y\big)-l_{\hat y,\alpha\beta}-b_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y)\cdot D_y\psi(\hat x,\hat y)+c_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y)u(\hat y)+f_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y)\big\}\geq0,
\end{equation*}
where
\begin{equation*}
l_{\hat x,\alpha\beta}=I_{\alpha\beta}^{1,\delta}[\hat x,D_x\psi(\hat x,\hat y),\psi(\cdot,\hat y)]+I_{\alpha\beta}^{2,\delta}[\hat x,D_x\psi(\hat x,\hat y),u(\cdot)],
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
l_{\hat y,\alpha\beta}=I_{\alpha\beta}^{1,\delta}[\hat y,-D_y\psi(\hat x,\hat y),-\psi(\hat x,\cdot)]+I_{\alpha\beta}^{2,\delta}[\hat y,-D_y\psi(\hat x,\hat y),u(\cdot)].
\end{equation*}
Since ($\ref{eq:3.2}$) and ($\ref{eq3.1}$) hold, and $c_{\alpha\beta}\geq \gamma$ in $\mathbb R^n$ uniformly in $\alpha\in\mathcal{A},\beta\in\mathcal{B}$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq3.7}
\gamma L|\hat x-\hat y|^\theta\leq\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A},\beta\in\mathcal{B}}\Big\{L_{\alpha\beta}+N_{\alpha\beta}\Big\},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray*}
L_{\alpha\beta}&=&Tr\Big(\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x)\sigma_{\alpha\beta}^T(\hat x)X-\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y)\sigma_{\alpha\beta}^T(\hat y)Y\Big)+\Big(b_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y)-b_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x)\Big)\cdot LD_x\phi(\hat x,\hat y)\\
&&+\Big(c_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y)-c_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x)\Big)u(\hat y)+f_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y)-f_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x)-2\eta b_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x)\cdot\hat x,
\end{eqnarray*}
and
\begin{equation*}
N_{\alpha\beta}=l_{\hat x,\alpha\beta}-l_{\hat y,\alpha\beta}.
\end{equation*}
By ($\ref{eq:3.4}$), ($\ref{eq::3.8}$) and ($\ref{eq::3.9}$), we see that (see also Example 3.6 in \cite{MHP})
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&Tr\Big(\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x)\sigma_{\alpha\beta}^T(\hat x)X-\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y)\sigma_{\alpha\beta}^T(\hat y)Y\Big)\\
&\leq& (1+\epsilon_0)\theta L|\hat x-\hat y|^{\theta-2}Tr\Big[\big(\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x)-\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y)\big)(\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x)-\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y)\big)^T\Big]+2\eta Tr\big(\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x)\sigma_{\alpha\beta}^T(\hat x)\big)\\
&\leq& (1+\epsilon_0)\theta L|\hat x-\hat y|^{\theta-2}Tr\Big[\big(\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x)-\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y)\big)(\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x)-\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y)\big)^T\Big]\\
&&+2\eta(C+\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A},\beta\in\mathcal B}[\sigma_{\alpha\beta}]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}|\hat x|)^2.
\end{eqnarray*}
Thus, we can estimate the local term $L_{\alpha\beta}$ easily. Using ($\ref{eq:3.2}$), ($\ref{eq::3.8}$), ($\ref{eq::3.9}$) and boundedness of $u$, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq::::3.12}
L_{\alpha\beta}&\leq&(1+\epsilon_0)\theta L|\hat x-\hat y|^{\theta-2}Tr\Big[\big(\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x)-\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y)\big)(\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x)-\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y)\big)^T\Big]\nonumber\\
&&+2\eta(C+\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A},\beta\in\mathcal B}[\sigma_{\alpha\beta}]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}|\hat x|)^2+\theta L|\hat x-\hat y|^{\theta-2}\Big(b_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y)-b_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x)\Big)\cdot (\hat x-\hat y)\nonumber\\
&&+\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A},\beta\in\mathcal{B}}[c_{\alpha\beta}]_{0,\theta;\mathbb R^n}|u|_{0;\mathbb R^n}|\hat x-\hat y|^{\theta}+\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A},\beta\in\mathcal{B}}[f_{\alpha\beta}]_{0,\theta;\mathbb R^n}|\hat x-\hat y|^{\theta}\nonumber\\
&&+2\eta(C|\hat x|+\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A},\beta\in\mathcal B}[b_{\alpha\beta}]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}|\hat x|^2).
\end{eqnarray}
Similarly as in the proof of Theorem $\ref{th2.1}$, we have $\eta|\hat x|^2\to 0$ as $\eta\to 0$ and
\begin{equation*}
\epsilon_1\leq|\hat x-\hat y|\leq \epsilon_1^{-1},
\end{equation*}
where $\epsilon_1$ is a positive constant independent of $\eta$.
Letting $\delta\to 0$, $\eta\to 0$ and $\epsilon_0\to 0$ in ($\ref{eq3.7}$), we have, by ($\ref{eq::::3.12}$) and the same estimates on the nonlocal term $N_{\alpha\beta}$ as Theorem $\ref{th2.1}$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\gamma L|\hat x-\hat y|^\theta&\leq&\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A},\beta\in\mathcal{B}}L\Big\{\theta|\hat x-\hat y|^{\theta-2}Tr\Big[\big(\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x)-\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y)\big)(\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x)-\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y)\big)^T\Big]\\
&&+\theta |\hat x-\hat y|^{\theta-2}\Big(b_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y)-b_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x)\Big)\cdot (\hat x-\hat y)+\int_{\mathbb R^n}\Big[|\hat x-\hat y+j_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x,\xi)-j_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y,\xi)|^\theta\\
&&-|\hat x-\hat y|^\theta-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)\theta|\hat x-\hat y|^{\theta-2}(\hat x-\hat y)\cdot\big(j_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x,\xi)-j_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y,\xi)\big)\Big]\mu(d\xi)\Big\}\\
&&+\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A},\beta\in\mathcal{B}}[c_{\alpha\beta}]_{0,\theta;\mathbb R^n}|u|_{0;\mathbb R^n}|\hat x-\hat y|^{\theta}+\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A},\beta\in\mathcal{B}}[f_{\alpha\beta}]_{0,\theta;\mathbb R^n}|\hat x-\hat y|^{\theta}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq,,3.16}
\gamma&\leq&\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A},\beta\in\mathcal{B}}\Big\{\theta|\hat x-\hat y|^{-2}Tr\Big[\big(\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x)-\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y)\big)(\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x)-\sigma_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y)\big)^T\Big]\nonumber\\
&&+\theta |\hat x-\hat y|^{-2}\Big(b_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y)-b_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x)\Big)\cdot(\hat x-\hat y)+|\hat x-\hat y|^{-\theta}\int_{\mathbb R^n}\Big[|\hat x-\hat y+j_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x,\xi)-j_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y,\xi)|^\theta\nonumber\\
&&-|\hat x-\hat y|^\theta-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)\theta|\hat x-\hat y|^{\theta-2}(\hat x-\hat y)\cdot\big(j_{\alpha\beta}(\hat x,\xi)-j_{\alpha\beta}(\hat y,\xi)\big)\Big]\mu(d\xi)\Big\}\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{1}{L}\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A},\beta\in\mathcal{B}}[c_{\alpha\beta}]_{0,\theta;\mathbb R^n}|u|_{0;\mathbb R^n}+\frac{1}{L}\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A},\beta\in\mathcal{B}}[f_{\alpha\beta}]_{0,\theta;\mathbb R^n}\nonumber\\
&\leq&N_1+\frac{1}{L}\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A},\beta\in\mathcal{B}}[c_{\alpha\beta}]_{0,\theta;\mathbb R^n}|u|_{0;\mathbb R^n}+\frac{1}{L}\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A},\beta\in\mathcal{B}}[f_{\alpha\beta}]_{0,\theta;\mathbb R^n},
\end{eqnarray}
where $N_1$ is defined in ($\ref{eq,3.12}$). It now follows from ($\ref{eq,,3.16}$) that, if $\gamma>N_1$, we can find a sufficiently large $L$ such that we have a contradiction. Therefore, we have $u\in C^{0,\theta}(\bar{\mathbb R}^n)$.
\end{proof}
\section{Semiconcavity}
\label{sec:compgamma0}
In this section we investigate the semiconcavity of viscosity solutions of ($\ref{eq1.1}$) and ($\ref{eq1.7}$). Again we start with equation ($\ref{eq1.1}$). We impose the following conditions on $G$ and $j(x,\xi)$.
\\
\\
($\bar{H}1$) If $\varphi\in C^{0,1}(\bar{\mathbb R}^n)$, there are a constant $1<\bar\theta\leq2$, a non-negative constant $\Lambda$ and two positive constants $C_3,C_4$ such that, for any $x,y,z\in\mathbb R^n$, $l_x,l_y,l_z\in\mathbb R$, $X,Y,Z\in\mathbb S^n$ and $L,\eta>0$, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{e4.1}
&&2G(z,\varphi(z),-\frac{L}{2}D_z\phi(x,y,z),\frac{Z}{2},l_z)\nonumber\\
&&-G(x,\varphi(x),LD_x\phi(x,y,z)+2\eta x,X,l_x)-G(y,\varphi(y),LD_y\phi(x,y,z),Y,l_y)\nonumber\\
&\leq&-\gamma\big(\varphi(x)+\varphi(y)-2\varphi(z)\big)+\Lambda(l_x+l_y-2l_z)+C_3(1+L)\phi(x,y,z)+C_4\eta(1+|x|^2),
\end{eqnarray}
if
\begin{eqnarray}\label{e4.2}
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
X & 0 & 0 \\
0& Y & 0\\
0 & 0 & -Z
\end{array}
\right)
&\leq&\frac{L}{\phi(x,y,z)}\left[\bar\theta(2\bar\theta-1)|\hat x-\hat y|^{2\bar{\theta}-2}
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
I & -I &\,\, 0 \\
-I& I &\,\, 0\\
0 & 0 & \,\,0
\end{array}
\right)+
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
I & I & -2I \\
I& I & -2I\\
-2I & -2I & 4I
\end{array}
\right)\right]\nonumber\\
&&+2\eta\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
I &\,\, 0 &\,\, 0 \\
0&\,\, 0 &\,\, 0\\
0 &\,\, 0 &\,\,0
\end{array}
\right),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\gamma$ is given by ($\ref{eq1.3}$) and $\phi(x,y,z)=(|x-y|^{2\bar\theta}+|x+y-2z|^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}$.\\
($\bar{H}2$) ($H2$) holds and, with the same $\bar\theta$ in ($\bar{H}1$) and for any $x,y\in\mathbb R^n$, we have
\begin{equation*}
|j(x,\xi)+j(y,\xi)-2j(\frac{x+y}{2},\xi)|\leq |x-y|^{\bar\theta}\rho(\xi)\quad\text{for}\,\,\xi\in \mathbb R^n.
\end{equation*}
\begin{example}
Since the assumption ($\bar{H}1$) is complicated, we provide a concrete example to show when it is satisfied. We consider the nonlinear convex nonlocal equation
\begin{equation}\label{eq::4.1}
-Tr\big(\sigma(x)\sigma^T(x)D^2u(x)\big)+F(I[x,u])+b(x)\cdot Du(x)+c(x)u(x)+f(x)=0,\quad \text{in}\,\,\mathbb R^n,
\end{equation}
where $F:\mathbb R\to\mathbb R$ is a continuous function. Suppose the following conditions are satisfied: there exists a non-negative constant $\Lambda$ such that, for any $l_x,l_y\in\mathbb R$,
\begin{equation*}
c\geq \gamma\,\,\text{in}\,\,\mathbb R^n\,\,\text{and}\,\,c\in C^{1,\bar\theta-1}(\bar{\mathbb R}^n),
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
f\,\,\text{is}\,\,\bar\theta\text{-semiconvex}\,\,\text{in}\,\,\mathbb R^n\,\,\text{and}\,\,\max\{[\sigma]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n},[\sigma]_{1,\bar\theta-1;\mathbb R^n},[b]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n},[b]_{1,\bar\theta-1,\mathbb R^n},[f]_{0,1,\mathbb R^n}\}<+\infty,
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation}\label{eq::4.2}
F\,\,\text{is}\,\,\text{convex}\,\,\text{in}\,\,\mathbb R^n\,\,\text{and}\,\,F(l_y)-F(l_x)\leq\Lambda(l_x-l_y).
\end{equation}
By the estimates on the local terms in Theorem $\ref{th4.2}$, if equation ($\ref{eq::4.1}$) does not contain the nonlocal term $F(I[x,u])$, then ($\ref{eq::4.1}$) satisfies ($\bar{H}1$). Thus, we only need to estimate the nonlocal terms. For any $l_x,l_y,l_z$, we have, by ($\ref{eq::4.2}$),
\begin{eqnarray*}
2F(l_z)-F(l_x)-F(l_y)&\leq&2F(l_z)-2F(\frac{l_x+l_y}{2})+\Big(2F(\frac{l_x+l_y}{2})-F(l_x)-F(l_y)\Big)\\
&\leq&\Lambda(l_x+l_y-2l_z).
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore, equation ($\ref{eq::4.1}$) satisfies ($\bar{H}1$).
This example can be generalized to equation
\begin{equation}\label{e4.5}
G(x,u,Du,D^2u)+F(I[x,u])=0,\quad \text{in}\,\,\mathbb R^n,
\end{equation}
where $G$ satisfies ($\ref{e4.1}$) without the last argument if $\varphi\in C^{0,1}(\bar{\mathbb R}^n)$ and ($\ref{e4.2}$) holds, and $F$ satisfies ($\ref{eq::4.2}$). It is obvious that ($\bar{H}1$) holds for equation ($\ref{e4.5}$).
\end{example}
\begin{lemma}\label{le4.1}
Suppose that the nonlinearity $G$ in ($\ref{eq1.1}$) is continuous and satisfies ($\ref{eq:1.5}$)-($\ref{eq1.2}$). Let $u,v,w$ be bounded functions and be respectively a viscosity subsolution, a viscosity subsolution and a viscosity supersolution of
\begin{equation*}
G(x,u,Du,D^2u,I[x,u])=0,\quad\text{in}\,\,\mathbb R^n,
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
G(x,v,Dv,D^2v,I[x,v])=0,\quad\text{in}\,\,\mathbb R^n,
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
G(x,w,Dw,D^2w,I[x,w])=0,\quad\text{in}\,\,\mathbb R^n.
\end{equation*}
Let $\psi\in C^2(\mathbb R^{3n})$ and $(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\in\mathbb R^n\times\mathbb R^n\times\mathbb R^n$ be such that
\begin{equation*}
(x,y,z)\mapsto u(x)+v(y)-2w(z)-\psi(x,y,z)
\end{equation*}
has a global maximum at $(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)$. Furthermore, assume that in a neighborhood of $(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)$ there are continuous functions $g_0,g_1:\mathbb R^{3n}\to \mathbb R$, $g_2:\mathbb R^{n}\to\mathbb S^n$ with $g_1(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)>0$, satisfying
\begin{equation*}
D^2\psi(x,y,z)\leq g_0(x,y,z)\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
I & -I &\,\, 0\\
-I & I & \,\, 0 \\
0 & 0 & \,\,0
\end{array}
\right)+g_1(x,y,z)
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
I & I & -2I\\
I & I & -2I\\
-2I &-2I & 4I
\end{array}
\right)+\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
g_2(x) & \,\, 0 &\,\, 0\\
0 & \,\,0 & \,\, 0 \\
0 & \,\,0 &\,\, 0
\end{array}
\right).
\end{equation*}
Then, for any $0<\delta<1$ and $\epsilon_0>0$, there are $X,Y,Z\in\mathbb S^n$ satisfying
\begin{equation*}
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
X & 0 & 0\\
0 & Y & 0\\
0 & 0 & -Z
\end{array}
\right)-\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
g_2(\hat x) & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & 0 & 0
\end{array}
\right)
\leq (1+\epsilon_0)\left[g_0(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
I & -I & 0\\
-I & I & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0
\end{array}
\right)+g_1(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
I & I & -2I\\
I & I & -2I\\
-2I &-2I & 4I
\end{array}
\right)\right],
\end{equation*}
such that
\begin{equation*}
G\big(\hat x,u(\hat x),D_x\psi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),X,I^{1,\delta}[\hat x,D_x\psi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),\psi(\cdot,\hat y,\hat z)]+I^{2,\delta}[\hat x,D_x\psi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),u(\cdot)]\big)\leq 0,
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
G\big(\hat y,v(\hat y),D_y\psi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),Y,I^{1,\delta}[\hat y,D_y\psi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),\psi(\hat x,\cdot,\hat z)]+I^{2,\delta}[\hat y,D_y\psi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),v(\cdot)]\big)\leq 0,
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
G\big(\hat z,w(\hat z),-\frac{1}{2}D_z\psi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),\frac{Z}{2},I^{1,\delta}[\hat z,-\frac{D_z\psi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)}{2},-\frac{\psi(\hat x,\hat y,\cdot)}{2}]+I^{2,\delta}[\hat z,-\frac{D_z\psi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)}{2},w(\cdot)]\big)\geq 0.
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
This lemma can be deduced from the proof of Theorem 4.9 in \cite{jk1}.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{re4.1}
Lemma $\ref{le4.1}$ is also true for Bellman-Isaacs equations ($\ref{eq..1.6}$).
\end{remark}
\begin{lemma}\label{le..4.2}
Suppose that a L\'{e}vy measure $\mu$ satisfies ($\ref{eq:1.5}$) and $j(x,\xi)$ satisfies assumption ($\bar{H}2$). Then
\begin{eqnarray}
M_2:&=&\sup_{\phi(x,y,z)\not=0}\Big\{\phi(x,y,z)^{-1}\int_{\mathbb R^n}\Big[\phi(x+j(x,\xi),y+j(y,\xi),z+j(z,\xi))-\phi(x,y,z)\nonumber\\
&&-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)\Big(D_x\phi(x,y,z),D_y\phi(x,y,z),D_z\phi(x,y,z)\Big)\cdot \Big(j(x,\xi),j(y,\xi),j(z,\xi)\Big)\Big]\mu(d\xi)\Big\}\nonumber\\
&<&+\infty,\nonumber\\\label{eq,4.3}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\phi(x,y,z)$ is defined in ($\bar{H}1$).
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By direct calculations, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq4.5}
D\phi(x,y,z)=\frac{1}{\phi(x,y,z)}\left[\bar{\theta}|x-y|^{2\bar{\theta}-2}
\left(
\begin{array}{c}
x-y \\
y-x \\
0
\end{array}
\right)
+\left(
\begin{array}{c}
x+y-2z \\
x+y-2z \\
-2x-2y+4z
\end{array}
\right)
\right]
\end{equation}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
D^2\phi(x,y,z)&=&-\frac{1}{\phi(x,y,z)}D\phi(x,y,z)\otimes D\phi(x,y,z)+\frac{1}{\phi(x,y,z)}
\Bigg[\bar{\theta}|x-y|^{2\bar{\theta}-2}
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
I & -I &\,\, 0 \\
-I& I &\,\, 0\\
0 & 0 &\,\, 0
\end{array}
\right)\nonumber\\
&&+\bar\theta(2\bar\theta-2)|x-y|^{2\bar\theta-4}
\left(
\begin{array}{c}
x- y \\
y- x \\
0
\end{array}
\right)\otimes
\left(
\begin{array}{c}
x-y \\
y-x \\
0
\end{array}
\right)+
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
I & I & -2I \\
I& I & -2I\\
-2I & -2I & 4I
\end{array}
\right)
\Bigg]\nonumber\\
&\leq&\frac{1}{\phi(x,y,z)}\left[\bar{\theta}(2\bar\theta-1)|x-y|^{2\bar{\theta}-2}
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
I & -I &\,\, 0 \\
-I& I &\,\, 0\\
0 & 0 &\,\, 0
\end{array}
\right)+
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
I & I & -2I \\
I& I & -2I\\
-2I & -2I & 4I
\end{array}
\right)\right].\label{eq4.6}
\end{eqnarray}
Since $\lim_{\xi\to 0}\rho(\xi)=0$, there exists a positive constant $\delta_2<1$ such that $\sup_{\xi\in B_{\delta_2}(0)}\rho(\xi)\leq \frac{1}{4}$. By (\ref{eq4.5}) and (\ref{eq4.6}), we have, for any $x,y,z\in\mathbb R^n$ and $\phi(x,y,z)\not=0$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&\phi(x,y,z)^{-1}\int_{\mathbb R^n}\Big[\phi(x+j(x,\xi),y+j(y,\xi),z+j(z,\xi))-\phi(x,y,z)\nonumber\\
&&-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)\Big(D_x\phi(x,y,z),D_y\phi(x,y,z),D_z\phi(x,y,z)\Big)\cdot \Big(j(x,\xi),j(y,\xi),j(z,\xi)\Big)\Big]\mu(d\xi)\nonumber\\
&\leq&\phi(x,y,z)^{-1}\Big\{\int_{B_{\delta_2}(0)}\Big[\sup_{0\leq t\leq 1}\Big(j(x,\xi),j(y,\xi),j(z,\xi)\Big)D^2\phi\big(x+tj(x,\xi),y+tj(y,\xi),z+tj(z,\xi)\big)\nonumber\\
&&\Big(j(x,\xi),j(y,\xi),j(z,\xi)\Big)^T\Big]\mu(d\xi)\nonumber\\
&&+\int_{B_{\delta_2}^c(0)}\Big[\Big(|x-y+j(x,\xi)-j(y,\xi)|^{2\bar\theta}+|x+y-2z+j(x,\xi)+j(y,\xi)-2j(z,\xi)|^2\Big)^{\frac{1}{2}}\nonumber\\
&&-\phi(x,y,z)-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)\frac{1}{\phi(x,y,z)}\nonumber\\
&&\Big(\bar\theta|x-y|^{2\bar\theta-2}(x-y)\cdot \big(j(x,\xi)-j(y,\xi)\big)+(x+y-2z)\cdot\big(j(x,\xi)+j(y,\xi)-2j(z,\xi)\big)\Big)\Big]\mu(d\xi)\Big\}\nonumber
\end{eqnarray*}
\begin{eqnarray*}
&\leq&\phi(x,y,z)^{-1}\Big\{\int_{B_{\delta_2}(0)}\Big[\sup_{0\leq t\leq 1}\frac{1}{\phi(x+tj(x,\xi),y+tj(y,\xi),z+tj(z,\xi))}\Big(\big(j(x,\xi)+j(y,\xi)-2j(z,\xi)\big)^2\nonumber\\
&&+\bar\theta(2\bar\theta-1)|x-y+t\big(j(x,\xi)-j(y,\xi)\big)|^{2\bar\theta-2}\big(j(x,\xi)-j(y,\xi)\big)^2\Big)\Big]\mu(d\xi)\nonumber\\
&&+\int_{B_{\delta_2}^c(0)}\Big[\Big(|x-y+j(x,\xi)-j(y,\xi)|^{2\bar\theta}+|x+y-2z+j(x,\xi)+j(y,\xi)-2j(z,\xi)|^2\Big)^{\frac{1}{2}}\nonumber\\
&&-\phi(x,y,z)-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)\frac{1}{\phi(x,y,z)}\nonumber\\
&&\Big(\bar\theta|x-y|^{2\bar\theta-2}(x-y)\cdot \big(j(x,\xi)-j(y,\xi)\big)+(x+y-2z)\cdot\big(j(x,\xi)+j(y,\xi)-2j(z,\xi)\big)\Big)\Big]\mu(d\xi)\Big\}.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray*}
By ($\bar{H}2$), we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
|j(x,\xi)+j(y,\xi)-2j(z,\xi)|&\leq& |j(x,\xi)+j(y,\xi)-2j(\frac{x+y}{2})|+|2j(\frac{x+y}{2},\xi)-2j(z,\xi)|\\
&\leq&\rho(\xi)\big(|x-y|^{\bar\theta}+|x+y-2z|\big).
\end{eqnarray*}
Using it, we obtain, for any $\xi\in B_{\delta_2}(0)$ and $t\in[0,1]$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&\phi(x+tj(x,\xi),y+tj(y,\xi),z+j(z,\xi))\\
&=&\Big[|x-y+t\big(j(x,\xi)-j(y,\xi)\big)|^{2\bar\theta}+|x+y-2z+t\big(j(x,\xi)+j(y,\xi)-2j(z,\xi)\big)|^2\Big]^{\frac{1}{2}}\\
&\geq&\Big[(\frac{3}{4})^{2\bar\theta}|x-y|^{2\bar\theta}+\big(\frac{3}{4}|x+y-2z|-\frac{1}{4}|x-y|^{\bar\theta}\big)^2\Big]^{\frac{1}{2}}\\
&\geq&\Big\{\big[(\frac{3}{4})^{2\bar\theta}-\frac{1}{16}\big]|x-y|^{2\bar\theta}+\frac{9}{32}|x+y-2z|^2\Big\}^{\frac{1}{2}}\\
&\geq&\frac{1}{2}\phi(x,y,z).
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore, for any $x,y,z\in\mathbb R^n$ and $\phi(x,y,z)\not=0$, we have by ($\ref{eq:1.5}$),
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\phi(x,y,z)^{-1}\int_{\mathbb R^n}\Big[\phi(x+j(x,\xi),y+j(y,\xi),z+j(z,\xi))-\phi(x,y,z)\nonumber\\
&&-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)\Big(D_x\phi(x,y,z),D_y\phi(x,y,z),D_z\phi(x,y,z)\Big)\cdot \Big(j(x,\xi),j(y,\xi),j(z,\xi)\Big)\Big]\mu(d\xi)\nonumber\\
&\leq&2\int_{B_{\delta_2}(0)}\Big[2+(\frac{5}{4})^{2\bar\theta-2}\bar\theta(2\bar\theta-1)\Big]\rho(\xi)^2\mu(d\xi)+\int_{B_{\delta_2}^c(0)}\Big\{\sqrt{2}\Big[\big(1+\rho(\xi)\big)^{\bar \theta}+\rho(\xi)\Big]-1\Big\}\mu(d\xi)\nonumber\\
&&+(\bar \theta+\frac{3}{2})\int_{B_1(0)\cap B_{\delta_2}^c(0)}\rho(\xi)\mu(d\xi)<+\infty.\label{eq,,4.12}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{th3.1}
Suppose that the nonlinearity $G$ in ($\ref{eq1.1}$) is continuous, and satisfies ($\ref{eq:1.5}$)-($\ref{eq1.2}$) and ($\bar{H}1$). Suppose that $j(x,\xi)$ satisfies assumption ($\bar{H}2$). Then, if $u\in C^{0,1}(\bar{\mathbb R^n})$ is a viscosity solution of ($\ref{eq1.1}$) and $\gamma>\Lambda M_2+C_3$ where $M_2$ is defined in ($\ref{eq,4.3}$), then $u$ is $\bar \theta$-semiconcave in $\mathbb R^n$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\Phi(x,y,z)=u(x)+u(y)-2u(z)-\psi(x,y,z)$ where $\psi(x,y,z)=L\phi(x,y,z)+\eta|x|^2$ and $\phi(x,y,z)$ is defined in ($\bar{H}1$). We want to prove, for any $\eta>0$, we have $\Phi(x,y,z)\leq 0$ for all $x,y,z\in\mathbb R^n$ and some fixed sufficiently large $L$. Otherwise, there exists a positive constant $\eta_0$ such that $\sup_{x,y,z\in\mathbb R^n}\Phi(x,y,z)>0$ if $0<\eta<\eta_0$. By boundedness of $u$, there is a point ($\hat x,\hat y,\hat z$) such that $\Phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)=\sup_{x,y,z\in\mathbb R^n}\Phi(x,y,z)>0$. Therefore, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq4.2}
\max\{\eta|\hat x|^2,L\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\}< u(\hat x)+u(\hat y)-2u(\hat z).
\end{equation}
By ($\ref{eq4.5}$) and ($\ref{eq4.6}$), we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
D^2\psi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)&\leq&\frac{L}{\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)}\left[\bar{\theta}(2\bar\theta-1)|\hat x-\hat y|^{2\bar{\theta}-2}
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
I & -I &\,\, 0 \\
-I& I &\,\, 0\\
0 & 0 &\,\, 0
\end{array}
\right)+
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
I & I & -2I \\
I& I & -2I\\
-2I & -2I & 4I
\end{array}
\right)\right]\\
&&+2\eta\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
I &\,\, 0 &\,\, 0 \\
0&\,\, 0 &\,\, 0\\
0 &\,\, 0 &\,\, 0
\end{array}
\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
By Lemma $\ref{le4.1}$, since $u\in BUC(\mathbb R^n)$ is a viscosity solution of ($\ref{eq1.1}$), for any $0<\delta<1$ and $\epsilon_0>0$, there are $X,Y,Z\in\mathbb S^n$ satisfying
\begin{eqnarray}
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
X & 0 & 0\\
0 & Y & 0\\
0 & 0 & -Z
\end{array}
\right)-2\eta\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
I&\,\, 0 & \,\,0\\
0 & \,\, 0 & \,\,0\\
0 & \,\, 0 & \,\,0
\end{array}
\right)&\leq&\frac{(1+\epsilon_0)L}{\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)}\Bigg[\bar{\theta}(2\bar\theta-1)|\hat x-\hat y|^{2\bar{\theta}-2}
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
I & -I &\,\, 0 \\
-I& I &\,\, 0\\
0 & 0 &\,\, 0
\end{array}
\right)\nonumber\\
&&+
\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
I & I & -2I \\
I& I & -2I\\
-2I & -2I & 4I
\end{array}
\right)\Bigg],\label{eq:4.4}
\end{eqnarray}
such that
\begin{equation*}
G(\hat x,u(\hat x),LD_x\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)+2\eta\hat x,X,l_{\hat x})\leq 0,
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
G(\hat y,u(\hat y),LD_y\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),Y,l_{\hat y})\leq 0,
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
G(\hat z,u(\hat z),-\frac{L}{2}D_z\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),\frac{Z}{2},l_{\hat z})\geq 0,
\end{equation*}
where
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&l_{\hat x}=I^{1,\delta}[\hat x,LD_x\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)+2\eta\hat x,L\phi(\cdot,\hat y,\hat z)+\eta|\cdot|^2]+I^{2,\delta}[\hat x,LD_x\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)+2\eta\hat x,u(\cdot)],\\
&&l_{\hat y}=I^{1,\delta}[\hat y,LD_y\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),L\phi(\hat x,\cdot,\hat z)]+I^{2,\delta}[\hat y,LD_y\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),u(\cdot)],\\
&&l_{\hat z}=I^{1,\delta}[\hat z,-\frac{L}{2}D_z\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),-\frac{L}{2}\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\cdot)]+I^{2,\delta}[\hat z,-\frac{L}{2}D_z\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),u(\cdot)].
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore, by ($\bar{H}1$) and ($\ref{eq4.2}$), we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:4.5}
\gamma L\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\leq \Lambda(l_{\hat x}+l_{\hat y}-2l_{\hat z})+C_3(1+L)\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)+C_4\eta(1+|\hat x|^2).
\end{equation}
We now estimate the integral term $l_{\hat x}+l_{\hat y}-2l_{\hat z}$.
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&l_{\hat x}+l_{\hat y}-2l_{\hat z}\\
&=&L\int_{B_{\delta}(0)}\Big(\phi(\hat x+j(\hat x,\xi),\hat y,\hat z)-\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)-D_x\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\cdot j(\hat x,\xi)\Big)\mu(d\xi)\\
&&+\eta\int_{B_{\delta}(0)}\Big(|\hat x+j(\hat x,\xi)|^2-|\hat x|^2-2\hat x\cdot j(\hat x,\xi)\Big)\mu(d\xi)\\
&&+L\int_{B_{\delta}(0)}\Big(\phi(\hat x,\hat y+j(\hat y,\xi),\hat z)-\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)-D_y\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\cdot j(\hat y,\xi)\Big)\mu(d\xi)\\
&&+L\int_{B_{\delta}(0)}\Big(\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z+j(\hat z,\xi))-\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)-D_z\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\cdot j(\hat z, \xi)\Big)\mu(d\xi)
\end{eqnarray*}
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&+\int_{B_\delta^c(0)}\Big[u(\hat x+j(\hat x,\xi))-u(\hat x)+u(\hat y+j(\hat y,\xi))-u(\hat y)-2\big(u(\hat z+j(\hat z,\xi))-u(\hat z)\big)\\
&&-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)\big(LD_x\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)+2\eta\hat x\big)\cdot j(\hat x,\xi)-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)LD_y\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\cdot j(\hat y,\xi)\\
&&-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)LD_z\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\cdot j(\hat z,\xi)\Big]\mu(d\xi).
\end{eqnarray*}
Thus, by ($\ref{eq4.5}$) and ($\ref{eq4.6}$), we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&l_{\hat x}+l_{\hat y}-2l_{\hat z}\\
&\leq&L\int_{B_\delta(0)}\Big[\sup_{0\leq t\leq 1}\frac{1}{\phi(\hat x+tj(\hat x,\xi),\hat y,\hat z)}\Big(\bar\theta(2\bar\theta-1)|\hat x-\hat y+tj(\hat x,\xi)|^{2\bar\theta-2}+1\Big)|j(\hat x,\xi)|^2\Big]\mu(d\xi)\\
&&+L\int_{B_\delta(0)}\Big[\sup_{0\leq t\leq 1}\frac{1}{\phi(\hat x,\hat y+tj(\hat y,\xi),\hat z)}\Big(\bar\theta(2\bar\theta-1)|\hat x-\hat y-tj(\hat y,\xi)|^{2\bar\theta-2}+1\Big)|j(\hat y,\xi)|^2\Big]\mu(d\xi)\\
&&+4L\int_{B_\delta(0)}\Big(\sup_{0\leq t\leq 1}\frac{1}{\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z+tj(\hat z,\xi))}|j(\hat z,\xi)|^2\Big)\mu(d\xi)+\eta\int_{B_\delta(0)}|j(\hat x,\xi)|^2\mu(d\xi)\\
&&+\int_{B_\delta^c(0)}\Big[u(\hat x+j(\hat x,\xi))-u(\hat x)+u(\hat y+j(\hat y,\xi))-u(\hat y)-2\big(u(\hat z+j(\hat z,\xi))-u(\hat z)\big)\\
&&-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)L\Big(D_x\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),D_y\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),D_z\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\Big)\cdot \Big(j(\hat x,\xi),j(\hat y,\xi),j(\hat z,\xi)\Big)\\
&&-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)2\eta\hat x\cdot j(\hat x,\xi)\Big]\mu(d\xi).
\end{eqnarray*}
Since $\Phi(x,y,z)$ attains a global maximum at ($\hat x,\hat y,\hat z$), we have, for any $\xi\in\mathbb R^n$,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq4.7}
&&u(\hat x+j(\hat x,\xi))-u(\hat x)+u(\hat y+j(\hat y,\xi))-u(\hat y)-2\big(u(\hat z+j(\hat z,\xi))-u(\hat z)\big)\nonumber\\
&\leq&L\phi(\hat x+j(\hat x,\xi),\hat y+j(\hat y,\xi),\hat z+j(\hat z,\xi))-L\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)+\eta|\hat x+j(\hat x,\xi)|^2-\eta|\hat x|^2.
\end{eqnarray}
By ($\ref{eq4.7}$), we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq::::4.9}
&&l_{\hat x}+l_{\hat y}-2l_{\hat z}\nonumber\\
&\leq&L\int_{B_\delta(0)}\Big[\sup_{0\leq t\leq 1}\frac{1}{\phi(\hat x+tj(\hat x,\xi),\hat y,\hat z)}\Big(\bar\theta(2\bar\theta-1)|\hat x-\hat y+tj(\hat x,\xi)|^{2\bar\theta-2}+1\Big)|j(\hat x,\xi)|^2\Big]\mu(d\xi)\nonumber\\
&&+L\int_{B_\delta(0)}\Big[\sup_{0\leq t\leq 1}\frac{1}{\phi(\hat x,\hat y+tj(\hat y,\xi),\hat z)}\Big(\bar\theta(2\bar\theta-1)|\hat x-\hat y-tj(\hat y,\xi)|^{2\bar\theta-2}+1\Big)|j(\hat y,\xi)|^2\Big]\mu(d\xi)\nonumber\\
&&+4L\int_{B_\delta(0)}\Big(\sup_{0\leq t\leq 1}\frac{1}{\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z+tj(\hat z,\xi))}|j(\hat z,\xi)|^2\Big)\mu(d\xi)\nonumber\\
&&+\eta\int_{\mathbb R^n}\Big(|\hat x+j(\hat x,\xi)|^2-|\hat x|^2-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)2\hat x\cdot j(\hat x,\xi)\Big)\mu(d\xi)\nonumber\\
&&+L\int_{B_\delta^c(0)}\Big[\phi(\hat x+j(\hat x,\xi),\hat y+j(\hat y,\xi),\hat z+j(\hat z,\xi))-\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\nonumber\\
&&-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)\Big(D_x\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),D_y\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),D_z\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\Big)\cdot \Big(j(\hat x,\xi),j(\hat y,\xi),j(\hat z,\xi)\Big)\Big]\mu(d\xi).
\end{eqnarray}
Similarly as in the proof of Theorem \ref{th2.1}, we have $\eta|\hat x|^2\to 0$ as $\eta\to 0$ and
\begin{equation*}
\epsilon_1\leq \phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\leq \epsilon_1^{-1},
\end{equation*}
where $\epsilon_1$ is a positive constant independent of $\eta$. Letting $\delta\rightarrow 0$ and then letting $\eta\rightarrow 0$ in ($\ref{eq:4.5}$), we have, by ($\ref{eq:1.5}$), ($\ref{eq::::4.9}$) and ($\bar{H}2$),
\begin{eqnarray*}
\gamma &L&\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\leq \Lambda L\int_{\mathbb R^n}\Big[\phi(\hat x+j(\hat x,\xi),\hat y+j(\hat y,\xi),\hat z+j(\hat z,\xi))-\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\\
&&-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)\Big(D_x\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),D_y\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),D_z\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\Big)\cdot \Big(j(\hat x,\xi),j(\hat y,\xi),j(\hat z,\xi)\Big)\Big]\mu(d\xi)\\
&&+C_3(1+L)\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z).
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore, by Lemma $\ref{le..4.2}$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\gamma&\leq&\Lambda\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)^{-1}\int_{\mathbb R^n}\Big[\phi(\hat x+j(\hat x,\xi),\hat y+j(\hat y,\xi),\hat z+j(\hat z,\xi))-\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\nonumber\\
&&-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)\Big(D_x\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),D_y\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),D_z\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\Big)\cdot \Big(j(\hat x,\xi),j(\hat y,\xi),j(\hat z,\xi)\Big)\Big]\mu(d\xi)\nonumber\\
&&+C_3(1+\frac{1}{L})\nonumber\\
&\leq&\Lambda M_2+C_3(1+\frac{1}{L})<+\infty,\label{eq,,4.11}
\end{eqnarray}
where $M_2$ is defined in ($\ref{eq,4.3}$). This yields a contradiction, if $\gamma>\Lambda M_2+C_3$, for sufficiently large $L$. Therefore, $u$ is $\bar\theta$-semiconcave in $\mathbb R^n$.
\end{proof}
Let us consider the semiconcavity of viscosity solutions of the Bellman equation ($\ref{eq1.7}$). The following estimates will be frequently used in the proof of the semiconcavity.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemm4.2}
(a) If $f$ is $\bar\theta$-semiconvex with constant $C$ in $\mathbb R^n$ and $[f]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}<+\infty$, then
\begin{equation*}
2f(z)-f(x)-f(y)\leq C|x-y|^{\bar\theta}+[f]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}|x+y-2z|.
\end{equation*}
Moreover, if $[f]_{1,\bar\theta-1;\mathbb R^n}<+\infty$, then
\begin{equation*}
|f(x)+f(y)-2f(z)|\leq \frac{\sqrt{n}}{2}[f]_{1,\bar\theta-1;\mathbb R^n}|x-y|^{\bar\theta}+[f]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}|x+y-2z|.
\end{equation*}
(b) If $f\in C^{0,1}(\bar{\mathbb R}^n)$, then
\begin{equation*}
|f(x)-f(z)|\leq2\max\{|f|_{0;\mathbb R^n},[f]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}\}\phi(x,y,z)^{\frac{1}{2}},
\end{equation*}
where $\phi(x,y,z)$ is defined in ($\bar{H}1$).
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
(a) Since $f$ is $\bar\theta$-semiconvex with constant $C$ in $\mathbb R^n$ and $[f]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}<+\infty$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
2f(z)-f(x)-f(y)&=&2f(\frac{x+y}{2})-f(x)-f(y)+\Big(2f(z)-2f(\frac{x+y}{2})\Big)\\
&\leq& C|x-y|^{\bar\theta}+[f]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}| x+y-2 z|.
\end{eqnarray*}
Moreover, if $[f]_{1,\bar\theta-1;\mathbb R^n}<+\infty$, then $f$ is $\bar\theta$-semiconvex and $\bar\theta$-semiconcave with a constant $\frac{\sqrt{n}}{2}[f]_{1,\bar\theta-1;\mathbb R^n}$ in $\mathbb R^n$. Thus, the result follows from the above estimate.\\
(b) Since $g\in C^{0,1}(\bar{\mathbb R}^n)$, then
\begin{eqnarray*}
|g(x)-g(z)|&\leq&|g(x)-g(\frac{x+y}{2})|+|g(\frac{x+y}{2})-g(z)|\\
&\leq&[g]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}|\frac{x-y}{2}|+\Big(2|g|_{0;\mathbb R^n}[g]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}\frac{|x+y-2z|}{2}\Big)^{\frac{1}{2}}\\
&\leq&2\max\{|g|_{0;\mathbb R^n},[g]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}\}\phi(x,y,z)^{\frac{1}{2}}.
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{th4.2}
Suppose that $c_{\alpha}\geq\gamma$ in $\mathbb R^n$ uniformly in $\alpha\in\mathcal{A}$. There exist a positive constant $C$ and $1<\bar\theta\leq 2$ such that ($\ref{eq::3.8}$) holds and
\begin{equation}\label{eq::4.8}
\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}\max\{[\sigma_{\alpha}]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n},[\sigma_{\alpha}]_{1,\bar\theta-1;\mathbb R^n},[b_{\alpha}]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n},[b_{\alpha}]_{1,\bar\theta-1,\mathbb R^n},[f_{\alpha}]_{0,1,\mathbb R^n}\}<+\infty.
\end{equation}
Suppose that the L\'evy measure $\mu$ satisfies ($\ref{eq:1.5}$), the family $\{j_{\alpha}(x,\xi)\}$ satisfies assumption ($\bar{H}2$) uniformly in $\alpha\in \mathcal A$, and $c_{\alpha}\in C^{1,\bar\theta-1}(\bar{\mathbb R}^n)$ and $\{f_\alpha\}$ is uniformly $\bar\theta$-semiconvex with constant $C_5$, uniformly in $\alpha\in\mathcal{A}$. Then, if $u\in C^{0,1}(\bar{\mathbb R}^n)$ is a viscosity solution of ($\ref{eq1.7}$) and $\gamma>N_2$ where
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq,4.13}
N_2:&=&\sup_{\phi(x,y,z)\not=0}\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}\phi(x,y,z)^{-2}\Big\{\bar\theta(2\bar\theta-1)|x-y|^{2\bar\theta-2}Tr\Big[\big(\sigma_{\alpha}(x)-\sigma_{\alpha}(y)\big)\big(\sigma_{\alpha}(x)-\sigma_{\alpha}(y)\big)^T\Big]\nonumber\\
&&+Tr\Big[\big(\sigma_{\alpha}(x)+\sigma_{\alpha}(y)-2\sigma_{\alpha}(z)\big)\big(\sigma_{\alpha}(x)+\sigma_{\alpha}(y)-2\sigma_{\alpha}(z)\big)^T\Big]\nonumber\\
&&+\bar\theta|x-y|^{2\bar\theta-2}(x-y)\cdot\big(b_{\alpha}(y)-b_{\alpha}(x)\big)+(x+y-2z)\cdot\big(2b_{\alpha}(z)-b_{\alpha}(x)-b_{\alpha}(y)\big)\nonumber\\
&&+\phi(x,y,z)\int_{\mathbb R^n}\Big[\phi\big(x+j_\alpha(x,\xi),y+j_\alpha(y,\xi),z+j_\alpha(z,\xi)\big)-\phi(x,y,z)\nonumber\\
&&-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)\Big(D_x\phi(x,y,z),D_y\phi(x,y,z),D_z\phi(x,y,z)\Big)\cdot \Big(j_\alpha(x,\xi),j_\alpha(y,\xi),j_\alpha(z,\xi)\Big)\Big]\mu(d\xi)\Big\}\nonumber\\
&<&+\infty,
\end{eqnarray}
then $u$ is $\bar\theta$-semiconcave in $\mathbb R^n$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
At the beginning of the proof, we will show that the constant $N_2$ has an upper bound. By ($\ref{eq::4.8}$), Lemma \ref{lemm4.2} and the estimates in ($\ref{eq,,4.12}$), we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
N_2&\leq&\bar\theta(2\bar\theta-1)\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}[\sigma_\alpha]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}^2+\big(\frac{\sqrt{n}}{2}\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}[\sigma_\alpha]_{1,\bar\theta-1;\mathbb R^n}+\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}[\sigma_\alpha]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}\big)^2+\bar\theta\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}[b_\alpha]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}\\
&&+\big(\frac{\sqrt{n}}{2}\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}[b_\alpha]_{1,\bar\theta-1;\mathbb R^n}+\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}[b_\alpha]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}\big)+2\int_{B_{\delta_2}(0)}\Big[2+(\frac{5}{4})^{2\bar\theta-2}\bar\theta(2\bar\theta-1)\Big]\rho(\xi)^2\mu(d\xi)\\
&&+\int_{B_{\delta_2}^c(0)}\Big\{\sqrt{2}\Big[(1+\rho(\xi))^{\bar \theta}+\rho(\xi)\Big]-1\Big\}\mu(d\xi)+(\bar \theta+\frac{3}{2})\int_{B_1(0)\cap B_{\delta_2}^c(0)}\rho(\xi)\mu(d\xi)<+\infty,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\delta_2$ was chosen in Lemma $\ref{le..4.2}$.
Then we want to prove that, for any $\eta>0$, $\Phi(x,y,z)=u(x)+u(y)-2u(z)-\psi(x,y,z)\leq 0$ for all $x,y,z\in\mathbb R^n$ and some fixed sufficiently large $L$, where $\psi(x,y,z)$ is given in Theorem $\ref{th3.1}$. Otherwise, there exists a positive constant $\eta_0$ such that $\sup_{x,y,z\in\mathbb R^n}\Phi(x,y,z)>0$ if $0<\eta<\eta_0$. By boundedness of $u$, there is a point ($\hat x,\hat y,\hat z$) such that $\Phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)=\sup_{x,y,z\in\mathbb R^n}\Phi(x,y,z)>0$. Therefore, we have ($\ref{eq4.2}$). By Remark $\ref{re4.1}$, since $u\in BUC(\mathbb R^n)$ is a viscosity solution of ($\ref{eq1.7}$), we have, for any $0<\delta<1$ and $\epsilon_0>0$, there are $X,Y,Z\in \mathbb S^n$ satisfying ($\ref{eq:4.4}$) such that
\begin{equation*}
\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}\big\{-Tr\big(\sigma_{\alpha}(\hat x)\sigma_{\alpha}^T(\hat x)X\big)-l_{\hat x,\alpha}+b_\alpha(\hat x)\cdot D_x\psi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)+c_{\alpha}(\hat x)u(\hat x)+f_{\alpha}(\hat x)\big\}\leq 0,
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}\big\{-Tr\big(\sigma_{\alpha}(\hat y)\sigma_{\alpha}^T(\hat y)Y\big)-l_{\hat y,\alpha}+b_\alpha(\hat y)\cdot D_y\psi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)+c_{\alpha}(\hat y)u(\hat y)+f_{\alpha}(\hat y)\big\}\leq 0,
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}\big\{-Tr\big(\sigma_{\alpha}(\hat z)\sigma_{\alpha}^T(\hat z)\frac{Z}{2}\big)-l_{\hat z,\alpha}-b_\alpha(\hat z)\cdot\frac{D_z\psi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)}{2}+c_{\alpha}(\hat z)u(\hat z)+f_{\alpha}(\hat z)\big\}\geq 0,
\end{equation*}
where
\begin{equation*}
l_{\hat x,\alpha}=I^{1,\delta}[\hat x,D_x\psi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),\psi(\cdot,\hat y,\hat z)]+I^{2,\delta}[\hat x,D_x\psi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),u(\cdot)],
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
l_{\hat y,\alpha}=I^{1,\delta}[\hat y,D_y\psi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),\psi(\hat x,\cdot,\hat z)]+I^{2,\delta}[\hat y,D_y\psi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),u(\cdot)],
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
l_{\hat z,\alpha}=I^{1,\delta}[\hat z,-\frac{D_z\psi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)}{2},-\frac{\psi(\hat x,\hat y,\cdot)}{2}]+I^{2,\delta}[\hat z,-\frac{D_z\psi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)}{2},u(\cdot)].
\end{equation*}
Thus, for any $\epsilon>0$, there exists $\alpha_\epsilon\in\mathcal{A}$ such that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq::4.9}
c_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat x)u(\hat x)+c_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat y)u(\hat y)-2c_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat z)u(\hat z)\leq L_{\alpha_\epsilon}+N_{\alpha_\epsilon}+\epsilon,
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray*}
L_{\alpha_\epsilon}&=&Tr\Big(\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat x)\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}^T(\hat x)X+\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat y)\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}^T(\hat y)Y-\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat z)\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}^T(\hat z)Z\Big)\\
&&-\Big(b_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat x)\cdot D_x\psi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)+b_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat y)\cdot D_y\psi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)+b_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat z)\cdot D_z\psi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\Big)\\
&&+2f_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat z)-f_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat y)-f_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat x)
\end{eqnarray*}
and
\begin{equation*}
N_{\alpha_\epsilon}=l_{\hat x,\alpha_\epsilon}+l_{\hat y,\alpha_\epsilon}-2l_{\hat z,\alpha_\epsilon}.
\end{equation*}
Since $c_\alpha\in C^{1,\bar{\theta}-1}(\bar{\mathbb R}^n)$ uniformly in $\alpha\in\mathcal{A}$ and $u\in C^{0,1}(\bar{\mathbb R}^n)$, using Lemma \ref{lemm4.2}, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq::::4.13}
&&c_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat x)u(\hat x)+c_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat y)u(\hat y)-2c_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat z)u(\hat z)\nonumber\\
&=&c_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat z)\big(u(\hat x)+u(\hat y)-2u(\hat z)\big)+\big(c_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat x)+c_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat y)-2c_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat z)\big)u(\hat z)\nonumber\\
&&+\big(c_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat x)-c_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat z)\big)\big(u(\hat x)-u(\hat z)\big)+\big(c_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat y)-c_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat z)\big)\big(u(\hat y)-u(\hat z)\big)\nonumber\\
&\geq&\gamma\big(u(\hat x)+u(\hat y)-2u(\hat z)\big)-|u|_{0;\mathbb R^n}\Big(\frac{\sqrt{n}}{2}\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}[c_\alpha]_{1,\bar\theta-1;\mathbb R^n}|\hat x-\hat y|^{\bar\theta}+\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}[c_\alpha]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}|\hat x+\hat y-2\hat z|\Big)\nonumber\\
&&-8\max\{|u|_{0;\mathbb R^n},[u]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}\}\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}\max\{|c_\alpha|_{0;\mathbb R^n},[c_\alpha]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}\}\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z).
\end{eqnarray}
By ($\ref{eq::3.8}$), ($\ref{eq:4.4}$) and ($\ref{eq::4.8}$), we see that
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&Tr\Big(\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat x)\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}^T(\hat x)X+\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat y)\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}^T(\hat y)Y-\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat z)\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}^T(\hat z)Z\Big)\\
&\leq&\frac{(1+\epsilon_0)L}{\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)}\Big\{\bar\theta(2\bar\theta-1)|\hat x-\hat y|^{2\bar\theta-2}Tr\Big[\big(\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat x)-\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat y)\big)\big(\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat x)-\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat y)\big)^T\Big]\\
&&+Tr\Big[\big(\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat x)+\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat y)-2\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat z)\big)\big(\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat x)+\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat y)-2\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat z)\big)^T\Big]\Big\}\\
&&+2\eta\big(C+\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}[\sigma_\alpha]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}|\hat x|\big)^2.
\end{eqnarray*}
Thus, we can estimate the local term $L_{\alpha_\epsilon}$ easily. By ($\ref{eq::3.8}$), ($\ref{eq4.5}$), ($\ref{eq::4.8}$), uniform $\bar\theta$-semiconvexity of $f_{\alpha}$ with constant $C_5$ and Lemma \ref{lemm4.2}, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq::::4.14}
L_{\alpha_\epsilon}&\leq&\frac{(1+\epsilon_0)L}{\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)}\Big\{\bar\theta(2\bar\theta-1)|\hat x-\hat y|^{2\bar\theta-2}Tr\Big[\big(\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat x)-\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat y)\big)\big(\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat x)-\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat y)\big)^T\Big]\nonumber\\
&&+Tr\Big[\big(\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat x)+\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat y)-2\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat z)\big)\big(\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat x)+\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat y)-2\sigma_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat z)\big)^T\Big]\Big\}\nonumber\\
&&+2\eta\big(C+\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}[\sigma_\alpha]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}|\hat x|\big)^2+\frac{\bar\theta L|\hat x-\hat y|^{2\bar\theta-2}}{\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)}(\hat x-\hat y)\cdot\big(b_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat y)-b_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat x)\big)\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{L}{\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)}(\hat x+\hat y-2\hat z)\cdot\big(2b_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat z)-b_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat x)-b_{\alpha_\epsilon}(\hat y)\big)+2\eta\big(C|\hat x|+\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}[b_\alpha]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}|\hat x|^2\big)\nonumber\\
&&+C_5|\hat x-\hat y|^{\bar\theta}+\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}[f_\alpha]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}|\hat x+\hat y-2\hat z|.
\end{eqnarray}
Similarly as in the proof of Theorem \ref{th2.1}, we have $\eta|\hat x|^2\to 0$ as $\eta\to 0$ and
\begin{equation*}
\epsilon_1\leq \phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\leq \epsilon_1^{-1},
\end{equation*}
where $\epsilon_1$ is a positive constant independent of $\eta$. Letting $\delta\to 0$, $\eta\to 0$, $\epsilon\to 0$ and $\epsilon_0\to 0$ in ($\ref{eq::4.9}$), we have, by ($\ref{eq4.2}$), ($\ref{eq::::4.13}$), ($\ref{eq::::4.14}$) and the same estimates on the nonlocal term $N_{\alpha_\epsilon}$ as Theorem $\ref{th3.1}$
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&\gamma L\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\\
&\leq&L\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)^{-1}\Big\{\bar\theta(2\bar\theta-1)|\hat x-\hat y|^{2\bar\theta-2}Tr\Big[\big(\sigma_{\alpha}(\hat x)-\sigma_{\alpha}(\hat y)\big)\big(\sigma_{\alpha}(\hat x)-\sigma_{\alpha}(\hat y)\big)^T\Big]\nonumber\\
&&+Tr\Big[\big(\sigma_{\alpha}(\hat x)+\sigma_{\alpha}(\hat y)-2\sigma_{\alpha}(\hat z)\big)\big(\sigma_{\alpha}(\hat x)+\sigma_{\alpha}(\hat y)-2\sigma_{\alpha}(\hat z)\big)^T\Big]\\
&&+\bar\theta|\hat x-\hat y|^{2\bar\theta-2}(\hat x-\hat y)\cdot\big(b_{\alpha}(\hat y)-b_{\alpha}(\hat x)\big)+(\hat x+\hat y-2\hat z)\cdot\big(2b_{\alpha}(\hat z)-b_{\alpha}(\hat x)-b_{\alpha}(\hat y)\big)\\
&&+\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\int_{\mathbb R^n}\Big[\phi\big(\hat x+j_\alpha(\hat x,\xi),\hat y+j_\alpha(\hat y,\xi),\hat z+j_\alpha(\hat z,\xi)\big)-\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\\
&&-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)\Big(D_x\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),D_y\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),D_z\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\Big)\cdot \Big(j_\alpha(\hat x,\xi),j_\alpha(\hat y,\xi),j_\alpha(\hat z,\xi)\Big)\Big]\mu(d\xi)\Big\}\\
&&+C_5|\hat x-\hat y|^{\bar\theta}+\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}[f_\alpha]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}|\hat x+\hat y-2\hat z|\\
&&+|u|_{0;\mathbb R^n}\Big(\frac{\sqrt{n}}{2}\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}[c_\alpha]_{1,\bar\theta-1;\mathbb R^n}|\hat x-\hat y|^{\bar\theta}+\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}[c_\alpha]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}|\hat x+\hat y-2\hat z|\Big)\nonumber\\
&&+8\max\{|u|_{0;\mathbb R^n},[u]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}\}\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}\max\{|c_\alpha|_{0;\mathbb R^n},[c_\alpha]_{0,1;\mathbb R^n}\}\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z).
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore,
\begin{eqnarray}
\gamma&\leq&\sup_{\alpha\in\mathcal{A}}\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)^{-2}\Big\{\bar\theta(2\bar\theta-1)|\hat x-\hat y|^{2\bar\theta-2}Tr\Big[\big(\sigma_{\alpha}(\hat x)-\sigma_{\alpha}(\hat y)\big)\big(\sigma_{\alpha}(\hat x)-\sigma_{\alpha}(\hat y)\big)^T\Big]\nonumber\\
&&+Tr\Big[\big(\sigma_{\alpha}(\hat x)+\sigma_{\alpha}(\hat y)-2\sigma_{\alpha}(\hat z)\big)\big(\sigma_{\alpha}(\hat x)+\sigma_{\alpha}(\hat y)-2\sigma_{\alpha}(\hat z)\big)^T\Big]\nonumber\\
&&+\bar\theta|\hat x-\hat y|^{2\bar\theta-2}(\hat x-\hat y)\cdot\big(b_{\alpha}(\hat y)-b_{\alpha}(\hat x)\big)+(\hat x+\hat y-2\hat z)\cdot\big(2b_{\alpha}(\hat z)-b_{\alpha}(\hat x)-b_{\alpha}(\hat y)\big)\nonumber\\
&&+\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\int_{\mathbb R^n}\Big[\phi\big(\hat x+j_\alpha(\hat x,\xi),\hat y+j_\alpha(\hat y,\xi),\hat z+j_\alpha(\hat z,\xi)\big)-\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\nonumber\\
&&-\mathbbm{1}_{B_1(0)}(\xi)\Big(D_x\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),D_y\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z),D_z\phi(\hat x,\hat y,\hat z)\Big)\cdot \Big(j_\alpha(\hat x,\xi),j_\alpha(\hat y,\xi),j_\alpha(\hat z,\xi)\Big)\Big]\mu(d\xi)\Big\}\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{C_6}{L}\leq N_2+\frac{C_6}{L},\label{eq,,4.19}
\end{eqnarray}
where $N_2$ is defined in ($\ref{eq,4.13}$) and $C_6$ is a positive constant. Hence, if $\gamma>N_2$, we can find a sufficiently large $L$ such that we have a contradiction in ($\ref{eq,,4.19}$). Therefore, $u$ is $\bar\theta$-semiconcave in $\mathbb R^n$.
\end{proof}
\textbf{Acknowledgement.} I would like to thank my advisor Prof. Andrzej \Swiech\, for suggesting the problem and for all the useful discussions and encouragement.
|
\section{Introduction}
Convolutional networks (convnets) have become increasingly important
to artificial intelligence in recent years,
as reviewed by~\citet{lecun-bengio-hinton}.
The present paper presents a theoretical argument for complex-valued convnets
and their remarkable performance; complex-valued convnets turn out to calculate
``data-driven multiscale windowed spectra'' characterizing
certain stochastic processes common in the modeling
of time series (such as audio) and natural images
(including patterns and textures).
We motivate the construction of such multiscale spectra
via ``local averages of multiwavelet absolute values''
or, more generally, ``nonlinear multiwavelet packets.''
A textbook treatment of all concepts and terms used above and below
is given by~\citet{mallat2008}.
Further information is available in the original work of~\citet{daubechies},
\citet{meyer}, \citet{coifman-meyer-quake-wickerhauser},
\citet{coifman-donoho}, \citet{simoncelli-freeman}, \citet{meyer-coifman},
\citet{lecun-bottou-bengio-haffner},
\citet{donoho-mallat-von_sachs-samuelides},
\citet{srivastava-lee-simoncelli-zhu}, \citet{rabiner-schafer},
and~\citet{mallat2008}, for example.
The work of~\citet{haensch-hellwich}, \citet{mallat2010},
\citet{poggio-mutch-leibo-rosasco-tacchetti},
\citet{bruna-mallat}, \citet{bruna-mallat-bacry-muzy},
and~\citet{chintala-ranzato-szlam-tian-tygert-zaremba}
also develops complex-valued convnets, providing copious applications
and numerical experiments.
A related, more sophisticated connection (to renormalization group theory)
is given by~\citet{mehta-schwab}.
Our exposition relies on nothing but the basic signal processing
treated by~\citet{mallat2008}. Via the connections discussed below,
the rich, rigorous mathematical analysis surveyed by~\citet{daubechies},
\citet{meyer}, \citet{mallat2008}, and others applies directly
to complex-valued convnets.
Citing such connections, the present paper's anonymous reviews suggested
viewing complex-valued convnets as a kind of baseline architecture for much
of the deep learning reviewed by~\citet{lecun-bengio-hinton}.
Section~\ref{numerical} presents numerical analyses corroborating
this viewpoint.
Having such a theoretical basis for deep learning could help in paring down the
combinatorial explosion of possibilities for future developments, while
probably also illuminating further possibilities.
The present paper proceeds as follows:
Section~\ref{stationary} reviews stationary stochastic processes
and their spectra.
Section~\ref{localstat} reviews locally stationary stochastic processes
and the connection of their spectra to stages in a complex-valued convnet.
Section~\ref{multiscale} introduces multiscale (multiple stages in a convnet).
Section~\ref{fitting} describes the fitting/learning/training that
the connection to convnets facilitates.
Section~\ref{numerical} briefly compares on a common benchmark the accuracies
for the complex-valued convnets
of~\citet{chintala-ranzato-szlam-tian-tygert-zaremba} to those
for the scattering transforms of~\citet{mallat2010} and
for the standard real-valued convnets of~\citet{krizhevsky-sutskever-hinton}.
Section~\ref{conclusion} generalizes and summarizes
the aforementioned sections.
\section{Stationary stochastic processes}
\label{stationary}
For simplicity, we first limit consideration to the special case
of a doubly infinite sequence of nonnegative random variables $X_k$,
where $k$ ranges over the integers.
This input data will be the result of convolving an unmeasured
independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.)\ sequence
$Z_k$, where $k$ ranges over the integers, with an unknown sequence
of real numbers $f_k$, where $k$ ranges over the integers
(this latter sequence is known as a ``filter,''
whereas the i.i.d.\ sequence is known as ``white noise''):
\begin{equation}
\label{colored}
X_j = \sum_{k=-\infty}^{\infty} f_{j-k} \, Z_k
\end{equation}
for any integer $j$.
Such a sequence $X_k$, with $k$ ranging over the integers,
is a (strictly) ``stationary stochastic process.''
The terminology ``strictly stationary'' refers to the fact that lagging
or shifting the process preserves the probability distribution of the process:
indeed, for any integer $l$, the shift $Y_k = X_{k-l}$, where $k$ ranges
over the integers, satisfies
\begin{equation}
Y_j = \sum_{k=-\infty}^{\infty} f_{j-k} \, Z'_k
\end{equation}
for any integer $j$, where $Z'_k = Z_{k-l}$;
the sequence $Z'_k$, with $k$ ranging over the integers, is i.i.d.\
with the same distribution as $Z_k$, where $k$ ranges over the integers.
The associated ``absolute spectrum'' is
\begin{equation}
\label{absspec}
\tilde{X}(\omega) = \lim_{n \to \infty} {\bf E}\left|
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2n+1}} \sum_{k=-n}^n e^{-i k \omega } X_k \right|
\end{equation}
for any real number $\omega$ (usually we consider not just any, but instead
restrict consideration to a sequence running from $0$ to about $2\pi$).
Please note that lagging or shifting the process changes neither
the probability distribution of the process (since the process is stationary)
nor the absolute spectrum:
for any integer $l$, the shift $Y_k = X_{k-l}$
yields $\tilde{Y}(\omega) = \tilde{X}(\omega)$ for any real number $\omega$,
due to the absolute value in equation~\ref{absspec}.
Similarly, the associated ``power spectrum'' is
\begin{equation}
\label{powerspec}
\doubletilde{X}(\omega) = \lim_{n \to \infty} {\bf E}\left(\left|
\frac{1}{\sqrt{2n+1}} \sum_{k=-n}^n e^{-i k \omega } X_k \right|^2\right)
\end{equation}
for any real number $\omega$; there is an extra squaring under the expectation
in equation~\ref{powerspec} compared to equation~\ref{absspec}.
Again, lagging or shifting the process changes neither
the probability distribution of the process nor the power spectrum:
for any integer $l$, the shift $Y_k = X_{k-l}$
yields $\doubletilde{Y}(\omega) = \doubletilde{X}(\omega)$
for any real number $\omega$, due to the absolute value
in equation~\ref{powerspec}.
The remainder of the present paper focuses on the absolute spectrum;
most of the discussion applies to the power spectrum, too.
\begin{remark}
The absolute spectrum can be more robust than the power spectrum,
in the same sense that the mean absolute deviation can be more robust
than the variance or standard deviation. The power spectrum is more fundamental
in a certain sense, yet the absolute spectrum may be preferable
for applications to machine learning. We conjecture that both can work
about the same. We focus on the absolute spectrum to simplify the exposition.
\end{remark}
\section{Locally stationary stochastic processes}
\label{localstat}
In practice, the input data is seldom strictly stationary,
but usually only locally stationary, that is, equation~\ref{colored} becomes
\begin{equation}
\label{slow}
X_j = \sum_{k=-\infty}^{\infty} f^{(j)}_{j-k} \, Z_k
\end{equation}
for any integer $j$, where $f^{(j)}_k$ changes much more slowly
when changing $j$ than when changing $k$.
To accommodate such data, we introduce windowed spectra;
for any even nonnegative-valued sequence $g_k$,
with $k$ ranging through the integers
--- this sequence could be samples of a Gaussian or any other window suitable
for Gabor analysis (the data itself will determine $g$ during training) ---
we consider
\begin{equation}
\label{localized}
\tilde{X}_l(\omega) = \frac{1}{2n+1} \sum_{j=-n+l}^{n+l}
\left| \frac{1}{\sqrt{2n+1}}
\sum_{k=-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-i k \omega } g_{k-j} X_k \right|
\end{equation}
for any integer $l$, with some positive integer $n$.
The extra summation in equation~\ref{localized} averages away noise
and is a kind of approximation to the expected value in equation~\ref{absspec}.
Usually $g_k$ is fairly close to $1$ for $k = -n$, $-n+1$, \dots, $n-1$, $n$,
and $g_k$ is fairly close to $0$ for $|k| > n$, making a reasonably smooth
transition between 0 and 1.
The most important difference between equation~\ref{absspec}
and equation~\ref{localized} is the absence of a limit in the latter
(hence the terminology, ``local'' spectrum).
Due to the absolute value, equation~\ref{localized} is equivalent to
\begin{equation}
\label{conv}
\tilde{X}_l(\omega) = \frac{1}{2n+1} \sum_{j=-n+l}^{n+l}
\left| \frac{1}{\sqrt{2n+1}}
\sum_{k=-\infty}^{\infty} g_{j-k}(\omega) \, X_k \right|
\end{equation}
for any {\it even} nonnegative-valued sequence $g_k$,
with $k$ ranging through the integers, where
\begin{equation}
g_k(\omega) = e^{i k \omega} g_k
\end{equation}
for any integer $k$ (``even'' means that $g_{-k} = g_k$ for every integer $k$).
Please note that the right-hand side of equation~\ref{conv} is just
a convolution followed by the absolute value followed by local averaging;
this will facilitate fitting/learning/training using data ---
enabling a ``data-driven'' approach --- in Section~\ref{fitting}.
\section{Multiscale}
\label{multiscale}
In most cases, the ideal choices of $n$ and width of the window
in equation~\ref{conv}, that is, the ideal number of indices for which $g_k$ is
substantially nonzero, are far from obvious. Often, in fact, multiple widths
are relevant (say, wider for lower-frequency variations than
for higher frequency).
Not knowing the ideal a priori, we use multiple windows on multiple scales.
An especially efficient multiscale implementation processes the results
of the lowest-frequency channels recursively.
For the lowest frequency, $\omega = 0$,
and when $X_k$ is nonnegative for every integer $k$
(for example, the input $X_k$ could be the $\tilde{X}_k$
arising from previous processing), equation~\ref{conv} simplifies to
\begin{equation}
\label{convolution}
\tilde{X}_l(0) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2n+1}} \sum_{k=-\infty}^{\infty} h_{l-k} X_k
\end{equation}
for any integer $l$, where
\begin{equation}
h_l = \frac{1}{2n+1} \sum_{j=-n+l}^{n+l} g_j
\end{equation}
for any integer $l$,
and again $g_j$, with $j$ ranging through the integers,
is an even sequence of nonnegative real numbers
(``even'' means that $g_{-j} = g_j$ for every integer $j$).
The result of equation~\ref{convolution} is simply a convolution
with the input sequence, and further convolutions --- say via recursive
processing of the form in equation~\ref{conv} --- can undo this convolution
and set the effective window however desired in later stages.
The deconvolution and subsequent convolution with the windowed exponential
of a later stage is numerically stable if the later window is wider
than the preceding.
In particular, recursively processing the zero-frequency channels
in this way can implement a ``wavelet transform'' (if each recursive stage
considers only two values for $\omega$, one zero and one nonzero
--- see Figure~\ref{wavefig})
or a ``multiwavelet transform'' (if each recursive stage considers
multiple values for $\omega$, with one of the values being zero
--- see Figure~\ref{multifig}).
For multidimensional signals, multiwavelets detect local directionality
beyond what wavelets provide.
If we recursively process the higher-frequency channels, too,
then we obtain a ``nonlinear wavelet packet transform'' or
a ``nonlinear multiwavelet packet transform'' --- a kind of nonlinear
iterated filter bank --- see Figure~\ref{packetfig}.
Linearly recombining the different frequency channels may help realize
local rotation-invariance and other potentially desirable properties
(indeed, \citet{mallat2010} did this for rotations and other transformations)
--- including generating harmonics when processing audio signals.
The transforms just discussed are undecimated,
but interleaving appropriate decimation or subsampling applied to the sequences
yields the usual decimated transforms.
\begin{remark}
In practice, decimation or subsampling is important
to avoid overfitting in the data-driven approach discussed below,
by limiting the number of degrees of freedom appropriately.
Even when the signal is not a strictly stationary stochastic process,
the averaging in equation~\ref{conv} --- the leftmost summation ---
performs the ``cycle spinning'' of~\citet{coifman-donoho} to avoid artifacts
that would otherwise arise due to windows' partitioning after subsampling.
The averaging reduces the variance; wider averaging would further reduce
the variance.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
Sequences that are finite rather than doubly infinite provide only enough
information for estimating a smoothed version of the spectrum. Alternatively,
a finite amount of data provides information for estimating multiscale
windowed spectra yielding time-frequency (or space-Fourier) resolution similar
to the multiresolution analysis of wavelets.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
SIFT, HOG, SURF, etc.\
of~\citet{lowe1999}, \citet{lowe2004}, \citet{dalal-triggs},
\citet{bay-ess-tuytelaars-van_gool}, and others are more analogous
to the multiwavelet architecture of Figure~\ref{multifig}
than to the more general wavelet-packet architecture of Figure~\ref{packetfig}.
\end{remark}
\section{Fitting/learning/training}
\label{fitting}
The ``multiwavelet transform'' constitutes a desirable baseline model.
We can easily adapt to the data the choices of windows and indeed the whole
recursive structure of the processing (whether restricting the recursion
to the zero-frequency channels, or also allowing the recursive processing
of higher-frequency channels). Viewing the convolutional filters
in equation~\ref{conv} that serve as windowed exponentials as parameters,
the desirable baseline is just one member of a parametric family of models.
This parametric family is known as a ``complex-valued convolutional network.''
We can fit (that is, learn or train) the parameters to the data
via optimization procedures such as stochastic gradient descent
in conjunction with ``backpropagation'' (backpropagation is the chain rule
of Calculus applied to calculate gradients of our recursively composed
operations). For ``supervised learning,''
we optimize according to a specified objective,
usually using the multiscale spectra as inputs to a scheme for classification
or regression, as detailed by~\citet{lecun-bottou-bengio-haffner}, for example.
\begin{remark}
In consonance with the ``best-basis'' approach
of~\citet{coifman-meyer-quake-wickerhauser} and~\citet{saito-coifman},
a potentially more efficient possibility is to restrict
the convolutional filters in equation~\ref{conv} to be windowed exponentials
that are designed completely a priori,
aside from one overall scaling factor per filter,
fitting/learning/training only the scaling factors.
How best to effect this approach is an open question.
\end{remark}
\section{Numerical experiments}
\label{numerical}
The following reports the classification accuracies for the complex-valued
convnets of~\citet{chintala-ranzato-szlam-tian-tygert-zaremba},
the standard real-valued convnets of~\citet{krizhevsky-sutskever-hinton},
and the scattering transforms of~\citet{oyallon-mallat},
on a benchmark data set, ``CIFAR-10,'' from~\citet{krizhevsky}
(CIFAR-10 contains 50,000 images in its training set
and 10,000 images in its testing set; each image falls into one of ten classes,
is full-color, and consists of a $32 \times 32$ grid of pixels):
According to Table~4 of~\cite{oyallon-mallat}, the scattering transforms attain
an error rate of $18\%$ on the test set, after training their classifiers
on the training set. According to Section~3.3
of~\cite{krizhevsky-sutskever-hinton}, a standard real-valued convnet
attains an error rate of $13\%$ on the test set without
the ``local response normalization'' of that Section~3.3,
and attains $11\%$ with the local response normalization.
The complex-valued convnets detailed
in~\citet{chintala-ranzato-szlam-tian-tygert-zaremba}
attain an error rate of $12\%$ on the test set,
at least when using a larger net and training with enough iterations
for the test error to settle down and converge
(for complex-valued convnets, accuracy seems to improve
as the net becomes larger --- for the error rate of $12\%$,
a net eight times the size of that reported in Table~1
of~\citet{chintala-ranzato-szlam-tian-tygert-zaremba} was sufficient,
using the same kernel sizes and other parameter settings as for Table~1).
Augmenting the training images with their mirror images
improved convergence to the reported accuracies. All in all, the extensively
trained real- and complex-valued convnets yielded similar error rates,
which are about a third less than those which scattering transforms attained.
Of course, the fitting/learning/training involved for classification
with the scattering transforms is much less extensive.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{conclusion}
While the above concerns $X_k$,
where $k$ ranges over the integers, extension to analyzing $X_{j,k}$,
where $j$ and $k$ range over the integers, is straightforward
--- the latter could be a ``locally homogeneous random field.''
Also, the infinite range of the integers is far from essential;
implementations on computers obviously use only finite sequences.
Moreover, the above construction is appropriate for processing
any locally stationary stochastic process, not just filtered white noise.
For instance, the construction can enable a multiresolution analysis
of ``regularity'' (or ``smoothness'') that easily distinguishes
between low-pass filtered i.i.d.\ Gaussian noise
and a pulse train or sinusoid with a random phase offset
(for example, $X_k = 1+\sin(\pi (k+J) / 1000)$ for any integer $k$,
where $J$ is an integer drawn uniformly at random from 1, 2, \dots, 2000).
More generally, the construction should enable discriminating
between many interesting classes of stochastic processes,
commensurate with the ability of multiwavelet-based multiresolution analysis
to measure ``regularity,'' ``intermittency,'' distributional characteristics
(say, Gaussian versus Poisson), etc.
Any globally stationary stochastic process --- with or without intermittent
fluctuations --- can be modeled as above as a locally stationary stochastic
process (of course, \citet{bruna-mallat-bacry-muzy} treat the former directly,
to great advantage in the analysis of homogeneous turbulence
and other phenomena from statistical physics).
Every model in the parametric family constituting
the complex-valued convnet calculates relevant features,
windowed spectra of the form in equation~\ref{localized}
and equation~\ref{conv}.
The absolute values in equation~\ref{localized} and equation~\ref{conv}
are the key nonlinearity, a reflection of the local stationarity
--- the local translation-invariance ---
of the process and its relevant features.
\subsection*{Acknowledgments}
We would like to thank Keith Adams, Lubomir Bourdev, Rob Fergus,
Armand Joulin, Manohar Paluri, Christian Puhrsch, Marc'Aurelio Ranzato,
Ben Recht, and Rachel Ward.
\begin{figure}
\vspace{1in}
\centering
\parbox{\textwidth}{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{wavelets}}
\vspace{.25in}
\caption{A flow chart for the ``wavelet transform'' of an input vector:
each box ``$\omega$$=$$0$'' corresponds to equation~\ref{conv}
with $\omega$$=$$0$ or (equivalently) to equation~\ref{convolution};
each box ``$\omega$$\ne$$0$'' corresponds to equation~\ref{conv}
--- convolution followed by taking the absolute value
of every entry followed by local averaging; each circle ``$\downarrow$''
corresponds to subsampling (say, retaining only every other entry)
}
\label{wavefig}
\vspace{1in}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\parbox{\textwidth}{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{multi}}
\vspace{.25in}
\caption{A flow chart for the ``multiwavelet transform'' of an input vector:
each box ``0'' corresponds to equation~\ref{conv} with $\omega$$=$$0$
or (equivalently) to equation~\ref{convolution};
each box ``1,'' ``2,'' or ``3'' corresponds
to equation~\ref{conv} for different convolutional filters,
but always with convolution followed by taking the absolute value
of every entry followed by local averaging; each circle ``$\downarrow$''
corresponds to subsampling (say, retaining only every fourth entry)
}
\label{multifig}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\parbox{\textwidth}{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{packets}}
\vspace{.25in}
\caption{A flow chart for the ``nonlinear wavelet packet transform''
of an input vector:
each box ``$\omega$$=$$0$'' corresponds to equation~\ref{conv}
with $\omega$$=$$0$ or (equivalently) to equation~\ref{convolution};
each box ``$\omega$$\ne$$0$'' corresponds to equation~\ref{conv}
--- convolution followed by taking the absolute value
of every entry followed by local averaging; each circle ``$\downarrow$''
corresponds to subsampling (say, retaining only every other entry);
the dashed arrows can involve downweighting the associated summands
(and the convolutional filter can be different for every arrow);
Figure~\ref{wavefig} is essentially a special case of the present figure
for which some of the convolutional filters simply deconvolve
the preceding local averaging (omitting some of the subsampling)
}
\label{packetfig}
\end{figure}
\newpage
|
\section{\label{sec:level1}Introduction}
The magnetic properties of a ferromagnetic film are determined by the relationship between intrinsic material parameters, such as exchange stiffness and magnetocrystalline anisotropy, and extrinsic effects, including magnetic anisotropies induced by shape, strain and interfaces. Typically, both intrinsic and extrinsic contributions give rise to a magnetic energy landscape that is uniform across the ferromagnetic film, aside from local variations caused by defects and/or film roughness. The magnetization reversal process and the magnetic hysteresis loop do not therefore usually depend on probing area. In conventional magnetic films with uniform magnetic anisotropy, magnetic switching proceeds by nucleation of reversed domains and subsequent domain growth via lateral domain wall motion. Models describing thermally activated magnetization reversal and magnetic domain wall motion use parameters that vary with magnetic anisotropy energy and random fluctuations thereof, while the energetics of magnetic domain walls is not specifically taken into account \cite{Labrune, Bruno, Lemerle}. Since the density of domain walls is often low and their spin structure and energy remain nearly constant during domain growth, this omission is justified for most ferromagnetic systems. However, if the motion of magnetic domain walls is prohibited by strong pinning, the energetics of domain walls can have a more pronounced influence on magnetization reversal, especially when the density of pinned walls is high and the anisotropy axes in neighbouring domains are non-collinear.
Strong local pinning of magnetic domain walls can be attained by various methods, including focused ion beam or low-energy proton irradiation \cite{Chappert, Terris, Fassbender2004, Fassbender2008, Franken, Kim, Hamann} and oxygen ion migration from an adjacent metal-oxide layer \cite{Bauer2013, Bauer2015}. Other promising strategies to locally tailor the magnetic properties of a continuous magnetic medium exploit exchange coupling with a multiferroic BiFeO$_{3}$ layer \cite{Chu, Lebeugle, Heron, You} or strain coupling to the ferroelastic domains of a ferroelectric BaTiO$_{3}$ substrate \cite{Lahtinen2011, Lahtinen2012, Franke2012, Chopdekar, Streubel, Franke2014}. In both cases, one-to-one correlations between the domains in BiFeO$_{3}$ or BaTiO$_{3}$ and the domains of an adjacent ferromagnetic film have been demonstrated. Furthermore, since the magnetic domain walls are firmly pinned on top of ferroelectric domain boundaries by abrupt changes in magnetic anisotropy, they do not move during magnetization reversal \cite{Lahtinen2011, Lahtinen2012}. This strong pinning effect leads to the formation of two types of magnetic domain walls with considerably different energy, depending on the direction of in-plane magnetic field \cite{Franke2012, Franke2014}.
In this work we investigate the influence of pinned magnetic domain walls on magnetization reversal in a strain-coupled Co$_{40}$Fe$_{40}$B$_{20}$/BaTiO$_{3}$ heterostructure with regular magnetic stripe domains (Fig. \ref{Fig1}). We find that magnetic switching in this system depends strongly on the type of magnetic domain wall that is created during a magnetic field sweep, especially if the thickness of the CoFeB film exceeds 50 nm. For magnetic fields along the stripe domains, high-energy head-to-head and tail-to-tail domain walls form. In this case, magnetization reversal proceeds in two clear steps involving abrupt magnetic switching in every second stripe domain at a time. The regular lateral modulations in the magnetization reversal process are driven by transformations of the domain wall structure into a low-energy head-to-tail configuration. On the other hand, if the magnetic field is applied perpendicular to the stripe domains, low-energy head-to-tail domain walls form. As a consequence, domain wall transformations cannot reduce the energy of the system and the magnetization of each domain switches simultaneously. The dependence of the magnetic switching fields for both reversal mechanisms on CoFeB film thickness and stripe domain width are discussed in detail.
\section{\label{sec:level2}Experimental details}
The experiments were conducted on a multiferroic heterostructure composed of a ferroelectric BaTiO$_{3}$ (001) single-crystal substrate and a ferromagnetic Co$_{40}$Fe$_{40}$B$_{20}$ wedge film, with thickness $t$ = 0 -- 150 nm. The wedge film was deposited via magnetron sputtering at 300 $^{\circ}$C. Upon cooling through the paraelectric-to-ferroelectric phase transition at 120 $^{\circ}$C, the lattice structure of BaTiO$_{3}$ becomes tetragonal and regular a$_{1}$ -- a$_{2}$ ferroelastic stripe domains are formed to minimize electrostatic and elastic energies \cite{Merz}. The alternating 90$^{\circ}$ in-plane rotations of the lattice tetragonality that are characteristic of this domain pattern give rise, via inverse magnetostriction, to
corresponding 90$^{\circ}$ in-plane rotations of the uniaxial magnetoelastic anisotropy axis in the CoFeB film.
At room temperature the ferroelastic a$_{1}$ and a$_{2}$ stripe domains are found to be fully imprinted into the CoFeB wedge film at all thicknesses, as schematically illustrated in Fig. \ref{Fig1}(a). This indicates that the magnetoelastic anisotropy dominates over the other anisotropy contributions in CoFeB even at the thick side of the film.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{Figure1}
\caption{(a) Sketch of the multiferroic heterostructure: white arrows indicate the ferroelectric polarization direction of a$_{1}$--a$_{2}$ domains in BaTiO$_{3}$, while black arrows indicate the direction of the uniaxial magnetoelastic anisotropy axes of the corresponding a$_{1}$--a$_{2}$ domains in CoFeB. The widths $\Delta_{1}$ and $\Delta_{2}$ of a$_{1}$ and a$_{2}$ domains range between 1 \textmu m and 10 \textmu m (on average $\Delta_{1}$ $>$ $\Delta_{2}$). Sketch of the configuration of 90$^{\circ}$ magnetically charged (b) and uncharged (c) domain walls obtained at remanence, after reducing the magnetic field from saturation along the direction parallel and perpendicular to the domain walls, respectively. ${\phi_{1}}$ and $\phi_{2}$ represent the magnetization angles in the a$_{1}$ and a$_{2}$ domains.}
\label{Fig1}
\end{figure}
The ferromagnetic domains were imaged at room temperature using magneto-optical Kerr effect (MOKE) microscopy with in-plane magnetic field. Magnetic hysteresis loops of individual a$_{1}$ and a$_{2}$ stripe domains were extracted from the variation of local magnetic contrast during magnetization reversal.
\section{\label{sec:level3}Magnetically charged and uncharged domain walls}
The magnetic domain walls that separate the imprinted a$_{1}$ and a$_{2}$ domains in CoFeB are strongly pinned onto the ferroelectric domain boundaries by the sudden rotation of the uniaxial magnetic anisotropy axes. As a result of this pinning effect, the magnetic domain walls do not move under application of a magnetic field and the total spin rotation within the walls varies with the direction and strength of the in-plane magnetic field \cite{Franke2012}.
Particularly relevant to the present work is the possibility to initialize magnetic domain walls with two distinct spin structures for specific magnetic field orientations. When the field is reduced from saturation along the direction parallel to the walls, the spins align in alternating head-to-head and tail-to-tail configurations which induce magnetostatic charges on each side of the domain walls (Fig. \ref{Fig1}(b)). Accordingly, these domain walls are usually referred to as magnetically charged. On the other hand, when the field is reduced from saturation along the direction perpendicular to the walls, magnetically uncharged head-to-tail domain walls are instead formed (Fig. \ref{Fig1}(c)). In ferromagnetic films without anisotropy modulations charged walls typically arrange in zigzag configurations to reduce magnetostatic charge density \cite{Hubert1979, Hubert1998, Favieres}. In our strain-coupled multiferroic heterostructure, however, both magnetically charged and uncharged walls are perfectly straight because of strong pinning onto the underlying ferroelectric domain boundaries.
The profile of charged magnetic domain walls is mostly determined by the competition between magnetostatic energy and magnetic anisotropy energy, while exchange energy and magnetic anisotropy energy mainly define the structure of uncharged magnetic domain walls \cite{Franke2014}. As magnetostatic coupling between spins extends over a longer distance than exchange interactions, the width and energy of charged walls are considerably larger than that of uncharged walls. Moreover, since the magnetostatic energy increases with ferromagnetic film thickness, the difference between the width and energy of charged and uncharged domain walls becomes more pronounced for thick films\cite{Franke2014}.
Fig. \ref{Fig2}(a) and (b) show Scanning Electron Microscopy with Polarization Analysis (SEMPA) images of charged and uncharged magnetic domains walls, at remanence, in a 20 nm CoFeB film that was grown on BaTiO$_{3}$ under the same conditions as the wedge film.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\includegraphics[]{Figure2}
\caption{Two-component SEMPA images of the remanent in-plane magnetization configuration of (a) charged and (b) uncharged magnetic domain walls in a 20 nm CoFeB/BaTiO$_{3}$ heterostructure. (c) Comparison of the domain wall profiles as obtained from a line scan along the direction perpendicular to the walls in (a) and (b). The spin asymmetry is proportional to the projection of the magnetization along the scan direction, for the charged wall, and perpendicular to it, for the uncharged wall.}
\label{Fig2}
\end{figure}
The elevated spatial resolution of SEMPA \cite{Berger, Fromter} allows for domain wall imaging at the nanoscale and for the extraction of the corresponding wall profiles (Fig. \ref{Fig2}(c)). Following the domain wall width definition of Lilley \cite{Lilley}, the widths of the charged and uncharged domain walls are estimated as $\delta_{c} = 770 \pm 60$ nm and $\delta_{uc} = 165 \pm 25$ nm, respectively.
\section{\label{sec:level3} Results and discussion}
The magnetization reversal process in CoFeB under the formation of charged or uncharged domain walls is investigated by MOKE microscopy.
To this end, a large set of MOKE images is collected as a function of magnetic field strength. This is done with the magnetic field applied either parallel or perpendicular to the domain walls and for different CoFeB film thicknesses. For each field sweep, the MOKE intensity of individual images is averaged along the direction of the stripe domains and combined into a single contour plot, as illustrated in Fig. \ref{Fig3}.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{Figure3}
\caption{Visualization of the averaging process used to combine a set of standard MOKE images, measured while sweeping the field from negative to positive saturating values (in this case along the domain walls), into a single contour plot displaying MOKE intensity as a function of position and magnetic field strength. Blue (red) color corresponds to magnetization pointing to the left (right).}
\label{Fig3}
\end{figure}
Such contour plots, wherein a vertical line contains information about the magnetization direction of each MOKE image, are used here as an efficient way to visualize magnetic switching in all the domains of the original set of images.
MOKE contour plots with magnetic field applied either parallel or perpendicular to the domain walls are shown in Fig. \ref{Fig4} for CoFeB film thicknesses ranging between 25 nm and 150 nm.
To facilitate direct comparisons, the magnetic hysteresis loops of selected a$_{1}$ and a$_{2}$ domains are also shown. The width of the selected a$_{1}$ and a$_{2}$ domains is similar for all thicknesses, being on average $\Delta_{1} \sim 8$ \textmu m and $\Delta_{2} \sim 5$ \textmu m, respectively.
\begin{figure*}[!ht]
\includegraphics[width=17.8cm]{Figure4}
\caption{Contour plots illustrating the magnetization reversal process at several film thicknesses while sweeping the magnetic field $H$ from negative to positive saturating values along the direction either parallel (left column) or perpendicular (right column) to the domain walls (DWs). The sample areas imaged in the left and right columns are the same. The scale of the MOKE intensity is identical to the one in Fig. \ref{Fig3}. When $H \parallel$ DWs blue (red) color corresponds to magnetization pointing to the left (right), while when $H \perp$ DWs blue (red) color corresponds to magnetization pointing down (up). The black and green solid lines in the contour plots mark the boundaries of the a$_{1}$ and a$_{2}$ domains, respectively, whose magnetic hysteresis loop is shown to the side.}
\label{Fig4}
\end{figure*}
In both cases, the magnetic field is applied at an angle of 45$^{\circ}$ with respect to the easy axes of a$_{1}$ and a$_{2}$ domains (see Fig. \ref{Fig1}). The reversal process should therefore not depend on the field direction nor the domain type, in accordance with the Stoner--Wohlfarth model for single domains with uniaxial magnetic anisotropy. In our system, however, the magnetic switching behavior depends strongly on the direction of the magnetic field and, for field parallel to the walls, on the domain type.
In particular, a$_{1}$ and a$_{2}$ domains switch simultaneously when the magnetic field is applied perpendicularly to the walls, while they switch at distinct fields when the magnetic field is applied parallel to the walls. This unusual switching behavior is caused by strong magnetic domain wall pinning and the substantial energy difference between charged and uncharged walls \cite{Hubert1979, Franke2014}, as discussed below.
The influence of the two types of domain walls on the reversal process is clarified through consideration of individual MOKE images illustrating the switching of a$_{1}$ and a$_{2}$ domains at a specific thickness ($t$ = 75 nm), as shown in Fig. \ref{Fig5}.
\begin{figure*}[!ht]
\includegraphics[width=16 cm]{Figure5}
\caption{MOKE images illustrating the reversal mechanism of a portion of the film (comprising one a$_{2}$ domain surrounded by two a$_{1}$ domains) at a thickness $t$ = 75 nm, while sweeping the field from negative to positive saturating values along the direction parallel (a) and perpendicular (b) to the domain walls. The arrows in the images indicate the direction of the magnetization of each domain, as derived from the MOKE intensity. The green solid lines mark the boundaries of the a$_{2}$ domain. Each image is linked via a dashed line to the corresponding position along the hysteresis loops.}
\label{Fig5}
\end{figure*}
When the magnetic field is applied parallel to the walls (Fig. \ref{Fig5}(a)) and reduced from saturation, the magnetization of each stripe domain rotates towards the respective easy anisotropy axes, causing the formation of charged domain walls. Both the energy and width of these walls are initially small, but rapidly increase upon decreasing field strength. At some field value (Fig. \ref{Fig5}(a--$1'$)), the energy of charged walls becomes so large that an abrupt magnetic switching event is triggered in every second stripe domain (Fig. \ref{Fig5}(a--$1''$)), here defined as a$_{2}$. During this first switching event all charged domain walls transform into lower-energy uncharged domain walls, thus providing a net energy gain for the entire magnetic system. Upon a further increase of the magnetic field strength, the a$_{1}$ domains switch too: during this second switching event all uncharged walls (Fig. \ref{Fig5}(a--$2'$) are transformed back into charged walls (Fig. \ref{Fig5}(a--$2''$)) which are now characterized by a modest spin rotation and, thus, considerably smaller energy. A different reversal process occurs when the magnetic field is applied perpendicular to the domain walls (Fig. \ref{Fig5}(b)): now, uncharged walls are formed when the magnetic field is reduced from saturation and the magnetic system cannot reduce its energy by domain wall transformations. Instead, in order to prevent the formation of higher-energy charged walls, magnetic switching is now completely synchronized in all domains (Fig. \ref{Fig5}(a--$1'$) and (a--$1''$)). A much weaker dependence of the magnetic hysteresis curve on the direction of applied magnetic field has been reported for an exchange-coupled La$_{0.7}$Sr$_{0.3}$MnO$_{3}$/BiFeO$_{3}$ heterostructure \cite{You}.
\subsection{Scaling of magnetic switching with domain width }
An intriguing aspect that emerges from the contour plots in Fig. \ref{Fig4} is the influence of domain width on the magnetization reversal process. When the magnetic field is applied along the stripe domains, charged walls are created and the switching field of the a$_{2}$ domains ($H_{S2}$) decreases with decreasing width $\Delta_{2}$. Specifically, $H_{S2}$ is inversely proportional to $\Delta_{2}$, as illustrated in Fig. \ref{Fig6}(a) for $t$ = 75 nm.
This scaling behavior is explained considering that narrow a$_{2}$ domains correspond to a higher density of charged domain walls and, consequently, a higher magnetic energy density compared to wide a$_{2}$ domains.
An alternative way to understand this behavior is provided in Fig. \ref{Fig6}(b), where the value of the spin rotation of charged walls, measured just before the first switching event, is plotted as a function of $\Delta_{2}$, for $t$ = 75 nm. For $\Delta_{2}$ = 5 \textmu m the spin rotation of charged domain walls increases up to $100^{\circ}$ before switching, while in narrower a$_{2}$ domains charged walls with considerably smaller spin rotation already transform into uncharged walls. Because larger spin rotations are associated with higher magnetic energy, Fig. \ref{Fig6}(b) indicates that wider a$_{2}$ domains can accommodate charged domain walls with higher energy than narrow a$_{2}$ domains, before transformations to uncharged domain walls occur.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{Figure6}
\caption{(a) Dependence of the switching field of the a$_{2}$ domains on domain width, measured at $t$ = 75 nm. Symbols represent experimental data while the line is the corresponding linear fit. (b) Dependence of the spin rotation of the charged domain walls that form before the reversal of the a$_{2}$ domains (first switching event) as a function of domains width, again for $t$ = 75 nm. Dependence of the spin rotation of the domain walls that form before and after the first (c) and second (d) switching event as a function of thickness, for $\Delta_{2} \sim 5$ \textmu m. Closed (open) symbols in (c) and (d) indicate magnetically charged (uncharged) domain walls.
}
\label{Fig6}
\end{figure}
While $H_{S2}$ scales with $\Delta_{2}$ when the field is applied along the stripe domains, $H_{S1}$ is independent of $\Delta_{1}$. Considering the arguments that were provided to explain the dependence of $H_{S2}$ on $\Delta_{2}$, this circumstance may appear in contradiction with the fact that uncharged walls are transformed back into charged walls when a$_{1}$ domains switch (see the second switching event in Fig. \ref{Fig5} (a)). However, charged walls that form after the second switching event have much smaller spin rotations, and correspondingly lower magnetic energies, than the charged walls before the first switching event. This is illustrated in Figs. \ref {Fig6} (c) -- (d), where the spin rotation of charged and uncharged walls before and after the two switching events is plotted as a function of CoFeB film thickness, for a$_{2}$ domains with similar width $\Delta_{2} \sim 5$ \textmu m (a$_{1}$ and a$_{2}$ domains switch almost simultaneously for $t \leq$ 50 nm and the corresponding data have been omitted from these figures). Since the energy of charged walls is small after magnetic switching in the a$_{1}$ domains, $H_{S1}$ is mainly determined by the magnetic anisotropy inside the domain, which is independent of $\Delta_{1}$, rather than the energetics of the domain walls. This observation is also confirmed by the fact that $H_{S1}$ is nearly identical for the two field orientations (see Fig. \ref{Fig4}).
\subsection{Scaling of magnetic switching with CoFeB film thickness}
Finally, the dependence of the magnetic switching field on CoFeB film thickness is discussed. From Fig. \ref{Fig4} it can be seen that both $H_{S1}$ and $H_{S2}$ decrease with CoFeB thickness for t $\geq$ 50 nm. The switching fields of a$_{1}$ domains (irrespective of field direction) and a$_{2}$ domains (magnetic field perpendicular to the walls) are not drastically influenced by domain wall transformations and thus their variation with film thickness mimics that of ferromagnetic films without regular anisotropy modulations. A different dependence of $H_{S2}$ on film thickness is obtained when charged magnetic walls are formed. In this case, two additional interlinked parameters affect $H_{S2}$, namely (1) the width of the a$_{2}$ domains (Fig. \ref{Fig6} (a)) and (2) the spin rotation within the walls and thus the wall energy (Figs. \ref {Fig6} (b) -- (d)). The dependence of $H_{S2}$ on film thickness and $\Delta_{2}$ is summarized in Figs. \ref{Fig7} (a) and (b).
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm]{Figure7}
\caption{(a) Dependence of the switching field of the a$_{2}$ domains on domain width and CoFeB film thickness, for thicknesses $\geq$ 50 nm. Symbols represent experimental data while lines are the corresponding linear fits. (b) Comparison between the switching fields of a$_{1}$ domains (open symbols) and a$_{2}$ domains (closed symbols) as a function of film thickness and for $\Delta_{2}$ values ranging between 1 \textmu m and 5 \textmu m (the switching field is independent of $\Delta$ in the a$_{1}$ domains). In both (a) and (b) the magnetic field is applied parallel to the domain walls.}
\label{Fig7}
\end{figure}
For relatively thin films, the energy difference between charged and uncharged magnetic domain walls is rather modest, giving rise to large spin rotations inside both domain walls and strong scaling of $H_{S2}$ with $1/\Delta_{2}$. At the other end of the thickness spectrum, the width and energy of uncharged walls are mostly unchanged, whereas those of charged walls are significantly enhanced. The growing energy difference between the two types of domain walls leads to a reduction of $H_{S2}$ with increasing CoFeB thickness. This scaling effect is most significant for wide a$_{2}$ domains, since charged walls can attain their full width and energy without restrictions. For small $\Delta_{2}$, however, the domain walls are artificially confined to narrow domain stripes, leading to a finite-size reduction of the spin rotation within the walls and thus of their width and energy \cite{Franke2014}. This effect hampers the reduction of $H_{S2}$ with film thickness in narrow domains and, consequently, the scaling of $H_{S2}$ with $1/\Delta_{2}$ becomes less pronounced at the thick side of the CoFeB wedge. When the energy gain during charged-to-uncharged wall transformations exceeds the magnetic anisotropy energy of the domains, magnetic switching in the a$_{2}$ domains can take place before zero applied magnetic field is reached. Negative switching fields are measured for narrow a$_{2}$ domains and/or at large CoFeB film thicknesses, as shown in Figs. \ref{Fig7} (a) and (b).
The $1/\Delta_{2}$ scaling behavior in our multiferroic heterostructure is qualitatively similar to that of two-dimensional magnetic systems with opposing interface and bulk anisotropies. In magnetic multilayers, for example, the interface anisotropy dominates the total energy of the system for very thin ferromagnetic films, but its contribution decays with thickness ($t$) as $1/t$ (see ref. \cite{Johnson}). This scaling effect causes a spin reorientation transition at a critical thickness $t_{c}$. Exchange bias in ferromagnetic-antiferromagnetic bilayers is another well-known magnetic interface effect \cite{Nogues}. The switching field in this case can also be negative (for one field sweep direction) and the magnitude of the exchange bias field scales as $1/t$. In our system, the a$_{2}$ domains are bordered by two straight and strongly pinned domain walls and the possible transformation of their internal spin structure acts as an interface-like potential energy. Consequently, the influence of the domain walls on $H_{S2}$ diminishes with domain width as $1/\Delta_{2}$. Since the energy difference between charged and uncharged magnetic domain walls increases with ferromagnetic film thickness, both vertical and lateral scaling effects can be utilized to tailor micromagnetic switching effects in fully correlated multiferroic heterostructures.
\section{Conclusion}
To conclude, we have investigated how magnetic domain wall pinning in a strain-coupled CoFeB/BaTiO$_{3}$ heterostructure affects the magnetization reversal process. Depending on the in-plane field direction, two distinct mechanisms are identified. If magnetically charged domain walls with high energy are formed during a field sweep, the system lowers its energy via domain wall transformation into uncharged configurations, which corresponds to abrupt magnetic switching in every second stripe domain. This lateral modulation of magnetization reversal is unusual and can result in switching before zero applied magnetic field is reached. On the other hand, rotation of the applied magnetic field by 90$^{\circ}$ results in the formation of low-energy uncharged magnetic domain walls and a very different reversal behavior. In this configuration, all domains switch simultaneously to prevent the formation of high-energy charged magnetic domain walls. The magnetic switching event that is driven by domain wall transformations scales with the energy difference between the two types of magnetic walls and, thus, with the thickness of the CoFeB film. Also, since the local energy of the system varies with the density of magnetic domain walls, the switching field that is associated with domain wall transformations is inversely proportional to the domain width. The observed dependence of magnetization reversal on field direction is anticipated to be a general feature of continuous ferromagnetic films with a regular modulation of non-collinear magnetic anisotropy axes and a high density of pinned magnetic domain walls.\\
This work was supported by the Academy of Finland (Grant No. 260361), the European Research Council (ERC-2012-StG 307502- E-CONTROL) and the ``Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft'' via ``Sonderforschungsbereich 668''.
\bibliographystyle{apsrev}
|
\section{Introduction}
In the development of a theory to describe plant water uptake, electrical
analogues of the system have been used for analysis
\cite{cowan1965,gardner1960,vandenhonert1948}. The analogues are based on
the assumption that rooting patterns are uniform and constant in each soil
layer. Steady flow is presumed in both the soil and the plant over the
period of calculation. In this approach the plant water potentials are
primarily the result of an imposed value of transpiration rate and its
variations. Later papers \cite{feddes2001,hillel1980,molz1981} have
presented detailed reviews on plant water uptake. In those papers the
Richards equation is used, with a sink term. Another approach is to model
the water movement and uptake over large areas, using individual plant
\cite{guswa2005}, or global behavior \cite{puma2005}. A microscopical
approach has also been proposed \cite{personne2003}, where the total water
uptake is calculated based on using a constant value for the entire
rooting profile. In more recent papers \cite{roose2004a,wang2004,wu1999}
the root growth has been taken into account, still using a fixed domain.
The root growth is inscribed on a domain that is not a function of time.
Some other papers about nutrient uptake consider root growth and
instantaneous coupling with the nutrient flux by using a variable domain
approximation \cite{reginato2000}. In this last model \cite{reginato2000}
a variable root length, and consequently, a variable available volume of
soil to each root of a root system is considered using a moving boundary
model. In this model the root system is uniformly distributed in the soil
and the variation of available soil volume per unit of root length is
modeled by a moving boundary. The approach presented here is based on that
in \cite{reginato2000} . In the proposed model plants growing in
controlled conditions, as in a growth chamber, are assumed. A constant
temperature and evapotranspiration rate is presumed. In this situation,
the water potential at the root surface is determined by the soil water
potential, and consequently determines water uptake by the growing root
system. The proposed model considers an uniform root water uptake for all
the root system. The goal of this paper is to present a simplified model
of water uptake coupled with a growing root system and analyze the
influence of system parameters on water uptake using typical values.
\section{Model}
Darcy's law describes the flow of water on a porous unsaturated medium as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:flujo1}
\vec J(\vec r, t) = -K(\Psi(\vec r, t)) \vec \nabla \Psi(\vec r, t)
\end{equation}
with $\vec J[cm^3/cm^2 s]$ the water flux per surface unit at position
$\vec r [cm]$ at time $t[s]$, $K [cm/s]$ the soil water conductivity and
$\Psi [cm]$ the soil water potential.
The corresponding continuity equation (mass conservation) is given by
\begin{equation}
-\nabla \cdot \vec{J} = \derp\theta t,
\end{equation}
with $\theta [cm^3/cm^3]$ the soil water content per unit of volume, with
the approximation of only radial flux the transport equation results
\begin{equation}\label{eq:cont1}
\derp{}t\left[\Psi(r,t)\right]=-\frac1{rC(\Psi(r,t)) } \derp{}{r}
\left[r K(\Psi(r,t)) \derp{}r \left[\Psi(r,t)\right]\right]
\end{equation}
where $r$ is the cylindrical radial coordinate, and
\begin{equation}
C(\Psi(r,t))=\der\theta\Psi(\Psi(r,t))
\end{equation}
is the differential capacity of water $[cm^{-1}]$.
The soil water constitutive relations for $K$, $\theta$, and $C$, as
functions of $\Psi$, are the ones proposed by Van Genuchten
\cite{vangenuchten1980}, and consist of the expressions given by:
\begin{eqnarray}
K(\Psi)&=&K_s \frac{\left\{\left[1+\left(\frac\Psi{\Psi_e} \right)^n
\right]^m - \left(\frac\Psi{\Psi_e} \right)^{n-1}\right\}^2}
{\left[1+\left(\frac\Psi{\Psi_e}\right)^n\right]^{m(p+2)}},
\label{eq:kapsivG}\\
\theta(\Psi) &=& \left[1+\left(\frac{\Psi}{\Psi_e}\right)^n\right]^{-m}
(\theta_s-\theta_R) + \theta_R,
\label{eq:titapsivG}\\
C(\Psi) &=& (\theta_s-\theta_R) \frac{1-n}{\Psi_e} \left[1+\left(
\frac{\Psi}{\Psi_e}\right)^n\right]^{-m-1} \left(\frac{\Psi}
{\Psi_e}\right)^{n-1},
\label{eq:CpsivG}
\end{eqnarray}
where $K_s [cm/s]$ is the saturated soil conductivity, $\theta_s
[cm^3/cm^3]$ is the saturated soil water content, $\theta_R [cm^3/cm^3]$
is the residual water content, $\Psi_e [cm]$, $p [1]$ and $n [1]$ are
experimental coefficients, and $m = 1-1/n$.
\begin{figure}[tp]
\center{\noindent\includegraphics[width=11cm]{evolucion.ps}}
\caption{Homogeneous rooting in soil and its time evolution.}
\label{fig:evolucion}
\end{figure}
We presume that the water potential does not change with soil depth, the
soil does not evaporate, and laboratory conditions, like light and
temperature are maintained constant. The root density is homogeneous on
the soil, the total volume is fixed (as in pots), therefore the soil
volume per unit of root length is decreasing as in Figure
\ref{fig:evolucion}. Based on these assumptions, and taking into account
the root length density as a function of time $(t)$ the following moving
boundary model in cylindrical coordinates \cite{personne2003,reginato2000}
is proposed
\begin{eqnarray}
\derp{}t\left[\Psi(r,t)\right]&=&-\frac1{rC(\Psi(r,t)) }\derp{}{r}
\left[r K(\Psi(r,t)) \derp{}r \left[\Psi(r,t)\right]\right]
\label{eq:modelo1}\\
\Psi(r,0) &=& \phi(r)
\label{eq:modelo2}\\
H\left(\Psi(R(t),t),t\right)&=&2\pi R(t)K(\Psi(R(t),t))\derp{\Psi}{r}
(R(t),t)
\label{eq:modelo3}\\
G\left(\Psi(s_0, t)\right)&=&-2\pi s_0 K(\Psi(s_0,t))\derp{\Psi}{r}
(s_0,t)
\label{eq:modelo4}\\
R(t)&=&R_0\sqrt{\frac{l_0}{l(t)}}\label{eq:modelo5}
\end{eqnarray}
with $s_0\leq r\leq R(t)$ and $0\leq t\leq T_{max}$, where $T_{max}$ is
the maximum time for which the system has meaning $\left(R(T_{max})\geq
s_0\right)$, $s_0$ is the root radius, $R_0$ is the initial half-distance
among roots, $R(t)$ is the instantaneous half-distance among roots (a
decreasing function as root density grows), $l_0$ is the initial root
length, and $l(t)$ is the instantaneous root length. Equation
(\ref{eq:modelo1}) is the pressure head based Buckingham-Richards
equation. The condition (\ref{eq:modelo2}) is the initial water potential
profile, with $\phi(r)$ a single valued function. The condition
(\ref{eq:modelo3}) represents the flux $(H)$ on the moving boundary $r =
R(t)$, which will be considered null in this paper as an approximation to
a soil isolated. The condition (\ref{eq:modelo4}) is the boundary
condition at the root soil interface $(r = s_0)$ representing the root
water uptake per unit of root length $\left( G(\Psi(s_0,t))[cm^3/cm\
s]\right)$. For the water uptake function $\left( G(\Psi)\right)$ we use
the function proposed by Feddes \cite{feddes2001} which is given by:
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}[b]{lllcl}
\\
$G(\Psi) = 0$ &if &$0>\Psi \geq \Psi_1$ \\
$G(\Psi) = S_{max}$ &if &$\Psi_1>\Psi\geq\Psi_2$\\
$G(\Psi) = S_{max}\frac{\Psi -\Psi3}{\Psi_2 -\Psi_3}$ &if&
$\Psi_2>\Psi\geq\Psi_3$\\
$G(\Psi) = 0$ &if &$\Psi_3>\Psi$ \\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
where $\Psi_1$, $\Psi_2$ and $\Psi_3$ are the anaerobiosis point, the
limiting point, and the wilting point, respectively. $S_{max} \left[cm^2/s
\right]$ is the maximum water uptake per unit of root length. A diagram of
this function can be seen on Figure \ref{fig:tomafig}. The condition
(\ref{eq:modelo5}) is the time dependence of the moving boundary $(R(t))$
which is obtained presuming a fixed total volume including soil and roots,
and a linear growth rate $(l(t) = l_0 + V \ t)$ \cite{reginato2000}, where
$V \left[cm/s\right]$ is the root length growth rate. Graphical evolution
of this system with time can be seen in Figure \ref{fig:evolucion}. A
schematic mathematical diagram of the problem is shown in Figure
\ref{fig:dominio}. Once the water potential $\Psi(s_0,t)$ at the root
surface is obtained, the water uptake is computed with a variable domain
integration method given by \cite{reginato2002}
\begin{eqnarray}
U(t)&=&l_0\int_0^{t}G(\Psi(s_0,\tau))d\tau\nonumber\\&&+\int_0^{t}
\left(\int_\tau^{t}G(\Psi(s_0,\tau))d\tau\right)\dot l(\tau)d\tau
\end{eqnarray}
where $U \left[cm^3\right]$ is the cumulative water uptake at time $t$.
This last expression can be simplified to (see \ref{app1})
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:tarziasimp}
U(t) &=& \int_0^t G(\Psi(s_0,\tau)) l(\tau) d\tau,
\end{eqnarray}
then the instantaneous water uptake can be defined as
\begin{equation}
U_i(t)=\dot{U}(t) = G(\Psi(s_0,t)) l(t).
\end{equation}
The remaining soil water $\left( W \left[cm^3\right]\right)$ as a function
of time can be calculated using
\begin{equation}
W(t) = 2 \pi\ l(t)\int_{s_0}^{R(t)}\theta\left(\Psi(r,t)\right) r\ dr,
\label{eq:aguasuelo}
\end{equation}
if the root is not growing then $l(t) = l_0 = constant$, and as a
consequence $R(t) = R_0$, therefore the water remaining in the soil in
this case is
\begin{equation}
W(t)=2\pi\ l_0\int_{s_0}^{R_0}\theta\left(\Psi(r,t)\right)r\ dr.
\label{eq:aguasuelofija}
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[tp]
\center{\noindent\includegraphics[width=90mm]{funciontoma.eps}}
\caption{Root water uptake function as proposed by Feddes
\citep{feddes2001}. The zone (a) is the zone of maximum water uptake,
while the zone (b) is the zone of linear water uptake.}
\label{fig:tomafig}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tp]
\center{\noindent \includegraphics[width=60mm]{dominio.ps}}
\caption{model of the domain of validity of the proposed model, the
shaded zone (a) represents the zone where the equation
(\ref{eq:modelo1}) is valid. The line (b) is the initial value condition
(\ref{eq:modelo2}). In the curve (c) $r=R(t)$ the boundary condition
(\ref{eq:modelo3}) is used. In the line (d) the root water uptake
condition (\ref{eq:modelo4}) is used.}\label{fig:dominio}
\end{figure}
To solve the system (\ref{eq:modelo1})--(\ref{eq:modelo5}) the domain is
transformed to a dimensionless form by using the following expressions:
\begin{eqnarray}
x &=& \frac{r-s_0}{R(t)-s_0}, \nonumber \\
\tau &=& \frac t{t_0},\label{eq:cambiovariables}\\ \nonumber
\Phi(x,\tau)&=&\frac{\Psi(r,t)}{\Psi_e}=\frac{\Psi(x(R(t)-s_0)+s_0,\tau
t_0)}{\Psi_e},
\end{eqnarray}
or their inverses given by
\begin{eqnarray}
r &=& s_0 +(R(t) - s_0) x \nonumber \\
t &=& t_0 \tau \\ \nonumber
\Psi(r,t)&=&\Psi_e\Phi\left(x,\tau\right)=\Psi_e\Phi\left(\frac{r-s_0}
{R(t)-s_0},\frac t{t_0}\right).
\end{eqnarray}
and the following definitions
\begin{eqnarray}
k(\Phi(x,\tau)) &=& \frac{K(\Psi(r,t))}{K_s} = \frac{\left\{\left[1+
\Phi^n(x,\tau)\right]^m - \Phi^{n-1}(x,\tau)\right\}^2}{\left[1+\Phi^n
(x,\tau)\right]^{m(p+2)}}
\label{eq:kadim}\\
c(\Phi(x,\tau))&=& \frac{C(\Psi(r,t))\Psi_e}{(\theta_s-\theta_R) (1-n)}
=\frac{\Phi^{n-1}(x,\tau)}{\left[1+\Phi^n(x,\tau)\right]^{m+1}}
\label{eq:cadim}\\
v(\tau) &=& \frac{R(t)}{s_0}
\\
w(\tau) &=& \frac{l(t)}{s_0}
\\
g(\Phi(x,\tau))&=&\frac{G(\Psi(r,t))}{S_{max}}
\\
H(\Psi(r,t))&=&0,
\\
c^*(\Phi(x,\tau),x,\tau)&=&\left((v(\tau)-1)x+1\right) c(\Phi(x,\tau))
\\
k^*(\Phi(x,\tau),x,\tau)&=&\left((v(\tau)-1)x+1\right) k(\Phi(x,\tau))
\\
\tilde c(\Phi(x,\tau),x,\tau)&=&-\frac{xv(\tau)w^\prime(\tau)}{2w(\tau)
(v(\tau)-1)}c^*(\Phi(x,\tau),x,\tau)
\\
v(\tau)&=&\frac{R_0}{s_0}\sqrt{\frac{l_0}{s_0 w(\tau)}}\label{eq:vadim}
\\
\gamma&=&\frac{t_0\Psi_e K_s}{(\theta_s-\theta_R)(1-n)s_0^2}
\label{eq:gamma}
\\
\sigma &=& \frac{S_{max}}{2 \pi K_s \Psi_e}\label{eq:sigma}
\\
\tau_{max} &=& \frac{T_{max}}{t_0}\label{eq:tmax}
\end{eqnarray}
where $k(\Phi(x,\tau))$ and $c(\Phi(x,\tau))$ are the dimensionless forms
of $K(\Psi(r,t))$ and $C(\Psi(r,t))$ respectively. The dimensionless
number $\gamma$ takes into account soil properties and the geometrical
proportions of the root, $t_0$ is chosen to make $\gamma = 1$. The
dimensionless number $\sigma$ takes into account one flux per unit of
length, related to the water uptake, the term $K_s \Psi_e$ is a flux per
unit of length when the soil is saturated and the gradient of the matric
potential is equal to $\Psi_e/1cm$.
Taking into account (\ref{eq:cambiovariables}) and the definitions
(\ref{eq:kadim})--(\ref{eq:tmax}), the system
(\ref{eq:modelo1})--(\ref{eq:modelo5}) is transformed in a dimensionless
form in the domain $(0,1) \times (0,\tau_{max})$ given by:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:sistema-cuerpo}
c^*(\Phi(x,\tau),x,\tau)\derp{}{\tau}\left[\Phi(x,\tau)\right]&=&\tilde
c(\Phi(x,\tau),x,\tau) \derp{}{x}\left[\Phi(x,\tau)\right]-\\&&\nonumber
\derp{}{x}\left[\frac{\gamma k^*(\Phi(x,\tau),x,\tau)}{(v(\tau)-1)^2}
\derp{}{x}\left[\Phi(x,\tau)\right]\right],
\\
\label{eq:sistema-cond-in}
\Phi(x,0) &=& \varphi(x),
\\
\label{eq:sistema-borde-lej}
\derp{\Phi}{x} (1,\tau) &=& 0,
\\
\label{eq:sistema-absorcion}
\sigma\ g(\Phi(0,\tau))&=&-\frac{1}{v(\tau)-1} k^*(\Phi(0,\tau),0,\tau)
\derp{\Phi}{x}(0,\tau),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\varphi(x) = \phi(s_0+(R_0-s_0)x)/\Psi_e$, is the dimensionless
initial profile. This transformation maps the spatial domain variable in
time to a fixed domain in time, and adds a term on the right side of the
transformed transport equation (\ref{eq:sistema-cuerpo}) which contains
the variation of the moving boundary. In order to solve the model
(\ref{eq:sistema-cuerpo}--\ref{eq:sistema-absorcion}) the non-linear
finite element method \cite{reddy2004} is applied and the resulting model
is solved by using the software FlexPDE \cite{flexpde} with an adaptive
mesh of around 400 nodes.
\section{Results}
All simulations were performed by a same hypothetical plant in three
types of soils (loam, silt and clay) for the same soil-root volume $(4000
cm^3)$ with the same total water content $(\theta_i=0.30)$. This initial
condition is fixed using the "field capacity" concept given by Ritchie
\cite{ritchie1981}. Hydraulic soil data selected were those for loam,
silt, and clay based on \cite{personne2003}. The soil parameters used are
shown in Table \ref{tab:parametros_suelo}. For the plant parameters
different sources were used. The values of $\Psi_2$ and $\Psi_3$ were
taken from \cite{feddes1978}, the value of $\Psi_1$ was chosen to assure
that wateruptake was possible at the beginning of the simulation. $s_0$
and $V$ are typical values from the literature \cite{kelly1992}, and $l_0$
was chosen to be $1$ cm to simulate a plant at the start of growth. The
plant and soil volume parameters are listed in Table \ref{tab:tabla1}.
Table \ref{tab:parametros_iniciales} shows parameters of soil and plant
properties and the initial ``available water''$(U_0)$. This last parameter
is approximated as
\begin{equation}
U_0 = [\theta_i -\theta(\Psi_3)] \times 4000 cm^3,
\end{equation}
and represents how much water can be extracted from the soil before it
reaches an uniform water potential at the wilting point. Beyond this point
the root cannot extract more water.
\begin{table}
\begin{flushleft}
\begin{tabular}{l|c|c|c|c|c|c}
Soil&$\theta_s$&$\theta_R$&$K_s$ (cm/s)& $\Psi_e$ (cm)&$n$& $p$\\
\hline
Loam&$0.43$&$0.078$&$2.89\times 10^{-4}$&$-27.78$&$1.56$&$0.5$\\
Silt&$0.46$&$0.034$&$7.00\times 10^{-5}$&$-62.5$&$1.37$&$0.5$\\
Clay&$0.38$&$0.068$&$5.80\times 10^{-6}$&$-125$&$1.09$&$0.5$
\end{tabular}
\end{flushleft}
\caption{Soil hydraulic properties}\label{tab:parametros_suelo}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\begin{flushleft}
\begin{tabular}{c|ll}
Parameter&Value\\ \hline
$l_0$&1&cm\\
$R_0$&35.7&cm\\
$V$&$1 * 10^{-4}$&cm/s\\
$s_0$&0.05&cm\\
$S_{max}$&$2*10^{-6}$ &cm$^2$/s \\
$\Psi_1$&-1&cm\\
$\Psi_2$&-750 &cm\\
$\Psi_3$&-17500&cm
\end{tabular}
\end{flushleft}
\caption{Values for the plant and soil volume parameters}
\label{tab:tabla1}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\begin{flushleft}
\begin{tabular}{l|c|c|c}
Soil & $\Psi(r,0)$ (cm) & $t_0$ (s) & $U_0$ (cm$^3$)\\
\hline
Loam & $-51.4$ &$0.0614$ & $850$ \\
Silt & $-194$ & $0.0901$ & $852$\\
Clay & $-3280$ &$0.0968$ & $128$
\end{tabular}
\end{flushleft}
\caption{Simulation parameters depending on soil and plant properties}
\label{tab:parametros_iniciales}
\end{table}
Figures \ref{fig:loam_profile}, \ref{fig:silt_profile}, and
\ref{fig:clay_profile} show the soil water potential profiles at different
times, with an initial moisture condition equivalent $(\theta=0.30)$, for
the loam, silt and clay soil, respectively. The curves reveal that a high
water potential gradient is developed in a very small time period for the
clay soil, while for the loam and silt soil the development of the water
potential gradient is more gradual. For loam and silt soil the root dries
the soil near the root surface on the first 30 days. After that period
these soils show a water potential on the root surface close to the
wilting point. The root starts to retrieve water near the moving boundary
$R(t)$. This is shown by an increase of the modulus of the water potential
(decrease of his value) at $x=1$ for the dimensionless domain, or $r =
R(t)$ for the physical domain. The clay soil shows a similar behavior but
the time period at which the potential near root zone reaches potentials
close to the wilting point is 10 days.
\begin{figure}[tp]
\center{\noindent\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{loam_profile_psi.eps}}
\caption{Water potential profiles at the scaled domain for the loam
soil.}\label{fig:loam_profile}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tp]
\center{\noindent\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{silt_profile_psi.eps}}
\caption{Water potential profiles at the scaled domain for the silt
soil.} \label{fig:silt_profile}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tp]
\center{\noindent\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{clay_profile_psi.eps}}
\caption{Water potential profiles at the scaled domain for the clay
soil.} \label{fig:clay_profile}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:sens_g_v} shows the relative water uptake
$(G(\Psi(s_0,t))/S_{max})$ per unit of root length as a function of time
for the three types of soil, at different root growth rate. At the initial
time the water uptake for loam and silt soil develops at the zone of
maximum uptake (zone (a) in Figure \ref{fig:tomafig}), while clay soil
does the same for the linear uptake zone (zone (b) in Figure
\ref{fig:tomafig}). The figure shows that the water uptake does not vary
much for the first 20 days as a function of $V$ for loam soil, after that
period loam soil enters on the linear regime at different times depending
on the value of $V$. After 40 days the gap among the curves on the log
scale remains almost constant and all the curves are in the linear uptake
regime. This means that the instantaneous root water uptake curves have a
multiplicative constant among them. Silt soil has a very similar behavior
to loam soil but the linear regime occurs at shorter times. For clay soil
the period of similar water uptake is 10 days and after that period the
curves begin a gradual separation that continues until the end of the
simulation. Clay soil also shows a very sharp initial decrease on the
curve (one order of magnitude), this is due to the linear regime and a
large decrease of $\Psi(s_0,t)$ at the beginning of the simulation.
\begin{figure}[p]
\center{\noindent\includegraphics[width=8cm]{gerelativo.eps}}
\caption{Relative water uptake per unit of root length time evolution
for the different soils. The curves refer to changes in root growth
speed $(V)$. The square is a zoom on the first day of simulation for the
clay soil.}\label{fig:sens_g_v}
\end{figure}
To compare the above simulations with those for a constant root length
density in a fixed domain model a simulation with $V=0$ $(R(t) = R_0)$ was
made. For the comparison to be useful the root length was taken to be the
average root length $(l_0=\bar{l}=389.8cm)$. Using this value the domain
is fixed and the moving boundary model then becomes the model proposed by
Personne \cite{personne2003}. The influxes on the root surface estimated
by the fixed boundary model are then integrated using
(\ref{eq:tarziasimp}) with the fixed root length, to compute the
cumulative uptake. This model will be referred to as Fixed Boundary Fixed
Length (FBFL). Similar to published results on nutrient uptake (e.g.
Claasen and Barber \cite{claasen1976}, Cushman \cite{cushman1979a}) the
influxes obtained with the fixed boundary model can be integrated using
equation (\ref{eq:tarziasimp}) with a variable root length, to compute the
cumulative uptake. This model will be referred to as Fixed Boundary
Variable Length (FBVL). Figure \ref{fig:tinst} shows the instantaneous
root system water uptake against time (i.e. $G(\Psi(s_0,t)) \times l(t)$),
for the three models. The time at which the instantaneous water uptake is
maximum is called the Maximum Uptake time (MUT). The MUT is only present
when the roots are growing. The straight line in the beginning is caused
by the assumption of linear root length growth and the constant water
uptake $(G(\Psi)=S_{max})$, on the models with root growth. In contrast
when the root is taking up water in the water stressed (linear zone) of
the water uptake function the instantaneous water uptake as a function of
time is non linear, in all models. We also observe that in the clay soil
for the models with root growth the water uptake initially decreases given
the large decrease in soil water potential at the root surface. This
variation is shown in the inset, the later increase in water uptake is due
to the root growth. The models with growing roots have a similar course in
time, but the differences between the MUT-values are consistently showing
that the MUT in the FBVL occurs earlier after the start of root growth.
The instantaneous water uptake of the FBFL model and the FBVL models
differs only by the multiplicative factor $l(t)/\bar{l}$.
\begin{figure}[p]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[scale=0.29]{FBFL_tomai.eps}
\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.29]{FBVL_tomai.eps}
\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.29]{MB_tomai.eps}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Instantaneous water uptake time evolution for the three models
to be compared, from top to bottom fixed boundary without root growth,
fixed boundary with root growth and moving boundary by the root growth.}
\label{fig:tinst}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:tacu} shows the cumulative water uptake as a function of
time for the three models. The cumulative water uptake at 90 days
$(U(90))$ is close to the amount of water initially available $(U_0)$ for
the FBFL and the moving boundary models (see Table
\ref{tab:parametros_iniciales}). For the FBVL model the cumulative water
uptake is lower than that predicted by the other. This difference is due
to the smaller value of the MUT. After 90 days $20\%$ of the initially
available water in the clay soil is remaining, whereas for the silt and
loam soil it is in the order of $10\%$. The clay soil does not trend to a
constant value due to the less water uptake. It is expected that over a
longer period the moisture content in the clay soil will asymptotically
approach to a lower value, that might be on the proximity of the values found on the other soils.
\begin{figure}[p]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[scale=0.28]{FBFL_tomac.eps}
\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.28]{FBVL_tomaac.eps}
\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.28]{MB_tomaac.eps}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Cumulative water uptake time evolution for the three models,
respectively fixed boundary without root growth, fixed boundary with
root growth and moving boundary with the root growth.}\label{fig:tacu}
\end{figure}
To analyze the effect of parameter variation on model output variables,
several sensitivity diagrams were made using a local approach
\cite{vangriensven2006}. The results are presented in Tables
\ref{tab:sensibilidadl0}, \ref{tab:sensibilidads0},
\ref{tab:sensibilidadsmax} and \ref{tab:sensibilidadv} as a function of
the multiplicative factor of each parameter for the loam soil. The more
relevant parameters are $V$ and $S_{max}$, having both positive
correlation on the water uptake at 30, 60 and 90 days and negative
correlation with the MUT. As for the WUMUT, $S_{max}$ has a negative
correlation and $V$ has a positive correlation. $s_0$ has an almost
constant sensitivity and always positive correlation. Therefore the
experimental measurement errors on those parameters would be more
amplified on the output of the model. For the silt soil there is a very
similar pattern than for the loam soil. For the clay soil there are some
differences. $S_{max}$ is no longer a relevant parameter and $s_0$ is a
relevant parameter with positive correlation to the accumulative water
uptake. For the MUT and WUMUT $s_0$ has a negative correlation. The
behavior of $V$ is left unchanged with respect to the loam soil. MUT shows
almost no sensitivity to $S_{max}$ but the WUMUT shows that this parameter
is very relevant with positive correlation. All the sensitivities are non
linear with some exceptions for $s_0$.
\begin{table}[htp]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}\hline
Factor&$0.5$&$1.5$&$2.0$\\\hline\hline
$U_{30}$&$-1.5\ 10^{-3}$&$1.5\ 10^{-3}$&$2.9\ 10^{-3}$\\
$U_{60}$&$-1.6\ 10^{-4}$&$1.6\ 10^{-4}$&$3.2\ 10^{-4}$\\
$U_{90}$&$-9.1\ 10^{-5}$&$8.7\ 10^{-5}$&$1.7\ 10^{-4}$\\
MUT&$2.1\ 10^{-3}$&$-2.1\ 10^{-3}$&$-4.2\ 10^{-3}$\\
WUMUT&$-7.8\ 10^{-5}$&$4.6\ 10^{-5}$&$1.1\ 10^{-4}$\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Sensitivity of the moving boundary model to the variation of
the initial length $l_0$ for the loam soil. $U_{30}$, $U_{60}$, and
$U_{90}$ are the cumulative water uptake at 30, 60 and 90 days
respectively. MUT and WUMUT are the maximum uptake time and the
cumulative water uptake at maximum uptake time respectively. The
sensitivity is the change of the output divided by the value of the
output without variation of the parameter.}\label{tab:sensibilidadl0}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[htp]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}\hline
Factor&$0.5$&$1.5$&$2.0$\\\hline\hline
$U_{30}$&$-1.5\ 10^{-2}$&$9.7\ 10^{-3}$&$1.7\ 10^{-2}$\\
$U_{60}$&$-1.0\ 10^{-2}$&$6.6\ 10^{-3}$&$1.2\ 10^{-2}$\\
$U_{90}$&$-7.7\ 10^{-3}$&$4.7\ 10^{-3}$&$8.1\ 10^{-3}$\\
MUT&$-1.4\ 10^{-2}$&$9.0\ 10^{-3}$&$1.6\ 10^{-2}$\\
WUMUT&$-2.8\ 10^{-2}$&$1.8\ 10^{-2}$&$3.2\ 10^{-2}$\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Sensitivity of the moving boundary model to the variation of
the root radius $s_0$ for the loam soil. $U_{30}$, $U_{60}$, and
$U_{90}$ are the cumulative water uptake at 30, 60 and 90 days
respectively. MUT and WUMUT are the maximum uptake time and the
cumulative water uptake at maximum uptake time respectively. The
sensitivity is the change of the output divided by the value of the
output without variation of the parameter.}\label{tab:sensibilidads0}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[htp]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}\hline
Factor&$0.5$&$1.5$&$2.0$\\\hline\hline
$U_{30}$&$-4.5\ 10^{-1}$&$6.4\ 10^{-2}$&$8.0\ 10^{-2}$\\
$U_{60}$&$-1.3\ 10^{-2}$&$1.3\ 10^{-3}$&$1.5\ 10^{-3}$\\
$U_{90}$&$-1.1\ 10^{-3}$&$1.0\ 10^{-3}$&$2.3\ 10^{-3}$\\
MUT&$4.8\ 10^{-1}$&$-2.1\ 10^{-1}$&$-3.4\ 10^{-1}$\\
WUMUT&$8.7\ 10^{-2}$&$-6.3\ 10^{-2}$&$-1.1\ 10^{-1}$\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Sensitivity of the moving boundary model to the variation of
the maximum root water uptake per unit of root length $S_{max}$ for the
loam soil. $U_{30}$, $U_{60}$, and $U_{90}$ are the cumulative water
uptake at 30, 60 and 90 days respectively. MUT and WUMUT are the maximum
uptake time and the cumulative water uptake at maximum uptake time
respectively. The sensitivity is the change of the output divided by the
value of the output without variation of the parameter.}
\label{tab:sensibilidadsmax}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[htp]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}\hline
Factor&$0.5$&$1.5$&$2.0$\\\hline\hline
$U_{30}$&$-4.5\ 10^{-1}$&$1.0\ 10^{-1}$&$1.5\ 10^{-1}$\\
$U_{60}$&$-5.9\ 10^{-2}$&$2.5\ 10^{-2}$&$3.9\ 10^{-2}$\\
$U_{90}$&$-3.6\ 10^{-2}$&$1.6\ 10^{-2}$&$2.6\ 10^{-2}$\\
MUT&$4.1\ 10^{-1}$&$-1.8\ 10^{-1}$&$-2.9\ 10^{-1}$\\
WUMUT&$-7.3\ 10^{-3}$&$4.3\ 10^{-3}$&$7.4\ 10^{-3}$\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Sensitivity of the moving boundary model to the variation of
the maximum root water uptake per unit of root length $S_{max}$ for the
loam soil. $U_{30}$, $U_{60}$, and $U_{90}$ are the cumulative water
uptake at 30, 60 and 90 days respectively. MUT and WUMUT are the maximum
uptake time and the cumulative water uptake at maximum uptake time
respectively. The sensitivity is the change of the output divided by the
value of the output without variation of the parameter.}
\label{tab:sensibilidadv}
\end{table}
Mass conservation implies that the total water volume must be the same at
the beginning and at an arbitrary time of the simulation. Since the water
can only be in the soil or inside the root, therefore the total water
volume $\left(T\left[cm^3\right]\right)$ at time $t$ would be
\begin{equation}
T(t)= U(t)+W(t)
\end{equation}
with $U(t)$ and $W(t)$ defined as in equations (\ref{eq:tarziasimp}) and
(\ref{eq:aguasuelo}) respectively. At the beginning of the simulation the
cumulative water uptake is null, therefore the total water is the water in
soil. With the above considerations the change of the cumulative water
uptake plus the water remaining in the soil minus the initial water
content $(W(t)+U(t) -W(0))$ as a function of time was calculated. For the
FBVL model the mass balance cannot be done because to compute the water
remaining in soil, the operation must be done with pressure head profiles
as a function of time which has been calculated in fixed domain, but this
result must be compared with the cumulative uptake by a growing root,
which has been calculated integrating in a variable domain. The results of
those calculations are shown in Figure \ref{fig:balance}. It shows that
there is an effect of water mass loss for the moving boundary model that
is not present on the fixed boundary model. There are two possible causes
for this mass loss. The first cause is the assumption of total volume
constant in the formulation of the model, reflected in the moving boundary
formula $\left(R(t) = R_0 \sqrt{\frac{l_0}{l(t)}}\right)$, i.e., the
volume that is kept constant is the soil plus root volume, being the
volume occupied by the root is $V_R= \pi s_0^2 l(t)$. Then the soil volume
is the total volume minus the root volume, therefore the root occupies a
bigger fraction of the total volume as time increases (see Figure
\ref{fig:evolucion}). The water content in the volume of soil removed by
the root is not taken into account in the calculation of the water in the
soil volume $(W(t))$. This means, in other words, that, for the model, the
root is ``eating'' the soil, and the water which is in that portion of the
soil. The second cause is the numerical errors. This case is similar for
both models and does not contribute a large mass loss. An important remark
is that the FEM is used to solve the water potential $(\Psi)$, not the
water content $(\theta)$, on a discretized space with a finite precision,
and cumulative errors could lead to a mass creation or loss depending of
the parameters. Figure \ref{fig:balance} shows the soil volume loss effect
plus the water mass loss due to the used numerical method in each
integration step. In each soil for the moving boundary model the water
loss is around $1\%$ of the total water. For the clay soil the total loss
is around $15\%$ of the total water uptake, while for the other soils the
loss is less than $2 \%$. The water loss for the fixed boundary model is
negligible compared with the total water or the cumulative water uptake.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c}
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{FBFL_balance.eps}
\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{MB_balance.eps}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Water mass balance $(W(t)+U(t) -W(0))$ versus time $(t)$ for
the values shown in Table \ref{tab:tabla1} for the FBFL and the Moving
Boundary models. The total water is the cumulative water uptake plus the
water remaining in the soil, the initial water is the total water at the
start of the simulation.}\label{fig:balance}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
An important remark is that all the results presented before are computed
for a single plant, in a fixed soil volume with initial soil water content
equal for all simulations, to compare the effect of the different soils on
the water uptake. The parameters used represent traits of the plant. $V$
can be regarded as the response to nutrient and water uptake and is
influenced by the plant genetics. $S_{max}$ is linked to atmospheric
factors and to genetic variation. $s_0$ is the constant root radius. $l_0$
is a growing stage trait, changes in it only means a change in the
development of the rooting system when the simulation begins.
There is a large difference in behaviour among the silt and loam soil on
one hand and the clay soil on the other hand. Initial pressure head (Table
\ref{tab:parametros_iniciales}) and pressure head profiles are different
(Figures \ref{fig:loam_profile}, \ref{fig:silt_profile} and
\ref{fig:clay_profile}), and instantaneous water uptake is much smaller
(Figures \ref{fig:sens_g_v} and \ref{fig:tinst}). This can be explained in
terms of the water uptake function $(G(\Psi))$. For the clay soil the
water uptake function is on the linear regime (zone (b) of Figure
\ref{fig:tomafig}) and the water potential is sharply decreasing (drying
the soil) at the root-soil interface. Once the time variation of the water
potential at the interface is stabilized the root growth has the dominant
effect on uptake and the curve is similar to the other curves, although it
shows a non linear behavior.
From Figure \ref{fig:balance}, the mass balance is not exactly zero owing
to the numerical method used. For the FBFL model the differences are due
to numerical errors only and are very low compared with the water volume
loss on the moving boundary model. The mass variation is produced on the
high instantaneous uptake zone, this is a known flaw of the finite
elements method. The moving boundary model has a higher mass variation
compared with the FBFL model by the accumulation of two factors, numerical
errors as in FBFL model, and a soil volume loss effect. The soil volume
loss effect is introduced by the assumption of constant total volume
(roots grows at the expense of a decrease in the soil volume), which is
reflected on the formula of the moving boundary (\ref{eq:modelo5}). For
the moving boundary model the differences on the total values of water
mass loss by a soil volume loss effect and numerical errors are due to the
different variations of the soil water contents. The clay soil has low
available water (see Table \ref{tab:parametros_iniciales}), but the total
water mass loss is similar to the other soils, and it represents about $10
\%$ of the initial total water. The assumptions that generate the soil
volume loss effect should be revised when soils for which the initial
potential is on the linear zone (i.e., low water availability) are
studied. The water mass loss is consistent with the model assumptions, and
the numerical induced errors are low compared to the water uptakes
$(<15\%$ for clay soils, and $<2 \%$ for the other soils). There are two
main actions to avoid the volume loss effect. The first one is to keep the
soil volume constant and not the root-soil volume. The second one is to
evaluate the mass loss and put it back into the soil using a source
function or a modification of the boundary conditions. Each procedure will
have its advantages and disadvantages, but, since the water loss is very
low compared with the water uptake for the studied cases, the revision is
left for a specific work on low initial available water.
The obtained results shows a global consistency with the structure of
soils studied, becoming a valuable tool to study the water uptake in a
more complex situation (for example when the effect of a variable
evapotranspiration on $S_{max}$ is considered).
Obviously, the results would change when plants not growing in pots but in
the field (in this case equation (\ref{eq:modelo5}) is invalid) are
considered. Here is necessary to develop a new rooting development
function $R(t)$. One change in this model to be useful in a field
situation is the use of a coordinate representing the depth and water
transport by gravity. Here $R(t)$ should incorporate the root
architecture. Moreover, since this is a first approach a simple water
uptake function has been used. This function could be changed to a more
complex function \cite{vrugt2001,li2006}. Moreover the effect of $V$ and
$S_{max}$ could change substantially after the first 30 days in field
conditions, since there will be circadian and climatic effects that will
alters the root water uptake function $(G)$, and the evapotranspiration
will be a parameter to be measured or calculated before the simulation.
The differences among models with and without root growth can bee seen in
figures \ref{fig:tinst} and \ref{fig:tacu}. The dynamics of water uptake
for the fixed boundary models are very different from those of a moving
boundary model. The maximum instantaneous water uptake is achieved much
faster for the fixed boundary model. Also a difference in the beginning
and end of the simulation for the values of the instantaneous water uptake
can be observed, while for the FBFL and the moving boundary model the
instantaneous water uptake reaches values close to zero as time goes by,
is not clear that the FBVL model has the same behavior. This difference is
because the influx on root surface is computed for a single root in a
fixed domain and the cumulative uptake by the growing root is calculated
using these influxes. From a physical point of view, to compute the
cumulative uptake influxes calculated in a variable domain should be used.
Therefore the mass balance cannot be calculated for the FBVL. For those
considerations of mass conservation the FBVL approach should be avoided on
water uptake models.
\section{Acknowledgments}
The authors would like to acknowledge the valuable suggestions of
Guillermo G. Weber from the University of Texas at Brownsville, and Sergio
Preidikman from Universidad Nacional de C\'ordoba (UNC) for the
implementation of the FEM. This work was supported in part by PIP N
18/C362 from SECyT-UNRC and PIP Nº 0534 from CONICET-UA, Argentina. The
authors would like to acknowledge the valuable suggestions made by the
anonymous referees to this work.
\bibliographystyle{elsarticle-num}
|
\section{\label{sec:level1}First-level heading}
\newcommand{\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}}{\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}}
\newcommand{P_i^{o}(t)}{P_i^{o}(t)}
\newcommand{P_i^{f}(t)}{P_i^{f}(t)}
\newcommand{\Gamma_i^{of}}{\Gamma_i^{of}}
\newcommand{\Gamma_i^{fo}}{\Gamma_i^{fo}}
\section{Introduction}
Many body classical models with discrete energy levels, such as Ising-spin systems, are particular examples of markovian
chains \cite{krapivsky10}, whose growing interest includes fields as diverse as condensed matter physics, biology
\cite{armond14} and economics \cite{jaeckel02}.
Despite intense research, exact results for these systems are rare in statistical physics, even for the most simple
Hamiltonians \cite{baxter08}.
In this context, Monte Carlo (MC) numerical calculations are often considered as a fundamental benchmark for theories and
experiments~\cite{landau00}.
While MC simulations usually provide accurate results for static properties of interacting discrete-variable models, the
situation is different regarding their dynamical evolution, which, lacking a first-principles equation of motion as in
continuous-variable systems, should be generally described by a stochastic master equation \cite{krapivsky10,glauber63}.
The latter expresses the probability distribution $\mathcal{P}(X,t)$ of a given state $X$ at time $t$, in the
form\cite{kampen07}
\begin{equation}
\small
\frac{\partial \mathcal{P}(X,t)}{\partial t}=\sum_Y W(X|Y)\mathcal{P}(Y,t)-\sum_Y W(Y|X) \mathcal{P}(Y,t)
\label{mme}
\end{equation}
where $W(Y|X)$ is the transition rate from state $X$ to state $Y$, in units of inverse time.
In model with discrete variables, where the states form a numerable set, the common requirement for a dynamical MC algorithm
is to reach asymptotically the equilibrium state, where the master equation fulfills detailed balance \cite{landau00}.
As a result Monte Carlo algorithms are usually based on the equilibrium (e.g., time-independent) transition probabilities
between states, instead of the time-varying probabilities resulting from the general solution of equation~(\ref{mme}).
The standard Monte Carlo step (MCS) that is used as the time step in most algorithms thus measures just the extent of random
exploration over the configuration space and has no direct relation with physical time.
In general, this can result in significant deviations between the MC dynamics and the dynamical behavior described by the
master equation.
However some equilibrium algorithms are known to reproduce successfully certain dynamical laws.
For example, this is the case of the Metropolis algorithm that predicts the $m\sim t^{1/2}$ scaling for the magnetization
{\it m} of the 2D Ising model after a subcritical quench~\cite{cugliandolo03}.
So far, the most important bridge between MCS and physical time has been built by a class of algorithms usually
called dynamic or kinetic Monte Carlo (KMC)~\cite{landau00, kratzer09}.
KMC algorithms use the information about the transition rates $W(X|Y)$ to select the new updates, thus assigning to this
process a real time related to the inverse rates.
More specifically, KMC algorithms use the fact that the average time between two consecutive events in the system is of the
order of $\langle\Delta t\rangle\sim R(X)^{-1}$, where $R(X)=\sum_YW(Y|X)$ is the total sum of all rates of individual
processes the system can undergo from a given state $X$~\cite{kratzer09}.
Therefore, single time step is updated in a realistic way using a Poissonian distribution, by the
expression $\Delta t=-R(X)^{-1} \mathrm{log}(x)$, with $x$ being a uniformly distributed variable between $0$ and $1$.
This trick allows one to map the simulation steps with a real time that is physically meaningful, and has become the current
standard for numerical calculations of the dynamics of discrete-variable models.
The KMC step is then completed by the execution of the process that has been selected following a specific rule.
The choice of this specific rule have produced different KMC schemes: the so called first-reaction method \cite{kratzer09},
for example, selects always the process with the fastest rate, while in the most commonly used BKL or
Gillespie algorithm~\cite{bkl75} the probability of selecting a process is a linear function of the rates.
As can be inferred from the discussion above, all standard KMC methods follow a Markov chain kinetics, sampling correctly
from the (usually unknown) solution of the master equation, and so producing stochastic trajectories along the actual time
axis.
These single trajectories, however, are very accurate as far as time scales remain larger than $\langle\Delta
t\rangle$.
At times of the order of consecutive events,
trajectories are not expected to reproduce the exact solution of the master equation in the time axis.
This loss of accuracy at small times prevents, for example, the inclusion in the KMC dynamics of any time-dependent parameter
whose variation is of the order of $\langle\Delta t\rangle$.
A reliable numerical technique capable of reproducing the master equation kinetics for fast and ultra-fast regimes is still
lacking.
In this work we present a new algorithm for addressing the latter problem, that is based on the numerical solution of the
master equation.
The main requirements are that
(i) the system can be decomposed into a set of $N$ two-level
subsystems, and (ii) any dynamical evolution is realized by sequential transitions within these individual subsystems.
In the following we refer to these
$N$
transitions as {\it minimal processes}.
Condition (i) is the standard form of any Hamiltonians with Ising-like spins,
however,
it
can be also
made to apply to,
e.g., classical mixtures on lattices or any generic Potts models. Condition
(ii) is equivalent to the well
known single-spin-flip update procedure, which is widely used for
dynamical calculations of discrete models.
As we show below, conditions (i) and (ii) can be
fulfilled in
any model with discrete-variables.
We expect that the algorithm will be of particular value for, e.g., short-time critical dynamics of interacting classical
models \cite{albano11}, phase order kinetics \cite{bray02} and driven systems in oscillating fields \cite{park13}.
However, its validity is not restricted
to physical systems, nor
to short times,
and may in principle be used as an alternative to
Metropolis or
KMC simulations in a large number of markovian chains
of different nature.
\section{Event-Driven Algorithm}
Without loss of generality, in the following we present the algorithm in terms of Ising
spins.
The
idea behind
the scheme
is the following: given an initial configuration of the interacting spins, within the
characteristic time scale $\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}$ (which is a priori unknown) associated with the flip of a single spin from that {\it
specific} configuration, the time evolution of the whole system is described by a set of $N$ independent reduced master
equations.
By solving the latter, the exact time dependent probability $P_i(\Delta t)$ for spin $i$ to flip is obtained
analytically for each spin $i$ at any time $\Delta t$, where $\Delta t$ is the time interval since the previous spin flip. In
turn, the condition $ \sum_iP_i(\tau_{\mathrm{ED}})=1$ defines the value
of $\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}$ consistent with the single spin flip for that given configuration. Once $\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}$ is defined, the algorithm proceeds
with evaluating all $P_i(\Delta t)$ at time $\Delta t=\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}$ and uses them to update the configuration. This concludes a step
of the algorithm. The whole procedure is then repeated.
At the beginning of each step, we consider each spin $i$ occupying level $o$ while level $f$ is initially free, so that
$P^o_i(\Delta t=0)=1$ and $P^f_i(0)=0$, where $P_i^{o,f}(t)$ corresponds to the occupation probabilities of the two levels.
Within $\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}$,
these occupation probabilities
fulfill the rate equations
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:rate}
\frac{dP_i^{o}(t)}{dt}&=&\gtP_i^{f}(t)-\goP_i^{o}(t) \nonumber\\
\frac{dP_i^{f}(t)}{dt}&=&\goP_i^{o}(t)-\gtP_i^{f}(t)
\end{eqnarray}
where $\Gamma_i^{of}$ and $\Gamma_i^{fo}$ are the transition rates of the two-level subsystem of spin $i$, depending on the energy value
$E_i^{o,f}$ of the levels and the physical nature of the system.
The limit of infinite time corresponds to Boltzmann occupation probabilities
$P^{o,f}_i(\infty)=e^{-\beta E_i^{o,f}}/Z$, where $Z$ is the partition function of the two-level
subsystem, $\beta^{-1}=k_BT$ and $k_B$ is the Boltzmann constant.
With these conditions the transition probability $P_i(\Delta t)$, i.e., from $o$ to $f$, can be written in the form
\begin{equation}
P_i(\Delta t)=P_i^f(\Delta t)=P_i^f(\infty)\left[1-e^{-(\Gamma_i^{of}+\Gamma_i^{fo})\Delta t}\right],
\label{p2}
\end{equation}
where $P_i^f(\infty)=1/[1+e^{\beta(E_i^f-E_i^o)}]$.
As usually done in literature, in the following we assume that the characteristic frequency $\Gamma=\Gamma_i^{of}+\Gamma_i^{fo}$ is constant
in the system, and $1/\Gamma$ is adopted as the unit of time
\cite{glauber63}.
From Eq.~(\ref{p2}) and by applying the normalization condition $\sum_iP_i(\tau_{\mathrm{ED}})=1$ given above, we obtain $\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}$ as
\begin{equation}
\Gamma \tau_{\mathrm{ED}} = - \mathrm{ln}\left[1-P^{-1}_*\right],
\label{tbs}
\end{equation}
with $P_*=\sum_iP^f_i(\infty)$.
Each step of the algorithm starts with the calculation, for each spin $i$, of the energy difference $\Delta
E_i=E_i^f-E_i^o$
associated to flipping the spin. From this, the value of $P_*$ can be calculated. If $P_*>1$ then the value of $\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}$ for the
current step becomes that of expression Eq.~(\ref{tbs}).
If $P_*\leq1$, we choose to set $\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}=1$ (see below).
Once $\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}$ is evaluated, the sites are updated with the corresponding probability Eq.~(\ref{p2}) with $\Delta t=\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}$,
resulting in an average of one spin flip.
Consequently, the total time of the simulation is now incremented by $\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}$.
A value of $P_*$ less than or equal to one, means that the system will never reach a time for which, in average, one
spin is flipped.
This is the well-known situation in which finite systems freeze,
and the dynamics arrests, after reaching a stable configuration at sufficiently low temperatures [one example is shown below
when discussing Fig. \ref{f_eq} (inset)].
In most cases, this condition should suggest the end of the calculation, since the system will never evolve after reaching
this state.
However, for problems in which the energy can change independently of the configuration (e.g., time-dependent Hamiltonians),
this freezing could be temporary and, consequently, $\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}$ should be set to a constant value when $P_*\leq1$.
The value $\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}=1$ is just a conventional number, since it has to be tailored to well-capture the time scale associated to
the energy changes in the problem at hand.
We note that $\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}$ corresponds to a discretization of real time and in general varies from step to step, as it is
linked to the elementary changes of the system.
In turn, the latter depends only on the microscopic interactions in the Hamiltonian and the specific spin configuration.
Thus, since the whole algorithm directly deals with the exact real time, when conditions (i) and (ii) above are
satisfied we expect that the results of the numerical simulation will reproduce well those of the exact master equation at
all time scales.
The role of $\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}$ can also
be seen as a coarsening of the dynamics to the next physically meaningful time value,
calculated exactly, and not generated from a distribution function as in KMC schemes.
This time coarsening represents the stochastic counterpart of that in event-driven molecular
dynamics approaches~\cite{poschel05}, thus corresponding to the waiting time connecting two consecutive (stochastic) events.
Therefore we refer to the above-described scheme as the Event-Driven algorithm (ED).
This algorithm is composed of two serial loops of size $N$, firstly performing the calculation of $P_*$ and secondly
updating the minimal processes with the corresponding probability.
Consequently the ED step is of complexity ${\cal O}(N)$, that is, it scales linearly with the number of two-level
subsystems,
which is the same as the Metropolis Monte Carlo step.
In general, for any discrete-variable markovian chain, starting from a given configuration, the dynamical step is a rule
selecting the next configuration among $N$ possible choices.
In terms of the ED scheme, the latter means that for any markovian chain one can build the set of $N$ two-levels equations.
The only input of the algorithm is the list of the $N$ energy differences corresponding to each one of the possible
choices of configurations.
The main idea of the ED scheme relies on the very commonly used approximation that many coupled equations can be
decoupled for the very short time scale in which the system performs what we call a minimal process.
Using this fact the algorithm finds the characteristic time $\tau_{ED}$ for which only one minimal process is likely to
happen.
Consider, for instance, the $q$-levels Potts model, in which each spin can be in one of the $q>2$ available states.
For a system of $N_s$ spins, this model will imply a number of subsystems of $N=(q-1)N_s$, since, for any given
configuration, a minimal process consists in the transition of one of the $N_s$ spins to one of its $(q-1)$
available states.
Each of these $N$ possible transitions is identified with a minimal process by the ED algorithm, though for this model those
minimal processes corresponding to the same spin are excluded.
Thus, we just need to evaluate the energy difference associated to each of these $N$ transitions.
In general, the number of minimal processes is not even forced to be constant along consecutive steps, as is the case for
example in the lattice gas model.
The latter consists of particles that occupy certain positions in a lattice, and are able to move only to first-neighbouring
empty sites.
The minimal processes here should be taken as the set of all single possible moves that particles can perform.
For a very diluted configuration, this number of subsystems is then $N=ZN_p$, where $N_p$ and $Z$ are the number of particles
and the coordination of the lattice, respectively.
However, when two particles become nearest neighbours, the number of minimal processes $N$ is reduced.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[height=\columnwidth, angle=-90]{f1}
\caption{Temporal evolution of the average local magnetization $\langle S_i(t)\rangle$ for ten different sites (from top to
bottom $i=56,57,58,\ldots,65$) of an Ising chain of $L=110$ sites at $T=0.1$.
The initial condition was set to $\langle S_i(0)\rangle=1$ for the ten central spins $51\leq i\leq60$,
and
$\langle S_i(0)\rangle=0$ otherwise.
Dots are the outcome of numerical simulations using Event-Driven algorithm (a), and KMC algorithm fitting the data for large
(b) and small (c) spin index.
Solid lines are the corresponding exact analytical solution obtained by R. J. Glauber in Ref. \cite{glauber63}.
}
\label{f_glauber}
\end{figure}
\section{Numerical tests}
In the following we implement the ED algorithm.
Its accuracy is tested in a dynamical problem whose exact solution is known, and further compared to that of a
state-of-the-art $N$-fold KMC algorithm, implemented via the KMCLib library~\cite{kmclib14}.
Further tests are also presented to show the consistency of the ED scheme
with well known equilibrium and dynamical behaviors of the 2D Ising model, while discussing some specific features of the
method.
\subsection{Glauber exact solution}
We start by testing the algorithm in the exploration of the temporal evolution of the {\it local} magnetization in a linear
spin chain (1D) following a quench.
Before general tests involving averages for the total magnetization, we compare here the predictions of the algorithm to the
exact solution of the full master equation, as obtained by Glauber~\cite{glauber63}.
Up to our knowledge, this remains the more complex discrete-variable statistical system for which the local magnetization
dynamics has been analytically obtained, in the full range of time scales and for arbitrary initial conditions.
In turn, this analysis for the non-equilibrium properties of the local order parameter is the most complex test to which the
algorithm can be subjected.
Figure~\ref{f_glauber}a shows the time evolution of an Ising chain with $L=110$ sites, where the
initial state comprises a block of 10 parallel spins in the center, while the remaining 100 are in a disordered state
(see the caption for details).
The figure shows a perfect agreement between the exact analytical solution (continuous lines) and the numerical results from
ED algorithm.
Worth noting, this agreement occurs not only for the asymptotic, long-time regime, but also for very short times, where the
system is strongly out of equilibrium and the functional dependence of the local magnetization on time is non-trivial.
This confirms that the ED algorithm successfully accounts for the actual master-equation solution, accurately reproducing the
trajectories in the real time axis, even for scales of the order of single flips.
For comparison, figures \ref{f_glauber}b and \ref{f_glauber}c shows the best fits for the outcome of the KMC algorithm
in the same problem.
By adjusting the time scale with a free parameter, a reasonable fit can be found at short times
for the local magnetization of sites far from (panel b), or deep into (panel c) the central ordered block of the initial
chain configuration.
While this rescaling is valid, it is impossible to find a single rescaling parameter successfully fitting all
the sites at once.
Moreover, as can be easily noticed from the figure, numerical and exact curves corresponding to sites near the edge of the
block, are completely impossible to collapse by solely a rescaling of the time axis.
\subsection{2D Isind model}
We now focus on equilibrium properties.
One important point is that, e.g. unlike KMC, here detailed balance is not directly used to determine the
transition probabilities, and in fact is in general not fulfilled. However, detailed balance is naturally recovered at
equilibrium in calculations.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[height=\columnwidth,angle=-90]{f2}
\caption{Equilibrium magnetization $m$ (blue) and energy $E$ (red) obtained with the algorithm (triangles) and with
Metropolis calculations (squares), by a slow annealing of the system at different temperatures.
Units of energy and temperature are $J$ and $J/k_B$, respectively, where $J$ is the coupling constant of the Ising
Hamiltonian.
Magnetization is the average value of the spins.
The dashed line corresponds to the exact transition temperature of the infinite system.
The inset is the temperature dependence of the average time step of the Event-Driven algorithm.}
\label{f_eq}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{f_eq} shows example results for the equilibrium properties of the 2D Ising model with size $L^2=100\times100$
using both ED and Metropolis, equilibrated for $5\times10^4\Gamma^{-1}$ and $5\times10^4$MCS, respectively.
The system undergoes a phase transition from paramagnetic to ferromagnetic phase at $T_c=2.269$.
The figure shows that the algorithm reproduces well the results from Metropolis for the magnetization and the energy as a
function of $T$, finding the same equilibrium configurations and $T_c$.
While central to the algorithm, $\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}$ can also capture certain interesting aspects of the system dynamics.
In the inset of Fig.~\ref{f_eq}, the characteristic time $\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}$, averaged over a time at least equal to the equilibration
one, is plotted as a function of $T$.
For $T>T_c$, $\langle\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}\rangle$ is very small ($\langle\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}\rangle\sim 10^{-4}/\Gamma$), corresponding to a fast flipping
rate, as expected in the paramagnetic phase.
Below $T_c$, however, $\langle\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}\rangle$ rapidly increases until it saturates for $T\lesssim1$.
At this temperature, the dynamics is essentially frozen and $\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}$ becomes one by construction.
As discussed above, frozen dynamics is always reached in
calculations for
finite
systems evolving into a stable configuration (e.g., the ferromagnetic state).
This can often result in an unwanted slowing down of computations at sufficiently low $T$. A rapid growth of $\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}$ (e.g.,
below $T_c$ in the figure) is then a computationally helpful flag of reaching a stable spin configuration.
In fact, this is a limiting case of the time coarsening that is performed by $\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}$ at each step of the algorithm, since
$\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}$ is chosen to prevent spurious updating for $\Delta t<\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}$ at each step.
We test the dynamical behavior of the algorithm for the 2D Ising model by quenching $T$ from a disordered configuration
(i.e., $T=\infty$) to a subcritical temperature $T=1<T_c$ corresponding to the fully magnetized ground state $m\approx1$ (see
Fig.~\ref{f_eq}). This is a well known coarsening process, where, as a result of quenching to low $T$, a mosaic of competing
ordered-phase clusters is formed.
In a finite system, the final state corresponds either to the fully ordered ground state or
to a configuration with striped domains
oriented antiparallel to the rest of the system \cite{olejarz12}.
The two physically relevant times in this situation are the time
$\tau_l$
associated with the appearence of the
first percolating cluster, i.e. an ordered domain of the size of the system, and the equilibration time $\tau_\mathrm{eq}$
after
which the system is found in one of the two final states.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[height=\columnwidth,angle=-90]{f3}
\caption{(a) Evolution of the magnetization $m$ using ED (triangles) and Metropolis (squares), after a quench from
a disordered configuration into $T=1$,
for a system of $L^2=250\times250$.
Inset: size scaling of the characteristic time
$\tau_l$
at which the first percolation
cluster is formed (see the text).
(b) Evolution of the average time step
of the ED algorithm after the quench described in panel (a).
Inset: size scaling of characteristic times $\tau_*$ and $\tau_\mathrm{eq}$ represented in the main figure (see the text).
}
\label{f_dyn}
\end{figure}
The evolution of the magnetization $m$ after the quench is shown in Fig.~\ref{f_dyn}a, where results are averaged over $500$
quench realizations in systems of up to $L^2=250\times250$ spins.
The figure shows that the ED algorithm reproduces the scaling $m\sim t^{1/2}$ typical of the coarsening dynamics of
two-dimensional systems with non-conserved order parameters \cite{cugliandolo03}, which is also captured by the Metropolis
dynamics, reaching the equilibrium configuration (i.e., plateau in the figure) at
$\tau_\mathrm{eq}\approx5\times10^3/\Gamma$.
The time
$\tau_l$,
shown in the inset as a function of the
linear size $L$,
signals the formation of the first percolating cluster, which has been demonstrated to be in general
unstable~\cite{cug14epl}.
Its computation was performed by first determining the ferromagnetic clusters, using an implementation of the Hoshen-Kopelman
algorithm~\cite{hk76},
and then by checking the percolating properties along the ED dynamics.
We find an exponent $\theta=0.84$ for the power law
$\tau_l\sim L^\theta$,
enriching the discussion on the phase
order kinetics of models with non-conserved order parameter, usually developed within the KMC scheme~\cite{cug14epl}.
Further information on the quench dynamics is obtained by the time evolution of $\langle\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}\rangle$ shown in
Fig.~\ref{f_dyn}b.
Firstly, the equilibration time $\tau_\mathrm{eq}$ extracted from Fig.~\ref{f_dyn}a is well captured by the dynamics
of $\langle\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}\rangle$.
Consistently, the value $\langle\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}\rangle\approx0.1/\Gamma$ for the plateau in Fig.~\ref{f_dyn}b is the same as that
obtained at equilibrium for the corresponding temperature $T=1$ (see inset of Fig.~\ref{f_eq}).
In addition, (ii) new information is provided by $\langle\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}\rangle$ on the physical mechanisms of phase ordering. That
is, a second characteristic time-scale $\tau_*$ appears at $\tau_*\simeq 2 \times 10^3/\Gamma$,
just where $\langle\tau_{\mathrm{ED}}\rangle$ changes the slope.
By inspection, we find that $\tau_*$ corresponds to the appearance of the first few stationary (i.e., final) states in some
realizations of the quenches.
That is, no final configuration is reached in our simulations for $t<\tau_*$.
After this time, however, the system starts having a non-zero probability of being in the final state, where $<\tau_{ED}>$ is
maximal.
Consequently, the average time scale of the relaxation slows down, in turn causing a more pronounced
slope.
In contrast, for $t>\tau_\mathrm{eq}$ all
configurations are either fully magnetized or striped. The inset shows that $\tau_\mathrm{eq}$ (as well as $\tau_*$) scales
with the system size as $\tau_\mathrm{eq}\sim L^2$, which is in agreement with known results \cite{cug14epl}.
\section{Conclusions}
In summary, we have introduced and tested a novel algorithm to simulate the stochastic dynamics of discrete variable models.
To the best of our knowledge, this is the first Monte Carlo method involving the exact physical time at all scales, with no
heuristic or phase-space assumptions.
The latter opens up the study of, e.g., strongly out-of-equilibrium situations for which exact numerical calculations are
currently not possible in short-time regimes.
As said above, the present algorithm can be adapted to tackle several classes of different problems.
For example, a microscopic update can be generalized that is consistent with conserved order parameter dynamics. The latter
can describe, e.g., the dynamics of kinetic phase separation in binary mixtures \cite{krapivsky10}.
The role of two level subsystems is here played by each couple of nearest-neighbor sites with different occupations, while
minimal processes translate into exchanges within these subsystems.
The same reasoning applies to general Potts models and related markovian chains.
The study of quenches in classical many-body systems and the relation to Kibble-Zurek mechanism \cite{liu14}, Lieb-Robinson
bounds with short- and long-range interactions \cite{metivier14}, as well as dynamical phase transitions in magnetic models
\cite{berger13}, are other important examples of physical processes of current interest where our algorithm can be
straightforwardly applied.
\section{Acknowledgments}
We thank L. Nicolao and N. Prokofiev for useful discussions.
We also acknowledge partial financial support from CNPq (Brazil), as well as the European Commission via ERC-St Grant ColdSIM
(No. 307688), EOARD, FWF-ANR grant "BLUESHIELD", EU via "RYSQ" and "COHERENCE", and UdS via Labex NIE and IdEX, Initial
Training Network COHERENCE and computing time at the HPC-UdS.
|
\section{Introduction}
A \emph{compactum} is simply a compact Hausdorff space and a \emph{continuum} is a connected compactum. There has been an extensive study of compacta and continua from the model-theoretic perspective; see, for example, \cite{Steeg2003} or \cite{bankston4}. In \cite{bankston1}, Bankston dualizes the model-theoretic notions of existential embeddings and existentially closed structures to the categories of compacta and continua; the dual notions are (appropriately named) \emph{co-existential mappings} and \emph{co-existentially closed compacta and continua}. In the appendix to this note, we show how these notions translate to their usual model-theoretic counterparts in the continuous signature for C$^*$-algebras (e.g., $X$ is a co-existentially closed compactum if and only if $C(X)$ is an existentially closed abelian C$^*$-algebra).
Recall that a continuum $X$ is said to be \emph{indecomposable} if $X$ is not the union of two of its proper subcontinua. If, in addition, every subcontinuum of $X$ is also indecomposable, then $X$ is said to be \emph{hereditarily indecomposable}. In \cite{bankston3}, Bankston proves that every co-existentially closed continuum is hereditarily indecomposable.
Amongst the hereditarily indecomposable continua, there is one such continuum that plays a special role. Recall that a continuum $X$ is said to be \emph{chainable} if, for every finite open cover $U_1,\ldots,U_n$ of $X$, there is a refinement to a cover $V_1,\ldots,V_m$ such that $V_i\cap V_j=\emptyset$ if and only if $|i-j|>1$. Up to homeomorphism, there is a unique continuum that is both chainable and hereditarily indecomposable; this continuum is called the \emph{pseudoarc} (see \cite{Logan}). In \cite{bankston2}, Bankston asks the natural question: is the pseudoarc a co-existentially closed continuum? In this note, we answer Bankston's question in the affirmative.
The plan of the proof is as follows: motivated by an $\curly{L}_{\omega_1,\omega}$ characterization of chainable continua in the (discrete) signature of lattice bases for continua given by Bankston in \cite{bankston5}, we prove that the class of separable $C(X)$ for which $X$ is a chainable continuum is definable by a uniform sequence of universal types (in the terminology of \cite{FHL}) in the continuous signature for C$^*$-algebras. Together with the fact, proven by K.P. Hart in \cite{hart}, that there is a unique universal theory of $C(X)$ for $X$ a nondegenerate continuum, this allows us to apply the technique of model-theoretic forcing to obtain a metrizable continuum $X$ for which $C(X)$ is existentially closed (so $X$ is hereditarily indecomposable) and for which $X$ is chainable, whence $X$ must be the pseudoarc.
We end this note by observing that $C(X)$, for $X$ a nondegenerate continuum, can never have quantifier elimination. The proof relies on combining the aforementioned result of Hart together with the observation that the class of $C(X)$, for $X$ a continuum, does not have the amalgamation property, as pointed out to us by Logan Hoehn. Together with results from \cite{EFKV}, the question of which abelian C$^*$-algebras have quantifier elimination is now completely settled: the only abelian C$^*$-algebras with quantifier elimination are $\mathbb{C}$, $\mathbb{C}^2$, and $C(2^\mathbb{N})$. In \cite{EFKV} it was shown that the only non-abelian C$^*$-algebra with quantifier elimination in $M_2(\mathbb{C})$, so we now have the complete list of C$^*$-algebras with quantifier elimination.
In this paper, we assume the reader is familiar with basic model theory as it applies to C$^*$-algebras. A good reference for the unacquainted reader is \cite{FHS2}. For background on the notions appearing in Section 3 (e.g. model companions, model-completions, etc.) we refer the reader to \cite{usvy}.
\subsection{Facts from the model theory of continua}
In this paper, all C$^*$-algebras are unital and we always work in the (continuous) signature $\curly{L}$ for (unital) C$^*$-algebras. In this language, the class of abelian C$^*$-algebras is clearly universally axiomatizable.
Throughout this paper, we will apply a topological adjective to an abelian C$^*$-algebra if its Gelfand spectrum possesses that property. Thus, for example, we will call $C(X)$ connected if $X$ is connected (and thus a continuum).
\begin{fact}
The class of connected abelian C$^*$-algebras is universally axiomatizable.
\end{fact}
\begin{proof}
That the class of connected abelian C$^*$-algebras is closed under ultraproducts is a special case of a more general result due to Gurevic (see \cite[Lemma 10]{gur}). (Alternatively, if $X$ is compact, then $X$ is connected if and only if $C(X)$ is projectionless; it remains to observe that if $(A_i \mid i\in I)$ is a family of C$^*$-algebras, $\mathcal U$ is an ultrafilter on $I$, and $A=\text{prod}_\mathcal U A_i$, then any projection of $A$ can be written as $\pi(p_i)$ with each $p_i$ a projection of $A_i$ and $\pi\colon\text{prod} A_i\to\text{prod}_\mathcal U A_i$ the usual quotient map.) It remains to see that the class is closed under substructures: if $C(X)\subseteq C(Y)$ and $Y$ is connected, then $Y$ continuously surjects onto $X$, whence $X$ is also connected.
\end{proof}
\begin{nrmk}
We may also give an explicit universal axiomatization of models of abelian projectionless C$^*$-algebras: note that a C$^*$-algebra is abelian if and only if $\sup_{x,y}\|xy-yx\|=0$ and that an abelian C$^*$-algebra is projectionless if and only if \[\sup_{\|f\|=1}\min (2\|1-ff^*\|\mathbin{\mathpalette\dotminussym{}} 1,1\dotminus4\|ff^*-(ff^*)^2\|)=0,\] where $r\mathbin{\mathpalette\dotminussym{}} s:=\max(r-s,0)$. To see this, first note that if $p$ is a proper projection, then $\|1-p\|=1$ and $\|p-p^2\|=0$. Conversely, if $X$ is connected and $f\in C(X)$ with $\|f\|=1$ satisfies $2\|1-ff^*\|\mathbin{\mathpalette\dotminussym{}} 1>0$, then the minimum of the spectrum of $ff^*$ is less than $1/2$. In particular, $ff^*$ attains the value $1/2$, whence $\|ff^*-(ff^*)^2\|\geq 1/4$ as required.
\end{nrmk}
We let $T_{\operatorname{conn}}$ denote the $\curly{L}$-theory of connected abelian C$^*$-algebras. The following important fact about $T_{\operatorname{conn}}$ is due to K. P. Hart. We indicate in the appendix how the version we state here follows from the statement given in \cite{hart}.
\begin{fact}\label{kp}
Suppose that $X$ and $Y$ are continua and $X$ is nondegenerate (that is, $X$ is not a single point). Then there is $C(X')\equiv C(X)$ for which $C(Y)$ embeds into $C(X')$.
\end{fact}
In particular, any two $C(X)$'s for $X$ a nondegenerate continuum have the same universal theory. As an aside, a standard ``sandwiching'' argument shows that if $X$ and $Y$ are nondegenerate continua for which both $\operatorname{Th}(C(X))$ and $\operatorname{Th}(C(Y))$ are $\forall\exists$-axiomatizable, then $\operatorname{Th}(C(X))=\operatorname{Th}(C(Y))$.
As another aside, one can use Fact \ref{kp} to prove that every complete theory of nondegenerate continua has continuum many nonisomorphic separable models. Indeed, first recall \cite[Section 20]{MT} that there is a family $(X_\alpha)_{\alpha<2^{\aleph_0}}$ of nondegenerate metrizable continua such that, for any metrizable continuum $Y$, $Y$ maps onto at most countably many of the $X_\alpha$'s. Now given a nondegenerate metrizable continuum $Y$ and $\alpha<2^{\aleph_0}$, by Fact \ref{kp} one can find a metrizable continua $Y_\alpha$ such that $C(X_\alpha)\hookrightarrow C(Y_\alpha)$ and $C(Y_\alpha)\equiv C(Y)$. It remains to observe that continuum many of the $Y_\alpha$'s must be pairwise non-homeomorphic.
\section{Proof of the Main Theorem}
Following the terminology of \cite{FHL} (see also \cite{FarahMagidor}), we say that a class $\mathcal{K}$ of separable models of $T_{\operatorname{conn}}$ is \emph{definable by a uniform sequence of universal types} if there are \emph{existential} $\curly{L}$-formulae $(\varphi_{m,n}(\vec x_m) \mid m,n\in \mathbb{N})$ (taking only nonnegative values) such that a model $C(X)$ of $T_{\operatorname{conn}}$ belongs to $\mathcal{K}$ if and only if, for all $m\in \mathbb{N}$, we have
\[
\left(\sup_{\vec x_m}\inf_n \varphi_{m,n}(\vec x_m)\right)^{C(X)}=0.
\]
\begin{thm}\label{omitting}
The class of models $C(X)$ of $T_{\operatorname{conn}}$ with $X$ chainable is uniformly definable by a sequence of universal types.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Consider the following quantifier-free $\curly{L}$-formulae, where $\vec x=(x_1\ldots,x_k)$, $\vec y=(y_1,\ldots,y_m)$, and $\vec z=(z_{ij})_{1\leq i,j\leq m}$:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\psi_0^k(\vec x)=\|\sum |x_{i}|\|-\|(\|\sum |x_i|\|-\sum |x_i|)\|$
\item\label{c3} $\psi_1^{m}(\vec y):=\max_{|i-j|\geq 2}\sqrt{\|y_iy_j\|}$
\item\label{c4} $\psi_2^{k,m}(\vec x,\vec y,\vec z):=\max_j \min_i d(|x_i|-|y_j|,|z_{ij}|)$
\end{itemize}
Note that if $X$ is a continuum and $\vec f\in C(X)^k$, then $\psi_0^k(\vec f)^{C(X)}\geq 0$ and $\psi_0^k(\vec f)^{C(X)}=r$ if and only if $r$ is maximal such that $\operatorname{range}(\sum |f_i|)\subseteq[r,\infty)$.
Let $\sigma_{k}(\vec x)$ denote the infinitary formula
\begin{eqnarray*}
\inf_{m}\inf_{\vec g}\inf_{\vec h} \min(\psi_0^{k}(\vec x),\max(\psi_0^k(\vec x)\mathbin{\mathpalette\dotminussym{}} k\psi_0^m(\vec y),m\psi_1^{m}(\vec y),m\psi_2^{k,m}(\vec x, \vec y,\vec z)))).
\end{eqnarray*}
\noindent To prove the theorem, we show that a metrizable continuum $X$ is chainable if and only if, for all $k$, we have
\[
\left(\sup_{\vec x}\sigma_{k}(\vec x)\right)^{C(X)}=0.
\]
Since we will evaluate formulas only in $C(X)$ during this proof, we suppress the superscript $C(X)$ to simplify notation.
We start with the backward implication. Suppose that $X$ is a metrizable continuum for which $\sup_{\vec x}\sigma_{k}(\vec x)=0$. Fix an open cover $U_1,\ldots,U_k$ of $X$. For $i=1,\ldots,k$, fix a nonnegative function $f_i$ in $C(X)$ with $\|f_i\|=1$ for which $U_i=\{x\in X\colon f_i(x)\neq 0\}$. (This is possible for, in a metrizable compact space, every closed set is the zeroset of a continuous function.) Since $(U_i)$ forms a cover of $X$, we have $\psi_0^k(\vec f)>0$. Fix $\epsilon>0$ for which $\psi_0^k(\vec f)>k\epsilon$. Take $m,\vec g$ and $\vec h$ witnessing that $\sigma_k(\vec f)<\frac{\epsilon}{2}$. Without loss of generality, we may assume that each $g_j$ and $h_{ij}$ are nonnegative functions.
Since $\psi_0^k(\vec f)\dot-k\psi_0^m(\vec g)<\frac{\epsilon}{2}$, we have that $\psi_0^m(\vec g)>\frac{\epsilon}{2}$. For $j=1,\ldots,m$, set
\[
W_j:=\left\{x\mid g_j(x)> \frac{\epsilon}{2m}\right\}.
\]
\noindent Note that $W_1,\ldots,W_m$ covers $X$. We next show that $(W_j)$ refines $(U_i)$. Fix $j$ and take $i$ such that $m\cdot d(f_i-g_j,h_{ij})<\frac{\epsilon}{2}$; we show that for such$i$, $W_j\subseteq U_i$. Towards this end, fix $x\in W_j$. Since $h_{ij}$ is nonnegative we have
\[-\frac{\epsilon}{2m} < f_i(x) - g_j(x),\]
and from the definition of $W_j$ we have
\[f_i(x)-g_j(x)<f_i(x)-\frac{\epsilon}{2m};\]
that is, $-\frac{\epsilon}{2m} < f_i(x) - \frac{\epsilon}{2m}$, whence $f_i(x)>0$ and $x\in U_i$.
Next fix $i,j\in \{1,\ldots,m\}$ with $|i-j|\geq 2$. Suppose, towards a contradiction, that $x\in W_i\cap W_j$. Then $\sqrt{g_ig_j(x)}> \frac{\epsilon}{2m}$, whence $m\psi_1^m(\vec g)^{C(X)}> \frac{\epsilon}{2}$, which is a contradiction. The only thing preventing from $(W_j)$ from being the desired chain refinement of $(U_i)$ is that we may not have that $W_i\cap W_{i+1}\not=\emptyset$ for all $1\leq i<m$. However, if $W_i\cap W_{i+1}=\emptyset$ for some $i<m$, then by connectedness of $X$ we have that either $X=\bigcup_{k\leq i}W_k$ or $X=\bigcup_{k\geq i+1}W_k$. We then pass to the appropriate subsequence of $W_j$, noting that the previous verified conditions of $(W_j)$ persist. This process must end after a finite number of steps, yielding the desired refinement of $(U_i)$.
We now prove the direct implication. Suppose that $X$ is chainable and fix $\vec f\in C(X)^k$. We must show that $\sigma_k(\vec f)=0$. Without loss of generality, we may assume that each $f_i$ is a nonnegative function of norm $1$. If $0\in \operatorname{range}(\sum_i f_i)$ then $\sigma_k(\vec f)=\psi_0^k(\vec f)=0$. Thus we may suppose that there is $\delta$ with $\psi^k_0(\vec f)>\delta>0$ and choose $\epsilon',\epsilon>0$ with
\[
\psi_0^k(\vec f)>k\epsilon'>k\epsilon>\psi_0^k(\vec f)-\delta>0.
\]
Note that $U_i:=\{x\mid f_i(x)>\epsilon\}$ covers $X$. Let $(W_j)_{j\leq m}$ be a chain that is a refinement for $U_i$ with $m$ minimal. For $j=1,\ldots,m$, it is routine to construct nonnegative functions $g_j\in C(X)$ with the following properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] $g_i\leq f_{i(j)}$ where $i(j)$ is the minimum $i$ such that $W_j\subseteq U_i$;
\item[(ii)] for all $x\in W_j$, $g_j(x)>\epsilon$;
\item[(iii)] $\|g_j\|<\epsilon'$.
\end{itemize}
Note that (i) implies that $\inf_{\vec z}\psi_2^{k,m}(\vec f,\vec g,\vec z)=0$ and (ii) and (iii) imply that $\psi_0^{m}(\vec g)\in [k\epsilon,k\epsilon']$. We need to some finagling to arrange that $\psi_1^m(\vec g)=0$.
For $Y\subseteq X$, set $\operatorname{bd}(Y):=\overline Y\setminus Y$.
For $1\leq j\leq m$, note that $\operatorname{bd}(W_j)\subseteq W_{j-1}\cup W_{j+1}$ (with the convention $W_0=W_{m+1}=\emptyset$). Moreover, by the connectedness of $X$, if $j\neq 1,m$, we have \[\operatorname{bd}(W_j)\cap W_{j-1}\neq\emptyset\neq \operatorname{bd}(W_j)\cap W_{j+1}.\]
For $j>1$ and $x\in \operatorname{bd}(W_j)\cap W_{j-1}$, we can find (using, for example, the metrizability of $X$) an open neighborhood $U_x$ of $x$ with the property that, setting
\[
Z_j:=\bigcup_{x\in \operatorname{bd}(W_j)\cap W_{j-1}}U_x,
\]
\noindent we have
\begin{itemize}
\item $Z_j\subseteq W_{j-1}\cup W_j$;
\item $\overline {Z_j}\cap \overline{W_{j+1}}=\emptyset$;
\item $\overline Z_j\cap \overline Z_{j+1}=\emptyset$.
\end{itemize}
\noindent For convenience, we set $Z_1:=\emptyset$ and $Z_{m+1}:=\emptyset$.
\
\noindent For $j=1,\ldots,m$, we consider the open set
\[
N_j:=Z_j\cup Z_{j+1}\cup (W_j\setminus \overline{\bigcup_{i>j}W_i})
\]
\noindent and its (proper) closed subset
\[
M_j:=\overline W_j\cap (X\setminus \bigcup_{i>j} W_i).
\]
We leave it to the reader to verify that $X=\bigcup_{j=1}^m M_j$ and that $N_i\cap N_j=\emptyset$ for $|i-j|\geq 2$.
For $j=1,\ldots,m$, take nonnegative $g_j'\in C(X)$ with $\|g_j'\|=1$ for which $N_j=\{x\in X \ : \ g_j'(x)\not=0\}$ and for which $g_j'$ is identically $1$ on $M_j$. Finally, set $g_j'':=g_j\cdot g_j'$. It remains to establish:
\[
\inf_{\vec h}\,\max(\psi_0^k(\vec f)\mathbin{\mathpalette\dotminussym{}} k\psi_0^m(\vec g''),\,m\psi_1^{m}(\vec g''),\,m\psi_2^{k,m}(\vec f, \vec g'',\vec h)) \leq\delta. \quad (\dagger)
\]
\
First observe that since $m$ was chosen to be minimal, there is $z\in W_1\setminus(\overline Z_2\cup W_2)$. It follows that $\sum g_j''(z)=g_1(z)<\epsilon'$, whence $\psi_0^m(\vec g'')<\epsilon'$. To obtain a lower bound on $\psi_0^m(\vec g'')$, fix $x\in X$ and take $j$ such that $x\in M_j$. Then $x\in \overline{W_j}$ whence $g_j(x)\geq \epsilon$ and $g_j'(x)=1$, so $g_j''(x)\geq \epsilon$. Since $x\in X$ is arbitrary, we have that $\psi_0^m(\vec g)\geq \epsilon$. It follows that $\psi_0^k(\vec f)\mathbin{\mathpalette\dotminussym{}} k\psi_0^m(\vec g'')<\delta$.
Next observe that since $N_i\cap N_j=\emptyset$ for $|i-j|\geq 2$, we have that $\psi_1^m(\vec g'')=0$. Finally, since $g_j''\leq g_j\leq f_{i(j)}$, we have that $$\inf_{\vec h}\psi_2^{k,m}(\vec f,\vec g'',\vec h)=0.$$ It follows that $(\dagger)$ holds and the proof is concluded.
\end{proof}
By a \emph{condition} we mean a finite set of expressions of the form $\varphi(\vec x)<r$ where $\varphi(\vec x)$ is a quantifier-free formula and $r\in \r$. If $A$ is a C$^*$-algebra and $\vec a$ is a tuple from $A$, we say that $\vec a$ satisfies the condition $p(\vec x)$ if $\varphi(\vec a)^A<r$ for all expressions $\varphi(\vec x)<r$ belonging to $p(\vec x)$.
The following fact can be proven using model-theoretic forcing; see, for example, \cite[Appendix A]{GS}.
\begin{fact}\label{forcing}
Suppose that $\mathcal{K}$ is a class of separable models of $T_{\operatorname{conn}}$ that is uniformly definable by a sequence of universal types as witnessed by the formulae $(\varphi_{m,n}(\vec x_m))$. Further suppose that, for every $\epsilon>0$, every $m\in \mathbb{N}$ and every satisfiable condition $p(\vec x)$ there is a model $C(X)$ of $T_{\operatorname{conn}}$ and $\vec f\in C(X)$ that satisfies $p(\vec x)$ and for which $\inf_n \varphi_{m,n}(\vec f)^{C(X)}<\epsilon$. Then there is a separable existentially closed model of $T_{\operatorname{conn}}$ that belongs to the class $\mathcal{K}$.
\end{fact}
\begin{cor}\label{pseudoec}
There is a separable existentially closed model of $T_{\operatorname{conn}}$ that is chainable, which is thus necessarily isomorphic to $C(\mathbb{P})$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $p(\vec x)$ is a condition that is satisfied in $C(X)$ for some continuum $X$. Using Fact \ref{kp}, we may embed $C(X)$ into $C(Y)$ with $C(Y)\equiv C(\mathbb{P})$, whence it follows that $p(\vec x)$ is satisfied in $C(Y)$ and hence in $C(\mathbb{P})$. In particular, for any $m,k\geq 1$, we have $\vec f\in C(\mathbb{P})$ such that $\vec f$ satisfies $p(\vec x)$ and $\sigma_k(\vec f)<\frac{1}{m}$. Thus, we can apply Fact \ref{forcing} to obtain a separable existentially closed model of $T_{\operatorname{conn}}$ that is chainable.
\end{proof}
\begin{nrmk}
It is known that $\mathbb{P}$ is generic in the descriptive set-theoretic sense, that is, in the space of subcontinua of $[0,1]^\mathbb{N}$, the set of those continua homeomorphic to $\mathbb{P}$ is a dense $G_\delta$ set. One can view Corollary \ref{pseudoec} as the statement that the pseudoarc is also model-theoretically generic as it arises as the generic model constructed using model-theoretic forcing.
\end{nrmk}
\begin{question}
What other properties of (metrizable) continua are uniformly definable by a sequence of universal types?
\end{question}
By the same arguments as above, if (P) is any property of metrizable continua that is uniformly definable by a sequence of universal types, then we can find a separable model $C(X)$ of $T_{\operatorname{conn}}$ that is existentially closed, chainable, and has property (P); since such a $C(X)$ is necessarily isomorphic to $C(\mathbb{P})$, we conclude that $\mathbb{P}$ has property (P). This could be a potentially new way of establishing continuum-theoretic properties of the pseudoarc.
\section{Connection to Quantifier Elimination}
In \cite{EFKV}, the following questions are posed:
\begin{question}
Does there exist a model $C(X)$ of $T_{\operatorname{conn}}$ for which $C(X)$ admits quantifier elimination and $C(X)\neq\mathbb C$? In particular, does $C(\mathbb{P})$ admit quantifier-elimination?
\end{question}
In this section we answer both of these questions in the negative. We first recall that a theory $T^*$ is a \emph{model companion} of $T_{\operatorname{conn}}$ if $T^*$ is a model-complete theory such that every model of $T_{\operatorname{conn}}$ embeds into a model of $T^*$ and vice-versa; if $T_{\operatorname{conn}}$ has a model companion, then it is necessarily unique (up to logical equivalence).
\begin{lemma}\label{prop:ModelCompanion}
Suppose that $C(X)\models T_{\operatorname{conn}}$, $X$ is nondegenerate, and $C(X)$ is model-complete. Then $\operatorname{Th}(C(X))$ is the model-companion of $T_{\operatorname{conn}}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
It suffices to show that if $C(Y)\models T_{\operatorname{conn}}$, then $C(Y)$ embeds into a model of $\operatorname{Th}(C(X))$. However, this follows immediately from Fact \ref{kp}.
\end{proof}
We recall that if $T^*$ is the model companion of $T_{\operatorname{conn}}$, then $T^*$ is said to be the \emph{model completion} of $T_{\operatorname{conn}}$ if $T^*$ has quantifier-elimination. (This is not the official definition of model completion, but is convenient for our purposes here.)
\begin{prop}\label{prop:ModelCompletion}
$T_{\operatorname{conn}}$ does not have a model completion.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
It is a standard fact of model theory that if $T_{\operatorname{conn}}$ has a model-completion, then $T_{\operatorname{conn}}$ has the amalgamation property. Stated in terms of continua, this means that whenever $X$, $Y$, and $Z$ are continua and $f:X\to Z$ and $g:Y\to Z$ are continuous surjections, there is a continuum $W$ and continuous surjections $r:W\to X$ and $s:W\to Y$ such that $f\circ r=g\circ s$. We give an example, due to Logan Hoehn, to show that the class of continua does not enjoy this co-amalgamation property.
Let $X = Y = [0, 1]$, and let $Z$ be the circle $\mathbb{S}^1$, which, for convenience, we view as the subset of $\mathbb{C}$ consisting of complex numbers $e^{i\theta}$. Let $f : X \to Z$ be $f(x) = e^{2\pi i x}$ and $g : Y \to Z$ be $g(y) = e^{\pi i (2y + 1)}$. Suppose that $W, r, s$ complete the amalgamation, in the above sense. Let $A = r^{-1}([0, 1/2]) \cap s^{-1}([1/2, 1])$ and $B = r^{-1}([1/2, 1]) \cap s^{-1}([0, 1/2])$, both of which are closed in $W$. It is easy to see that $A \cup B = W$. Now suppose that $w \in A \cap B$. Then $r(w) = s(w) = 1/2$, so $f(r(w)) = e^{\pi i} \neq e^{2\pi i} = g(s(w))$, contradicting the assumption that $f \circ r = g \circ s$. Therefore $A \cap B = \emptyset$, and so $W$ is disconnected, yielding a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\begin{rmk}
Although the class of continua does not satisfy the amalgamation property in general, there are some continua that can always be amalgamated over. For example, in \cite{Kras}, Krasinkiewicz shows that one can always amalgamate over an arc. It is a standard fact of model theory (see \cite{ecfactor} for the proof in general or \cite{bankston2} for a proof in the case of continua) that one can always amalgamate over existentially closed structures. In particular, as a consequence of Corollary \ref{pseudoec}, we see that one can always amalgamate over the pseudoarc.
\end{rmk}
\begin{cor}
If $X$ is a nondegenerate continuum, then $C(X)$ does not have quantifier-elimination.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
If $C(X)$ had quantifier-elimination, then by Lemma \ref{prop:ModelCompanion}, $\operatorname{Th}(C(X))$ is the model-companion, and hence model-completion, of $T_{\operatorname{conn}}$, contradicting Proposition \ref{prop:ModelCompletion}.
\end{proof}
\begin{rmk}
In \cite{EFKV}, the authors show that if $C(X)$ has quantifier-elimination, then either $X$ is connected or else $C(X)$ is elementarily equivalent to $\mathbb{C}$, $\mathbb{C}^2$, or $C(2^\mathbb{N})$. The authors also ask if the former case can occur; our observations show that it cannot.
\end{rmk}
It is natural to wonder which abelian C$^*$-algebras are model-complete. We remark here that there is only one possible connected infinite-dimensional abelian C$^*$-algebra that could be model-complete:
\begin{prop}
The following are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $C(\mathbb{P})$ is model-complete;
\item there is a nondegenerate continuum $X$ such that $C(X)$ is model-complete;
\item $T_{\operatorname{conn}}$ has a model-companion.
\end{enumerate}
If these conditions hold, then $\operatorname{Th}(C(\mathbb{P}))$ is the model companion of $T_{\operatorname{conn}}$ and $C(\mathbb{P})$ is the unique (up to elementary equivalence) connected abelian C$^*$-algebra that is model-complete.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
The implication (1)$\Rightarrow$(2) is obvious and the implication (2)$\Rightarrow$(3) is the content of Lemma \ref{prop:ModelCompanion}. For the direction (3)$\Rightarrow$(1), observe that if $T^*$ is the model-companion of $T$, then, since the models of $T^*$ are precisely the existentially closed models of $T_{\operatorname{conn}}$, by Theorem \ref{pseudoec} we have $C(\mathbb{P})\models T^*$. If $C(X)\models T^*$, then by Fact \ref{kp}, there is $C(X')\equiv C(X)$ such that $C(\mathbb{P})$ embeds into $C(X')$; since $C(X')\models T^*$ and $T^*$ is model-complete, we see that the embedding of $C(\mathbb{P})$ into $C(X')$ is elementary. In particular, $C(\mathbb{P})\equiv C(X')\equiv C(X)$. It follows that $T^*$ is complete, whence $T^*=\operatorname{Th}(C(\mathbb{P}))$ and $C(\mathbb{P})$ is model-complete. We have already remarked, as a consequence of Fact \ref{kp}, that there is at most one connected abelian C$^*$-algebra that is $\forall\exists$-axiomatizable; since model-completeness implies $\forall\exists$-axiomatizability, the proof is complete.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{S:introduction}
In this paper we extend some results about the spectral properties of first and second order differential operators on complete Riemannian manifolds (see \cites{GromovLawson83,Shubin99,BrMiSh02,Br2,Chernoff73,Ro-Be70,Ol1,Shubin92}) to operators acting on sections of certain infinite dimensional bundles, called $A$-Hilbert bundles of finite type, cf. Section~\ref{SS:A-Hilbert bundles}. As a main example we consider lifts of operators acting on a finite dimensional vector bundle over a complete Riemannian manifold $M$ to a Galois cover $\widetilde{M}$ of $M$.
Let $A$ be a von Neumann algebra with a finite, faithful, normal trace $\tau$. Let $E^+$ and $E^-$ be $A$-Hilbert bundles of finite type over a complete Riemannian manifold $M$, cf. Section~\ref{SS:A-Hilbert bundles}. In particular, this means that the fibers of $E^\pm$ are Hilbert spaces endowed with an action of $A$. We consider a first order differential operator $D\colon C^\infty_c(M,E^+)\to C^\infty_c(M,E^-)$ (here $C^\infty_c$ denotes the space of smooth compactly supported sections). We also fix an $A$-linear bundle map $V:E^+\to E^-$.
We give a criterion for self-adjointness of the generalized Schr\"odinger operator $H_V:= D^*D+V$. Then we show that if there exists a constant $C>0$ such that $V(x)>C$ for all $x$ outside of a compact subset of $M$, then the {\em von Neumann spectral counting function} $N_\tau(\lambda;H_V)$ of $H_V$ is finite for all $\lambda<C$. For operators acting on finite dimensional bundles this result is obtained in \cite{Anghel93}.
One of the motivations for our study is an attempt to extend Atiayh's $L^2$-index theory for covering manifolds, \cites{Atiyah76,Schick05}, to coverings of non-compact manifolds. As a first application to index theory we develop in Section~\ref{S:Callias} a Callias-type index theory, \cites{Anghel93Callias,BottSeeley78,Bunke95,Callias78}, for operators acting on $A$-Hilbert bundles over non-compact manifolds.
More specifically, given a bundle map $F:E^+\to E^-$ we provide a criterion for $\tau$-Fredholmness of the operator $D_F:= D+F$. The $\tau$-Fredholmness implies that the kernel of $D_F$ and $D_F^\ast$ have finite $\tau$-dimension, where $D_F^\ast$ is the formal adjoint of $D_F$. Hence, we can define the $\tau$-index $\ind_\tau{}D_F$. We prove that this index is stable under compact perturbations of $F$.
Another possible application of our analysis, which will be discussed elsewhere, is to the equivariant index theory of operators acting on a non-compact manifold with a proper action of a Lie group $G$. A significant progress was achieved recently in developing the equivariant index theory of operators acting on sections of a finite dimensional bundle over such manifolds, \cites{MaZhang-noncompact,MathaiHochs,MathaiZhang10,Br-index,BrNonCompactGroup,BrCano14,Paradan03,MaZhang14}. These results find applications in the study of geometric quantization, representations of reductive groups and other areas. This paper provides the analytic tools needed to extend these results to operators acting on $A$-Hilbert bundles.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section~\ref{S:main} we formulate our main results. In Section~\ref{S:A-Hilbert bundles} we recall the basic properties of von Neumann algebras and $A$-Hilbert modules. In Sections~\ref{S:prsaD} and \ref{S:prsa} we prove criteria of self-adjointness for first and second order operators respectively. In Section~\ref{S:Fredholm} we prove criteria for finiteness of the spectral counting function $N_\tau(\lambda;H_V)$ and for Fredholmness of the operator $D_F:=D+F$. In Section~\ref{S:Callias} we introduce the Callias-type $\tau$-index and prove its stability.
\subsection*{Acknowledgment} We are very grateful to Ognjen Milatovic for very careful reading of the manuscript and providing a lot of useful remarks and corrections.
\section{The main results}\label{S:main}
In this section we formulate the main results of the paper.
\subsection{An operator of order one}\label{SS:IDir}
Let $A$ be a von Neumann algebra with a finite, faithful, normal trace $\tau:A\to \mathbb{C}$. Let $E=E^+\oplus{}E^-$ be a $\mathbb{Z}_2$-graded $A$-Hilbert bundle of finite type over a complete Riemannian manifold $M$, cf. Section~\ref{SS:A-Hilbert bundles}. In particular, this means that the fibers of $E^\pm$ are Hilbert spaces endowed with an action of $A$. We denote the Riemannian metric on $M$ by $g^{TM}$.
Consider a first order differential operator $D\colon C^\infty_c(M,E^+)\to C^\infty_c(M,E^-)$ (here $C^\infty_c$ denotes the space of smooth compactly supported sections). We assume that the principal symbol $\sigma(D)$ of $D$ is injective so that $D$ is elliptic.
\subsection*{Assumption}
Throughout the paper we assume that there exists a constant $c>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{E:Istronglyelliptic}
0\ <\ \|\sigma(D)(x,\xi)\| \ \le \ c\,|\xi|, \qquad \text{for all}\ \ x\in M, \ \xi\in T_x^*M\backslash\{0\}.
\end{equation}
Here $|\xi|$ denotes the length of $\xi$ defined by the Riemannian metric on $M$, $\sigma(D)(x,\xi):E^+_x\to E^-_x$ is the leading symbol of $D$, and $\|\sigma(D)(x,\xi)\|$ is its operator norm.
An interesting class of examples of operators satisfying \eqref{E:Istronglyelliptic} is given by Dirac-type operators on $M$ paired with a connection on an $A$-Hilbert bundle, cf. \cite{Schick05}*{Section 7.4}.
\subsection{Self-adjointness of a first order operator}\label{SS:IsaD}
Let $d\mu$ be a smooth measure on $M$. We don't assume that $d\mu$ is the measure defined by the Riemannian metric $g^{TM}$. Let $L^2(M,E^\pm)$ denote the space of square-integrable sections of $E^\pm$. We also set $E:=E^+\oplus{}E^-$. Then
\[
L^2(M,E)\ = \ L^2(M,E^+)\oplus L^2(M,E^-).
\]
Let $D^\ast$ denote the formal adjoint of $D$. Consider the operator
\begin{equation}\label{E:IcalD}
\mathcal{D}\ :=\ \begin{pmatrix}0&D^\ast\\D&0\end{pmatrix}.
\end{equation}
Then $\mathcal{D}$ is an unbounded operator on $L^2(M,E)$.
Our first result is the following extension of \cite[Th.~1.17]{GromovLawson83}:
\begin{theorem}\label{T:IsaD}
Suppose that $D\colon C^\infty_c(M,E^+)\to C^\infty_c(M,E^-)$ satisfies \eqref{E:Istronglyelliptic} and the Riemannian metric $g^{TM}$ is complete. Then $\mathcal{D}$ is essentially self-adjoint with initial domain $C^\infty_c(M,E)\ = \ C^\infty_c(M,E^+)\oplus C^\infty_c(M,E^-)$.
\end{theorem}
The proof is given is Section~\ref{S:prsaD}.
\subsection{A Schr\"odinger-type operator}\label{SS:IShr}
Consider the Schr\"odinger-type operator
\begin{equation}\label{E:IHV}
H_V \ = \ D^*D \ + \ V,
\end{equation}
where $V(x):E_x^+\to E_x^+$ is an $A$-linear self-adjoint bundle endomorphism.
We view $H_V$ as an unbounded operator on $L^2(M,E^+)$ with initial domain $C^\infty_c(M,E^+)$ and give a sufficient condition for self-adjointness of this operator. For simplicity we assume that the potential $V$ is a measurable section which belongs to $L^\infty_{loc}$.\footnote{Much more general potentials were considered in \cite{BrMiSh02}. It would be interesting to extend the results we present in this paper to the type of potentials considered in \cite{BrMiSh02}.}
Our next result is the following extension of \cite[Th.~2.7]{BrMiSh02} to $A$-Hilbert bundles:
\begin{theorem}\label{T:Isa}
Suppose there exists a function $q\colon M\to\mathbb{R}$ such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item $V(x)\ge -q(x)\operatorname{Id}$ for all $x\in M$;
\item
$q\geq1$ and $q^{-1/2}$ is globally Lipschitz, i.e. there exists a constant $L>0$ such
that, for every $x_{1}, x_{2}\in M$,
\begin{equation}\label{E:ILipschitz}
|q^{-1/2}(x_{1})-q^{-1/2}(x_{2})|\leq Ld(x_{1},x_{2}),
\end{equation}
where $d$ is the distance induced by the metric $g^{TM}$;
\item the metric $g:=q^{-1}g^{TM}$ on $M$ is complete.
\end{enumerate}
Then $H_V$ is essentially self-adjoint on $C^\infty_c(M,E^+)$.
\end{theorem}
The proof is given in Section~\ref{S:prsa}.
\begin{remark}
We say that a curve $\gamma\colon [a,\infty)\to M$ {\em goes to infinity} if for any
compact set $K\subset M$ there exists $t_K>0$ such that $\gamma(t)\not\in K$, for all
$t\ge t_K$. Condition (3) of the theorem is equivalent to the condition that the integral $\int_\gamma\frac{ds}{\sqrt{q}}=\infty$ for every going to infinity curve $\gamma$.
\end{remark}
\begin{corollary}\label{C:Isaboudedbelow}
If $V(x)$ is bounded below, i.e. there exists a constant $b>0$ such that $V(x)\ge -b$, then the operator $H_V$ is essentially self-adjoint.
\end{corollary}
In the rest of this paper we denote by $H_V$ both the operator and its self-adjoint closure.
\subsection{The spectral counting function of a Schr\"odinger-type operator}\label{SS:INlambda}
The trace $\tau:A\to \mathbb{C}$ on $A$ extends to a (possibly infinite) trace $\Tr_\tau$ on the space of bounded $A$-linear operators acting on $L^2(M,E^\pm)$.
For each $\lambda\in \mathbb{R}$ let $P_\lambda$ denote the orthogonal projection onto the spectral subspace of the operator $H_V$ corresponding to the ray $(-\infty, \lambda]$ and define the {\em spectral counting function}
\begin{equation}\label{E:IN(lambda)}
N_\tau(\lambda;H_V)\ := \ \Tr_\tau P_\lambda.
\end{equation}
\begin{theorem}\label{T:IN<infty}
Suppose there exist a compact $K\subset M$ and a constant $C$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{E:IFredholmcondition}
V(x)\ \ge \ C, \qquad \text{for all}\quad x\not\in K.
\end{equation}
Then
\begin{equation}\label{E:IN<infty}
N_\tau(\lambda;H_V)\ \ < \ \infty, \qquad \text{for all}\quad \lambda< C.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
Inequality \eqref{E:IFredholmcondition} implies that $V(x)$ is bounded below and, hence, the operator $H_V$ is self-adjoint by Corollary~\ref{C:Isaboudedbelow}.
\end{remark}
\subsection{$\tau$-Fredholmness}\label{SS:IFredholm}
We first recall the notion of Fredholmness in the von Neumann setting, cf. \cite[Section 3]{Breuer68Fredholm1}.
Let $H_1$ and $H_2$ be $A$-Hilbert spaces and $T:\operatorname{Dom}(T)\subset H_1\rightarrow H_2$ be a closed $A$-operator.
\begin{definition}\label{D:Fredholm operator}
We say that the operator $T$ is \emph{$\tau$-Fredholm} if the following two conditions are satisfied:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] $\Ker T$ has finite $\tau$-dimension;
\item[(ii)] there exists an $A$-Hilbert subspace $L$ of $H_2$ such that $L\subset\im T$ and $\dim_\tau L^\perp<\infty$.
\end{itemize}
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}
If $H_1$ and $H_2$ are Hilbert spaces over $\mathbb{C}$, an operator $T:H_1\to H_2$ is called Fredholm if its kernel and cokernel are finite dimensional. Equivalently, this means that the kernels of $T$ and $T^*$ are finite dimensional and the image of $T$ is closed. The image of a $\tau$-Fredholm operator does not need to be closed. Moreover, the image of $T$ is not in general an $A$-Hilbert space and the $\tau$-dimension of the cokernel of $T$ is not defined. Because of this we need to replace the condition of finite-dimensionality of the cokernel by Condition (ii) of Definition~\ref{D:Fredholm operator}.
\end{remark}
Consider the operator
\begin{equation}\label{E:Op1}
\mathcal{T}\ =\ \begin{pmatrix}0&T^*\\T&0\end{pmatrix}:\,H_1\oplus H_2\ \longrightarrow \ H_1\oplus H_2.
\end{equation}
\begin{lemma}\label{L:IFredholmness}
The operator $T$ is $\tau$-Fredholm if and only if there exists $\lambda>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{E:NtaucalT}
N_\tau(\lambda;\mathcal{T}^2) \ < \ \infty.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
The lemma is proven in Section~\ref{SS:prIFredholmness}.
\begin{remark}\label{R:NtaucalT}
The inequality \eqref{E:NtaucalT} is equivalent to
\[
N_\tau(\lambda;T^*T)<\infty, \quad \text{and}\quad N_\tau(\lambda;TT^*)<\infty.
\]
\end{remark}
\begin{remark} The condition \eqref{E:NtaucalT} is often taken as a definition of $\tau$-Fredholmness, cf. for example \cite{Luck02book}*{\S2.1.1}.
\end{remark}
\subsection{$\tau$-Fredholmness of a Callias-type operator}\label{SS:ICalliasFredholm}
Let $D$ be as in Section~\ref{SS:IDir} and let $F:E^+\to E^-$ be an $A$-linear bundle map. We set
\[
\mathcal{F}\ :=\ \begin{pmatrix}
0&F^*\\mathbb{F}&0
\end{pmatrix}
\]
and consider the operator
\begin{equation}\label{E:IDF}
\mathcal{D}_\mathcal{F}\ := \ \mathcal{D}+\mathcal{F}\ = \ \begin{pmatrix}
0&D^*+F^*\\D+F&0
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{equation}
This operator satisfies the conditions of Theorem~\ref{T:IsaD} and, hence, is essentially self-adjoint.
Its self-adjoint closure is denoted by the same symbol $\mathcal{D}_\mathcal{F}$.
Let
\[
\{\mathcal{D},\mathcal{F}\}\ := \ \mathcal{D}\circ \mathcal{F}\ +\ \mathcal{F}\circ \mathcal{D} \ = \ \begin{pmatrix}
D^*F+F^*D&0\\0&DF^*+FD^*
\end{pmatrix}
\]
denote the {\em anti-commutator} of $\mathcal{D}$ and $\mathcal{F}$. We also set $D_F:=D+F$.
\begin{definition}\label{D:Calliastype}
We say that the operators $D_F$ and $\mathcal{D}_\mathcal{F}$ are of {\em Callias-type} if
\begin{enumerate}
\item the leading symbol $\sigma(\mathcal{D})$ anti-commutes with $\mathcal{F}$ so that the anti-commutator $\{\mathcal{D},\mathcal{F}\}$ is an $A$-linear bundle endomorphism of $E=E^+\oplus{}E^-$;
\item there exist a compact set $K\subset M$ and $\epsilon>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{E:Calliastype}
\mathcal{F}^2(x)\geq\left\|\left\{\mathcal{D},\mathcal{F}\right\}(x)\right\|+\epsilon
\end{equation}
for all $x\in M\backslash K$.
\end{enumerate}
Here $\left\|\left\{\mathcal{D},\mathcal{F}\right\}(x)\right\|$ denotes the norm of the A-linear map $\left\{\mathcal{D},\mathcal{F}\right\}(x):E_x\to E_x$.
\end{definition}
In Section~\ref{S:Fredholm} we get the following corollary of Theorem~\ref{T:IN<infty}:
\begin{theorem}\label{T:IFredholm}
A Callias-type operator $D_F$ is $\tau$-Fredholm.
\end{theorem}
\subsection{A Callias-type index}\label{SS:ICallias}
Suppose now that $D_F$ is an operator of Callias-type. By Theorem ~\ref{T:IFredholm}, $\dim_\tau\Ker D_F$ and $\dim_\tau\Ker D_F^*$ are finite. Hence, we can define the $\tau$-index of $D_F$ by
\begin{equation}\label{E:ICallias index}
\ind_\tau D_F\ := \ \dim_\tau \Ker D_F\ - \ \dim_\tau\Ker D_F^*.
\end{equation}
For operators acting on sections of finite-dimensional bundles (i.e. when the von Neumann algebra $A=\mathbb{C}$) this index was introduced by C.~ Callias \cite{Callias78} and was extended and studied in many papers including \cite{Bunke95,BottSeeley78,Anghel93Callias}. We refer to \eqref{E:ICallias index} as the {\em Callias-type $\tau$-index} of the pair $(D,F)$.
In Section~\ref{S:Callias} we prove the following stability property of the Callias-type $\tau$-index:
\begin{theorem}\label{T:ICallias}
Let $F_0$ and $F_1$ be two $A$-linear bundle maps $E^+\to E^-$ satisfying conditions $(1)$ and $(2)$ of Definition~\ref{D:Calliastype}.
If there exists a compact set $K\subset M$ such that $F_0(x)=F_1(x)$ for all $x\not\in K$, then
\begin{equation}\label{E:ICallias stability}
\ind_\tau D_{F_0}\ = \ \ind_\tau D_{F_1}.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\section{$A$-Hilbert bundles}\label{S:A-Hilbert bundles}
In this section we recall some basic properties of von Neumann algebras, cf. \cite{Blackadar06book}, and recall the definitions of $A$-Hilbert space and $A$-Hilbert bundle, cf. \cite{Schick05}.
\subsection{A Hilbert space completion}\label{SS:completion}
Let $A$ be a von Neumann algebra endowed with a finite, faithful, normal trace $\tau:A\to \mathbb{C}$, cf. \cite[III.2.5]{Blackadar06book}. We normalize the trace so that $\tau(\operatorname{Id})=1$.
We define on $A$ the inner product
\begin{equation}\label{von neumann inner product}
\left\langle a,b\right\rangle_\tau\ :=\ \tau(ab^\ast), \qquad a,b\in A,
\end{equation}
and denote by $l^2(A)$ the Hilbert space completion of $A$ with respect to this inner product.
Notice that $l^2(A)$ is an Hilbert space endowed with an $A$-module structure.
\begin{example}\label{Ex:Hilbert Gamma}
Suppose $\Gamma$ is a discrete group and denote by $l^2(\Gamma)$ the Hilbert space of complex valued square summable functions on $\Gamma$. The {\em right regular representation} of $\Gamma$ is the unitary representation $R:\Gamma\to \mathcal{B}(l^2(\Gamma))$ defined by
\[
(R_gu)(h)=u(hg),\qquad h,\,g\in \Gamma;\ u\in l^2(\Gamma).
\]
The smallest subalgebra of $\mathcal{B}(l^2(\Gamma))$ which is weakly closed and contains all the operators $R_g\ (g\in \Gamma)$ is called the {\em von Neumann algebra} of $\Gamma$ and is denoted by $\mathcal{N}\Gamma$.
On $\mathcal{N}\Gamma$ we have the canonical faithful positive trace $\tau$ defined by:
\begin{equation}\label{E:canonical trace}
\tau(f)=\innerprod{f(\delta_e),\delta_e}_{l^2(\Gamma)},\ \ \ \ f\in \mathcal{N}\Gamma,
\end{equation}
where $\delta_e\in l^2(\Gamma)$ is by definition the characteristic function of the unit element.
The completion $l^2(\mathcal{N}\Gamma)$ of $\mathcal{N}\Gamma$ with respect to this inner product is canonically isomorphic to $l^2(\Gamma)$,
cf. \cite[Example 7.11]{Schick05}.
\end{example}
\subsection{Ан $A$-Hilbert spaces}\label{SS:A-Hilbert spaces}
Let $A$ be a von Neumnn algebra endowed with a trace $\tau$ satisfying the same properties as in section~\ref{SS:completion}.
Suppose $A$ acts on a Hilbert space $H$.
The action of $A$ on $H$ is said to be \emph{compatible} with the inner product if
\begin{equation}\label{E:compatibleA}
\langle xa^*,y \rangle = \langle x,ya \rangle,\qquad a \in {A}; \ x,y \in H.
\end{equation}
Notice, that the action of $\mathcal{N}\Gamma$ on $l^2(\Gamma)$ in Example~\ref{Ex:Hilbert Gamma} is compatible with the inner product on $l^2(\Gamma)$.
\begin{definition}\label{D:A-Hilbert space}
An \emph{$A$-Hilbert space} is a Hilbert space $H$ endowed with a compatible $A$-module structure such that there exists a separable Hilbert space $V_H$ and an isometric $A$-linear embedding
\[
i: H\ \hookrightarrow\ l^2(A)\otimes V_H.
\]
We say that $H$ is \emph{an $A$-Hilbert space of finite type} if $V_H$ can be chosen finite dimensional.
\end{definition}
Notice, that since the action of $A$ is compatible with the scalar product, the orthogonal complement $i(H)^\perp$ to $i(H)$ in $ l^2(A)\otimes V_H$ is also an $A$-module. In other words $H$ is a projective $A$-module, cf. \cite{Blackadar06book}.
\subsection{A-Hilbert bundles}\label{SS:A-Hilbert bundles}
\begin{definition}
An \emph{$A$-Hilbert bundle} $E$ on a manifold $M$ is a locally trivial bundle of $A$-Hilbert spaces, the transition functions being $A$-Hilbert space isomorphisms.
If the fibers are $A$-Hilbert spaces of finite type, the bundle is called an \emph{$A$-Hilbert bundle of finite type}.
We denote by $C^\infty_c(M,E)$ the space of smooth compactly supported sections of $E$.
If $M$ is endowed with a smooth measure $d\mu$ we define the $L^2$-scalar product
\[
(s_1,s_2)_2\ := \ \int_M\,\< s_1(x),s_2(x)\,\>\,d\mu, \qquad s_1,s_2\in C^\infty_c(M,E),
\]
and by $L^2(M,E)$ the completion of $C^\infty_c(M,E)$ with respect to this scalar product.
We set $|s(x)|:=\<s(x),s(x)\>^{1/2}$ and denote by
\[
\|s\|\ :=\ \left(\,\int_M\,|s|^2\,d\mu\,\right)^{1/2}
\]
the $L^2$-norm of $s$.
\end{definition}
\begin{example}\label{Galois covers}
Let $M$ be a smooth compact manifold and $\pi\colon \widetilde{M}\to M$ be the Galois cover of $M$ with deck transformation group $\Gamma$. We let $\Gamma$ act on the Hilbert space $l^2(\Gamma)$ by left and right convolution.
Let $A=\mathcal{N}\Gamma$ denote the von Neumann algebra of $\Gamma$. The right action of $\Gamma$ extends to a right action of $A$ on $l^2(\Gamma)$ commuting with the left $\Gamma$-action. Therefore, $E:=\widetilde M\times_\Gamma l^2(\Gamma)$ is an $A$-Hilbert bundle of finite type on $M$.
Notice that the space $L^2(M,E)$ coincides with the space $L^2(\widetilde{M})$ of square-integrable functions on $\widetilde{M}$.
\end{example}
\section{Self-adjointness of first order differential operators}\label{S:prsaD}
In this section we prove Theorem~\ref{T:IsaD}.
Since the operator $\mathcal{D}$ is formally self-adjoint, to show that it is essentially self-adjoint we need to prove that its maximal and minimal extensions coincide. Since the domain $\operatorname{Dom}(\mathcal{D}_{\min})$ of the minimal extension is closed in the operator norm of $\mathcal{D}$, it is enough to show that for every $s\in \operatorname{Dom}(\mathcal{D}_{\max})$ there exists a sequence $\{s_k\}$ in $\operatorname{Dom}(\mathcal{D}_{\min})$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{E:sktos}
\lim_{k\to\infty}s_k=s, \quad \lim_{k\to\infty}\mathcal{D} s_k= \mathcal{D} s,
\end{equation}
where the limits are in $L^2$-norm topology.
\subsection{The minimal extension}\label{SS:minimal extension}
Recall that the Sobolev spaces of sections of an $A$-vector bundle were defined by Mi{\v{s}}{\v{c}}enko and Fomenko \cite{FomenkoMoscenko80}. In particular, if $\Omega\subset M$ is an open set with compact closure, the Sobolev space $H^s_0(\Omega,E)$ is defined as the closure in Sobolev norm of the space $C_0^\infty(\Omega,E)$ of smooth sections, having compact support in $\Omega$. If $T$ is a differential operator of order $k$, then $T$ extends to a bounded operator
\[
T:\,H^k_0(\Omega,E)\ \to \ L^2(M,E).
\]
Recall that the minimal domain $\operatorname{Dom}(T_{\min})$ is the closure of $C^\infty_c(M,E)$ with respect to the graph norm of $T$. We conclude that
\begin{equation}\label{E:Hk subset Dommin}
H^k_0(\Omega,E)\ \subset \ \operatorname{Dom}(T_{\min})
\end{equation}
for any open set $\Omega$ whose closure is compact.
\subsection{The maximal extension}\label{SS:maximal extension}
Recall that the domain $\operatorname{Dom}(T_{\max})$ of the maximal extension consists of all sections $s\in L^2(M,E)$ such that $T{s}\in L^2(M,E)$, where $T{s}$ is understood in distributional sense.
Since $\mathcal{D}$ is a first order elliptic operator, $\operatorname{Dom}(\mathcal{D}_{\max})\subset H^1_{loc}(M,E)$. It follows now from \eqref{E:Hk subset Dommin}, that for any Lipschitz function $\phi\in C^0_c(M)$ and any $s\in \operatorname{Dom}(\mathcal{D}_{\max})$
\begin{equation}\label{E:phis in Dommin}
\phi\,s\ \in \ \operatorname{Dom}(\mathcal{D}_{\min}).
\end{equation}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{T:IsaD}}\label{SS:prsaD}
By Lemma~8.9 of \cite{BrMiSh02} there exists a sequence $\{\phi_k\}$ of Lipschitz functions with compact support on $M$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{E:cutoff}
\begin{aligned}
(i&)\quad 0\leq\phi_k\leq1; \\
(ii&)\quad |d\phi_k|\leq\frac{1}{k};\\
(iii&)\quad \lim_{k\to\infty}\phi_k(x)=1,\ \ \text{for al} \ \ x\in M.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
For any $s\in \operatorname{Dom}(\mathcal{D}_{\max})$ set $s_k=\phi_k s$. Then $s_k\in \operatorname{Dom}(\mathcal{D}_{\min})$ by \eqref{E:phis in Dommin} and $\lim_{k\to \infty}s_k=s$. It remains to show that $\mathcal{D}{}s_k$ converges to $\mathcal{D}{}s$ in the $L^2$-norm.
We have:
\begin{equation}\label{E:calDsk}
\mathcal{D} s_k\ =\ \phi_k\mathcal{D} s\ +\ [\mathcal{D},\phi_k]\,s.
\end{equation}
Notice that
\[
[\mathcal{D},\phi_k](x)\ =\ -i\sigma(\mathcal{D})\big(x,d\phi_k(x)\big)
\]
is a bundle map. From \eqref{E:cutoff} and \eqref{E:Istronglyelliptic} we conclude that
\[
\big\|\,[\mathcal{D},\phi_k]\,s\,\big\| \ = \
\big\|\, \sigma(\mathcal{D})(x,d\phi_k)\,s\,\big\| \ \le \ \frac{c}k\cdot\|s\|.
\]
Hence, $\lim_{k\to\infty}[\mathcal{D},\phi_k]=0$. Since $\phi_k\mathcal{D} s\to \mathcal{D} s$ in $L^2$-norm we obtain
\[
\lim_{k\to\infty} \mathcal{D} s_k \ = \ \mathcal{D} s.
\]
The essential self-adjointness of the operator $\mathcal{D}$ is proved. \hfill $\square$
\section{Self-adjointness of a Schr\"odinger-type operator}\label{S:prsa}
In this section we prove Theorem~\ref{T:Isa}. We use the notation of Section~\ref{SS:IShr}.
We denote by $H_{V,0}$ the restriction of the operator \eqref{E:IHV} to the space $C^\infty_c(M,E^+)$ of smooth compactly supported sections of $E^+$. Let $H_{V,0}^*$ denote the operator adjoint to $H_{V,0}$ and let $\operatorname{Dom}(H_{V,0}^*)$ denote its domain.
Since the operator $H_{V,0}$ is symmetric, to show that its closure is self-adjoint it is enough to prove that
\begin{equation}\label{E:symmetry}
( H_Vs_1,s_2) \ = \ (s_1,H_Vs_2), \qquad s_1,s_2\in \operatorname{Dom}(H_{V,0}^*).
\end{equation}
To prove \eqref{E:symmetry} we need some information about the behavior of sections from $\operatorname{Dom}(H_{V,0}^*)$ at infinity. This information is provided by the following
\begin{proposition}\label{P:domain}
Suppose $q:M\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ is a function satisfying the assumptions of Theorem~\ref{T:Isa}.
If $s\in \operatorname{Dom}(H_{V,0}^*)$, then $q^{-1/2}Ds$ is square integrable and
\begin{equation}\label{E:ineqt}
\|q^{-1/2}Ds\|^2
\ \leq \ 2\,\Big(\, (1+2L^2)\,\|s\|^2+\|s\|\,\|H_Vs\|\,\Big),
\end{equation}
where $L$ is the Lipschitz constant introduced in \eqref{E:ILipschitz}.
\end{proposition}
\begin{remark}\label{R:domain}
For the Schr\"odinger operator on scalar valued functions on
$\mathbb{R}^n$ an analogous lemma was established in \cite{Ro-Be70}. The proof was
adapted in \cites{Ol1,Ol2} to the case of a Riemannian manifold and to differential forms in \cite{Br2}. The case of a general operator $D$ and a singular potential $V$ was considered in \cite{BrMiSh02}.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Regularity of sections from $\operatorname{Dom}(H_{V,0}^*)$}\label{SS:regiularity}
The theory of elliptic (pseudo)-differential operators on $A$-Hilbert bundles of finite type was developed in \cite{BFKM} (see also \cite{FomenkoMoscenko80} for a similar theory for bundles of finitely generated $A$-modules). In particular, the Sobolev spaces of sections of such bundles are introduced in these papers and it is shown that any $s\in \operatorname{Dom}(H_{V,0}^*)$ belongs to the Sobolev space $H^2_{loc}$. Hence,
\begin{equation}\label{E:DsVs}
Ds\ \in \ L^2_{loc}(M,E^-), \ \ Vs\ \in \ L^2_{loc}(M,E^+),\qquad\text{for any}\quad s\in \operatorname{Dom}(H_{V,0}^*).
\end{equation}
The new information provided by Proposition~\ref{P:domain} is about the rate of decay of $Ds$ at infinity.
\begin{remark}
The equation \eqref{E:DsVs} is the only place in the proof of Theorem~\ref{T:Isa} where we use the fact that the fibers of $E^\pm$ are modules of finite type. The rest of the proof of Theorem~\ref{T:Isa} follows the lines of \cite[\S9]{BrMiSh02} with almost no changes. It is even simpler, since in \cite{BrMiSh02} much more singular potentials are considered.
\end{remark}
Set $\widehat{D}=-i\sigma(D)$. Then
\[
D(\phi s)\ = \ \widehat{D}(d\phi)s+\phi Ds.
\]
Note that $\widehat{D^*}=-(\widehat{D})^*$.
\subsection{Proof of Proposition~\ref{P:domain}}\label{SS:prdomain}
Let $\psi$ be a Lipschitz function with compact support such that a $0\leq\psi\leq q^{-1/2}\le 1$.
Set
\[
C \ = \ \operatornamewithlimits{ess\ sup}_{x\in M}\, \|\widehat{D}(d\psi)\|.
\]
Using \eqref{E:DsVs} we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{E:psiDs2}
\begin{aligned}
\|\psi Ds\|^2 \ & = \ (D^*(\psi^2Ds),s)
\ = \
(\psi^{2}D^*Ds,s) + 2(\psi\widehat{D^*}(d\psi)Ds,s)\\
&= \
\mathrm{Re}(\psi^2D^*Ds,s) \ + \ 2\mathrm{Re}(\psi\widehat{D^*}(d\psi)Ds,s)\\
& \le \ \mathrm{Re}(\psi^2D^*Ds,s) \ + \ 2C\|\psi Ds\|\|s\|\\
& =\ \mathrm{Re} (\psi^2H_Vs,s)-(\psi^2Vs,s)+2C||\psi Ds\|\,\|s\|.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Since $V\ge -q\operatorname{Id}$, $q\ge 1$ and $q\psi^2\le 1$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{E:psiVss}
(\psi^2Vs,s)\ = \ (V\psi s,\psi s) \ \ge\ - (q\psi s,\psi s) \ \ge \ -\| s\|^2.
\end{equation}
Using the inequality $ab\le \frac12 a^2+\frac12{b^2}$ we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{E:psiDss}
2C\|\psi Ds\|\,\|s\| \ \le \ \frac12\,\|\psi Ds\|^2\ +\ 2C^2\,\|s\|^2.
\end{equation}
Combining \eqref{E:psiDs2},\eqref{E:psiVss}, and \eqref{E:psiDss} and using that $\psi^2\le q^{-1}\le 1$ we get
\[
\|\psi Ds\|^2\ \le \ \|H_Vs\|\,\|s\|\ +\ \frac12\,\|\psi Ds\|^2\ +\ (1+2C)\,\|s\|^2,
\]
and
\begin{equation}\label{E:psiDs<}
\|\psi Ds\|^{2
\ \leq \ 2\,\Big(\, (1+2C^2)\,\|s\|^2+\|s\|\,\|H_Vs\|\,\Big).
\end{equation}
To prove \eqref{E:ineqt} we now make a special choice of the function $\psi$. Let $\phi_k$ be as in \eqref{E:cutoff} and set
\(
\psi_k := \phi_k\cdot q^{-1/2}.
\)
Then $0\leq\psi_{k}\leq q^{-1/2}$, and
\[
|d\psi_{k}|\ \le\ |d\phi_k|\cdot q^{-1/2}\ +\ \phi_k|dq^{-1/2}|.
\]
Therefore, $|d\psi_{k}|\leq\frac{1}{k}+L$. Since
$\psi_{k}(x)\to q^{-1/2}(x)$ as $k\to\infty$, the dominated convergence theorem applied
to \eqref{E:psiDs<} with $\psi=\psi_k$ immediately implies~\eqref{E:ineqt}.
\hfill$\square$
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{T:Isa}}\label{SS:prsa}
Let $s_1,s_2\in \operatorname{Dom}(H_{V,0}^*)$. Then
\[
(\phi s_1, D^*Ds_2) \ = \ (D(\phi s_1),Ds_2)
\ = \
(\widehat{D}(d\phi)s_1,Ds_2)+(\phi Ds_1,Ds_2).
\]
Similarly,
\[
(D^*Ds_1,\phi s_2) \ = \ (Ds_1,\widehat{D}(d\phi)s_2)+(\phi Ds_1,Ds_2)
\]
Hence,
\begin{equation}\label{E:Huv-uHv}\notag
(\phi s_1,H_Vs_2)-(H_Vs_1,\phi s_2)
\ = \ (\widehat{D}(d\phi)s_1,Ds_2)-(Ds_1,\widehat{D}(d\phi)s_2).
\end{equation}
By \eqref{E:Istronglyelliptic},
\[
\operatornamewithlimits{ess\ sup}_{x\in M}|\widehat{D}(d\phi)|\ \leq\ c\; \operatornamewithlimits{ess\ sup}_{x\in M}|d\phi(x)|,
\]
Therefore,
\begin{equation}\label{E:pravlev}
|(\phi s_1,H_Vs_2)-(H_Vs_1,\phi s_2)|
\ \leq \ c\; \underset{x\in M}\operatornamewithlimits{ess\ sup} \left(|d\phi|q^{1/2}\right)\cdot
\left(\|s_1\|\|q^{-1/2}Ds_2\|+\|s_2\|\|q^{-1/2}Ds_1\|\right).
\end{equation}
Consider a metric $g:=q^{-1}g^{TM}$. By condition (iii) of Theorem~\ref{T:Isa} this metric is complete. By Lemma~8.9 of \cite{BrMiSh02} there exists a sequence $\{\phi_k\}$ of Lipschitz functions such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item $0\leq\phi_k\leq1$ and $|d\phi_k|_g\leq\frac{1}{k}$;
\item $\lim_{k\to\infty}\phi_k(x)=1$, for all $x\in M$.
\end{enumerate}
Since
$|d\phi_k|_{g}=q^{1/2}|d\phi_k|$, we conclude
\[
\operatornamewithlimits{ess\ sup}_{x\in M}(|d\phi_k|q^{1/2}(x)) \ \leq\ \frac{1}{k}.
\]
Using \eqref{E:pravlev}, we obtain
\[
|(\phi_k u,H_Vv)-(H_Vu,\phi_k v)|
\ \leq \ \frac{c}{k}\left(\|s_1\|\|q^{-1/2}Ds_2\|+\|q^{-1/2}Ds_1\|\|s_2\|\right)
\ \to \ 0, \quad\text{as} \quad k\to\infty,
\]
where the convergence to $0$ of the RHS of this inequality follows from Proposition~\ref{P:domain}.
On the other side, by the dominated convergence theorem we have
\[
(\phi_k s_1,H_Vs_2)-(H_Vs_1,\phi_k s_2) \ \longrightarrow \ (s_1,H_Vs_2)-(H_Vs_1,s_2)
\]
as $k\to\infty$. Thus $(H_Vs_1,s_2)=(s_1,H_Vs_2)$, for all $s_1, s_2\in \operatorname{Dom}(H_{V,0}^*)$. Therefore, $H_V$ is essentially self-adjoint.\hfill$\square$
\section{Fredholmness} \label{S:Fredholm}
In this section we prove Theorems~\ref{T:IN<infty} and \ref{T:IFredholm}.
\subsection{Variational principle}\label{SS:variational}
We make use of a variational principle in the von Neumann setting,
stated in the following:
\begin{lemma}\label{L:variational principle}
Let $H$ be an $A$-Hilbert space and $T$ be a self-adjoint operator commuting with the action of $A$.
Then, for every $\lambda\in\mathbb{R}$,
\begin{equation}\label{var.princ.eq.}
N_\tau(\lambda;T)=\sup_L \dim_\tau L,
\end{equation}
where $L$ varies among the $A$-Hilbert subspaces of $H$ with $L\subset \operatorname{Dom}(T)$ and satisfying:
\[
(Tu,u)\leq \lambda \,(u,u),\qquad u\in L.
\]
\end{lemma}
This lemma is well-known.
For the proof we refer to \cite[Lemma 2.4]{Shubin96Morse} where the case $A=\mathcal{N}\Gamma$ is treated
(the case of a general finite von Neumann algebra $A$ follows with minor modifications).
\subsection{Restriction to a compact subset}\label{SS:restriction}
Note, first, that for any $A$-linear self-adjoint operator $T$ and any $l,\,\lambda\in \mathbb{R}$ we have:
\begin{equation}
N_\tau(\lambda+l;T+l)\ =\ N_\tau(\lambda;T).
\end{equation}
Therefore, by replacing $V(x)$ with $V(x)+l$ in Theorem~\ref{T:IN<infty}, we can assume that $C,\lambda>0$ in (\ref{E:IFredholmcondition}) and (\ref{E:IN<infty}) and $V(x)\geq 0$ for all $x\in M$.
Let the compact set $K\subset M$ be as in \eqref{E:IFredholmcondition}. For any $\lambda>0$ consider the set
\[
M_\lambda \ := \ \{ x\in M:\, V(x)\geq \lambda\}.
\]
Then
\[
\Omega_\lambda\ :=\ M\backslash M_\lambda
\]
is an open set. We denote its closure by $\bar{\Omega}_\lambda$. We now assume that $0<\lambda<C$ and choose $\lambda_1$ such that $0<\lambda<\lambda_1<C$. Then
\[
\bar{\Omega}_{\lambda}\ \subset\ \Omega_{\lambda_1}, \qquad
\bar{\Omega}_{\lambda_1}\ \subset\ \Omega_{C}, \qquad \bar{\Omega}_C\subset K.
\]
Let $\phi:M\to [0,1]$ be a smooth function such that
\[
\phi|_{\Omega_{\lambda_1}}\equiv 1, \qquad \phi|_{M\backslash\Omega_{C}}\equiv 0.
\]
Define the $A$-linear restriction map $\rho: L^2(M,E) \ \to \ L^2(\Omega_{C},E|_{\Omega_{C}})$ by the formula
\begin{equation}\label{E:MtoK1}
\rho(s):= \phi s.
\end{equation}
\begin{lemma}\label{L:restriction}
Let $L\subset \operatorname{Dom}(H_V)$ be an $A$-Hilbert subspace of $L^2(M,E)$ satisfying
\begin{equation}\label{E:Fredholmness:eq1}
(H_Vs,s)\ \leq\ \lambda\,(s,s),\qquad s\in L.
\end{equation}
Then $\rho$ is injective when restricted to $L$ and $\rho(L)$ is a closed $A$-invariant subspace of $L^2(\Omega_\lambda,E|_{\Omega_\lambda})$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The potential $V$ satisfies the inequality $V(x)\geq 0$ for any $x\in M$. Hence, the operator $H_V$ satisfies the conditions of Theorem~\ref{T:Isa} with $q=\operatorname{const}$. It follows from Proposition~\ref{P:domain} that for any $s\in \operatorname{Dom}(H_V)$ we have $Ds\in L^2(M,E)$. Hence,
\begin{equation}\label{E:HVss}
(H_Vs,s)\ = \ \|Ds\|^2\ +\ (Vs,s)\ \ge\ (Vs,s).
\end{equation}
In particular, $(Vs,s)<\infty$.
For any $s\in L$ using \eqref{E:HVss} we obtain
\[
\lambda\,\|s\|^2\ \geq (H_Vs,s)\ \geq\ (Vs,s)\ \geq\
\lambda_1\,\int_{M\setminus \Omega_{\lambda_1}} |s(x)|^2\, d\mu(x)
\]
and
\[
\lambda\,\int_{\Omega_{\lambda_1}} |s(x)|^2\, d\mu(x)\ \ge\
(\lambda_1-\lambda)\,\int_{M\setminus \Omega_{\lambda_1}} |s(x)|^2\, d\mu(x).
\]
Hence,
\[
\|\rho(s)\|^2\ \geq \ \int_{\Omega_{\lambda_1}}\,|s(x)|^2\,d\mu(x) \ \geq\
\frac{\lambda_1-\lambda}{\lambda}\,
\int_{M\setminus \Omega_{\lambda_1}} |s(x)|^2\, d\mu(x).
\]
Therefore,
\begin{equation}\label{E:rho(s)>s}
\begin{aligned}
\|s\|^2\ & = \int_{\Omega_{\lambda_1}} |s(x)|^2\, d\mu(x)+\,\int_{M\setminus \Omega_{\lambda_1}} |s(x)|^2\, d\mu(x)\\
&\leq \|\rho(s)\|^2\ +\ \frac{\lambda}{\lambda_1-\lambda}\,\|\rho(s)\|^2
= \left(\,\frac{\lambda_1}{\lambda_1-\lambda}\,\right)\, \|\rho(s)\|^2.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
This inequality together with the fact that $\rho$ is a bounded $A$-equivariant map proves the lemma.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Extension to a closed manifold}\label{SS:tilM}
Choose a closed manifold $\widehat{M}$ containing $\Omega_C$ as an open subset. Let $\widehat{E}=\widehat{E}^+\oplus\widehat{E}^-$ be a graded $A$-Hilbert bundle of finite type over $\widehat{M}$ extending $E|_{\Omega_C}$. Let
$\widehat{D}:C^\infty(\widehat{E}^+)\rightarrow C^\infty(\widehat{E}^-)$ and $\widehat{V}:\widehat{E}^+\to \widehat{E}^+$
be a first order elliptic differential operator and a positive bundle map which agree with $D$ and $V$ on $\Omega_C$. Set
\[
H_{\widehat{V}} \ := \ \widehat{D}^*\widehat{D}\ + \ \widehat{V}.
\]
Then the restrictions of $H_V$ and $H_{\widehat{V}}$ to $\Omega_C$ coincide.
We view $\rho(L)\subset L^2(\Omega_C,E^+|_{\Omega_C})$ as a subspace of $L^2(\widehat{M},\widehat{E}^+)$.
\begin{lemma}\label{L:HVrhosrhos}
Under the assumptions of Lemma~\ref{L:restriction}, there exists a constant $R>0$ such that for any $u\in \rho(L)$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{E:HVrhosrhos}
\big(\,H_{\widehat{V}}u,u\,\big) \ \leq\ R\,(u,u).
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Set
\[
a\ :=\ \max_{x\in M} \|\sigma(D)(x,d\phi(x))\|.
\]
Notice that the maximum exists, since $\phi$ has compact support.
For $u\in \rho(L)$ there exists $s\in L$ such that $u= \rho(s)= \phi{}s$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{E:tilDu<}
\begin{aligned}
\|\widehat{D} u\|^2\ &= \ \|D(\phi s)\|^2 \ = \ \big(\,\|\phi Ds\|+\|[D,\phi]s\|\,\big)^2\\
&\leq \ \big(\,\|Ds\|+a\,\|s\|\,\big)^2 \ \leq \ 2\,\|Ds\|^2\ + \ 2a^2\,\|s\|^2.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Also, since $V(x)>0$ for all $x\in M$ we conclude
\begin{equation}\label{E:Vuu>}
(\widehat{V} u,u)\ = \ (\phi^2Vs,s)\ \leq \ (Vs,s).
\end{equation}
By using \eqref{E:tilDu<} and \eqref{E:Vuu>} we obtain
\[
\begin{aligned}
\big(\,H_{\widehat{V}}u,u\,\big) \ & = \
\|\widehat{D} u\|^2\ + \ (\widehat{V} u,u) \ \leq\
2 \|Ds\|^2 \ + \ 2a^2\|s\|^2 \ + \ (Vs,s) \\
&\leq \
2\,\big(\, \|Ds\|^2+ (Vs,s)\,\big) \ + \ 2a^2\|s\|^2 \ = \
2\,(H_Vs,s) \ + \ 2a^2\,\|s\|^2.
\end{aligned}
\]
Using \eqref{E:Fredholmness:eq1} and \eqref{E:rho(s)>s} we now conclude
\[
\big(\,H_{\widehat{V}}u,u\,\big)\ \leq\ 2(\lambda+a^2)\,\|s\|^2 \ \leq\
2(\lambda+a^2)\, \left(\,\frac{\lambda_1}{\lambda_1-\lambda}\,\right)\,\|u\|^2.
\]
Hence, \eqref{E:HVrhosrhos} holds with $R= 2(\lambda+a^2)\, \left(\,\frac{\lambda_1}{\lambda_1-\lambda}\,\right)$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{T:IN<infty}}\label{SS:prIN<infty}
Since $\widehat{V}\ge0$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{E:spectral counting functions comparison}
N_\tau(\lambda;H_{\widehat{V}})\leq N_\tau(\lambda;\widehat{D}^*\widehat{D}),\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \lambda\in\mathbb{R}.
\end{equation}
It is shown in \cite{BFKM}*{\S2.4} that the spectral counting function $N_\tau(\,\lambda;\widehat{D}^*\widehat{D})$ is finite. Hence, it follows from (\ref{E:spectral counting functions comparison}) and Lemmas~\ref{L:variational principle} and \ref{L:HVrhosrhos} that
\[
\dim_\tau \rho(L)\ \le\ N_\tau(R;H_{\widehat{V}}) \ < \ \infty.
\]
From Lemma~\ref{L:restriction} and the open mapping theorem we deduce that the map $\rho|_L:L\rightarrow \rho(L)$ is an isomorphism of Hilbert $A$-spaces. By \cite[Theorem 1.12 (2)]{Luck02book} \begin{equation}\label{E:L=rho(L)}
\dim_\tau L\ =\ \dim_\tau \rho(L) \ \le \ N_\tau(R;H_{\widehat{V}}).
\end{equation}
Hence, by Lemma~\ref{L:variational principle} we get
\[
N_\tau(\lambda;H_V) \ \le\ N_\tau(R;H_{\widehat{V}}) \ < \ \infty.
\]
Theorem \ref{T:IN<infty} is proven.\hfill $\square$
\subsection{Proof of Lemma~\ref{L:IFredholmness}}\label{SS:prIFredholmness}
Consider the bounded operator
\begin{equation}
\Phi(\mathcal{T}):=\mathcal{T}\,(I+\mathcal{T}^2)^{-\frac{1}{2}},
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{T}$ is the operator defined in \eqref{E:Op1}.
Observe that the operator $\Phi(\mathcal{T})$ is $\tau$-Fredholm if and only if $T$ is $\tau$-Fredholm, and
\[
N_\tau(\lambda; \mathcal{T}^2) \ = \ N_\tau\left(\,\frac{\lambda}{1+\lambda};\Phi(\mathcal{T})^2\,\right).
\]
Thus Lemma~\ref{L:IFredholmness} is a direct consequence of the following:
\begin{lemma}
Let $S$ be a bounded self-adjoint $A$-linear operator on an $A$-Hilbert space $H$.
Then $S$ is $\tau$-Fredholm if and only if there exists $\lambda>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{E:NtaucalT2}
N_\tau(\lambda;S^2) \ < \ \infty.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose $N_\tau(\lambda;S^2) < \infty$ for some $\lambda>0$. We need to show that $S$ is $\tau$-Fredholm in the sense of Definition~\ref{D:Fredholm operator}.
Since the function $N_\tau(\cdot;S^2)$ is nondecreasing, we have:
\[
\dim_\tau\Ker S\ =\ N_\tau(0;S^2) \ \leq \ N_\tau(\lambda;S^2)\ <\ \infty.
\]
Thus the condition (i) of Definition~\ref{D:Fredholm operator} is satisfied.
Set $L:=\im (I-P_\lambda(S^2))$, where $P_\lambda(S^2)$ denotes the orthogonal projection onto the spectral subspace of the operator $S^2$ corresponding to $[0, \lambda]$.
Then $L$ is $A$-invariant, $L\subseteq \im S^2\subseteq \im S$ and
\[
\dim_\tau L^\perp\ =\ \dim_\tau (P_\lambda(S))\ =\ N_\tau(\lambda;S^2)\ <\ \infty.
\]
Hence the condition (ii) of Definition~\ref{D:Fredholm operator} is also satisfied.
\
Suppose now that $S$ is $\tau$-Fredholm and let $L$ be an $A$-Hilbert subspace of $H$ such that $L\subseteq\im S$ and $\dim_\tau L^\perp<\infty$.
The map
\begin{equation}\label{E:S1}
S_1\ :=\ S|_{(\Ker S)^\perp}:\,(\Ker S)^\perp\ \rightarrow\ H
\end{equation}
is one-to-one.
Set
\[
L_1\ := \ S_1^{-1}(L)\ \subset (\Ker S)^\perp.
\]
Then $L_1$ is a closed $A$-invariant subspace of $H$ and $S:L_1\to L$ is a bijection. It follows from the Open Mapping Theorem that there exists $\epsilon>0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{E:Su>eps}
\left\|\,Su\,\right\| \ > \ \epsilon\,\|u\|, \qquad \text{for any}\quad u\in L_1.
\end{equation}
We finish the proof of the lemma by showing that any $\lambda<\epsilon^2$ satisfies \eqref{E:NtaucalT2}. Recall that $P_\lambda(S^2)$ denotes the orthogonal projection on the spectral subspace of $S^2$ corresponding to the interval $[0,\lambda]$. Thus
\begin{equation}\label{E:Su<epsilon}
\left\|\,Su\,\right\| \ \le \ \sqrt{\lambda}\,\|u\| \ < \ \epsilon\,\|u\|,
\qquad \text{for any}\quad u\in \im{}P_\lambda(S^2).
\end{equation}
From \eqref{E:Su>eps} and \eqref{E:Su<epsilon} we now conclude that $\im P_\lambda(S^2)\cap L_1=\{0\}$. Hence, it follows from \cite[Theorem~1.12]{Luck02book} that
\begin{equation}\label{E:Ntau<L1}
N_\tau(\lambda;S^2)\ \leq\ \dim_\tau L_1^\perp.
\end{equation}
To finish the proof of the lemma it is now enough to show that $ \dim_\tau L_1^\perp<\infty$.
Let $L_2$ be the orthogonal complement of $L_1$ in $(\Ker S)^\perp$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{E:L1=L2+KerS}
\dim_\tau L_1^\perp\ =\ \dim_\tau L_2\ +\ \dim_\tau\Ker S.
\end{equation}
Since $S$ is $\tau$-Fredholm, $\dim_\tau\Ker{}S$ is finite and it suffices to prove that $\dim_\tau L_2$ is finite.
Notice that, by \eqref{E:Su>eps}, $S(L_2)$ is a closed subspace of $H$ and $S:L_2\to S(L_2)$ is a topological isomorphism. Hence,
\begin{equation}\label{E:S(L2)=L2}
\dim_\tau{}S(L_2)\ =\ \dim_\tau{}L_2,
\end{equation}
cf. \cite[Lemma~1.13]{Luck02book}. Since the map \eqref{E:S1} is one-to-one, we conclude that
\[
S(L_2)\cap L\ =\ S_1(L_2)\cap L \ = \ \{0\}.
\]
Let $P_L$ be the orthogonal projection onto the subspace $L$. Then
\[
I-P_L:\,S(L_2)\ \to L^\perp
\]
is a one-to one map. Therefore, by \cite[Theorem~1.12(2)]{Luck02book},
\[
\dim_\tau S(L_2)\ \leq\ \dim_\tau L^\perp\ <\ \infty.
\]
From \eqref{E:Ntau<L1}, \eqref{E:L1=L2+KerS}, and \eqref{E:S(L2)=L2} we now conclude that $N_\tau(\lambda;S^2)<\infty$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{T:IFredholm}}\label{SS:prIFredholm}
We are now ready to prove $\tau$-Fredholmness of a Callias-type operator $D+F$. The operator \eqref{E:IDF} satisfies the conditions of Theorem~\ref{T:IsaD} and, hence, is essentially self-adjoint. Hence
\begin{equation}\label{E:NDphi=NDphi2}
N_\tau(\lambda;\mathcal{D}_\mathcal{F}) \ = \ N_\tau(\lambda^2;\mathcal{D}_\mathcal{F}^2).
\end{equation}
Moreover
\begin{equation}\label{E:calDPhi2}
\mathcal{D}_\mathcal{F}^2\ = \ \mathcal{D}^2 \ +\ \{\mathcal{D},\mathcal{F}\}\ +\ \mathcal{F}^2\ = \ \mathcal{D}^2\ + \ V,
\end{equation}
where $V=\{\mathcal{D},\mathcal{F}\}\ +\ \mathcal{F}^2$. By the Callias condition \eqref{E:Calliastype}, $V(x)>\epsilon$ for all $x\in M\backslash{K}$. Hence, it follows from Theorem~\ref{T:IN<infty} that $N_\tau(\epsilon; \mathcal{D}_\mathcal{F}^2)$ is finite. Theorem~\ref{T:IFredholm} follows now from Lemma~\ref{L:IFredholmness}.
\hfill$\square$
\section{Stability of the Callias-type $\tau$-index} \label{S:Callias}
In this section we prove Theorem~\ref{T:ICallias}.
\subsection{Continuous perturbations}\label{SS:continuous perturbation}
We start with an abstract result. Let $H_1$ and $H_2$ be $A$-Hilbert spaces and suppose that $T:H_1\to H_2$ is a closed $A$-linear operator. We denote by $\operatorname{Dom}(T)$ the domain of $T$ considered as a Hilbert space with the graph scalar product
\[
(x,y)_{\operatorname{Dom}(T)}\ :=\ (x,y)_{H_1}\ +\ (Dx,Dy)_{H_2}.
\]
Then $T:\operatorname{Dom}(T)\to H_2$ is a bounded $A$-linear operator.
Assume in addition that $T$ is $\tau$-Fredholm, cf. Definition~\ref{D:Fredholm operator}.
\begin{definition}\label{D:boundedperturbation}
A one parameter family $\{T_t\}_{t\in[0,1]}$ of $\tau$-Fredholm operators $T_t:H_1\to H_2$ is called a {\em continuous perturbation of $T$ with fixed domain} if $T_0=T$, $\operatorname{Dom}(T_t)=\operatorname{Dom}(T)$ for all $t\in [0,1]$, and the induced family $T_t:\operatorname{Dom}(T)\to H_2$ is continuous in operator norm (as a family of maps between the Hilbert spaces $\operatorname{Dom}(T)$ and $H_2$).
\end{definition}
The next lemma shows that the $\tau$-index is stable with respect to continuous perturbations with fixed domain.
\begin{lemma}\label{L:Abstract Stability}
Let $\{T_t\}_{t\in[0,1]}$ be a continuous perturbation of $T$ with fixed domain. Then
\begin{equation}\label{E:Abstract Stability}
\ind_\tau T_t\ = \ \ind_\tau T, \qquad\text{for all}\quad t\in [0,1].
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
In general, note that the operator
\[
(I+T^*T)^{\frac{1}{2}}:\,\operatorname{Dom}(T)\ \longrightarrow\ H_1
\]
is an isometric isomorphism of $A$-Hilbert spaces and consider the family of operators
\[
\Phi(T_t):=T_t(I+T^*T)^{-\frac{1}{2}}:\,H_1\ \longrightarrow\ H_2.
\]
The operators $\Phi(T_t)$ form a continuous family of bounded $\tau$-Fredholm operators and
\[
\ind_\tau \Phi(T_t) \ = \ \ind_\tau T_t.
\]
Hence, it is enough to prove the lemma for the case when $\operatorname{Dom}(T)= H_1$ and $T_t$ is a continuous family of bounded operators. In this case the lemma is proven in \cite[Theorem 4]{Breuer69Fredholm2}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{T:ICallias}}\label{SS:prICallias}
For $0\leq t\leq 1$, we set:
\[
D_t\ :=\ D\ +\ F_0\ +\ t\,(F_1-F_0).
\]
Since the $A$-endomorphism $F_1-F_0$ vanishes outside of the compact set $K$, all $D_t$ satisfy the condition \eqref{E:Calliastype} and, hence, are Callias-type operators. It follows from Theorem~\ref{T:IFredholm} that all the operators $D_t$ are $\tau$-Fredholm.
Since $F_1-F_0:L^2(M,E^+)\to L^2(M,E^-)$ is a bounded $A$-operator, the domain of $D_t$ is independent of $t$. Finally, we have:
\[
\left\|D_s-D_t\right\|=\left|s-t\right|\left\|F_1-F_0\right\|,\qquad \text{for all}\quad s,\,t\in [0,1].
\]
Thus the family $\{D_t\}$ is continuous in operator norm. Theorem~\ref{T:IFredholm} follows now from Lemma~\ref{L:Abstract Stability}.
\hfill$\square$
\begin{bibdiv}
\begin{biblist}
\bib{Anghel93}{article}{
author={Anghel, N.},
title={An abstract index theorem on noncompact {R}iemannian manifolds},
date={1993},
ISSN={0362-1588},
journal={Houston J. Math.},
volume={19},
number={2},
pages={223\ndash 237},
review={\MR{1225459 (94c:58193)}},
}
\bib{Anghel93Callias}{article}{
author={Anghel, N.},
title={On the index of {C}allias-type operators},
date={1993},
ISSN={1016-443X},
journal={Geom. Funct. Anal.},
volume={3},
number={5},
pages={431\ndash 438},
url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01896237},
review={\MR{1233861 (94m:58213)}},
}
\bib{Atiyah76}{article}{
author={Atiyah, M.~F.},
title={Elliptic operators, discrete groups and von neumann algebras},
date={1976},
journal={Asr\'erisque},
volume={32/33},
pages={43\ndash 72},
}
\bib{Blackadar06book}{book}{
author={Blackadar, B.},
title={Operator algebras},
series={Encyclopaedia of Mathematical Sciences},
publisher={Springer-Verlag, Berlin},
date={2006},
volume={122},
ISBN={978-3-540-28486-4; 3-540-28486-9},
url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-28517-2},
note={Theory of $C{^{*}}$-algebras and von Neumann algebras, Operator
Algebras and Non-commutative Geometry, III},
review={\MR{2188261 (2006k:46082)}},
}
\bib{BottSeeley78}{article}{
author={Bott, R.},
author={Seeley, R.},
title={Some remarks on the paper of {C}allias: ``{A}xial anomalies and
index theorems on open spaces'' [{C}omm. {M}ath. {P}hys. {\bf 62} (1978), no.
3, 213--234;\ {MR} 80h:58045a]},
date={1978},
ISSN={0010-3616},
journal={Comm. Math. Phys.},
volume={62},
number={3},
pages={235\ndash 245},
url={http://projecteuclid.org/euclid.cmp/1103904396},
review={\MR{507781 (80h:58045b)}},
}
\bib{Br2}{article}{
author={Braverman, M.},
title={On self-adjointness of a {S}chr\"odinger operator on differential
forms},
date={1998},
ISSN={0002-9939},
journal={Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.},
volume={126},
pages={617\ndash 623},
}
\bib{Br-index}{article}{
author={Braverman, M.},
title={Index theorem for equivariant {D}irac operators on noncompact
manifolds},
date={2002},
journal={$K$-Theory},
volume={27},
number={1},
pages={61\ndash 101},
}
\bib{BrNonCompactGroup}{article}{
author={Braverman, M.},
title={The index theory on non-compact manifolds with proper group
action},
date={2015},
journal={J. Geom. Phys.},
volume={98},
pages={275 -- 284},
}
\bib{BrCano14}{incollection}{
author={Braverman, M.},
author={Cano, L.},
title={Index theory for non-compact {$G$}-manifolds},
date={2014},
booktitle={Geometric, algebraic and topological methods for quantum field
theory},
publisher={World Sci. Publ., Hackensack, NJ},
pages={60\ndash 94},
url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/9789814460057_0002},
review={\MR{3204959}},
}
\bib{BrMiSh02}{article}{
author={Braverman, M.},
author={Milatovich, O.},
author={Shubin, M.},
title={Essential selfadjointness of {S}chr\"odinger-type operators on
manifolds},
date={2002},
journal={Russian Math. Surveys},
volume={57},
pages={41\ndash 692},
}
\bib{Breuer68Fredholm1}{article}{
author={Breuer, M.},
title={Fredholm theories in von {N}eumann algebras. {I}},
date={1968},
ISSN={0025-5831},
journal={Math. Ann.},
volume={178},
pages={243\ndash 254},
review={\MR{0234294 (38 \#2611)}},
}
\bib{Breuer69Fredholm2}{article}{
author={Breuer, M.},
title={Fredholm theories in von {N}eumann algebras. {II}},
date={1969},
ISSN={0025-5831},
journal={Math. Ann.},
volume={180},
pages={313\ndash 325},
review={\MR{0264407 (41 \#9002)}},
}
\bib{Bunke95}{article}{
author={Bunke, U.},
title={A {$K$}-theoretic relative index theorem and {C}allias-type
{D}irac operators},
date={1995},
ISSN={0025-5831},
journal={Math. Ann.},
volume={303},
number={2},
pages={241\ndash 279},
url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01460989},
review={\MR{1348799 (96e:58148)}},
}
\bib{BFKM}{article}{
author={Burghelea, D.},
author={Friedlander, L.},
author={Kappeler, T.},
author={McDonald, P.},
title={Analytic and {R}eidemeister torsion for representations in finite
type {H}ilbert modules},
date={1996},
journal={Geom. Funct. Anal.},
pages={751\ndash 859},
}
\bib{Callias78}{article}{
author={Callias, C.},
title={Axial anomalies and index theorems on open spaces},
date={1978},
ISSN={0010-3616},
journal={Comm. Math. Phys.},
volume={62},
number={3},
pages={213\ndash 234},
url={http://projecteuclid.org/euclid.cmp/1103904395},
review={\MR{507780 (80h:58045a)}},
}
\bib{Chernoff73}{article}{
author={Chernoff, P.},
title={Essential self-adjointness of powers of generators of hyperbolic
equations},
date={1973},
journal={J. Functional Analysis},
volume={12},
pages={401\ndash 414},
}
\bib{FomenkoMoscenko80}{article}{
author={Fomenko, A.~T.},
author={Mi{\v{s}}{\v{c}}enko, A.~S.},
title={The index of elliptic operators over ${C}^*$-algebras},
date={1980},
journal={Math. USSR, Izv.},
volume={15},
pages={87\ndash 112},
}
\bib{GromovLawson83}{article}{
author={Gromov, M.},
author={Lawson, H.~B., Jr.},
title={Positive scalar curvature and the {D}irac operator on complete
{R}iemannian manifolds},
date={1983},
ISSN={0073-8301},
journal={Inst. Hautes \'Etudes Sci. Publ. Math.},
number={58},
pages={83\ndash 196 (1984)},
url={http://www.numdam.org/item?id=PMIHES_1983__58__83_0},
review={\MR{720933 (85g:58082)}},
}
\bib{MathaiHochs}{article}{
author={Hochs, P.},
author={Mathai, V.},
title={Geometric quantization and families of inner products},
journal={50 pages, [arXiv:1309.6760]},
}
\bib{Luck02book}{book}{
author={L{\"u}ck, W.},
title={{$L^2$}-invariants: theory and applications to geometry and
{$K$}-theory},
series={Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete. 3. Folge. A
Series of Modern Surveys in Mathematics [Results in Mathematics and Related
Areas. 3rd Series. A Series of Modern Surveys in Mathematics]},
publisher={Springer-Verlag, Berlin},
date={2002},
volume={44},
ISBN={3-540-43566-2},
url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-04687-6},
review={\MR{1926649 (2003m:58033)}},
}
\bib{MaZhang-noncompact}{misc}{
author={Ma, X.},
author={Zhang, W.},
title={Geometric quantization for proper moment maps},
date={2008},
note={arXiv:0812.3989},
}
\bib{MaZhang14}{article}{
author={Ma, X.},
author={Zhang, W.},
title={Geometric quantization for proper moment maps: the {V}ergne
conjecture},
date={2014},
ISSN={0001-5962},
journal={Acta Math.},
volume={212},
number={1},
pages={11\ndash 57},
url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11511-014-0108-3},
review={\MR{3179607}},
}
\bib{MathaiZhang10}{article}{
author={Mathai, V.},
author={Zhang, W.},
title={Geometric quantization for proper actions},
date={2010},
journal={Adv. Math.},
volume={225},
pages={1224\ndash 1247},
note={With an appendix by Ulrich Bunke [arXiv:0806.3138]},
}
\bib{Ol1}{article}{
author={Oleinik, I.M.},
title={On the essential self-adjointness of the {Schr\"odinger} operator
on a complete {Riemannian} manifold},
date={1993},
journal={Mathematical Notes},
volume={54},
pages={934\ndash 939},
}
\bib{Ol2}{article}{
author={Oleinik, I.M.},
title={On the connection of the classical and quantum mechanical
completeness of a potential at infinity on complete {Riemannian} manifolds},
date={1994},
journal={Mathematical Notes},
volume={55},
pages={380\ndash 386},
}
\bib{Paradan03}{article}{
author={Paradan, P.-{\'E}.},
title={{$\operatorname{Spin}\sp c$}-quantization and the
{$K$}-multiplicities of the discrete series},
date={2003},
journal={Ann. Sci. \'Ecole Norm. Sup. (4)},
volume={36},
pages={805\ndash 845},
}
\bib{Ro-Be70}{article}{
author={Rofe-Beketov, F.S.},
title={Self-adjointness conditions for the {Schr\"odinger} operator},
date={1970},
journal={Mat. Zametki},
volume={8},
pages={741\ndash 751},
}
\bib{Schick05}{article}{
author={Schick, T.},
title={{$L^2$}-index theorems, {$KK$}-theory, and connections},
date={2005},
ISSN={1076-9803},
journal={New York J. Math.},
volume={11},
pages={387\ndash 443 (electronic)},
url={http://nyjm.albany.edu:8000/j/2005/11_387.html},
review={\MR{2188248 (2006h:19007)}},
}
\bib{Shubin99}{incollection}{
author={Shubin, M.},
title={Spectral theory of the {S}chr\"odinger operators on non-compact
manifolds: qualitative results},
date={1999},
booktitle={Spectral theory and geometry ({E}dinburgh, 1998)},
series={London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser.},
volume={273},
publisher={Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge},
pages={226\ndash 283},
url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511566165.009},
review={\MR{1736869 (2001d:58037)}},
}
\bib{Shubin92}{article}{
author={Shubin, M.},
title={Spectral theory of elliptic operators on non-compact manifolds},
date={1992},
journal={Ast\'erisque},
volume={207},
pages={37\ndash 108},
}
\bib{Shubin96Morse}{article}{
author={Shubin, M.},
title={Semiclassical asymptotics on covering manifolds and {M}orse
inequalities},
date={1996},
journal={Geom. Funct. Anal.},
volume={6},
pages={370\ndash 409},
}
\end{biblist}
\end{bibdiv}
\end{document}
|
\chapter{Conclusions}\label{thesis_concl}
Over the years, a lot of models and tools for parallel programming have been proposed. This great deal of efforts is mainly due to the difficulties in coordinating several, possibly hundreds or thousands, activities in an easy way but allowing an efficient exploitation of computational resources. In fact, to date does not exist a universal approach working better than others in every situation. Actually, there are several good approaches based on different perspectives and abstraction levels. Nevertheless, starting from the second half of nineties, with the advent of computational Grids, parallel programming difficulties became greater and greater and also the most promising approaches trail along. Indeed, programming the Grids is even more difficult than traditional parallel programming. This is because the computers belonging to a Grid can be heterogeneous, separated by firewalls, unsafe
and managed by different administration policies. To address these additional difficulties most of the models and tools conceived and developed for parallel programming have to be re-thought and adapted.
In particular, Structured Parallel Programming models, and the derived environment have been proved to be very effective approach for programming parallel applications, but some well-known issues prevent them from achieving significant popularity in the wider parallel and grid programming community.
In this thesis we presented an organic set of tools and models conceived, designed and developed or properly modified to address most of these issues.
We started discussing how we modified the \muskel framework for supporting the issue related to the lack of extendability of the skeleton systems. We discussed how our customized \muskel supports the introduction of new skeletons, modeling parallelism exploitation patterns not originally covered by the primitive \muskel skeletons.
This possibility is supported by allowing \muskel users (the programmers) to define new skeletons providing the arbitrary data flow graph executed in the skeleton and by letting our \muskel version to seamlessly integrate such new skeletons with the primitive ones.
We also presented experimental results validating our \muskel approach to extend and customize its skeleton set. We ran several test programs using the custom features introduced in \muskel. When grain is small, \muskel does not scale well, even using a very small number of remote interpreter instances. When the computational grain is high enough
the efficiency is definitely close to the ideal one. Despite the data shown in this thesis refer to synthetic computations, the tests we conducted using actual computations
achieved very similar results. This because the automatic load balancing mechanism implemented in the \muskel distributed interpreter through auto scheduling perfectly optimized the execution of variable grain macro data-flow instructions.
As far as we know, this is the most significant effort in the skeleton community to tackle problems deriving from a fixed skeleton set. Only Schaeffer and his group at the University of Alberta implemented a system were programmers can, in controlled ways, insert new parallelism exploitation patterns in the system \cite{bromling:parco:2001}, although the approach followed here is a bit different, in that programmers are encouraged to intervene directly in the run-time support implementation, to introduce new skeletons, while in \muskel new skeletons may be introduced using the intermediate macro data flow language as the skeleton ``assembly'' language.
Unfortunately, programmers using this approach, in order to program unstructured parallel application, have to interact directly with data-flow graph. It requires to programmers to reason in terms of program-blocks instead of a monolithic program.
In order to ease the generation of macro data-flow blocks and in general to provide mechanism easing the use of structured parallel programming environment, we exploited some \textit{metaprogramming} techniques.
We exploited some metaprogramming techniques based both on Aspect Oriented Programming (AOP) and on Attribute Oriented Programming ($@$OP). We showed how these techniques can be seamlessly exploited to transform sequential applications into parallel ones. In particular, we showed how annotations and aspect can be exploited to drive the sequential application transformation into a macro data-flow graph that can be executed on distributed architectures.
The exploitation of $@$OP and AOP techniques allows to completely separate the concerns relative to parallelism exploitation and application functional code. In particular, the same application code used to perform functional debugging on a single, sequential machine may be easily turned into parallel code.
To validate the $@$OP approach we implemented PAL, a java annotation based metaprogramming framework that restructures applications at bytecode-level at run-time in order to make them parallel. PAL transformations depend on: i) the resources available at run-time, ii) the hints provided by programmers and iii) the available \textit{adapters}. An adapter is a specialized entity that instructs the PAL transformation engine to drive the code transformation depending on the available parallel tools and frameworks. Experimental results show that the PAL is an effective and efficient approach for handling resource heterogeneity and dynamicity. Actually, run-time code transformation brings to a very good exploitation of computational resources. For this implementation we developed two distinct adapters. The first adapter we developed foster the bytecode transformation making the original code a multithreaded one. The other adapter supports the bytecode transformation that makes the original code compliant with JJPF, a structured parallel programming framework we developed some years ago.
PAL demonstrated that, given the existence of a proper metaprogramming run-time support, annotations are a handy way both to indicate which parts of a program must run in parallel and to express non-functional requirements directly in the source code.
Therefore, we decided to apply the main features of PAL approach to our modified \muskel implementation. Actually, adapting them to \muskel we changed a little bit the approach. Such a change is due to a few motivations. First of all because \muskel provides \emph{per se} a distributed macro data-flow executor whereas PAL exploits external tools for distributed program execution. Moreover, we would like to have a more flexible mechanism for macro data-flow block generation and management. Finally, we would like to exploit a standard tool for run-time code transformation instead of using ad-hoc tools, like the one we developed for PAL.
As a consequence we decided to use integrate in \muskel the AOP model and in particular the AspectJ framework.
The integration has been performed in two steps, in the first step we integrated the AOP mechanisms in order to achieve very simple code transformation.
The second step consisted in testing the integration of \muskel with AspectJ to in a more complex scenario. Hence, we exploited the aspect oriented programming support we integrated in \muskel in order to develop workflows which structure and processing are optimized at run-time.
In order to prove the effectiveness of the approach in \muskel, we conducted some experiments on a network of workstations.
The only difference between plain \muskel and the system proposed here to execute workflows lies in the way fireable instructions are provided to the distributed data-flow interpreter of \muskel.
Indeed, in plain \muskel, fireable instructions are taken from a compiled representation of a data-flow graph. Each time a new token arrives to a macro data-flow instruction in the graph the target data-flow instruction is checked for ``fireability'' and, possibly, delivered to the distributed macro data-flow interpreter. The time spent is in the sub-micro second range (net time, not taking into account time spent to copy parameters in memory during the interpreter call). When executing workflows according to the approach discussed here, instead, fireable instructions is generated at run-time by the AOP engine. We measured the overhead when exploiting the AOP approach, it is approximately 23 milliseconds per workflow node.
These two results presented are feasible approaches for programming cluster or networks of workstation but are not suitable for computational Grids, where component models are preferable. This is due to several motivations we described in deep in this thesis.
Provide parallel programming models for Grids are important because they are becoming the dominant type of parallel architectures. Moreover, due to their heterogeneous and distributed nature, they represent a very good test-bed for testing parallel programming models dealing with dynamicity handling.
The \muskel framework, handle dynamicity exploiting the \emph{Application Manager}: an entity that observes the behavior of the parallel application and in case of problems reacts aiming to fix them. This approach has proved to be effective. Nevertheless, some of the implementation choices done when \muskel was developed limit its exploitation on Grids.
Therefore, we decided to generalize and extend the \muskel \textit{Application Manager} approach to make it suitable for components models, in order to be able to port the approach in existing component models.
We ported the \muskel approach in the Grid Component Model. Actually, the \textit{Application Manager} approach form the base of the autonomic features of GCM: each self-optimizing GCM component contains an \textit{Application Manager} that in GCM is called \textit{Autonomic Manager}.
Nevertheless, \textit{Autonomic Manager} rely fully on the application programmer's expertise for the setup of the management code, which can be quite difficult to write since it is tailored for the particular component or assembly of them. As a result, the introduction of dynamic adaptivity might enable the management of grid dynamism but, at the same time, decreases the component reuse potential since it further specializes components with application specific management code.
In order to address this problem, we proposed the \emph{Behavioural Skeletons} as a novel way to describe autonomic components in the GCM framework. Behavioural Skeletons aim to describe recurring patterns of component assemblies that can be equipped with correct and effective management strategies with respect to a given management goal.
The Behavioural Skeletons model provides a way for handling dynamicity, supporting reuse both of functional and non-functional code.
We presented a significant set of skeletons and we discussed how behavioural skeletons can be implemented in the framework of the GCM component model. Behavioural skeletons provide the programmer with the ability to implement autonomic managers completely taking care of the parallelism exploitation details by simply instantiating existing skeletons and by providing suitable, functional parameters.
To validate our Behavioural Skeletons we conducted some experiments with the current prototype of the GCM that is currently under development in the GridCOMP STREP project \cite{gridcomp}.
We discussed the experimental results achieved when running an application exploiting instances of our Behavioural Skeletons and we showed how the skeletons used may take decisions at the appropriate time to maintain the application behaviour within the limits stated by the user with a specific performance contract.
\section*{Future Works}
New efforts for future work can be invested in different directions, as suggested by the results offered by this thesis.
Concerning the macro data-flow based skeleton customizations, new mechanisms for modifying the macro data-flow graph can be conceived, possibly simpler than the existing one. Just as a note, currently we are developing a graphic tool that allows programmers (\muskel users) to design their macro data-flow graphs and then compile them directly to Java code as required by \muskel.
Several other annotations and aspects can be designed and implemented for easing the run-time generation of macro data-flow blocks. Possibly supporting several types of non-functional requirements. Regarding PAL, many adapters, even more complex than existing one can be developed. In particular, adapters for widely-used frameworks for Grid programming, like Globus or ProActive. Another interesting possibility can be the porting of the adapters model in our customized \muskel, perhaps making possible the transformation, at run-time, of the macro data-flow blocks generated by \muskel in GCM components.
In this thesis we presented a reduced set of Behavioural Skeletons, other skeletons can be conceived, designed and implemented. As an example, a Behavioural Skeleton supporting the non-functional replication management for easing the development of fault-tolerant component applications. Furthermore, a lot of research can be conducted on the distributed (cooperative) self-management of component applications, in particular regarding to the methodologies for splitting the user specified QoS contracts.
\insertblankpage
\chapter{Introduction}
Computers are becoming tools of vital importance. They are used almost everywhere, they are used for work, for study, for fun and actually for solve problem.
Unfortunately, many problems require a huge amount of computational power to solve (as an example: genome mapping, portfolio risk-analysis, protein folding). Such a power cannot be obtained using a single processor. The only suitable solution is to distribute the application workload across many different computational resources. Resources those contemporaneously (``in parallel'') execute parts of the whole application. Programming applications that make use of several computational resources at the same time introduces some difficulties, as an example the communication and synchronization among the resources, or the application code and data decomposition and distribution. In order to ease this burden, since the early steps of computer science, researchers conceived and designed programming models and tools aiming at supporting the development of parallel applications.
Throughout the ages, a lot of models and tools have been proposed, presented in several different (sometime exotic) forms. Nevertheless, the main goal is always the same: find a good trade-off between simplicity and efficiency.
Indeed, a very abstract model simplifies the programming activity but can lead to a very inefficient exploitation of computing resources. Instead, a low-level model allows programmers to efficiently exploit the computational resources but requires to programmers a tremendous effort when the number of resources grows.
Since the nineties, several research groups have proposed the \emph{structured parallel programming environments} (SPPE). Since the structured parallel programming model was conceived, several works have been done about it.
Programming environments relying on this paradigm ask programmers to explicitly deal with the \emph{qualitative} aspects of parallelism exploitation, namely the application structure and problem decomposition strategies. All the low-level parallelism exploitation related aspects like communication, synchronization, mapping and scheduling are managed by compiler tools and run-time support.
In these environments parallelism is exploited by composing ``skeletons'', i.e. parallelism exploitation patterns. From language viewpoint, a skeleton is a higher-order function that behaves as a pure function (no side-effects). Several real world, complex applications have been developed using these environments. The skeletal approach has been proved to be quite effective, when application algorithms can be somehow expressed in terms of skeleton composition. Notwithstanding, skeletal programming has still to make a substantial impact on mainstream practice in parallel applications programming.
\section{Contribution of the thesis}
This thesis originates from the wish to address the issues that have limited the diffusion of structured parallel programming environments. These issues are well-known by the structured parallel programming models scientific community. They have been organically reported in two key papers \cite{cole:manifesto:02, advske:pc:06} where the authors describe both the issues and the features that the next generation of structured parallel programming environments have to support in order to address them. The features ``checklist'' includes, as an example, the ease of use, the integration of structured and unstructured form of parallelization, the support for code reuse, the heterogeneity and dynamicity handling.
Drawing a parallel with web programming model we can refer as ``Skeletons 2.0'' the next generation of structured parallel programming environments that address the issues that prevent the skeleton environment to became part of the mainstream practice in parallel applications programming.
Some groups of researchers involved in structured parallel programming developed skeleton systems that have partially addressed the ``Skeletons 2.0'' principles to different degrees in different combinations. Nevertheless, the research for addressing the presented issues has just started. Indeed, up to now, tools and models that are generally recognized as the best solutions for addressing the issues still do not exist.
The main goal of this thesis is to present an organic set of tools and models conceived, designed and developed to address most of these issues, therefore form the base of a next generation skeleton system. The scientific contribution of the thesis is organized in three main parts. They reports four results we obtained in the last three years. These research results as has been already presented in published papers.
Some results have been achieved with actual experiments conducted using software tools and packages designed and developed to the purpose. Some of them are simple, proof-of-concept tools, like JJPF \cite{DaDa05parco} or PAL \cite{pal}. Some others are custom version of existing framework, like \muskel with the support for developing unstructured form of parallelism \cite{muskelJournal} or \muskel with an aspect oriented programming support \cite{muskaspects:cg_book:08}. Others are part of complex international research project focused on Grid computing, like the Behavioural Skeletons \cite{pdp08:beske}.
Our first contribution copes with the lack of models supporting the integration of unstructured form of parallelization in skeleton systems. In fact, if on the one hand structured parallel programming environments raise the level of abstraction perceived by programmers and guarantee good performance, on the other hand they restrict the freedom of programmers to implement arbitrary parallelism exploitation patterns. In order to address this issue we propose a \textit{macro data-flow} based approach that can be used to implement mixed parallel programming environments providing the programmer with both structured and unstructured ways of expressing parallelism. Structured parallel exploitation patterns are implemented translating them into data-flow graphs executed by a distributed macro data-flow interpreter. Unstructured parallelism exploitation can be achieved by explicitly programming data-flow (sub)graphs.
To validate the approach, we modified a skeleton system that in its original form does not deal with unstructured parallelism: \muskel. We extended \muskel, in collaboration with the research staff that developed it.
Our customized \muskel is implemented exploiting (macro) data-flow technology, rather than more usual skeleton technology relying on the usage of implementation templates. Using data-flow, the extended \muskel supports the development of both classical, predefined skeletons, and programmer-defined parallelism exploitation patters.
Our extended version provides two mechanisms to the \muskel programmers for unstructured parallelism exploitation. First, we provide primitives that allow to access the fundamental features of the data-flow graph generated out of the compilation of a skeleton program. Namely, methods to deliver data to and retrieve data from data-flow graph. We provide to programmers the ability to instantiate a new graph in the task pool by providing the input task token and to redirect the output token of the graph to an arbitrary data-flow instruction in the pool. Second, we provide the programmer with direct access to the definition of data-flow graphs, in such a way he can describe his particular parallelism exploitation patterns that cannot be efficiently implemented with the available skeletons.
The two mechanisms can be jointly used to program all those parts of the application that cannot be easily and efficiently implementing using the traditional skeletons subsystem.
Unfortunately, this approach is not free from shortcomings. In fact, exploiting unstructured parallelism interacting directly with data-flow graph requires to programmers to reason in terms of program-blocks instead of a monolithic program.
In order to ease the generation of macro data-flow blocks and in general to provide mechanism easing the use of structured parallel programming environment, we exploited some \textit{metaprogramming} techniques.
Exploiting these techniques the programmers are no longer requested to deal with complex application structuring but simply to give hints to the metaprogramming support using high-level directives. The directives drive the automatic application transformation.
In this thesis we present two results we obtained regarding the exploitation of metaprogramming techniques for parallel programming. The first result is ``Parallel Abstraction Layer'' (PAL). A java annotation based metaprogramming framework that restructures applications at bytecode-level at run-time in order to make them parallel. The parallelization is obtained asynchronously executing the annotated methods. Each method call is transformed in a macro data-flow block that can be dispatched and executed on the available computing resources.
PAL transformations depend on both on the resources available at run-time and the hints provided by programmers.
The other result concerns the integration of the Aspect Oriented Programming mechanisms with our modified \muskel skeleton framework.
We make this integration in two distinct phases, in the first phase we integrated the AOP mechanisms in order to achieve very simple code transformation. In the second phase we implemented a more complex integration to obtain a support enabling the development of \textit{workflows} which structure and processing are optimized at run-time depending on the available computational resources.
In this thesis we present also a model to address two other issues: the lack of support for code reuse, and the lack of support for handling of dynamicity.
The \muskel framework, addresses this last point through the definition of the \emph{Application Manager}, namely an entity able to observe, at run-time, the behavior of the parallel application and in case of faults or application non-functional requirement violations it reacts aiming to fix the problem.
The dynamicity handling is a very important feature for next generation parallel programming systems, especially for the ones designed for computational Grids. Indeed, Grid are often composed by heterogeneous computer
and managed by different administration policies. To address these additional difficulties most of the models and tools conceived and developed for parallel programming have to be re-thought and adapted.
Actually, the \muskel framework, at least in its original form, is designed to be exploited in cluster and network of workstations rather than in Grids. Indeed, some of the implementation choices done when it was developed limit its exploitation on Grids, in particular the ones related with communication protocol and with the mechanisms for recruiting computational resource.
On the other hand, several studies recognized that component technology could be leveraged to ease the development of Grid Application \cite{armstrong99toward, 383872}. Indeed, a few component based model have been proposed by parallel computing scientific community for programming Grids, as CCA \cite{cca}, CCM \cite{DenPerPriRib} and GCM \cite{gcm:coregrid:07}.
The GCM represents one of the main European scientific community efforts for designing and developing \cite{gridcomp} a grid component model. We contributed to the design of GCM and its reference implementation together with the research group that developed \muskel and with several European research groups. In particular, we focused our contribution on the GCM autonomic features. We referred to the \muskel \textit{Application Manager} approach, generalizing it and extending the approach to make it suitable for components based models. Indeed, each GCM component with a complete support of autonomic features has an \textit{Autonomic Manager} that observes the component behavior. In case the behavior turns out to be different from the expected one the manager trigger a component reconfiguration.
In other words, GCM autonomic features provide programmers with a configurable and straightforward way to implement autonomic grid applications. Hence, they ease the development of application for the Grids. Nevertheless, they rely fully on the application programmer's expertise for the setup of the management code, which can be quite difficult to write since it may involve the management of black-box components, and, notably, is tailored for the particular component or assembly of them. As a result, the introduction of dynamic adaptivity and self-management might enable the management of grid dynamism, and uncertainty aspects but, at the same time, decreases the component reuse potential since it further specializes components with application specific management code. In order to address this problem, we propose the \emph{Behavioural Skeletons} as a novel way to describe autonomic components in the GCM framework. Behavioural Skeletons aim to describe recurring patterns of component assemblies that can be equipped with correct and effective management strategies with respect to a given management goal. Behavioural Skeletons help the application designer to i) design component assemblies that can be effectively reused, and ii) cope with management complexity. The Behavioural Skeletons model is an effective solution for handling dynamicity, supporting reuse both of functional and non-functional code. We want to point out that we have not the ``sole rights'' concerning the Behavioural Skeletons model. Indeed, it has been developed in conjunction with the other authors of the two papers about Behavioural Skeletons we published \cite{pdp08:beske, heraklion-beske}.
This thesis is not our first attempt of design programming model for parallel programming. In a previous work we developed JJPF, a Java and Jini based Parallel Framework, and investigated the possibilities offered by structured parallel programming. In \cite{DaDa05parco} we described the architecture of JJPF. JJPF was specifically designed to efficiently exploit affordable parallel architectures, such as a network of workstations. Its reactive fault-tolerance support and its dynamic support for task distribution as well as for resources recruiting were designed to enable an efficient exploitation of resources in highly dynamic environment. In particular, JJPF exploits the Jini technologies to dynamically find and recruit the available computational resources.
JJPF provide to programmers an API enabling the development of task-parallel application following the master-slave paradigm. It also provides an high-level support for data sharing among slaves. JJPF ease the parallel programming task hiding most of low-level error prone issues to programmers.
As we stated above, JJPF is implemented in Java. It simplifies the code portability among heterogeneous architectures. For the communications among master and slaves JJPF exploits the JERI. It is a variant of RMI allowing the protocol customization and as a consequence an optimization of its performance in several situations. For the performance purpose JJPF also provides an alternative to the java distributed class-loader that reduces the class-loading latency in some situations.
Some problems encountered during the design of JJPF still remain open. Moreover, during the realization of JJPF we faced directly with the development complexity of this kind of software so we think that some kind of software engineering is needed to facilitate reuse and maintenance of source code.
\section{Thesis Outline}
As we already stated, in this thesis we report our contribution to address the issues that are typical of traditional structured parallel programming environments. The contribution is organized in three main parts. Each part is presented in a dedicated chapter. Moreover, there are three more chapters: an Introduction chapter (this one, actually), a Conclusion chapter and another one that introduces the problems we face in this thesis and outlines the state-of-the-art of existing solutions.
In the remain of this section we describe the content of each chapter.
\paragraph{Chapter \ref{parallel_issues}}
In this chapter we take into account the problems related to programming parallel applications, the existing solutions and their main limitations. In particular, after a general introduction to the different parallel programming models, the topic is focused on the limitations that prevent the structured parallel programming models from spreading and to become part of the mainstream practice.
Section \ref{sec:fromseq} gives a bird's-eye view both on the parallel architectures and on the fields in which parallelism has traditionally been employed. Section \ref{sec:stateofart} reports a selection of the main parallel programming models distinguishing between the implicit (Section \ref{functional-logic-model}) and explicit (Section \ref{sec:explicit}) approaches. The explicit approaches are further discussed subdividing them, with respect to the abstraction presented to programmers, in high-level (Section \ref{dataflow-model}) and low-level (Section \ref{low-level-model}) ones. For each of them are presented the Pros and Cons. The chapter reports also some other notable approaches (Section \ref{other-appr}). Then the Chapter present the structured approach, an approach conceived in order to overcome the limitations of traditional approaches (Section \ref{structured-model}). Some tools based on the structured parallel programming models are presented (Section \ref{old-fashion}) and others are reported as well as references to the literature. The models are presented highlighting their features and main limitations. Section \ref{sec:openissues} reports the issues that next generation skeleton system should own to address the existing limitations. Finally, the chapter introduces (Section \ref{sec:ourefforts}) our contributions to the field placing them in the proper context, showing how such contributions can be exploited for addressing the issues related to structured parallel programming environments.
\paragraph{Chapter \ref{skeleton_customization}}
In this Chapter we discuss a methodology that can be exploited in order to provide to programmers the possibility to mix structured and unstructured ways of expressing parallelism while preserving most of the benefits typical of structured parallel programming models. The methodology is based on the data-flow model. Unstructured parallelism exploitation is achieved by explicitly programming data-flow graphs.
Section \ref{sec:introDFmuskel} briefly recalls the structured programming models outlining their main advantages and limitations. In particular, the section focuses on the skeleton customization issue. Namely the lack of flexibility of skeletal systems in expressing parallel form different from the ones that are ``bundled'' with the skeleton framework and their compositions. Then the section introduces the macro data-flow based approach we conceived in order to address of this limitation and reports the related work: alternative approaches addressing the structured parallel programming limitations.
Section \ref{sec:templ-dataflow} introduces both the classical template-based implementation of skeleton systems and the more recent data-flow technologies based one used in \muskel.
Section \ref{sec:unstruc} describes the details of our contribution, i.e. how we exploited the methodology presented to extend the \muskel framework.
Finally, Section \ref{sec:results} reports the experimental results we obtained conducting some test using our customized \muskel framework.
\paragraph{Chapter \ref{muskelWorkflow}} In this Chapter we introduce some novel metaprogramming techniques for the generation and optimization of macro data-flow blocks. This Chapter presents our efforts aimed at providing metaprogramming tools and models for optimizing at run-time the execution of structured parallel applications. The approaches are based on the run-time generation of macro data-flow blocks from the application code. The Chapter discusses how we exploited these techniques both in our modified \muskel framework as well as in other frameworks we developed.
Section \ref{motivations} presents the motivations behind our contributions. Section \ref{PAL} presents PAL, our first result in the field. The core of PAL framework is its metaprogramming engine that transforms at run-time an annotated sequential java code in a parallel program exploiting both programmer hints and information about executing platforms.
Section \ref{PALimpl} describes the details of our PAL prototype implementation. Section \ref{PALtests} reports the experimental results we obtained testing PAL framework. Section \ref{PALmotivations} discusses the motivations that convinced us to integrate the PAL approach to our modified \muskel framework. Section (\ref{metamuskel} describes the preliminary attempts we made integrating metaprogramming techniques in \muskel showing how Aspect Oriented Programming can be exploited to do some simple code transformations.
Section \ref{muskworkflows} describes how we further enhanced \muskel making it able to exploit metaprogramming for run-time code optimizations. In particular, how it can be exploited to optimize the parallel execution of computations expressed as workflows. Section \ref{sec:imple} describes the implementation details of workflows transformations and Section \ref{sec:perfresults} presents the results of some experiments we conducted. Finally Section \ref{sec:gendifferences} presents a comparison of the two approaches.
\paragraph{Chapter \ref{mdf_as_components}}
In this Chapter we present some results about the customization of skeletons applied to the Grid Component Model.
In this chapter we present the Behavioural Skeletons model, an approach, we contribute to conceive and validate, aimed at provide programmers with the ability to implement autonomic grid component-based applications completely taking care of the parallelism exploitation details by simply instantiating existing skeletons and by providing suitable, functional parameters. The model has been specifically conceived to enable code reuse and dynamicity handling.
Section \ref{sec:introComponents} describes how component-based applications can ease the task of developing grid applications. Section \ref{sec:GCMintro} outlines the grid component model focusing on its autonomic features. After, Section \ref{sec:BeSke} presents the Behavioural Skeletons model, Section \ref{sec:BeSkeSet} reports a set of noteworthy Behavioural Skeletons and Section \ref{sec:BeSkeImpl} describe their GCM implementation. Section \ref{sec:BeSkeExp} describes a set of experiment we conducted to validate the Behavioural Skeletons model.
\paragraph{Chapter \ref{thesis_concl}}
This Chapter summarizes the materials contained in the previous chapters and discusses the conclusions of
the thesis. Finally, the future work related to the thesis is introduced.
\insertblankpage
\chapter{Mixing Structured and Macro-Dataflow approaches}\label{skeleton_customization}
\paragraph{Chapter road-map}
\emph{
In this chapter we describe our contribution to skeleton customization. We start with an introduction on structured programming model outlining its main advantages and recalling its main limitations. In particular, we focus on the skeleton customization issue. Namely the lack of flexibility of skeletal systems in expressing parallel form different from the ones ``bundled'' with the skeleton framework. Then we briefly introduce the data-flow approach we conceived to address of this limitation and we report related work: alternative approaches addressing the structured parallel programming limitations (Section \ref{sec:introDFmuskel})
Besides, we introduce classical implementation template and more recent data-flow technologies as used to design and implement skeleton systems (Section \ref{sec:templ-dataflow}).
Then, we describe the details of our contribution, i.e. our extended version of \muskel framework, discussing how skeletons customization is supported exploiting data-flow implementation (Section \ref{sec:unstruc}). Finally, we report the experimental results we obtained exploiting our customized \muskel (Section \ref{sec:results}).
}
\section{Data-flow enables skeleton customization}\label{sec:introDFmuskel}
We already introduced structured parallel programming models in the previous chapter, where we described their Pros and Cons. Let us to briefly recall here their main features and limitations.
Structured parallel programming models provide the programmers with native high-level parallelism exploitation patterns that can be instantiated, possibly in a nested way, to implement a wide range of applications
\cite{cole:manifesto:02,kuchen:europar:2002,kuchen-optim,skie:PC:1999,teti-fgcs}.
In particular, those programming models hide to programmers ``assembly level'' of parallel programming, i.e. by avoiding a direct interaction with the distributed execution environment via communication or shared memory access primitives and/or via explicit scheduling and code mapping. Rather, the high-level native, parametric parallelism exploitation patterns provided encapsulate and abstract from all these parallelism exploitation related details.
In contrast, when using a traditional parallel programming system, the programmers have usually to explicitly program code for distributing and scheduling the processes on the available resources and for moving input and output data among the involved processing elements.
The cost of this appealing high-level way of dealing with parallel programs is paid in terms of programming freedom. The programmer (or skeleton system user) is normally not allowed to use arbitrary parallelism exploitation patterns, but he must only use the ones provided by the system. They usually include all those reusable patterns that have efficient distributed implementations available.
This is mainly aimed at avoiding the possibly for the programmers to write code that can potentially impairs the efficiency of the implementation provided for the available, native parallel patterns.
This is a well-known problem (See chapter \ref{parallel_issues}).
In this Chapter we discuss the methodology we conceived, designed and used to modify the \muskel parallel programming environment in order to provide to programmers the possibility to mix structured and unstructured ways of expressing parallelism while preserving most of the benefits typical of structured parallel programming models.
The methodology is based on the macro data-flow model. Structured parallel exploitation patterns are implemented translating them into macro data-flow graphs executed by the
distributed macro data-flow interpreters. Unstructured, user-defined parallelism exploitation patterns are achieved by explicitly programming data-flow graphs. These (macro) data-flow graphs can be used in the skeleton systems in any place where predefined skeletons can be used, thus providing the possibility to seamlessly integrate both kind of parallelism exploitation within the same program.
The mechanisms enabling data-flow graphs customization provide programmers the possibility to program new parallelism exploitation patterns.
The methodology has been developed together with the other authors of \cite{muskelJournal}, we all contributed in a substantially equal way to the conception, design and implementation of the approach.
\bigskip
Macro data-flow implementation for algorithmical skeleton programming environment was introduced in late '90 \cite{MDF:parco:99} and then has been used in other contexts related to skeleton programming environments \cite{772854}.
Cole eSkel, we already presented in the previous chapter, addresses these problems by allowing programmers to program their own peculiar MPI code within each process in the skeleton tree. Programmers can ask to have a stage of a pipeline or a worker in a farm running on $k$ processors. Then, the programmer may use the $k$ processes communicator returned by the library for the stage/worker to implement its own parallel pipeline stage/worker process. As far as we know, this is the only attempt to integrate ad hoc, unstructured parallelism exploitation in a structured parallel programming environment. The implementation of eSkel, however, is based on process templates, rather than on data flow.
Other skeleton libraries, such as Muesli \cite{kuchen:europar:2002,kuchen-optim,muesli-home}, provide programmers with a quite large flexibility in skeleton programming following a different approach. They provide a number of data parallel data structures along with elementary, collective data parallel operations that can be arbitrary nested to get more and more complex data parallel skeletons. However, this flexibility is restricted to the data parallel part, and it is anyway limited by the available collective operations.
CO2P3S \cite{shaeffer-europar00} is a design pattern based parallel programming environment written in Java and targeting symmetric multiprocessors. In CO2P3S, programmers are allowed to program their own parallel design patterns (skeletons) by interacting with the intermediate implementation level \cite{bromling:parco:2001}. Again, this environment does not use data flow technology but implements design patterns using proper process network templates.
JaSkel \cite{DBLP:conf/ccgrid/FerreiraSP06} provides a skeleton
library implementing the same skeleton set than \muskel. In JaSkel,
however, skeletons look much more implementation templates, according
to the terminology used in Section \ref{sec:templ-dataflow}. However, it looks like the programmer can exploit the full OO programming methodology to specialize the skeletons to his own needs. As the programmer is involved in the management of support code too (e.g. he has to specify the master process/thread of a task farm skeletons) JaSkel can be classified as a kind of ``low-level, extensible'' skeleton system, although it is not clear from the paper whether entirely new skeletons can be easily added to the system (actually, it looks like it is not possible at all).
\section{Template based vs. data-flow based skeleton systems}
\label{sec:templ-dataflow}
A skeleton based parallel programming environment provides programmers with a set of predefined and parametric parallelism exploitation patterns. The patterns are parametric in the kind of basic computation executed in parallel and, possibly, in the execution parallelism degree or in some other execution related parameters. As an example, a pipeline skeleton takes as parameters the computations to be computed at the pipeline stages. In some skeleton systems these computations can be either sequential computations or parallel ones (i.e. other skeletons) while in other systems (mainly the ones developed at the very beginning of the skeleton related research activity) these computations may only be sequential ones.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics[scale=0.48]{figure/template2}}
\caption{Skeleton program execution according to the implementation template approach.}
\label{fig:template}
\end{figure}
The first attempts to implement skeleton programming environments all relied on the implementation template technology.
As discussed in \cite{libro-susanna}, in a implementation template based skeleton system each skeletons is implemented using a parametric process network picked up among the ones available for that particular skeleton and for the kind of target architecture at hand in a template library (see \cite{kuchen-farm}, discussing several implementation templates, already appeared in bibliography, all suitable to implement task farms, that is embarrassingly parallel computations implemented according to a master-worker paradigm). The template library is designed once and for all by the skeleton system designer and summarizes his knowledge concerning implementation of the parallelism exploitation patterns modeled by skeletons.
Therefore, the compilation process of a skeleton program, according to the implementation template model, can be summarized as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item the skeleton program is parsed, a skeleton tree is derived, hosting the precise skeleton structure of the application. The skeleton tree has nodes marked with one of the available skeleton, and leaves marked with sequential code (sequential skeletons).
\item the skeleton tree is traversed, in some order, and templates from the library are assigned to each one of the skeleton nodes, but the sequential ones, that always correspond to the execution of a sequential process on the target machine. During this phase, parameters of the templates (e.g. the parallelism degree or the kind of communication mechanisms used) are fixed, possibly exploiting proper heuristics associated to the library entries
\item the enriched skeleton tree is used to generate the actual
parallel code. Depending on the system that may involve a
traditional compilation step (e.g. in P3L when using the Anacleto
compiler \cite{anacleto-australia} or in ASSIST when using the
\textbf{astcc} compiler tools
\cite{assist:imp:europar:03,assist:parco:03}) or exploiting proper
parallel libraries (e.g. in Muesli \cite{muesli-home} and eSkel
\cite{eskel-site} exploiting MPI within a proper skeleton library hosting templates
\item the parallel code is eventually run on the target architecture, possibly exploiting some kind of loader/deploy tool.
\end{enumerate}
Figure \ref{fig:template} summarizes the process leading from a skeleton source code to the running code exploiting template technology.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics[scale=0.48]{figure/dataflow}}
\caption{Skeleton program execution according to the data-flow approach.}
\label{fig:dataflow}
\end{figure}
More recently, an implementation methodology based on data-flow has been proposed \cite{MDF:parco:99}. In this case the skeleton source code is used to compile a data-flow graph and the data-flow graph is then executed on the target architecture exploiting a suitable distributed data-flow interpreter engine. The approach has been used both in the implementation of Lithium \cite{tesiteti,teti-fgcs} and in Serot's SKIPPER skeleton environment \cite{serot02}. In both cases, the data-flow approach was used to support fixed skeleton set programming environments. We adopted the very same implementation approach to develop our version of the \muskel framework, modifying it in collaboration with the original developers, enriching it with a data-flow implementation to support extensible skeleton sets.
When data-flow technology is exploited to implement skeletons, the compilation process of a skeleton program can be summarized as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item the skeleton program is parsed, a data-flow graph is derived. The data-flow graph represents the pure data-flow behavior of the skeleton tree in the program
\item for each one of the input tasks, a copy of the data-flow graph is instantiated, with the task appearing as an input token to the graph. The new graph is delivered to the distributed data-flow interpreter ``instruction pool''
\item the distributed macro data-flow interpreter fetches fireable instructions from the instruction pool and the instructions are executed exploiting the nodes in the target architecture. Possibly, optimizations are taken into account (based on proper heuristics) that try to avoid unnecessary communications (e.g. caching tokens that will eventually be reused) or to adapt the computation grain of the program to the target architecture features (e.g. delivering more than a single fireable instruction to remote nodes to decrease the impact of communication set up latency, or multiprocessing the remote nodes to achieve communication and computation overlap).
\end{enumerate}
Figure \ref{fig:dataflow} summarizes the process leading from skeleton source code to the running code exploiting this data-flow approach.
The two approaches just outlined appear very different, but they have been successfully used to implement different skeleton systems.
Let us to point out a quite subtle difference in the two approaches.
On the one side, when using implementation templates, the process network eventually run on the target architecture is very close to the one the programmer has in mind when instantiating skeletons in the source code. In some systems the ``optimization'' phase of Figure \ref{fig:template} is actually empty and the program eventually run on the target architecture is build out of plain juxtaposition of the process networks making up the templates of the skeletons using in the program. Even in case the optimization phase do actually modify the process network structure (in Figure \ref{fig:template} the master/slave service process of the two consecutive farms are optimized/collapsed, for instance), the overall structure of the process network does not change too much.
On the other side, when a data-flow approach is used the process network run on the target architecture is completely different from
the skeleton tree exposed by programmer in the source code. Rather, the skeleton tree is used to implement the parallel computation in a correct and efficient way, exploiting a set of techniques and mechanisms that are much more close to the techniques and mechanisms used in operating systems rather than to those used in the execution of parallel programs, both structured and unstructured.
Under a slightly different perspective, this can be interpreted as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item skeletons in the program ``annotate'' sequential code by providing the meta information required to efficiently implement the program in parallel;
\item the support tools of the skeleton programming environment (the macro data-flow graph compiler and the distributed macro data-flow interpreter, in this case) ``interpret'' the meta information to accurately and efficiently implement the skeleton program, exploiting (possibly at run-time, when the target architecture features are known) the whole set of known mechanisms supporting implementation optimization (e.g. caches, pre-fetching, node multiprocessing, etc.).
\end{itemize}
Under this perspective, the macro data-flow implementation for parallel skeleton programs opens new perspectives in the design of parallel programming systems where parallelism is dealt with as a ``non-functional'' feature, specified by programmers
and handled by the compiling/run-time support tools in the more convenient and efficient way w.r.t. to the target architecture at hand. In the following Chapters of this thesis will be presented some techniques we exploited to provide programmers methodologies aiming the expression of non-functional requirements and their run-time enforcement.
\section{\muskel}
\label{sec:struct}
We already introduced \muskel and its programming model in the Chapter \ref{parallel_issues}. There we also outlined how we modified \muskel, collaborating with its original developers, in order to provide programmers with mechanisms enabling skeleton customizations.
In this section we give a more detailed explanation both of the original \muskel and of the enhanced version we proposed.
\muskel is skeleton programming environment derived from Lithium \cite{teti-fgcs}, it provides the stream parallel skeletons of Lithium, namely stateless task farm and pipeline. These skeletons can be arbitrary nested, to program pipelines with farm stages, as an example, and they process a single stream of input tasks to produce a single stream of output tasks. \muskel implements skeletons exploiting data-flow technology and Java RMI facilities.
\muskel programmers can express parallel computations simply using the provided \textbf{Pipeline} and \textbf{Farm} classes. For instance, to express a parallel computation structured as a two-stage pipeline where each stage is a farm, \muskel programmers should write a code such as the one of Figure \ref{fig:code}.
The two classes \textbf{f} and \textbf{g} implement the \textbf{Skeleton} interface, i.e. supplying a \textbf{compute} method with the signature
\[ \texttt{Object compute(Object t)} \]
computing \textbf{f} and \textbf{g} respectively. The \textbf{Skeleton} interface represents the ``sequential'' skeleton, that is the skeleton always executed sequentially and only aimed at wrapping sequential code in such a way such code can be used in other, non-sequential skeletons.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{figure/code}}
\caption{Sample \muskel code: sketch of \textit{all} (but the sequential portions of code) the coded needed to set up and execute a two-stage pipeline with parallel stages (farms).}
\label{fig:code}
\end{figure}
In order to execute the program, a \muskel programmer first sets up a \textbf{Manager} object. Then, using proper methods, he specifies the program to execute, the performance contract required (in this case, the parallelism degree required for the execution), the input data source (the input stream manager, which is basically an iterator providing the classical \textbf{boolean hasNext()} and \textbf{Object next()} methods) and who is in charge of processing the output data (the output stream manager, just providing a \textbf{void deliver(Object)} method processing a single result of the program).
Eventually he can ask parallel program execution simply issuing
an \textbf{eval} call to the manager.
When the call terminates, an output file is produced.
Actually, the \textbf{eval} method execution happens in steps.
First, the manager looks for available processing elements using a simplified, multicast based peer-to-peer discovery protocol, and recruits the required remote processing elements. Each remote processing element runs a data-flow interpreter.
Then the skeleton program (the \textbf{main} of the example depicted in Figure \ref{fig:code}) is compiled into a macro data-flow graph (actually capitalizing on normal form results shown in \cite{pdcs:nf:99,teti-fgcs})
and a thread is forked for each one of the remote processing elements recruited.
Then the input stream is read. For each task item, an instance of the macro data-flow graph is created and the task item token is stored in the proper place (initial data-flow instruction(s)). The graph is placed in the task pool, the repository for data-flow instructions to be executed.
Each thread looks for a fireable instruction in the task pool and delivers it for execution to the associated remote data-flow interpreter. The remote interpreter instance associated to the thread is initialized by being sent the serialized code of the data-flow instructions, once and for all before the computation actually starts. Once the remote interpreter terminates the execution of the data-flow instruction, the thread either stores the result token in the proper ``next'' data-flow instruction(s) in the task pool, or it directly writes the result to the output stream, invoking the \textbf{deliver} method of the output stream manager.
If a remote node ``fails'' (e.g. due to a network failure, or to the node failure/shutdown), the manager looks for another node and starts dispatching data flow instructions to the new node instead \cite{muskel:qos:pdp:05}. As the manager is a centralized entity, if it fails, the whole computation fails. However, the manager is usually run on the machine of the \muskel user, which is assumed to be safer than the remote nodes recruited as remote interpreter instances.
The policies implemented by the \muskel managers are \textit{best effort}. The \muskel framework tries to do its best to accomplish user requests. In case it is not possible to completely satisfy the user requests, the framework accomplishes to establish the closest configuration to the one implicitly specified by the user with the performance contract. In the example above, the framework tries to recruit 10 remote interpreters. In case only $n<10$ remote interpreters are found, the parallelism degree is set exactly to $n$. In the worst case, that is if no remote interpreter is found, the computation is performed sequentially, on the local processing element.
In the current version of \muskel, the only performance contract actually implemented is the \textbf{ParDegree} one, asking for the usage of a constant number of remote interpreters in the execution of the program.
We do not enter in more detail in the implementation of the distributed data-flow interpreter here. The interested reader can refer to \cite{MDF:parco:99,muskel:qos:pdp:05}. Instead, we will try to give a better insight into the compilation of skeleton code into data-flow graphs.
A \muskel parallel skeleton code is described by the grammar:
\[ {\sf P}\ ::= {\sf seq}(\mathit{className}) \mid {\sf pipe}({\sf P}, {\sf P}) \mid
{\sf farm}({\sf P}) \]
where the \textbf{className}s refer to classes implementing the \textbf{Skeleton} interface,
and a macro data-flow instruction is a tuple:
$\langle \mathit{id}, \mathit{gid}, \mathit{opcode}, {\cal I}^n, {\cal O}^k \rangle $
where \textit{id} is the instruction identifier, \textit{gid} is the graph identifier (both are either integers or the special \textit{NoId} identifier), \textit{opcode} is the name of the \textbf{Skeleton} class providing the code to compute the instruction (i.e. computing the output tokens out of the input ones) and ${\cal I}$ and ${\cal O}$ are the input tokens and the output token destinations, respectively.
An input token is a pair $\langle \mathit{value}, \mathit{presenceBit} \rangle$ and an output token destination is a pair $\langle \textit{destInstructionId},\textit{destTokenNumber} \rangle$.
With these assumptions, a data-flow instruction such as:
\[ \langle
a,b,\texttt{f},\langle \langle 123, \texttt{true} \rangle , \langle \texttt{null}, \texttt{false} \rangle \rangle,
\langle \langle i,j \rangle
\rangle \rangle
\] \\
%
is the instruction with identifier \textit{a} belonging to the graph with identifier \textit{b}. It has two input tokens, one present (the integer 123) and one not present yet. It is not fireable, as one token is missing. When the missing token will be delivered to this instruction, coming either from the input stream or from another instruction, the instruction becomes fireable. To be computed, the two tokens must be given to the \textbf{compute} method of the \textbf{f} class. The method computes a single result that will be delivered to the instruction with identifier \textit{i} in the same graph, in the position corresponding to input token number \textit{j}.
The process compiling the skeleton program into the data-flow graph
can therefore be more formally described as follows. We define a
pre-compile function $PC[\ ]$ as:\smallskip\\
{\small \hspace*{2em}\ $ PC[ {\sf seq}\ ( {\texttt{f}})]_{gid}\ = \lambda i. \{
\langle \mathit{newId}(), gid, \texttt{f},
\langle \langle \texttt{null}, \texttt{false} \rangle \rangle,
\langle \langle i, \mathit{NoId} \rangle \rangle
\rangle \}\ $\smallskip\\
\hspace*{2em}\ $ PC[ {\sf farm}( {\sf P}\ )]_{gid}\ = C[{\sf P}]_{gid}\ $\smallskip\\
\hspace*{2em}\ $PC[ {\sf pipe}\ ( {\sf P}_1, {\sf P}_2) ] _ {gid}\ =
\lambda i. \{
C[{\sf P}_1]_{gid}\ (getId(C[{\sf P}_2]_{gid}\ )),
C[{\sf P}_2]_{gid}(i)
\}\ $ }
\smallskip\\
\noindent where $\lambda x.T$ is the usual function representation
($(\lambda x.T)(y) = T\hspace{-0.75ex}\mid_{x=y})$ and $getID()$ is
the function returning the $id$ of the first instruction in its
argument graph, that is, the one assuming to receive the input token
from outside the graph, and a compile function $C[]$ such
as:
{\small
\hspace*{2em}\ \[ C[ {\sf P}\ ] = PC[ {\sf P}\ ] _ {newGid()}\ (\texttt{NoId}) \] }
\noindent where \textbf{newId()} and \textbf{newGid()} are stateful functions returning a fresh (i.e. unused) instruction and graph identifier, respectively. The compile function returns therefore a graph, with a fresh graph identifier, hosting all the data-flow instructions relative to the skeleton program. The result tokens are identified as those whose destination is \textbf{NoId}.
As an example, the compilation of the \textbf{main} program
{\sf pipe}({\sf farm}({\sf seq}(\texttt{f})), {\sf farm}({\sf seq}(\texttt{g})))
produces the data flow graph:\smallskip\\{\small
$\{ \langle 1, 1, \texttt{f}, \langle \langle \texttt{null}, \texttt{false}
\rangle \rangle , \langle \langle 2, 1 \rangle \rangle \rangle\
,
\langle 2, 1, \texttt{g}, \langle \langle \texttt{null}, \texttt{false} \rangle \rangle , \langle \langle \texttt{NoId}, \texttt{NoId} \rangle \rangle \rangle
\}$
} \smallskip\\
\noindent (assuming that identifiers and token positions start from 1).
When the application manager is told to actually compute the program, via an \textbf{eval()} method call, the input file stream is read looking for tasks to be computed. Each task found is used to replace the data field of the lower \emph{id} data-flow instruction in a new $C[ {\sf P}\ ]$ graph.
In the example above, this results in the generation of a set of independent graphs such as:\smallskip\\
{\small
$\{ \langle 1, i, \texttt{f}, \langle \langle \texttt{task$_i$}, \texttt{true}
\rangle \rangle , \langle \langle 2, 1 \rangle \rangle \rangle\
,
\langle 2, i, \texttt{g}, \langle \langle \texttt{null}, \texttt{false} \rangle \rangle , \langle \langle \texttt{NoId}, \texttt{NoId} \rangle \rangle \rangle
\}$
}
\smallskip\\
\noindent for all the tasks ranging from $task_1$ to $task_n$.
All the resulting instructions are put in the task pool of the distributed interpreter in such a way that the control threads taking care of ``feeding'' the remote data-flow interpreter instances can start fetching the fireable instructions.
The output tokens generated by instructions with destination tag equal to \textbf{NoId} are directly delivered to the output file stream by the threads receiving them from the remote interpreter instances. Those with a non-\textbf{NoId} flag are delivered to the proper instructions in the task pool that will eventually become fireable.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{figure/ucode2}}
\caption{Custom/user-defined skeleton declaration.}
\label{fig:ucode}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Programmer-defined skeletons}\label{sec:unstruc}
In order to introduce completely new parallelism exploitation patterns, our version of the \muskel framework provides programmers with mechanisms that can be used to design plain, arbitrary macro data-flow graphs. A macro data-flow graph can be defined creating some \textbf{Mdfi} (macro data-flow instruction) objects and connecting them in a \textbf{MdfGraph}\ object.
As an example, the code in Figure \ref{fig:ucode} is the code needed to program a data-flow graph with two instructions. The first one computes the \textbf{compute} method \textbf{inc1} on its input token and delivers the result to the second instruction. The second one, computes the \textbf{sq1} \textbf{compute} method on its input token and delivers the result to a generic ``next'' instruction (this is modeled giving the destination token tag a \textbf{Mdfi.NoInstrId} tag). The \textbf{Dest} stuff in the code is meant to represent destination of output tokens as triples hosting the graph identifier, the instruction identifier and the destination input token targeted in this instruction. Macro data-flow instructions are build stating the manager they refer to, their identifier, the code executed (must be a \textbf{Skeleton} object) the number of input and output tokens and a vector with a destination for each one of the output tokens.
Take into account that the simple macro data-flow graph of Figure \ref{fig:ucode} is actually the very same macro data-flow graph derived compiling a primitive \muskel skeleton code such as:
\begin{center}
\verb9Skeleton main = new Pipeline(new Inc(), new Sq()))9
\end{center}
\noindent More complex, programmer-defined macro data-flow graph may comprehend instructions delivering tokens to an arbitrary number of other instructions, as well as instructions gathering input tokens from several distinct other instructions.
\textbf{MdfGraph} objects are used to create new \textbf{ParCompute} objects. The \textbf{ParCompute} objects can be used in any place were a \textbf{Skeleton} object is used. Therefore programmer-defined parallelism exploitation patterns can be used as pipeline stages or as farm workers, for instance. The only limitation on the graphs that can be used in a \textbf{ParCompute} object consists in requiring that the graph has a unique input token and a unique output token.
When executing programs with programmer-defined parallelism exploitation patterns the process of compiling skeleton code to macro data-flow graphs is slightly modified.
When an original \muskel skeleton is compiled, the process described above is applied.
When a programmer-defined skeleton is compiled, the associated macro data-flow graph is directly taken from the \textbf{ParCompute} instance variables where the graph supplied by the programmer is maintained. Such graph is linked to the rest of the graph according to the rules relative to the skeleton where the programmer-defined skeleton appears.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centerline{\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{figure/mdfg}}
\vspace*{-5em}
\caption{Mixed sample MDF graph: the upper part comes from a programmer-defined MDF graph (it cannot be derived using primitive \muskel skeletons) and the lower part is actually coming from a three stage pipeline with two sequential stages (the second and the third one) and a parallel first stage (the programmer-defined one).}
\label{fig:grafoMuskel}
\end{figure}
To show how the whole process works, let us suppose we want to pre-process each input tasks in such a way that for each task $t_i$ a new task
\[t'_i = h_1(f_1(t_i), g_2(g_1(f_1(t_i))))\] is produced. This computation cannot be programmed using the stream parallel skeletons currently provided by the original \muskel. Then we want to process the preprocessed tasks through a two-stage pipeline, in order to produce the final result.
In this case the programmer can set up a new graph using a code similar to the one shown in Figure \ref{fig:code} and then used that new \textbf{ParCompute} object as the first stage of a two-stage pipeline whose second stage happens to be the postprocessing two-stage pipeline. When compiling the whole program, the outer pipeline is compiled first. As the first stage is a programmer-defined skeleton, its macro data-flow graph is directly taken from the programmer-supplied one. The second stage is compiled according to the (recursive) procedure previously described and eventually the (unique) last instruction of the first graph is modified in such a way it sends its only output token to the very first instruction in the second stage graph. The resulting graph is outlined in Figure \ref{fig:grafoMuskel}.
Making good usage of the mechanisms that allow to define new data-flow graphs, the programmer can arrange to express computations with arbitrary mixes of arbitrary data-flow graphs and graphs coming from the compilation of structured, stream parallel skeleton computations. The execution of the resulting data-flow graph is supported by the \muskel distributed data-flow interpreter as the execution of any other data-flow graph derived from the compilation of a skeleton program. Therefore, the customized skeletons are efficiently executed as the skeletons ``bundled'' with \muskel. Indeed, in data-flow based skeleton systems, as we already stated when we presented them, the optimizations do not directly depends on the skeleton structure but on the data-flow engine capability of executing the macro data-flow instruction in an efficient way.
In order to allow primitive \muskel skeleton usage as code to be executed in an instruction of a programmer-defined macro data-flow graph it is sufficient to compile ``on the fly'' the primitive skeleton and include the result (i.e. the macro data-flow graph) of this compilation in the programmer-defined macro data-flow graph.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics[scale=0.60]{figure/map2}}
\caption{Introducing a new, programmer-defined skeleton: a map working on vectors and with a fixed, programmer-defined parallelism degree.}
\label{fig:map}
\end{figure}
As a final example, consider the code of Figure \ref{fig:map}.
This code actually shows how a new \textbf{Map2} skeleton, performing in parallel the same computation on all the portions of an input vector, can be defined and used. It's worth pointing out how programmer-defined skeletons, once properly debugged and fine-tuned, can simply be incorporated in the \muskel skeleton framework and used seamlessly, as the primitive \muskel ones, but for the fact (as show in the code) the constructor needs the manager as a parameter. This is needed just to be able to link together the macro data-flow graphs generated by the compiler and those supplied by the programmer. This feature has been released
by postponing the data-flow graph creation to the moment the graph needs to be instantiated after the arrival of a new task to compute, as at that time all the information necessary to perform graph ``conjunction'' is available.
\section{Experimental results}
\label{sec:results}
To validate our approach we conducted some test with our modified version of the \muskel framework. The original \muskel interpreter engine has been left basically unchanged, whereas the part supporting parallelism exploitation pattern programming has been changed to support linking of custom MDF graphs to the code produced by the compiler out of plain \muskel skeleton trees. We used our customized version for implementing an application that can not be (at least not easily) implemented using standard (i.e. without our proposed customization support) skeleton environments.
Figure \ref{fig:grana} summarizes the typical performance results of our enhanced interpreter. We ran several synthetic programs using the custom macro data-flow graph features introduced in \muskel. We designed the programs in such a way the macro data-flow instructions appearing in the graph had a precise ``average grain'' (i.e. average ration between the time spent by the remote interpreter to compute the macro data flow instruction sent to it, and the time spent in communicating data to the remote interpreter plus the time to retrieve the computation results). For each test-bed we passed as input parameters to the developed programs 1K input tasks.
The results show that when the computational grain is small, \muskel does not scale well, even using a very small number of remote interpreter instances. Indeed, Figure \ref{fig:grana} clearly shows that when the computational grain is 3 the efficiency rapidly decreases, going under 0.7 even when only four computational resources are used. When the grain is 70 the efficiency goes under 0.8 only when the number of recruited computational resources is higher than 14. Finally, when the grain is high enough (about 200 times the time spent in communications actually spent in computation of MDF instructions) the efficiency is definitely close to the ideal one even using 16 or more machines.
Despite the data shown refers to some synthetic computations, actual computations (e.g. image processing ones) achieved very similar results. This because the automatic load balancing mechanism implemented in the \muskel distributed interpreter, obtained by mean of auto scheduling techniques, perfectly optimized the execution of variable grain MDF instructions.
All the experiments have been performed on a Linux (kernel 2.4.22) RLX Pentium III blade architecture, with Fast Ethernet interconnection among the blades, equipped with Java 1.4.1\_01 run-time.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics[scale=0.33]{figure/bini}}
\caption{Effect of middleware: scalability of the \muskel prototype using plain RMI vs. the one using ProActive active objects
\label{fig:sec1}\label{fig:proactive}
\end{figure}
Despite measuring scalability of our modified \muskel framework, we also have taken into account the possibility to use different mechanisms to support distributed data-flow interpreter execution. In particular, we investigated the possibility of implementing the \muskel approach for skeleton customization on top of the ProActive framework \cite{proactive} both to be able to target a different set of architectures and to demonstrate the ``portability'' of our approach, i.e. that it is a feasible and efficient solution not only when it exploits the \muskel data-flow interpreter.
For this purpose, we conducted some experiments aimed at verifying the overhead introduced by ProActive with respect to the plain Java RMI \muskel prototype, when using the secure shell (\textbf{ssh}) tunneling of the RMI protocol (feature natively provided by the ProActive framework). In particular, we modified the ``kernel'' of the data-flow interpreter of \muskel in order to make it able to exploit the ProActive active objects in place of plain RMI objects as remote data-flow interpreter instances. The results we achieved are summarized in Figure \ref{fig:proactive}. The figure plots the completion times for the very same program run on a Linux workstation cluster when using plain Java RMI and when using ProActive active objects to implement the remote data-flow interpreter instances. The macro data-flow instructions, in this case, have a grain comparable to the ``high grain'' of instructions of Figure \ref{fig:grana}. Experiments showed that ProActive active objects are slightly less efficient but the difference is negligible. In this case, the setup time of the remote data-flow interpreter instances was not considered in the overall completion time, being paid once and forall when the system is started up.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{figure/perfe}
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{figure/effe}
\end{center}
\caption{Scalability of the \muskel prototype and effect of computation grain.}
\label{fig:scala}
\label{fig:grana}
\end{figure}
\newpage
\section*{Summarizing the Chapter}
\emph{
\hrule
\medskip
\noindent In this Chapter we discussed a methodology for extending algorithmic skeletons based parallel programming frameworks aimed at providing programmers with the possibility to freely customize the structure of their parallel applications. It is based on mechanisms allowing programmers to modify the data-flow graph derived from the compilation of skeleton based application.
In particular, we discussed how we modified the \muskel framework for parallel programming. The version we developed (collaborating with the team that developed the original \muskel) supports extendability of the skeleton set, as advocated by Cole in his ``manifesto'' paper \cite{cole:manifesto:02}.
In particular, we discussed how our modified \muskel supports the introduction of new skeletons, modeling parallelism exploitation patterns not originally covered by the primitive \muskel skeletons.
This possibility is supported by allowing programmers to define new skeletons providing the arbitrary data-flow graph executed in the skeleton and by letting \muskel to seamlessly integrate such new skeletons in the primitive ones.
We also presented experimental results validating our \muskel approach to extend and customize its skeleton set.
As far as we know, this is the most significant effort in the skeleton community to tackle problems deriving from a fixed skeleton set. Only Schaeffer and his group at the University of Alberta implemented a system were programmers can, in controlled ways, insert new parallelism exploitation patterns in the system \cite{bromling:parco:2001}, although the approach followed here is a bit different, in that programmers are encouraged to intervene directly in the run-time support implementation, to introduce new skeletons, while in our \muskel new skeletons may be introduced using the intermediate macro data-flow language as the skeleton ``assembly'' language.
\medskip
\hrule
}
\chapter{Behavioural Skeletons}\label{mdf_as_components}
\paragraph{Chapter road-map}
\emph{
In this chapter we present Behavioural Skeletons, an approach, we contribute to conceive and validate, aimed at providing programmers with the ability to implement autonomic grid component-based applications that completely take care of the parallelism exploitation details by simply instantiating existing skeletons and by providing suitable, functional parameters. The model has been specifically conceived to enable code reuse and dynamicity handling. We start describing (Section \ref{sec:introComponents}) how component-based application can ease the task of developing grid applications. Then we outline the Grid Component Model (Section \ref{sec:GCMintro}) with respect to its autonomic features.
After we present the Behavioural Skeletons model (Section \ref{sec:BeSke}), a set of noteworthy Behavioural Skeletons (Section \ref{sec:BeSkeSet}) and their implementation (Section \ref{sec:BeSkeImpl}).
At the end of chapter we describe a set of experiment we conducted to validate the Behavioural Skeletons model (Section \ref{sec:BeSkeExp}).
}
\section{Components to simplify Grid programming}\label{sec:introComponents}
Developing grid applications is even more difficult than programming traditional parallel applications. This is due to several factors as, the heterogeneity of resources, their worldwide distribution, their dynamic recruiting and releasing. Indeed, when programming Grid applications neither the target platforms nor their status are fixed \cite{grads:overview}.
As a consequence, grid applications need to dynamically adapt to the features of the underlying architecture in order to be efficient and/or high performance \cite{advske:pc:06}.
In recent years, several research initiatives exploiting component technology \cite{gcm:coregrid:07} have investigated the area of component adaptation, i.e. the process of changing the component for use in different contexts. This process can be either static or dynamic.
The basic use of static adaptation covers straightforward but popular methodologies, such as \emph{copy-paste}, and \emph{OO inheritance}. A more advanced usage covers the case in which adaptation happens at run-time. These systems enable dynamically defined adaptation by allowing adaptations, in the form of code, scripts or rules, to be added, removed or modified at run-time \cite{ac:superimpostion:99}. Among them is worth to distinguish the systems where all possible adaptation cases have been specified at compile-time, but the conditions determining the actual adaptation at any point in time can be dynamically changed \cite{reconf:adaptcomp:05}.
Dynamically adaptable systems rely on a clear separation of concerns between adaptation and application logic. This approach has
recently gained increased impetus in the grid community, especially via its formalization in terms of the \emph{Autonomic Computing} (AC) paradigm \cite{ngg3:06,reinefeld:dagstuhl:2004,assist:qos:euromicro:06}. The AC term is emblematic of a vast \emph{hierarchy} of self-governing systems, many of which consist of many interacting, self-governing components that in turn comprise a number of interacting,
self-governing components at the next level down \cite{AC:vision:2003}. An autonomic component will typically consist of one or more managed components coupled with a single autonomic manager that controls them. To pursue its goal, the manager may trigger an adaptation of the managed components to react to a run-time change of application QoS requirements or to the platform status.
In this regard, an assembly of self-managed components implements, via their managers, a distributed algorithm that manages the entire application. Several existing programming frameworks aim to ease this task by providing a set of mechanisms to dynamically install reactive rules within autonomic managers. These rules are typically specified as a collection of \texttt{when-}\emph{event}\texttt{-if-} \emph{cond}\texttt{-then-}\emph{act} clauses, where \emph{event} is raised by the monitoring of component internal or external activity (e.g. the component server interface received a request, and the platform running a component exceeded a threshold load, respectively); \emph{cond} is an expression over component internal attributes (e.g. component life-cycle status); \emph{act} represents an adaptation action (e.g. create, destroy a component, wire, unwire components, notify events to another component's manager). Several programming frameworks implement
variants of this general idea, including ASSIST \cite{van:assist:02,advske:pc:06}, AutoMate \cite{ac:automate:06}, SAFRAN \cite{ac:safran:06}, and finally the forthcoming CoreGrid Component Model (GCM) \cite{gcm:coregrid:07}. The latter two are derived from a common ancestor, i.e. the Fractal hierarchical component model
\cite{fractal:spec}. All the named frameworks, except SAFRAN, are targeted to distributed applications on grids.
\label{sec:relwork}
Though such programming frameworks considerably ease the development of an autonomic application for the grid (to various degrees), they rely fully on the application
programmer's expertise for the set-up of the management code, which can be quite difficult to write since it may involve the management of black-box components, and, notably, is tailored for the particular component or assembly of them. As a result, the introduction of dynamic adaptivity and self-management might enable the management of grid
dynamism, and uncertainty aspects but, at the same time, decreases the component reuse potential since it further specializes components with application specific
management code.
From the point of view of issues to address for designing and developing next generation structured parallel programming systems, this is a big problem. Indeed, if on the one hand making components adaptive addresses the issue of handling dynamicity (issue number VII), on the other hand it impairs the code reuse (issue number V).
In this chapter we cope with this problem proposing \emph{Behavioural Skeletons} as a novel way to describe autonomic components in the GCM framework. We contributed significantly to their conception, design and implementation together with other researchers, co-authored of the papers \cite{pdp08:beske, heraklion-beske} in which we presented this model. My personal contribution has mainly concerned the definition of the task farm Behavioural Skeleton as well as the implementation of that skeleton within GridCOMP.
Behavioural Skeletons aim to describe recurring patterns of component assemblies that can be (either statically or dynamically) equipped with correct and effective management strategies with respect to a given management goal. Behavioural Skeletons help the application designer to i) design component assemblies that can be effectively reused, and ii) cope with management complexity by providing a component with an explicit context with respect to top-down design (i.e. component nesting).
\section{GCM: the Grid Component Model}\label{sec:GCMintro}
\label{sec:gcm}
GCM is a hierarchical component model explicitly designed to support component-based autonomic applications in highly dynamic and heterogeneous distributed platforms, such as grids. It is currently under development by the partners of the EU CoreGRID Network of Excellence\footnote{\texttt{http://www.coregrid.net}}. A companion EU STREP project, GridCOMP \footnote{\texttt{http://gridcomp.ercim.org}} is going to complete the development of an open source implementation of GCM (preliminary versions are already available for download as embedded modules in the ProActive middleware suite)\footnote{\texttt{http://www-sop.inria.fr/oasis/ProActive}}.
GCM builds on the Fractal component model \cite{fractal:spec} and exhibits three prominent features: hierarchical composition, collective interactions and autonomic management. We participate to both the projects (CoreGrid \& GridComp) and collaborate for the design and development of GCM, in particular in the context of autonomic management.
The full specification of GCM can be found in \cite{gcm:coregrid:07}.
\paragraph{Hierarchical composition} As in fractal, a GCM component is composed of
two main parts: the \emph{membrane} and the \emph{content}. The
membrane is an abstract entity that embodies the control
behavior associated with a component, including the mediation of
incoming and outgoing invocations of content entities. The content may
include either the code directly implementing functional component behavior (\emph{primitive})
or other components (\emph{composite}). In the latter case, the included components are referred as the \textit{inner components}. GCM components, as Fractal ones, can be
hierarchically nested to any level. Component nesting represents the
\emph{implemented\_by} relationship. Composite components are first class citizens in GCM and, once designed and implemented, they cannot be distinguished from primitive, non-composite ones.
\paragraph{Collective interactions}
The Grid Component Model allows component interactions to take place with several distinct
mechanisms. In addition to classical ``RPC-like'' use/provide ports (or
client/server interfaces), GCM allows data, stream and event ports to be
used in component interaction. Both static and dynamic wiring between
dual interfaces is supported. Each interface may expose several
\emph{operations} of different types. Furthermore, collective interaction
patterns (communication mechanisms) are also supported. In particular,
composite components may benefit from customizable one-to-many and many-to-one
functional interfaces to distribute requests arriving to one
component's port to many inner components
and gather requests from many inner components to a single
outgoing port.
\paragraph{Autonomic management}
Autonomic management aims to attack the
complexity which entangles the management of complex systems (as applications for Grids are) by equipping their parts with self-management facilities
\cite{AC:vision:2003}. GCM is therefore
assumed to provide several levels of autonomic managers in components,
that take care of the non-functional features of the component
programs. GCM components thus have two kinds of interfaces:
functional and non-functional ones. The functional interfaces host
all those ports concerned with implementation of the functional features of
the component.
The non-functional interfaces host all those ports needed to support the component management activity in the implementation of the
non-functional features, i.e. all those features contributing to the efficiency of the component in obtaining the expected (functional) results but not directly involved in result computation. Each GCM
component therefore contains an \emph{Autonomic Manager} (AM),
interacting with other managers in other components via the component
non-functional interfaces. The AM implements the autonomic cycle via
a simple program based on the reactive rules described above. In this,
the AM leverages on component controllers for the \emph{event}
monitoring and the execution of reconfiguration \emph{actions}.
In GCM, the latter controller is called the \emph{Autonomic Behaviour
Controller} (ABC). This controller exposes server-only non-functional
interfaces, which can be accessed either from the AM or an external
component that logically surrogates the AM strategy. From the point of view of autonomic features, the GCM components exhibiting just the ABC are called \emph{passive}, whereas the GCM components exhibiting both the ABC and the AM are called \emph{active}.
\section{Describing Adaptive Applications}
\label{sec:descr:behaviour}
The architecture of a component-based application is usually described via an ADL (Architecture Description Language) text, which enumerates the components and describes their relationships via the \emph{used-by} relationship. In a hierarchical component model, such as the GCM, the ADL describes also the \emph{implemented-by} relationship, which represents the component nesting.
However, the ADL supplies a static vision of an application, which is not fully satisfactory for an application exhibiting autonomic behavior since it may autonomously change behavior during its execution. Such change may be of several types:
\smallskip
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{Component lifecycle.} Components can be started or stopped.
\item \emph{Component relationships.} The used-by and/or implemented-by relationships among components are changed. This may involve component creation/destruction, and component wiring alteration.
\item \emph{Component attributes.} A refinement of the behavior of some components (which does not involve structural changes) is required, usually over a pre-determined parametric functionality.
\end{itemize}
\smallskip
In the most general case, an autonomic application may evolve along adaption steps that involve one or more changes belonging to these three classes. In this regard, the ADL just represents a snapshot of the launch time configuration.
The evolution of a component is driven by its AM, which may request management action with the AM at the next level up in order to deal with management issues it cannot solve locally. Overall, it is a part of a distributed system that cooperatively manages the entire application.
In the general case, the management code executing in the AM of a component depends both on the component's functional behavior and on the goal of the management. The AM should also be able to cooperate with other AMs, which are unknown at design time due to the nature of component-based design. Currently, programming frameworks supporting the AC paradigm (such as the ones mentioned in Section \ref{sec:relwork}) just provide mechanisms to implement management code. This approach has several
disadvantages, especially when applied to a hierarchical component model:
\smallskip
\begin{itemize}
\item The management code is difficult to develop and to test since the context in which it should work may be unknown.
\item The management code is tailored to the particular instance of the management elements (inner components), further restricting the component reusability possible.
\end{itemize}
\section{Behavioural Skeletons}\label{sec:BeSke}
Behavioural Skeletons aim to abstract parametric paradigms of the GCM components assembly, each of them specialized to solve one or more management goals belonging to the classical AC classes, i.e. configuration, optimization, healing and protection.
They represent a specialization of the algorithmic
skeleton concept for component management.
Behavioural Skeletons, as algorithmic skeletons, represent patterns
of parallel computations (which are expressed in GCM as graphs of
components), but in addition they exploit skeletons' inherent
semantics to design sound self-management schemes of parallel
components.
As a byproduct, Behavioural Skeletons allow categorization of GCM designers and programmers into three classes. They are, in increasing degree of expertise and decreasing cardinality:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textit{GCM users}: they use Behavioural Skeletons together with their pre-defined AM strategy. In many cases they should just instantiate a skeleton with inner components, and get as result a composite component exhibiting one or more self-management behaviors.
\item \textit{GCM expert users}: they use Behavioural Skeletons overriding the AM management strategy. However, the specialization does not involve the ABC and thus does not require specific knowledge about the GCM membrane implementation.
\item \textit{GCM skeleton designers}: they introduce new Behavioural Skeletons or classes of them. To this end, the design and development of a brand new ABC might be required. This may involve the definition of new interfaces for the ABC, the implementation of the ABC itself, together with its wiring with other controllers, and the design and wiring of new interceptors. Obviously, this requires quite a deep knowledge of the particular GCM implementation.
\end{enumerate}
Due to the hierarchical nature of GCM, Behavioural
Skeletons can be identified with a composite component with no loss of
generality (identifying skeletons as particular higher-order
components \cite{gorlatch:hoc:dagstuhl:05}).
Since skeletons are fully-fledged GCM components, they can be wired and nested via standard GCM mechanisms. From the implementation viewpoint, a Behavioural Skeleton is a partially defined composite component, i.e. a component with placeholders, which may be used to instantiate the skeleton. As sketched in Figure \ref{fig:ABC}, there are three classes of placeholders:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The functional interfaces \textsf{S} and \textsf{C} that are GCM membrane controllers (thus objects).
\item The AM that is a particular inner component. It includes the management plan, its goal, and exported non-functional interfaces.
\item Inner component \textsf{W}, implementing the functional behavior.
\end{enumerate}
\smallskip
The orchestration of the inner components is implicitly defined by the skeleton type. In order to instantiate the skeleton, placeholders should be filled with suitable entities. Observe that just entities in the former two classes are skeleton specific. Indeed, the placeholders of the third class, representing the inner components implementing the functional behavior, are filled with user-defined components. The entities part of the first two classes characterize the composite component as a higher order one orchestrating the entities of the third class; like traditional skeletons are higher order functions taking as parameter user specified functions.
Behavioural Skeletons usage helps designers in two main ways. First, the application designer benefits from a library of skeletons, each of them carrying several pre-defined, efficient self-management strategies. Then, the component/application designer is provided with a framework that helps both the design of new skeletons and their implementation.
In both cases two features of Behavioural Skeletons are exploited:
on the one hand, the skeletons exhibit an explicit higher-order functional semantics that delimits the skeleton usage and definition domain. On the other hand, the skeletons describe parametric interaction patterns and can be designed in such a way that parameters affect non-functional behavior but are invariant for functional behavior.
\section{A Basic Set of Behavioural Skeletons}\label{sec:BeSkeSet}
Here we present a basic set of Behavioural Skeletons. Despite their simplicity, they cover a significant set of parallel computations of common usage.
The presented Behavioural Skeletons springs from the idea of \emph{functional replication}.
Let us assume these skeletons have two functional interfaces: a one-to-many stream server \textsf{S}, and a many-to-one client stream interface \textsf{C} (see Figure \ref{fig:ABC}). The skeleton accepts requests on the server interface; and dispatches them to a number of instances of an inner
component \textsf{W}, which may propagate results outside the skeleton via \textsf{C} interface.
Assume that replicas of \textsf{W} can safely lose the internal state between different calls. For example, the component has just a transient internal state and/or stores persistent data via an external database component.
\paragraph{Farm}
A task farm processes a stream of tasks $\{x_0, \ldots, x_m\}$ producing a stream of results $\{f(x_0), \ldots, f(x_m)\}$. The computation of $f(x_i)$ is independent of the computation of $f(x_j)$ for any $i \ne j$ (the task farm parallel pattern is often referred to as the ``embarrassingly parallel'' pattern). The items of the input stream are available at different times, in general: item $x_i$ is available $t \ge 0$ time units after item $x_{i-1}$ was available. Also, in the general case, it is not required that the output stream keeps the same ordering as the input stream, i.e. item $f(x_i)$ may be placed in the output stream in position $j \ne i$.
In this case, in our farm Behavioural Skeleton, a stream of tasks is absorbed by a \emph{unicast} \textsf{S}. Then each task is computed by one instance of \textsf{W} and the result is sent to \textsf{C}, which collects results according to a \emph{from-any} policy.
This skeleton can be equipped with a self-optimizing policy as the number of \textsf{W} can be dynamically changed in a sound way since they are stateless.
The typical QoS goal is to keep a given limit (possibly dynamically
changing) of served requests in a time frame. Therefore, the AM just checks the average time tasks need to traverse the skeleton, and possibly reacts by creating/destroying instances of \textsf{W}, and
wiring/unwiring them to/from the interfaces.
\paragraph{Data-Parallel}
the task farm Behavioural Skeleton can be conveniently and easily adapted to cover other common patterns of parallel computation. For example, data parallel computations can be captured by simply modifying the behavior associated with the \textsf{S} and \textsf{C} interfaces. In a data parallel computation a stream of tasks is absorbed by a
\emph{scatter} \textsf{S}. Each of the tasks appearing is split into (possibly overlapping) partitions, which are distributed to replicas of \textsf{W} to be computed. The results computed by the \textsf{W} are \emph{gathered} and assembled by \textsf{C} in a single item, which is eventually delivered onto the output stream.
As in the previous case, the
number of \textsf{W} can be dynamically changed (between different
requests) in a sound way since they are stateless. In addition to the
previous case, the skeleton can be equipped with a self-configuration
goal, e.g. resource balancing and tuning (e.g. disk space,
load, memory usage), that can be achieved by changing the
partition-worker mapping in \textsf{S} (and \textsf{C}, accordingly).
\smallskip
The task farm (and data parallel) Behavioural Skeleton just outlined can be easily modified to the case in which the \textsf{S} is an RPC interface. In this case, the \textsf{C} interface can be either an RPC interface or missing.
Also, the stateless functional replication idea can be extended to the stateful case by requiring inner components \textsf{W} to expose suitable methods to serialize, read and write the internal state. A suitable manipulation of the serialized state enables the reconfiguration of workers (also in the data-parallel scenario \cite{advske:pc:06}).
Anyway, in order to achieve self-healing goals some additional requirements on the GCM implementation level should be enforced. They are related to the implementation of GCM mechanisms, such as component membranes and their parts (e.g. interfaces) and messaging system. At the level of interest, they are primitive mechanisms, in which correctness and robustness should be enforced ex-ante, at least to achieve some of the described management policies.
The process of identification of other skeletons may benefit from the work done within the software engineering community, which identified some common adaptation
paradigms, such as \emph{proxies}
\cite{ac:proxy:04}, which may be interposed between interacting components to change their interaction relationships; and dynamic \emph{wrappers} \cite{ac:wrapping:01}. Both of these can be used for self-protection purposes. As an example, a couple of encrypting proxies can be used to secure a communication between components. Wrapping can be used to hide one or more interfaces whether a component is deployed into an untrusted platform.
\section{Autonomic Components: \\design and implementation}
\label{sec:BeSkeImpl}
The two main characteristics of autonomic components are the ability to
self-manage and to cooperate with other autonomic components to
achieve a common goal, such as guaranteeing a given behavior of an entire
component-based application. In the light of this, viewing the
management of a single component as an atomic feature enables design of
its management (to a certain extent) in isolation.
The management of a single component is therefore considered a
\emph{logically centralized} activity. Components will be able to
interact with other components according to well-defined protocols
described by management \emph{interaction patterns}, which are
established by the component model.
\subsection{The management of a GCM component}
The management of a single component is characterized by its ability to make non-trivial decisions.
Thus GCM components are differentiated as being \emph{passive} or \emph{active}, with the following meanings:
\begin{description}
\item[Passive] A component exposes non-functional
operations enabling introspection
(state and sensors) and dynamic reconfiguration.
These operations exhibit a parametric but
deterministic behavior. The operation semantics
is not underpinned by a decision making process (i.e. does not
implement any optimization strategy), but can only be constrained by
specific pre-conditions that, when not satisfied, may nullify an
operation request. All components should implement at least a
reflection mechanism that may be queried about the list and the type of
exposed operations.
\item[Active] A component exhibits self-managing behavior, that is
a further set of autonomic capabilities built on top of passive level functionality. The process
incarnates the autonomic management process: monitor, analyze, plan,
execute. The \emph{monitoring} phase is supported by introspective operations,
while the \emph{executing} phase is supported by re-configuring
operations described above.
\end{description}
In the architecture of GCM components, these two features are
implemented within the Autonomic Behaviour Controller (ABC) and
Autonomic Manager (AM), respectively. Since the management is a
logically centralized activity, a single copy of each of them can
appear in a component. Notice that, this does not prevent a
parallel implementation of them for different reasons, such as
fault-tolerance or performance. A passive component implements
just the ABC, whereas an active component implements both the ABC and
the AM. The following relationship holds\\
\[ \SubType{\SubType{Comp}{PassiveComp}}{ActiveComp} \]
\noindent
where \code{<:} is a subtyping relation. This is described in the GCM
specification by increasing values of conformance levels
\cite{gcm:coregrid:07}.
\paragraph{GCM Passive Autonomic Components}
The ABC and the AM represent two successive levels of abstraction of
component management. As mentioned above, the ABC implements operations
for component reconfiguration and monitoring. The design of these operations is strictly related to membrane structure and implementation, and therefore the choice of implementing the ABC as a controller in the membrane was the more obvious and natural.
Within the membrane, the ABC can access all the services
exposed by sub-component controllers, such as that related to life cycle and
binding, in order to implement correct reconfiguration
protocols. In general, these protocols depend on component structure
and behavior. However, in the case of Behavioural Skeletons they depend
almost solely on the skeleton family and not on the particular
skeleton. In this regard, the ABC effectively abstracts out management
operations for Behavioural Skeletons.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centerline{\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{figure/ABC}}
\caption{GCM: membrane and content (CC is the content controller, LC the lifecycle controller and BC is the binding controller).}
\label{fig:ABC}
\end{figure}
As we presented Behavioural Skeletons based on the idea of functional replication, we show the details of these skeletons.
In this case, the reconfiguration operations require the
addition/removal of workers as well as the tuning of distribution/collection strategies used to distribute and collect tasks and results to and from the workers.
The worker addition and/or removal operations can be used to change
the parallelism degree of the component as well to remap workers on
different processing elements and/or platforms. The distribution/collection tuning operations can be used to throttle and
balance the resource usage of workers, such as CPU, memory and IO.
The introspection operations involve querying component status
with respect to one or more pre-defined QoS metrics. The component status
is generally obtained as a harmonized measure involving component
status and inner component status.
In the following we describe in some detail the implementation of a
reconfiguration and an introspection operation.
\paragraph{\texttt{add\_worker(k)}}
\label{sec:addw}
\emph{Semantics:} Add $k$ workers to a skeleton based on the functional replication.
\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{Stop.} The ABC requires the \emph{Lifecycle Controller} (LC) to
stop all the components. To
this end, the LC retrieves from the \emph{Content Controller} (CC) the list
of inner components \serifd{W}{1} $\cdots$ \serifd{W}{n}, and then
issues a \texttt{stop} on them.
\item \emph{Type Inspection.} All the \serifd{W}{1} $\cdots$ \serifd{W}{n} have
the same type. The ABC retrieves from the CC the list of inner components
\serifd{W}{1} $\cdots$ \serifd{W}{n}, then retrieves TypeOf(\serifd{W}{1}).
\item \emph{New.} One or more new inner components of type
TypeOf(\serifd{W}{1}) are created.
\item \emph{Bind.} The component server interface \serif{S} is wired to newly
created \serifd{W}{n+1} $\cdots$ \serifd{W}{n+k} inner
components via the \emph{Binding Controller} (BC). \serifd{W}{n+1}
$\cdots$ \serifd{W}{n+k}, in turn,
wire their client interfaces to the component
collective client interface \serif{C}. The process requires the inspection of
the types of the interfaces of \serifd{W}{1} that is used again as a
template for all \serifd{W}{i}.
\item \emph{Restart.} The ABC requires the LC to re-start all the components.
\item \emph{Return.} Return a failure code if some of the previous operations
failed (e.g. inner components do not implement stop/start
operations); return success otherwise.
\end{enumerate}
\paragraph{\texttt{get\_measure(m)}}
\emph{Semantics:} Query the component about the current status of the
measure $m$, which may depend on the status of the inner components
(possibly involving other measures) and the membrane status.\\
\emph{Examples:} Transactions per unit time, load balancing, number
of up-and-running workers, etc.
\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{Collect Workers' Measures.} The ABC retrieves from the CC the list of inner components \serifd{W}{1} $\cdots$ \serifd{W}{n}, then
issues a \texttt{get\_measure(m)} on each.
\item \emph{Collect Membrane Measures.} The ABC queries membrane sensors relating
to the particular metric $m$.
\item \emph{Harmonize Measures.} Measures acquired from workers and from
the membrane are harmonized by using a $m$-dependent function (e.g.
average, maximum, etc.).
\item \emph{Return.} Return a failure code if some of the previous operations
failed (e.g. sensor not implemented in inner components); return
monitor information otherwise.
\end{enumerate}
\paragraph{GCM Active Autonomic components}
The operations implemented in the ABC can be arbitrarily complex;
however, they do not involve any decision making process. In general,
each of them implements a protocol that is a simple list
of actions. On the contrary, the AM is expected to enforce a
contractually specified QoS. To this end the AM should decide
\emph{if} a reconfiguration is needed, and if so, \emph{which}
reconfiguration plan can re-establish contract validity
\cite{adaptivity:parco:05}. Furthermore, as we shall see in
Section \ref{sec:coopman}, the AM should also determine if the contract
violation is
due to the managed component or is the byproduct of other components'
malfunction. The architecture of an active GCM component is shown in
Figure \ref{fig:AM}.
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\centerline{\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{figure/AM}}
\caption{Left) GCM active component architecture. Right) ABC and AM interaction.}
\label{fig:AM}
\end{figure*}
The AM accepts a QoS contract\footnote{the notion of \textit{QoS contract} is still the subject of further investigations and possible refinements. The one discussed here is the bare minimum necessary to discuss AM behavior and implementation.}, which is currently defined as pair
$\langle V, E \rangle$, where $V$ is a set of variables
representing the measures the AM can evaluate (via the ABC), and
$E$ is a mathematical
expression over these variables that might include the $\min$ and $\max$
operator over a finite domain. The set of $V$ determines the
minimum set of measures the AM should be able to monitor to accept the
contract. The $E$ encodes the constraints and goal the AM is
required to pursue. This encoding can be realized in many different
ways provided $E$ can be evaluated in finite time and possibly
quite efficiently.
Having accepted a QoS contract, the AM iteratively checks its validity,
and in the case that it appears broken, evaluates a number of pre-defined
reconfiguration plans.
Each reconfiguration plan consists of a sequence of actions (to be
executed via the ABC), and a QoS forecast formula. This formula allows
the value of a subset of $V$ after the reconfiguration to be forecast.
The AM instantiates in turn all reconfiguration plans
obtaining, for each plan, a set of forecast values. A plan is marked
as \emph{valid} if the set of $V$ updated with forecast values satisfies
the QoS contract. Among the valid plans, the AM heuristically chooses the
reconfiguration plan to be executed. If no reconfiguration plan is
valid, an exception is raised.
As is clear, the main difficulty in the AM definition is the
specification of a reconfiguration plan. In the general case, the reconfiguration
plans, and especially their forecast formula, are strictly related to
the behavior of a particular component. As discussed in Section \ref{sec:descr:behaviour},
Behavioural Skeletons enable the definition of reusable reconfiguration
plans by categorizing and restricting component behavior in families
and skeletons.
\subsection{Cooperative management}
\label{sec:coopman}
The ultimate goal of QoS management is to guarantee programmer intentions
despite software and environmental instabilities and
malfunctions. To this end, the management of a whole system should be
coordinated to achieve a common goal. In general, we envisage a
component-based system as a graph, whose nodes are components, and
edges are relations among them, such as data
dependency, management, geographic locality, etc. Different relations
can be kept distinct by a proper labeling of edges. Here we
restrict the focus to two relations which are of particular interest for GCM:
\textit{used\_by} and the \textit{implemented\_by} (see
Section \ref{sec:descr:behaviour}). Since the GCM is a hierarchical
model, the nesting relation naturally defines the \textit{implemented\_by}
relationship. In particular, the application structure along the nesting
relation describes a tree whose nodes represent components (leaves are
primitive components) and edges represent their nesting. In this
case, the management of a composite component C is cooperatively
performed by the \lab{AM}{C} of the component itself and the
\lab{AM}{C_i} of the
child components $C_i, i=1..n$. In the case where inner components are
passive, the cooperation is really one of control by the outer
component: services exposed by the \lab{ABC}{C_i} are called by
the \lab{ABC}{C}.
Conceptually, non-functional properties modeling run-time behavior
of the whole hierarchy can be synthesized in a bottom-up fashion: the
behavior of a composite component depends on the behavior of its nested
components. Management actions and QoS contracts should be
projected along the tree in a top-down fashion: the
users usually would like to declare a global goal they expect from an
application. This matches the idea of submitting a contract at the
root of tree. A fully autonomic system should automatically split the
global goal into sub-goals that should then be forced on inner components.
On the whole, each GCM component enforces local decisions. When a
contract violation is detected, its AM tries autonomously to re-establish
the contract to a valid status by re-configuring its membrane or inner
components. In the event that it cannot (no valid plan), it raises an event
to its father component, thus increasing the extent of the
reconfiguration. The overall behavior enforces the maximum locality
of reconfigurations, which is a highly desirable property in a
distributed system, since it eases the mapping of components onto the
network of platforms that usually exhibit a hierarchical nature in
terms of uniformity of resources and latency/bandwidth of networks
(cluster of clusters).
Observe that cooperation between components is unavoidable even in
very simplistic applications. Let us consider an example:
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centerline{\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{figure/pipe}}
\caption{Producer-filter-consumer with parallel filter (farm skeleton).}
\label{fig:pipe}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{Producer-filter-consumer} Let us assume that the application
sketched in Figure \ref{fig:pipe} has the final goal to generate,
render, and display a video with a given minimum number of frames/sec
($FPS>k$). The contract is split into three identical contracts since
the property should be enforced on all stages in order to hold globally.
The rendering (filter) has been parallelized since it is
the most CPU-demanding stage. Two common problems of such
applications are a transient overload of platform where \serifd{W}{1}
$\cdots$ \serifd{W}{n} are running, or an increased complexity of
scene to be rendered. These events may lead to a violation of QoS
contract at the \lab{AM}{F}. In this case, it may increase the number of workers
(mapped on fresh machines) to deal with the insufficient aggregate power of
already running resources. In many cases this will \emph{locally} solve the
problem. However, a slightly more sophisticated contract should
consider also the input and output channels. In particular the filter
stage might be not rendering enough frames because it does not receive
enough scenes to render. In this case the \lab{AM}{F} can detect the
local violation, but cannot locally solve the problem. As a matter of
fact, no plan involving a change of parallelism degree can solve this
problem. \lab{AM}{F} can just signal the problem to a higher level \lab{AM}{A},
which can try to remap the input channel to a faster link, or simply
signal to the end user that the contract is not satisfied.
\section{Experiments}\label{sec:BeSkeExp}
\label{sec:experiments}
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{figure/stop}}
\caption{Reconfiguration overhead: Stop.}
\label{fig:overhead:stop}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{figure/new}}
\caption{Reconfiguration overhead: New.}
\label{fig:overhead:new}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.8\linewidth]{figure/restart}}
\caption{Reconfiguration overhead: Restart.}
\label{fig:overhead:restart}
\end{figure}
In order to validate the Behavioural Skeletons approach, we conducted some experiments with the current prototype of the GCM. It is under development in the GridCOMP STREP project \cite{gridcomp}. The prototype, which is being developed on top of ProActive middleware \cite{proactive}, includes almost all of the features described in this chapter.
All the experimental data are measured on the application shown in Figure \ref{fig:pipe} that we already presented in the previous section. It basically is a three-stages pipeline in which the second stage consists in a farm of workers processing the images coming from the first stage, and delivering them to the third stage. The experiments mainly aim to assess the overhead due to management and reconfiguration of GCM components. For the sake of reproducibility, the experiments have been run on a cluster instead of a more heterogeneous grid. The cluster includes 31 nodes (1 Intel P3@800MHz core per node) wired with a fast Ethernet. Workers are allocated in the cluster in a round robin fashion with up to 3 workers per node (for a total of 93 workers). Note however, the very same experimental code can run on any distributed platform supported by the ProActive middleware.
Figures \ref{fig:overhead:stop}, \ref{fig:overhead:new}, and \ref{fig:overhead:restart} respectively show the time spent on the farm Behavioural Skeleton (filter) for the \emph{stop}, \emph{new} and \emph{restart} Autonomic Behavioural Controller (ABC) services described in Section \ref{sec:addw}.
This time consists in application overhead, since in current implementation none of the
workers can accept new tasks during the process. In the figures, a point
$k$ in the X-axis describes the overhead due to \emph{stop/new/restart}
in the adaptation of the running program from a $k$ to \mbox{$k+1$} worker
configuration.
As highlighted by the curves in Figure \ref{fig:overhead:stop} and
\ref{fig:overhead:restart} the overhead of \emph{stop} and
\emph{restart} is linear with respect to the number of workers
involved in the operations. This is mainly due to a linear time
barrier within the Life cycle Controller (LCC), which is an inherent part of the
underlying ProActive middleware. Indeed, in the current implementation the LCC sequentially stops all the workers. Note that adaptation process does not
strictly require such a barrier. Both stopping all the workers and
linear time synchronization are peculiarities of the current GCM
implementation on top of the ProActive middleware, and not of the farm
Behavioural Skeleton, which can be implemented avoiding both
problems. In addition, the creation of a new
worker can be executed, at least in principle, outside the critical path by using a
speculative creation.
Figure~\ref{fig:overhead:new} shows the time spent for the \emph{new} Autonomic Behavioural Controller (ABC)
operation (see Section \ref{sec:addw}). Again, in this case, the time is
overhead. The experiment measures the time required for the creation of a single worker, and
thus the times measured are almost independent of the number of
workers pre-existing the new one.
As highlighted by the Figure \ref{fig:overhead:new} and
\ref{fig:overhead:restart} the overhead of the \emph{new} and
\emph{restart} operations is much higher in the case where a fresh
platform is involved (number of workers less than 32). The difference
is mainly due to the additional time for Java remote class loading. In fact, when a worker is created, if the classes it needs are not present (in the machine that is running it), they are copied locally then loaded in the cluster node main memory and compiled. Clearly, performing such operations require time, hundreds of milliseconds. Rather, if the classes are already present, already loaded in main memory or even already compiled in machine target code by the Java JIT, performing these reconfiguration operations is noticeably cheaper.
The results of the last experiment are presented in Figure \ref{fig:adapt}. It describes
the behavior of the application over quite a long run (two hours, approximately) that includes
several self-triggered reconfigurations. In this case the
application is provided with a Quality of Service (QoS) contract that enforces the
production of a minimum of $1.5$ results per second (tasks/s). During
the run, an increasing number of platforms are externally overloaded
with an artificial load (we started the compilation of some complex software written in C++). The top half of the figure
reports the measured average throughput of the filter stage (the second, actually), and the
QoS contract. The bottom half of the figure reports the number of
overloaded machines along the run, and the corresponding increase of
workers of the filter stage. Initially the throughput of the filter
stage is abundantly higher than requested ($\sim 3.5$ tasks/s); but it
decreases when more machines are overloaded. As soon as the contract
is violated, the Autonomic Manager reacts by adding more workers.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth]{figure/adapt2}}
\caption{Self-optimization experiment.}
\label{fig:adapt}
\end{figure}
\newpage
\section*{Summarizing the Chapter}
\emph{
\hrule
\medskip
The challenge of autonomicity in the context of component-based development of grid software is substantial. Building into components autonomic capability typically impairs their reusability. In this Chapter we proposed Behavioural Skeletons as a compromise: being skeletons they support reuse, while their parameterization allows the controlled adaptivity needed to achieve dynamic adjustment of QoS while preserving functionality.
We also presented a significant set of skeletons and we discussed how Behavioural Skeletons can be implemented in the framework of the GCM component model. Behavioural Skeletons provide the programmer with the ability to implement autonomic managers completely taking care of the parallelism exploitation details by simply instantiating existing skeletons and by providing suitable, functional parameters.
Finally, we discussed the experimental results achieved when running an application exploiting instances of our Behavioural Skeletons and we showed how the skeletons used may take decisions at the appropriate time to maintain the application behavior within the limits stated by the user with a specific performance contract.
The whole experiments have been performed using GCM components and Behavioural Skeletons, as being designed and implemented in the framework of the CoreGRID and GridCOMP projects.
To our knowledge, no other similar results are available yet.
\medskip
\hrule
}
\chapter{Metaprogramming Run-time Optimizations}\label{muskelWorkflow}
\paragraph{Chapter road-map}
\emph{
This Chapter presents our efforts aimed at exploiting metaprogramming techniques for optimizing at run-time the execution of structured parallel applications. The approaches are based on the run-time generation of macro data-flow blocks from the application code.
We start presenting the motivations (Section \ref{motivations}) of our contributions. Then we present PAL (Section \ref{PAL}), our first result in the field. PAL is a metaprogramming engine that transforms at run-time an annotated sequential java code in a parallel program, exploiting both programmer hints and executing platform information. We describe our PAL prototype implementation (Section \ref{PALimpl}) and the results of the tests we made with it (Section \ref{PALtests}). After we discuss the motivations that convinced us to integrate the PAL approach with our version of the \muskel framework (Section \ref{PALmotivations}). In the following section (\ref{metamuskel}) we describe the preliminary attempts we made integrating metaprogramming techniques in \muskel.
In Section \ref{muskworkflows} we present how we further enhanced \muskel making it able to exploit metaprogramming for run-time code optimizations. In particular, how it can be exploited to optimize the parallel execution of computations expressed as workflows. In Section \ref{sec:imple} we describe the implementation of workflows transformations and in Section \ref{sec:perfresults} we present the performance results obtained. Finally, we compare the two approaches (Section \ref{sec:gendifferences}) and we summarize the Chapter contributions.
}
\section{Our efforts in run-time optimization}\label{motivations}
In the previous chapter we described how the macro data-flow model can be exploited in order to allow the customization of algorithmic skeletons. We showed how we modified the \muskel parallel framework in order to provide programmers with mechanisms able to change skeletons structure. In this chapter we present the metaprogramming techniques we exploited both to ease the generation of the macro data-flow graph and to optimize at run-time the parallel execution of the macro data-flow blocks.
\subsection{Metaprogramming}
Code-generating programs are sometimes called metaprograms; writing such programs is called metaprogramming. Metaprograms do part of the work during compile-time that is otherwise done at run-time. Compile-time metaprogramming exploits information available at compile-time to generate temporary source code, which is merged by the compiler with the rest of the source code and then compiled. The goal of run-time metaprogramming, instead, is to achieve real-time code optimizations transforming or adapting the code whenever some information becomes available.
\subsubsection{Compile-time metaprogramming}
The most common metaprogramming tool is a compiler, which allows a programmer to write a relatively short program in a high-level language and uses it to write an equivalent assembly language or machine language program. Another still fairly common example of metaprogramming might be found in the use of Template Metaprogramming. Template metaprogramming is a metaprogramming technique in which templates are used by a compiler to generate temporary source code, which is merged by the compiler with the rest of the source code and then compiled. The output of these templates includes compile-time constants, data structures, and complete functions. The use of templates can be thought of as compile-time execution. The technique is used by a number of languages, the most well-known being C++, but also D, Eiffel, Haskell, ML and XL. The use of templates as a metaprogramming technique requires two distinct operations: a template must be defined, and a defined template must be instantiated. The template definition describes the generic form of the generated source code, and the instantiation causes a specific set of source code to be generated from the generic form in the template. Template metaprogramming is generally Turing-complete, meaning that any computation expressible by a computer program can be computed, in some form, by a template metaprogram. Templates are different from macros. A macro, which is also a compile-time language feature, generates code in-line using text manipulation and substitution. Macro systems often have limited compile-time process flow abilities and usually lack awareness of the semantics and type system of their companion language (an exception should be made with Lisp's macros, which are written in Lisp itself, and is not a simple text manipulation and substitution). Template metaprograms have no mutable variables that is, no variable can change value once it has been initialized, therefore template metaprogramming can be seen as a form of functional programming. In fact, many template implementations only implement flow control through recursion. Some common reasons to use templates is to implement generic programming (avoiding sections of code which are similar except for some minor variations) and especially to perform automatic compile-time optimization such as doing something once at compile-time rather than every time the program is run, for instance having the compiler unroll loops to eliminate jumps and loop count decrements whenever the program is executed. The main problem of this approach is the inefficient exploitation of the executing environment. Indeed to guarantee the code portability such optimizations are done in a generic way, for instance without exploiting specific CPU extension like SSE or 3DNow. To overwork it the application should be re-compiled once all the running architecture details are known.
\subsubsection{Run-time metaprogramming}
Run-time metaprogramming points at either the generation of programs specialized with respect to the running architecture or the adaptation of programs with respect to additional information provided by programmers, e.g. non-functional requirements. The metaprogramming related information (metadata) is processed by the metaprogramming run-time support. It exploits both such metadata and the environmental information to transforms the original code into an optimized one.
Nevertheless, this solution presents a major problem: the re-compilation overhead. Indeed, re-compile the whole application from scratch on each machine it is moved for execution is computationally expansive.
A viable solution consists in writing the applications using bytecode based languages, like Java and .NET. Indeed, their compilers do not translate the program into target machine language but translate it into an intermediate language (IL). The IL has greater expressiveness than the machine and the assembly languages and can be transformed in a machine-level program paying a small overhead.
Furthermore, there are other advantages in implementing application, especially the distributed ones, exploiting a virtual machine based language: e.g. the possibility to run programs across different platforms at the only cost of porting the execution environment and to achieve better security (the execution engine mediates all accesses to resources made by programs verifying that the system can not be compromised by the running application).
In the past, other programming languages with the same architecture, essentially p-code, have been proposed (see for instance the introduction of \cite{krall}) but Java has been the first to have a huge impact on programming mainstream. Java approach has been recognized as successful, indeed, since the 2002 also Microsoft introduced their virtual-machine based programming languages. They are based on the Common Language Infrastructure (CLI). The core of CLI is the virtual execution system also known as Common Language Runtime(CLR).
Both JVM \cite{JavaLang} and CLR \cite{ECMA335} implement a multi-threaded stack-based virtual machine, that offers many services such as dynamic loading, garbage collection, clearly the Just In Time (JIT) compilation and above all a noteworthy reflection support. Features like garbage collection raise the programming abstraction level whereas dynamic loading, JIT compilation and a native multi-thread support simplify the task of programming distributed and concurrent applications. Reflection support enables programs to read its own metadata. A program reflecting on itself extract metadata (from its representation expressed in terms of intermediate language) and using that metadata can modify its own behavior. Reflection support is useful to inspect the structure of types, to access fields and even to choose dynamically the methods to invoke. Exploiting reflection support programs can change their structure and their (byte) code.
The reflection support can be provided by the run-time system at different levels of complexity \cite{CLOS}:
\begin{itemize}
\item{Introspection} : the program can access to a representation of its own internal state. This support may range from knowing the type of values at run-time to having access to a representation of the whole source program.
\item{Intercession} : the representation of the state of the program can be changed at run-time. This may include the set of types used, values and the source code.
\end{itemize}
Both introspection and intercession require a mechanism, called reification, to expose the execution state of a program as data. The reification mechanism exposes an abstraction of some elements of the execution environment. These elements may include programming abstractions such as types or source code; they may also include other elements, like the evaluation stack (as in 3-LISP \cite{LISP}), that are not modeled by the language.
For compiled languages it could be harder to reflect elements of the source language: the object program runs on a machine that usually is far from the abstract machine of the source language. Enabling RTTI (Runtime Type Identification, a support that allows a program to have exact information about type of objects at run-time) in C++, for instance, requires that the run-time support contain additional code to keep track of types at run-time. Besides, the programmer would expect abstractions compatible with the structure of the programming language abstract machine (unless he is interested in manipulating the state of the machine that is target of the compilation).
\subsubsection{Custom metadata management}
The metadata readable through the advanced reflection supports are both the information about types (class, method, field names an hierarchies) and about additional, non-functional attributes.
A straightforward example is the Java serialization architecture: the programmer can declare the instances of a serializable class simply by implementing the \textbf{Serializable} interface, which in fact is an empty interface. Thus, two types that differ only for the implementation of the \textbf{Serializable} interface are indistinguishable from the execution (functional) standpoint. Besides, the serialization of the instances of non-serializable types will not be allowed by the serialization support. Clearly, this ``interface-based'' mechanism for the metadata specification is not flexible and can not be expressed at more fine level, for instance at method-level. This limitation leads to the development of Java annotations \cite{javaAnnotation}.
A Java annotation is a special syntax that adds metadata to Java source code. Annotations can be added to program elements such as classes, methods, fields, parameters, local variables, and packages. Unlike Javadoc tags, Java annotations are reflective in that they may be retained by the Java VM and made retrievable at run-time. The possibility to retain and retrieve this information at run-time makes the ``real'' difference between the Java annotations and the earlier annotation based approach. For instance, the OpenMP pragma based approach or the HPF annotation or consisting in simple directives to compiler driving the data decomposition optimization, approaches that are not designed to work with non-shared memory architectures.
The exploitation of Java annotations as a way to embed non-functional information is at the base of Attribute Oriented Programming \cite{AttributeOP1, AttributeOP2}.
Attribute Oriented Programmers use Java annotations to mark program elements (e.g. classes and methods) to indicate that they maintain the application-specific or domain-specific semantics. As an example, some programmers may define a ``logging'' attribute and associate it with a method to indicate the method should implement a logging function, while other programmers may define a ``web service'' attribute and associate it with a class to indicate the class should be implemented as a web service. Attributes aim the separation of concerns: application's core logic (or business logic) are clearly distinguished from application-specific or domain-specific semantics (e.g. logging and web service functions). By hiding the implementation details of those semantics from program code, attributes increase the level of programming abstraction and reduce programming complexity. The program elements associated with attributes are transformed in order to fit the programmers' requirements.
The effectiveness of the approach is demonstrated by its rapidly diffusion, indeed some very popular and widely used programming frameworks \cite{JBoss,Spring} adopted the Attribute Oriented Programming approach as a way to embed programmers' hints and requirements. There are also some scientific works exploiting annotations information to drive the application run-time transformation, for instance in \cite{1066964} authors propose a way to transform an annotated application in a multithreaded one and \cite{fraclet} describes a way to transform a POJO in a Fractal component simply transforming the code according to the programmer annotations.
In Section \ref{PAL} we describe how we exploited the Attribute Oriented Programming approach in our Parallel Abstraction Layer (PAL). PAL is a metaprogramming engine able to dynamically restructure parallel applications depending both on the information gathered at run-time about the running platform and on the hints specified inside the source code by programmers.
A slightly different approach that aims to a clear separation between the application business code and application management information is the Aspect Oriented Programming (AOP) model. Whereas the Attribute Oriented Programming model separates the management code from the business one exploiting a language support, Aspect Oriented Programming model requires programmers provide additional files containing a set of rules which describe the actions to perform when the application execution flow reach certain points. The main actions performed consist in code injection and code substitution.
Some scientific works exploit AOP for code transformations.
Sobral et al. discussed the usage of AOP to support modular computing \cite{Sobral:aosd-acp4is06,SobralIpdps2006,10.1109/PDP.2007.20}. They use AOP techniques to separately solve partition, concurrency and distribution problems and eventually show how the related aspects can be used to provide a (kernel for a) general purpose, modular parallel computing framework.
Other authors \cite{aspect-mpi-c++} demonstrated that AOP can be efficiently exploited in conjunction with components and patterns to derive parallel applications for distributed memory systems. It highly relies on the ability of the programmer to find out the right places to exploit aspects.
In \cite{bruno04} another approach exploiting aspects to parallelize Java applications from the Java Grande forum using AspectJ is presented. Good results are shown in the paper, but the procedure used to exploit aspects requires entering the program details to find out possibilities for parallelization.
In the Sections \ref{metamuskel} and \ref{muskworkflows} we describe how we integrated the AOP approach in our next generation \muskel. In particular, how we exploited the AspectJ \cite{aspectj} tool to manage the generation of macro data-flow blocks, aimed at the parallelization of workflow computations.
Both the PAL and the AspectJ integration with \muskel approaches have been published, respectively in \cite{pal} and \cite{muskaspects:cg_book:08}. In both the cases
the authors collectively contributed to the paper.
\section{The PAL experience}\label{PAL}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.85\linewidth]{figure/idea3}
\caption{PAL approach overview
}\label{fig:idea}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\linewidth]{figure/Untitled}
\caption{Sample code using PAL
}\label{fig:pal}\label{fig:file-example}
\end{figure}
The Parallel Abstraction Layer is a general-purpose approach for implementing simple parallel applications that does not require complex application structuring by programmers. Programmers are only required to insert, in the source code, some hints, eventually exploited by the PAL run-time support to transform the application code. The transformation is aimed at in enforcing an efficient parallel (even distributed) execution of the application. The general idea is outlined in Figure \ref{fig:idea}.
Programmers' hints consist in non-functional requirements, namely, requirements which specify criteria that can be used to judge the operation of a system, rather than specific behaviors. Examples of non-functional requirements includes: Efficiency, Price, Hardware Reliability, Software and tools availability and Parallelism degree. In PAL implementation they are specified through the annotation mechanisms provided by Java \cite{javaAnnotation}.
The PAL run-time support exploits the information conveyed in the annotations to transform the original program in a parallel one. The transformed program is optimized with respect to the target parallel/distributed architecture.
Programmers are required to give some kind of ``parallel structure'' to the code directly at the source code level, as it happens in the algorithmic skeleton case.
In our PAL implementation it can be done exploiting the java annotation mechanism. For instance, the farm semantics is obtained indicating which ``parts'' of code should be replicated and executed in parallel. A ``part'' is intended to be a piece of side-effect free code which input and output data are well-defined. Programmers are in charge of ensuring the ``parts'' satisfy these requirements. Each java code ``part'' is transformed by the PAL in a macro data-flow block that can be dispatched for execution.
PAL has a multi-level software architecture. It is depicted in Figure \ref{fig:PAL-arch}. On top, there is PAL frontend, namely the annotations provided by PAL and the host language, Java in our PAL implementation. In the bottom layer, there are the adapters and the information system: the formers foster PAL during code transformation instructing it about how to structure the application code to make it parallel and compliant with a specific parallel framework.
The latter is a set of tools aimed at run-time information gathering. Finally, the middle layer is the real metaprogramming engine that uses the information gathered in order to decide which adapter exploit among the available to enforce the non-functional requirements expressed by the programmers through annotations.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\linewidth]{figure/PAL-arch}
\caption{PAL architecture}
\label{fig:PAL-arch}
\end{figure}
Compared with traditional skeletal environments, PAL presents three additional advantages.
\begin{itemize}
\item First, annotations can be ignored and the semantics of the original sequential code is preserved. This means that the programmers' application code can be run through a classical sequential compiler (or interpreter) suite and debugged using normal debugging tools.
\item Second, annotations are processed at run-time, typically exploiting reflection properties of the hosting language. As a consequence, while handling annotations, a bunch of knowledge can be exploited which is not available at compile-time (kind of machines at hand, kind of interconnection network, etc.) and this can lead to more efficient parallel implementations of the user application.
\item Third, the knowledge concerning the kind of target architecture can be exploited leading to radically diverse implementation of the very same user code. As an example, if the run-time can figure out that the target architecture where the program is running happens to be a grid, it can transform the code in such a way possibly coarser grain parallelism is exploited. On the other hand, in case the run-time figures out that user asked to execute the code on a SMP target, a more efficient, possibly finer grain, multithreaded version of the code can be produced as the result of the annotation handling.
\end{itemize}
PAL enforces code optimizations via automatic application restructuring in order to exploit all the available application parallelism with respect to programmer's annotations (non-functional application requirements). The transformation process is done at run-time, which is at the time we have the information we need to optimize the restructuring process with respect to the available parallel tools and underlying resources. The code is transformed at bytecode level thus, it does not need to recompile the application source code on the target architecture. Hence, the transformation introduces only a small overhead for the code transformations.
The generative \cite{genProgramming} metaprogramming engine of PAL gathers at run-time information on available parallel tools and computational resources. Then, it analyzes the bytecode looking for programmer annotations (non-functional requirements) and transforms the annotated original code to an optimized, parallel one. The structure of the transformed bytecode depends on the selected parallel framework (clearly subjected to adapters availability) and on the presence and/or value of some non-functional requirements.
PAL exploits the available parallelism by asynchronously executing parts of the original code. The parts to be executed asynchronously are individuated by the annotations specified by programmers. In particular, in Java the most natural choice consists in individuating methods calls as the parts to be asynchronously executed.
Asynchronous execution of method code is based on the concept of \emph{future} \cite{caromel05theory, caromel04asynchronous}. When a method is called asynchronously it immediately returns a future, that is a stub ``empty'' object. The caller can then continue its own computations and access to the future object content (e.g. calling its methods) just when needed. If in the meanwhile the return value has already been computed, the call to reify the future succeeds immediately, otherwise it blocks until the actual return value is computed and then returns it.
In our PAL implementation, to indicate a method as ``parallelizable'' PAL programmers have simply to put a proper \textbf{@Parallel} annotation enriched with non-functional requirements, such as the required parallelism degree, on the line right before method declaration.
Exploiting the annotation mechanism allows to keep the PAL applications very similar to normal sequential applications, actually. Hence, Programmers may simply run the application through standard Java tools to verify it is functionally correct. PAL autonomically performs at run-time activities aimed at achieving the asynchronous and parallel execution of the PAL-annotated methods and at managing any consistency related problems, without any further programmer intervention.
The PAL approach also avoids the proliferation of source files and classes, that is a quite common situation in framework based programming, as it works transforming bytecode. Unfortunately, it raises several problems related to data sharing management. As an example, methods annotated with a \textbf{@Parallel} should not access class fields: they may only access their own parameters and the local method variables. This is due to the impossibility to intercept all the accesses to non-private class fields. This limitation prevent the usage of static class fields as a way for sharing data among different instances of annotated method calls, making more complex the development of application in which the computational resources running the different annotated method calls need to exchange data during the method computation. It is worth to note that this is not a limitation of the approach but depends by the Java language. Indeed having a proper language support for detecting public field changes it would not be difficult to provide a proper annotation for managing the remote accesses to fields.
\subsection{PAL: implementation details}\label{sec:pro}\label{PALimpl}
We implemented a PAL prototype in Java 1.5, as Java provides a manageable intermediate language (Java bytecode \cite{javaVMSpec}) and natively supports code annotations, since version 1.5. Furthermore, it owns all the properties needed by our approach (e.g. type safety and security).
For this implementation we developed two distinct adapters. One for transforming the bytecode in a multithreaded one and another to transform the bytecode making it compliant with JJPF. In order to do this our PAL implementation makes better usage of ASM \cite{bruneton02asm}: a Java bytecode manipulation framework.
The current PAL prototype accepts only one kind of non-functional attribute that can be specified with the \textbf{@Parallel} annotation: \textbf{parDegree}. It denotes the number of processing elements to be used for the method execution. PAL uses such information to make a choice between the multithreaded and JJPF adapter. This choice is driven by the number of processors/cores available on the host machine: if the machine owns a sufficient number of processors the annotated bytecode directly compiled from user code is transformed in a semantically equivalent multithreaded version. Otherwise, PAL chooses to transform the compiled bytecode in a semantically equivalent JJPF version that uses several networked machines to execute the program.
PAL basically transforms code in such a way the annotated methods can be computed asynchronously. The original code is ``adapted'' using an adapter in order to be compliant with the parallel framework associated with the adapter. In our implementation, where the only available adapter for distributed computations is the JJPF one, the methods are adapted to be run on the remote JJPF servers displaced onto the processing elements. Conversely, the \textbf{main} code invoking the \textbf{@Parallel} methods is used to implement the ``client'' code, i.e. the application the user runs on its own local machine. This application eventually will interact with the remote JJPF servers according to proper JJPF mechanisms and protocols.
Method call parameters, the input data for the code to be executed asynchronously, are packaged in a ``task''. When a server receives a task to be computed, it removes its server-descriptor from the processing elements available for JJPF. When the task computation is completed the server re-inserts its descriptor from the available ones. In other words, when a annotated method is called an empty future is immediately returned, a ``task'' is generated and it is inserted into the JJPF queue; eventually it is sent to one among the available processing element, which remove itself from the available resources, computes the task and returns the result that JJPF finally put inside the proper future.
This implementation schema looks like very close to a classical master/slave implementation.
We could have developed an adapter for other parallel programming frameworks as targets. As an example, we could have used the Globus toolkit. However, JJPF is very compact and required a slightly more compact amount of code to be targeted, with respect to the Globus or other grid middleware frameworks. As the principles driving the generation of the parallel code are the same both using JJPF and other grid middleware frameworks, we preferred JJPF to be able to implement a proof-of-concept adapter prototype in a very short time.
As we already stated before, our current PAL prototype
has some limitations, in particular, the only parameter passing semantics available for annotated methods is the \emph{deep-copy} one, and the program sequential semantics is not guaranteed if the class fields are accessed from inside the PAL-annotated methods.
Figure \ref{fig:file-example} shows an example of PAL prototype usage, namely a program computing the Mandelbrot set. The \textbf{Mandelbrot} class uses a \textbf{@Parallel} annotation to state that all the \textbf{createLines} calls should be computed in parallel, with a parallelism degree equal to \textbf{16}. Observe that, due to some Java limitations (see below), the programmer must specify \textbf{PFFuture} as return type, and consequently return an object of this type. \textbf{PFFuture} is a template defined by the PAL framework. It represents a container needed to enable the future mechanism. The type specified as argument is the original method return type. Initially, we tried to have to a more transparent mechanism for the future implementation, without any explicit Future declaration. It consisted in the run-time substitution of the return type with a PAL-type inheriting from the original one. In our idea, the PAL-type would have filtered any original type dereferentiation following the \emph{wait-by-necessity} \cite{caromel89wait} semantics. Unfortunately, we had to face two Java limitations that limit the current prototype to the current solution. These limitations regard the impossibility to extend some widely used Java BCL classes (String, Integer,...) because they are declared \textbf{final}, and the impossibility to intercept all non-private class field accesses.
In the \textbf{Main} class, the programmer just asks to transform the \textbf{Main} class and the \textbf{Mandelbrot} ones with PAL, that is, to process the relevant PAL annotations and to produce an executable IL which exploits parallelism according to the features (hardware and software) of the target architecture where the \textbf{Main} itself is being run.
\subsection{Experimental results}\label{PALtests}
\label{sec:test}
To validate the PAL approach we ran some experiments with the current prototype we developed. In particular, the conducted experiments were aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of PAL approach. It has been evaluated measuring the overhead caused by raising the programming abstraction by means of PAL.
We ran tests for each adapter developed, i.e. both for the multithread adapter and for the JJPF one. In other words, the tests were covering parallel transformations suiting both multiprocessor and cluster architectures. In the former case, we used, as computing resource for the test-bed, a hyper-threading bi-processors workstation (Dual Intel Xeon 2Ghz, Linux kernel 2.6). In the latter case, instead, we ran the transformed application on a blade cluster (24 machines single PentiumIII-800Mhz processor with multiple Fast Ethernet network, Linux kernel 2.4).
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering \vspace*{-2em}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{figure/paltest}\vspace*{-2em}
\caption{Mandelbrot computation: efficiency comparison with different image resolution, processing element number and task computational weight.}
\label{fig:efficiency}
\end{figure}
In both cases, our test application was a fractal image generator, which computes sections of the Mandelbrot set. The Mandelbrot set is a set of points in the complex plane, the boundary of which forms a fractal. Mathematically, the Mandelbrot set can be defined as the set of complex $c$-values for which the orbit of 0 under iteration of the complex quadratic polynomial $x_{n+1} = x_{n^2} + c$ remains bounded. A complex number, $c$, is in the Mandelbrot set if, when starting with $x_0 = 0$ and applying the iteration repeatedly, the absolute value of $x_n$ never exceeds a certain number (that number depends on $c$) however large $n$ gets.
When computed and graphed on the complex plane, the Mandelbrot Set has an elaborate boundary, which does not simplify at any given magnification. This qualifies the boundary as a fractal.
We picked up Mandelbrot because it is a very popular benchmark for embarrassingly parallel computation. PAL addresses exactly these kinds of computations, as it only allows executing remotely methods not accessing shared (static) variables nor having any kind of side effects. On the one hand, this obviously represents a limitation, as PAL cannot compete, as an example, with other approaches supporting plain loop parallelization. On the other hand, huge amounts of embarrassingly parallel applications are executed on clusters, workstation networks and grids. Most of times, the implementation of these applications requires a significant programming effort, despite being ``easy'' embarrassingly parallel, far more consistent than the effort required to execute the same kind of application exploiting PAL.
To study in more detail the behavior of the transformed, parallel, version of the Mandelbrot application in several contexts, we ran the fractal generator setting different resolutions (600x400, 1200x800 and 2400x1600) and task computational weights, starting from 1 up to 40 lines at time. For each test-bed the total number of lines were fixed, hence when the task size (number of lines to compute) increases, the total number of tasks decreases.
The Mandelbrot application, when transformed exploiting the multithread adapter, has been executed only with \textbf{parDegree} parameter set to 1 or 2 (we used a bi-processor machine for the test-bed). Nevertheless, the multithreaded experiments achieved promising results, as the registered efficiency with parallel degree 2 is very close to the ideal one, for all the setting combinations (resolution and compute lines). Since in a multicore solution we have a lower communication impact than in a COW or grid solution, we can point out that this performance should be easily maintained with symmetric multiprocessors even with larger (with four, eight or more cores) processing elements.
After the test with the multithread adapter, we tested also the JJPF one for distributed architectures. We used the very same Mandelbrot source code. PAL transformed it exploiting the JJPF adapter in order to make it able to be executed on distributed workstation network. In this case, we achieved performances definitely close to the ones we achieved with hand written JJPF code (see Figure \ref{fig:efficiency}). The Figure shows the result of the experiments with an image resolution of 2400x1600 (other results obtained using different image resolutions gave comparable results) when a different number of processing elements are used (i.e. different values specified to the \textbf{@Parallel(parDegree=...)} annotation).
These results demonstrate that PAL performance strictly depends on the parallel tool targeted by the PAL IL transformation techniques. Actually, the overhead introduced by PAL is negligible.
\subsection{Learning from PAL experience}\label{PALmotivations
Designing, developing and then testing PAL we are taught a lesson by exploiting generative metaprogramming techniques coupled with programmers high-level hints specified at source code level, it is possible to transform a java program that own some properties, enriched with some proper annotations, in a parallel program. The parallelization is obtained through the asynchronous and parallel execution of annotated methods. Annotated method code is transformed in a macro data-flow block that can be dispatched to be executed on the available computational resources.
This process executed at run-time directly at intermediate language level, allows to exploit the information available to parallelize the applications with respect both to the parallel tools available on the target execution environment and to the programmer supplied non-functional requirements. A run-time transformation allows to hide most of parallelization issues. The results we obtained are very encouraging and show that the overhead introduced by PAL is negligible. Nevertheless, the PAL prototype we developed has some limitations. The non-functional requirements are limited to the possibility to indicate the parallelism degree, the parameter passing semantic to PAL-annotated method is limited to deep-copy and the class fields are not accessible from PAL-annotated methods. Furthermore, the programmer has to include an explicit dereferentiation of objects returned by PAL-annotated methods. Finally, current PAL prototype allows only very simple forms of parallelization.
In a sense, PAL has been a proof of concept demonstrating the effectiveness of the approach. With this awareness in mind, we decided to exploit the gained experience to integrate some elements of the PAL approach in our modified muskel framework. The goal is to obtain a framework allowing programmers to develop customizable parallel structured applications which ``parts'' can be transformed in macro data-flow blocks optimized at run-time according to programmers directives and available hardware and software resources.
\section{Metaprogramming \muskel}\label{metamuskel}
\label{sec:aop}
PAL proved that, given the existence of a proper metaprogramming run-time support, annotations are a handy way both to indicate which parts of a program must run in parallel and to express non-functional requirements directly in the source code. Such information given as input to PAL metaprogramming engine can be actually exploited to optimize the original annotated code with respect to the running platform and the programmers' non-functional specifications.
Therefore, we decided to apply the main features of PAL approach to our modified \muskel implementation. Actually, adapting them to \muskel we changed a little bit the approach. Such a change is due to a few motivations. First of all because \muskel provides \emph{per se} a distributed macro data-flow executor whereas PAL exploits external tools for distributed program execution. Moreover, we would like to have a more flexible mechanism for macro data-flow block generation and management. Finally, we would like to exploit a standard tool for run-time code transformation instead of using ad-hoc tools.
As a consequence we decided to use integrate in \muskel the AOP model and in particular the AspectJ framework.
The first step in this direction was exploiting AspectJ to implement aspect driven program normalization in \muskel. We already introduced normal form and code normalization in Section \ref{old-fashion}.
Let us to recall it briefly. Normalization consists in transforming an arbitrary \muskel program, whose structure is a generic skeleton tree, into a new, equivalent one, whose parallel structure is a farm with a worker made up of the sequential composition of the sequential skeletons appearing in the original skeleton tree taken left to right. This second program is the skeleton program normal form and happens to perform better (with respect to the service time) than the original one in the general case and in the same way in the worst case.
As an example, the code reported in the previous chapter in Figure \ref{fig:code} can be transformed into the equivalent normal form code:
\[
\texttt{Skeleton main = new Farm(new Seq(f,g));} \]
where \textbf{Seq} is basically a pipeline whose stages are executed sequentially on a single processor.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centerline{\includegraphics[scale=0.55]{figure/contract}}
\caption{AspectJ code handling performance contracts in \muskel.}
\label{fig:contratto}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centerline{\includegraphics[scale=0.55]{figure/normalform}}
\caption{AspectJ code modeling normal form in \muskel.}
\label{fig:aop-nf}
\end{figure}
Code normalization can be obtained explicitly inserting statements in the source code. This means that programmers must change the source code to use the normal form in place of the non-normal form version of the same program.
Exploiting AspectJ we defined a proper aspect dealing with normal form transformation by defining a pointcut on the execution of the \textbf{setProgram} \textbf{Manager} method and associating to the pointcut the action performing normal form transformation on the source code in the aspect, such as the one of Figure \ref{fig:aop-nf}.
As a consequence, the programmers can decide whether to use the original or the normal form version of the program just picking up the standard Java compiler or the AspectJ one. The fact the program is left unchanged means the programmer may debug the original bug and have the normal form one debugged too as a consequence, provided the AOP code in the normal form aspect is correct.
Moreover, exploiting aspects as discussed above, we handled also related features by means of proper aspects. In fact, in case the programmer provided a performance contract (a parallelism degree, in the simpler case) and then used the AspectJ compiler to ask normal form execution of the program, it turns out to be quite natural imagine a further aspect handling the performance contract consequently. Figure \ref{fig:contratto} shows the AspectJ aspect handling this aspect. In this case, contracts are stored as soon as they have been issued by the programmer, with the first pointcut, then, in when normalization has been required (second pointcut) and program parallel evaluation is required, the contract is handled consequently (third pointcut), that is, it is either left unchanged or a new contract is derived from the original one according to some normal form related procedure.
The second step consisted in testing the integration of \muskel with AspectJ to in a more complex scenario. Hence, we exploited the aspect oriented programming support integrated in \muskel in order to develop workflows which structure and processing are optimized at run-time.
\section{Workflows with \muskel}\label{muskworkflows}
Workflows represents a popular programming model for grid applications \cite{wfls}. In a workflow, programmers express the data dependencies that incurs among a set of blocks, possibly using a DAG. Each block processes input data to produce output data. Workflow schedulers arrange the computations for grid execution in such a way
\begin{itemize}
\item all the parallelism implicitly defined through the (absence of) dependencies in the DAG is exploited, and
\item available grid resources (processing elements) are efficiently used.
\end{itemize}
In a sense, a programming model that eases the development of efficient workflow applications can be successfully exploited for the development of many grid applications. For this reason, we conceived an approach aimed at the implementation of workflows on top of the \muskel distributed macro data-flow interpreter. We took into account the execution of workflows on a set of input data items. The set of input data items represents the program input stream. Each item on that stream will be submitted to a full workflow computation. The results of that computation will appear as a data items onto the program output stream.
Usually the workflows considered in grids are made of nodes that are computationally complex. Possibly parallel applications processing data contained in one or more input files to produce data in one or more output files \cite{wfls}.
We considered a very simple class of workflows: those whose DAG nodes are Java ``functions'' processing a generic Object input parameters to produce an Object output results.
\subsection{Aspects to implement workflows}
\label{sec:aspects}
As already stated, we considered workflows processing stream of input data to produce stream of output data.
Actually, these are not classical workflows. As discussed in the following, however, classical workflows can be efficiently addressed as well as a side effect of the efficient implementation of stream parallel workflows.
This allows to express both parallelism implicit in the workflow definition (and therefore exploited within the computation of a single instance of the workflow) and stream parallelism (parallelism among distinct instances of workflow computation, relative to independent input data items).
In order to obtain a macro data-flow graph from the workflow abstract code, we exploited the AspectJ AOP framework \cite{aspectjnew}:
\begin{itemize}
\item Programmers express workflows as plain Java code, with the constraint the nodes of the workflow must be expressed using \textbf{Compute} object calls.
\item Programmers declare a \textbf{Manager} object passing it an \textbf{Iterator} providing the input tasks. The \textbf{Manager} object completely and transparently takes care of implementing stream parallelism using the \muskel distributed macro data-flow interpreter.
\item AOP pointcuts and advices are used to intercept the calls to the \textbf{compute} methods and to transform such calls into proper fireable macro data-flow instructions submitted to the \muskel distributed data-flow interpreter.
\end{itemize}
Sample code used to model workflows is shown in Figure \ref{fig:wf1}. The right part of the Figure lists the Java code modeling the workflow graphically depicted in the left part of the Figure. Multiple results are modeled returning \textbf{Vector} objects and multiple input parameters are modeled with a ``vararg'' \textbf{compute} method\footnote{varargs have been introduced in Java 1.5 and allow to pass a variable number of arguments (of the same type) to a method; the arguments are referred to in the method body as array elements}.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.95\linewidth]{figure/WF1}}
\caption{Sample workflow (left) and relative Java code (right)}
\label{fig:wf1}
\end{figure}
More in detail, the calls to \textbf{compute} methods are transformed into the submission of a proper (already fireable) macro data-flow instruction to the muskel distributed macro data-flow interpreter modified in such a way a \textbf{Future} for the result is immediately returned.
If one of the input arguments of the \textbf{compute} call is a \textbf{Future}, the advice intercepting the \textbf{compute} method call takes care of waiting for its actual value to be computed before submitting the macro data-flow instruction to the interpreter.
As input \textbf{Future} actual values are only required by the advice right before the workflow node is started, parallelism implicit in the workflow is correctly delegated to the underlying \muskel interpreter. As an example, consider the workflow of Figure \ref{fig:wf1}. The functions \textbf{G1} and \textbf{G2} are evaluated (their evaluation is requested by the advice to \muskel interpreter) sequentially. However, as the first one immediately returns a \textbf{Future}, the second one (also returning a \textbf{Future}) will eventually run in parallel on a distinct remote processing element as outlined in Figure \ref{fig:par}. When the evaluation of the \textbf{H} node is requested, the advice intercepting the request will realize two futures are passed as input parameters and therefore it will wait before submitting the node evaluation request to the \muskel interpreter up to the moment the two actual values of the ``input'' \textbf{Future}s are available.
Overall, advices transforming calls to \textbf{compute} methods into fireable macro data-flow instructions act as the data-flow \textit{matching unit}, according to classical data-flow jargon.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.770\linewidth]{figure/WF1_1}}
\caption{Transition diagram relative to the execution of part of the workflow of Figure \ref{fig:wf1}.}
\label{fig:par}
\end{figure}
The approach suggested here to implement workflows on top of the \muskel macro data-flow interpreter presents at least two significant advantages:
\begin{itemize}
\item
the whole, already existing, efficient and assessed \muskel macro data-flow interpreter structure is fully exploited. The \muskel interpreter takes completely care of ensuring load balancing, fault tolerance (w.r.t. remote resource faults) and security;
\item
programmers are only asked to express workflows with elementary Java code,
possibly spending some time wrapping workflow node code in \textbf{Compute} objects and declaring a \textbf{Manager} object which is used to supply input data, retrieve output data, control non functional features (e.g. parallelism degree in the execution of the workflow) and to ask the evaluation of the workflow code.
\item As in PAL, transformation can be easily disabled. This means that the programmers' application code can be run through a classical sequential compiler/interpreter suite and debugged using normal debugging tools.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Aspects with \muskel: implementation details}
\label{sec:imple}
In order to be able to express workflows, the programmer must write one class per workflow node. The class has to implement the \textbf{Compute} interface, which is a very simple interface such as:
{\scriptsize
\begin{verbatim}
public interface Compute extends Serializable{
public Object compute(Object... params);
}
\end{verbatim}
}
The \texttt{compute} method is assumed to compute the workflow node results (the returned \textbf{Object}) out of the input parameters \textbf{params}.
Then the workflow can be described in a class implementing the \textbf{Workflow} interface, which is defined as follows:
{\scriptsize
\begin{verbatim}
public interface Workflow {
public Object doWorkflow(Object param);
}
\end{verbatim}
}
As an example, a workflow
can be described by the class:
{\scriptsize
\begin{verbatim}
public class WorkFlow1 implements Workflow {
public Object doWorkflow(Object task) {
Vector resF = (Vector) F.compute(((Vector)task).elementAt(0));
Object resG1 = G1.compute(resF.elementAt(0));
Object resG2 = G2.compute( resF.elementAt(1),
((Vector)task).elementAt(1) );
Object resH = H.compute(resG1, resG2);
return resH;
}
}
\end{verbatim}
}
The code style here is quite close to the style used when programming plain Java applications.
We capture the execution of the \textbf{Compute} calls in the workflow exploiting aspects. \ The pointcut is defined on the calls of the \textbf{compute} method of any object implementing \textbf{Compute}:
{\scriptsize
\begin{verbatim}
pointcut computeRemotely(Object param[], itfs.Compute code) :
call(Object itfs.Compute.compute(Object ... )) &&
!within(execEngine.Engine) &&
args(param) && target(code) ;
\end{verbatim}
}
\noindent The advice invoked on the pointcut is an \textbf{around} advice such as:
{\scriptsize
\begin{verbatim}
execEngine.Engine eng = new execEngine.Engine();
Future around(Object param[], itfs.Compute code)
:computeRemotely(param, code) {
for(int i=0; i<param.length; i++) {
// reifing each parameter right before call
if(param[i] instanceof Future) {
param[i] = ((Future) param[i]).getValue();
}
}
// deliver fireable instruction
Object future = eng.exec(codice, param);
// and return the corresponding Future object
return future;
}
\end{verbatim}
}
It arranges to collect the \textbf{Compute} class name and the input parameters and creates a macro data-flow instruction, which is submitted to the distributed \muskel macro data-flow interpreter via the predefined \textbf{execEngine} object instance declared in the aspect class.
Input tokens to the macro data-flow instruction that are \textbf{Future} instances rather than plain reified objects, are eventually reified \textit{on the fly} within the advice.
Eventually, a \textbf{Future} object is returned. It can be eventually used to retrieve the actual data computed by the distributed interpreter during the \textbf{compute} call.
In particular, \textbf{Future} interface provides two methods: a \textbf{getValue()} method to get the actual value of the \textbf{Future}, possibly waiting for the completion of the corresponding computation, and a boolean \textbf{isReady()} method to test whether the computation producing the actual value of the \textbf{Future} is already terminated
As a whole, the procedure just described models an asynchronous execution of the macro data-flow instructions implementing the workflow nodes. It allows to fully exploit the parallelism intrinsic to the workflow, by properly using \textbf{Future}s.
As already stated, we are interested not only in the exploitation of parallelism within the evaluation of a single workflow instance, but also in exploiting the parallelism among different instances of workflows run on distinct input data sets.
%
In order to support stream parallelism, we provide the programmer with a \textbf{StreamIterator} manager. This manager takes as parameters an \textbf{Iterator} (providing the input data sets to be processed by the \textbf{Workflow}) and a \textbf{Workflow}. It provides a method to compute the whole bunch of inputs, as well as a method to get an \textbf{Iterator} that can be used to retrieve workflow results.
Using the \textbf{StreamIterator} manager, the \textbf{main} code relative to our example can therefore be expressed as follows:
{\scriptsize
\begin{verbatim}
public static void main(String[] args) {
// workflow to be used (userdef)
Workflow wf = new WorkFlow1();
// provide the input tasks via an iterator (userdef)
InTaskIterator intIt =
new InTaskIterator();
// declare the manager
Manager mgr = new StreamIterator(wf,intIt);
// start parallel computation
mgr.go();
// get access to result iterator
Iterator resIt = mgr.getResultIterator();
// while there are more results ...
while(resIt.hasNext()) {
// get one and
Object result = resIt.next();
// process it (userdef)
...
}
}
\end{verbatim}
}
The main task of the \textbf{StreamIterator} manager is to invoke execution of the parameter \textbf{Workflow} instances on all the input data sets provided by the \textbf{Iterator}.
This is achieved exploiting a proper \textbf{Thread} pool and activating one thread in the pool for each independent workflow computation.
Then, the AOP procedure illustrated above intercepts the calls to \textbf{compute} methods and arrange to run them in parallel through the \muskel distributed macro data-flow interpreter.
\subsection{Experiments}\label{sec:perfresults}
\label{sec:exp}
In order to prove the effectiveness of the approach, we tested it making some experiments on a distributed computing architecture (a network of workstations, actually). We directly used Java (version 1.5) accessible via plain secure shell (\textbf{ssh/scp}) rather than with other more sophisticated grid middleware.
It is worth to point out that the tests have not been conducted to evaluate the scalability of plain \muskel, that has actually already been demonstrated, as discussed in \cite{muskel:qos:pdp:05}. Rather, the tests have been performed in order to give an estimation of the overhead introduced by aspectj transformations.
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.95\linewidth]{figure/effe}}
\caption{Efficiency of the muskel/aspect workflow prototype}
\label{fig:perf}
\end{figure}
In fact, the only difference between plain \muskel and the system proposed here, able to execute workflows on top of \muskel, lies in the way the fireable instructions are provided to the distributed data-flow interpreter of \muskel.
Actually, in plain \muskel, fireable instructions are retrieved from a compiled representation of a data-flow graph. In particular, each time a new token arrives to a macro data-flow instruction in the graph (either from the input stream or as the result of the distributed computation of another macro data-flow instruction) the target data-flow instruction is checked for ``fireability'' and, possibly, delivered to the distributed macro data-flow interpreter. The time spent is in the sub-micro second range (only considering net time, not taking into account time spent to copy parameters in memory during the interpreter call).
When executing workflows according to the approach discussed here, instead, fireable instructions are generated by means of the aspectj tool. In particular, they come from the ``advice'' invoked on the ``pointcut'' intercepting the \textbf{compute} calls. In order to estimate the overhead introduced by using these Aspect Oriented Techniques we measured the time spent to intercept the \textbf{compute} calls and to transform them in macro data-flow blocks. The measurement results are shown in the following table (times are in milliseconds):
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{l|r||l|r} \hline \hline
\textit{Average} & 23.09 &
\textit{Minimum} & 19 \\ \hline
\textit{Standard deviation} & 3.01 &
\textit{Maximum} & 27 \\ \hline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\noindent These values are relative to an Intel dual-core machine (2 GHz Core 2 Duo machine), running Mac OS/X 10.4, Java 1.5.0\_07, AspectJ 1.5.4 with AspectJ tools 1.4.2 and Eclipse 3.2.2. On the same machine, delivering a fireable instruction to the macro data-flow interpreter with plain \muskel requires a time average of 0.004 milliseconds. The difference in the times is not surprising: in the former case, we go through pure meta programming tools and we ``interpret'' each call, while in the latter we use plain (compiled) Java to handle each one of the calls.
Therefore, we can conclude the average 23 milliseconds represent the pure overhead spent each time a new fireable instruction has to be computed (i.e. each time one of the workflow \textbf{Compute} nodes is computed).
The time spent in \textbf{Future} reification (i.e. filling the object placeholder with the computed value, once available), instead, is negligible (this not taking into account the time spent to wait for actual production of \textbf{Future} values, of course).
This allows us to conclude that the parallel execution of workflows on top of \muskel slightly increases the grain required to achieve almost ideal scalability.
In fact, Figure \ref{fig:perf} shows how with suitable grain
of the workflow nodes (i.e. of the \textbf{Compute} functions) efficiency close to the ideal one is achieved.
\section{Differences between the two approaches} \label{sec:gendifferences}
As we already stated before, both PAL and AspectJ enriched \muskel (AEM) were conceived, designed and implemented to provide a proof-of-concept of our metaprogramming approach to structured parallel programming. Actually, they enforce code parallelization via a hints-driven code transformation. Hints are provided by programmers in the form of java annotations (PAL) and AspectJ rules AEM. Even if the two frameworks attain the same idea, they are slightly different. The main differences between the two frameworks are:
\begin{itemize}
\item In AEM there is a sharp-cut distinction between the ``control'' and ``business'' code, actually contained in separate files, whereas with PAL programmers write business code and annotations (that behaves as control code) inside the same file.
\item PAL was conceived to exploit method-level parallelism: through a simple program enrichment process, programmers choose which Java methods-call should be transformed in asynchronous ones, i.e. PAL allows to add parallelism to legacy java code with a minimal intervention.
Instead, in AEM programmers have to implement their application as a workflow.
\item PAL provides a fixed number of annotations (hence a very limited number of action can be performed) that an adapter-based architecture exploits to transform bytecode at run-time. The transformation process depends, in a way, on the adapter used. In AEM the code transformation policies implementation is based on AspectJ, the most widely diffused tool for aspect oriented programming, which offers a rich set of mechanisms for customizing the ``aspectization'' process. As a consequence, the programmers can customize/optimize/change the transformation process by simply modifying the aspects (without a direct code update).
\end{itemize}
\newpage
\section*{Summarizing the Chapter}\label{sec:conclu}
\emph{
\hrule
\medskip
In this Chapter we presented two results, about the exploitation of metaprogramming techniques in structured parallel programming environment. We exploited those techniques in order to generate and optimize at run-time macro data-flow blocks without directly dealing with their low-level management.
First we presented a new technique for high-level parallel programming based on the introduction of a \emph{Parallel Abstraction Layer} (PAL). PAL does not introduce a new parallel programming model, but actually exploits the programmer knowledge provided through annotations to restructure at run-time the application, hiding most of parallelization issues, once it notice the information about the running platform.
This process is executed directly at intermediate language level. This allows to have a portable code transformation mechanism without paying a complete code recompilation for each change in the code.
In order to have a proof-of-concept of the approach we developed a PAL Java prototype and we used it to perform some experiments. The results are very encouraging and show that the overhead introduced by PAL is negligible, while keeping the programmer effort to parallelize the code negligible.
Then we presented the other result we obtained integrating the AspectJ framework with our modified \muskel. We described how AOP techniques can be seamlessly used to transform a very basic kind of workflows in such a way they can be executed on distributed target architectures through the \muskel macro data-flow interpreter. How AOP techniques allow to completely separate the concerns relative to parallelism exploitation and application functional core. In particular, the same application code used to perform functional debugging on a single, sequential machine may be turned into parallel code by adding aspects, compiling it through AspectJ and then running it on the \muskel run-time support.
The way used to write workflow code is quite basic Java programming. Workflow components must implement a simple interface, and programmers are explicitly required to provide them as side effect free sequential components.
The experiments conducted show that the approach is perfectly feasible and that actual speedups can be achieved provided that the workflow nodes are medium to coarse grain.
\medskip
\hrule
}
\insertblankpage
\chapter{High-Level Parallel Programming} \label{parallel_issues}
As we already stated in the Introduction, using several processors (or computational resources) at the same time (in parallel), however, introduces some difficulties. The conceptual barrier encountered by the programmers in efficiently coordinating many concurrent activities towards a single goal is an example of such barriers. To address these difficulties software developers need high-level programming models for sensibly raising the abstraction of computational resources. This is a fundamental requirement to avoid programmers having to deal with low-level coordination mechanisms. In fact, low-level parallel programming is an error prone approach that distracts programmers from qualitative aspects of parallelization.
Throughout the ages, researchers conceived and developed several models for high-level parallel programming.
However, most of current implementations of very high-level programming models often suffer from low performance. This because of the abstraction penalty, which actually has historically limited the usage of high-level programming techniques in high performance computing. For this reason, nowadays most of parallel programs are developed exploiting lower-level language, even if a higher-level language would make the coding easier.
\emph{Structured parallel programming models} were conceived to be an alternative both to very high-level models and to low-level models.
Structured parallel programming models ask programmers to explicitly deal with the \emph{qualitative} aspects of parallelism exploitation, namely the application structure and problem decomposition strategies.
Compilers and run-time supports manage all the low-level parallelism exploitation related aspects like communication, synchronization, scheduling and mapping.
The \emph{Structured Way} is driven by those two observations: there are some things programmers do better than compilers, and there are some things that compilers do better than programmers.
Nevertheless, also the structured models are not perfect and free from limitations. In fact, for some years researchers very expert in structured parallel programming models have outlined the features that the next generation of structured models have to provide in order to address these limitations \cite{cole:manifesto:02, advske:pc:06}.
In next three chapters of this thesis we present some results we obtained as an attempt of address some of these limitations.
\paragraph{Chapter road-map}
\emph{The chapter starts with a bird's-eye view both on the parallel architectures and on the fields in which parallelism has traditionally been employed (Section \ref{sec:fromseq}). Then, it reports the main parallel programming models (Section \ref{sec:stateofart}) distinguishing between the implicit (Section \ref{functional-logic-model}) and explicit (Section \ref{sec:explicit}) approaches. The explicit approaches are further subdivided in high-level (Section \ref{dataflow-model}), and low-level (Section \ref{low-level-model}) ones. The chapter reports also some other notable approaches (Section \ref{other-appr}). Then the Chapter present the structured approach, an approach conceived in order to overcome the limitations of traditional approaches (Section \ref{structured-model}). Some tools based on the structured parallel programming models are presented (Section \ref{old-fashion}) highlighting their features and main limitations.
Then Section \ref{sec:openissues} reports the issues that next generation skeleton system should own to address the existing limitations. Finally, the chapter introduces (Section \ref{sec:ourefforts}) our contributions to the field placing them in the proper context, showing how they can be exploited for addressing some of the issues related to structured parallel programming environments.
}
\section{From sequential to parallel architectures}\label{sec:fromseq}
The Von Neumann architecture is a very common and well-known computer design model. It has a very simple formulation and can be described as a sequential process running in a linear address space. It consists in a processing unit and a single separate storage structure to hold both instructions and data. The Von Neumann model ``implements'' a universal Turing machine. It represents the common ``referential model'' of specifying \textit{sequential architectures}, in contrast with \textit{parallel architectures}.
In a parallel architecture many instructions are carried out simultaneously. Parallel computers operate on the principle that large problems can almost always be divided into smaller ones, which may be carried out at the same time.
Parallel architectures exist in several forms and levels. They range from superscalar processors to computational Grids
In this section we briefly mention some of the most common forms of parallelism, without claiming to be exhaustive but only to give an idea of the variety of the existing forms of parallelism.
\paragraph{Bit-level parallelism} is a form of parallelization based on increasing processor word size. It leads to a reduction of the number of instructions the processor must execute in order to perform an operation on variables whose sizes are greater than the length of the word. (For instance, consider a case where a 16-bit processor must add two 32-bit numbers. The processor must first add the 16 lower-order bits from each number, and then add the 16 higher-order bits, and the carry from the previous add requiring two instructions to complete a single operation. A 32-bit processor would be able to complete the operation using a single instruction).
Historically, 4-bit microprocessors were replaced with 8-bit, then 16-bit, then 32-bit microprocessors. This trend generally came to an end with the introduction of 32-bit processors, which has been a standard in general purpose computing for two decades. Only recently, with the proliferation of processors based both on the IBM PowerPC G5 processor and on the x86-64 architectures, the 64-bit processors have become commonplace.
\paragraph{Instruction-level parallelism} is a form of parallelization based on the simultaneous execution of instructions part of a computer program. Even if ordinary programs are typically written according to a sequential execution model where instructions execute one after the other and in the order specified by the programmer, in some significant cases there is no need to follow this order. ILP allows the compiler and the processor to overlap the execution of multiple instructions or even to change the order in which instructions are executed. Due to its nature, ILP requires an hardware support; micro-architectural techniques that are used to exploit ILP include (for a better description see \cite{ILParallelism}):
\begin{itemize}
\item Instruction pipelining, where the execution of multiple instructions can be partially overlapped.
\item Superscalar execution, in which multiple execution units are used to execute multiple instructions in parallel. In typical superscalar processors, the instructions executing simultaneously are adjacent in the original program order.
\item Out-of-order execution, where instructions execute in any order that does not violate data dependencies. Note that this technique is orthogonal w.r.t. both pipelining and superscalar.
\item Register renaming, which refers to a technique used to avoid unnecessary serialization of program operations imposed by the reuse of registers by those operations, used to enable out-of-order execution.
\item Speculative execution, which allows the execution of complete instructions or parts of instructions before being certain whether this execution should take place or not. A commonly used form of speculative execution is control flow speculation where instructions following a control flow instruction (e.g., a branch) are executed before the target of the control flow instruction is determined. Several other forms of speculative execution have been proposed and are in use including speculative execution driven by value prediction, memory dependence prediction and cache latency prediction.
\item Branch prediction, which is used to avoid stalling for control dependencies to be resolved. Branch prediction is used with speculative execution.
\end{itemize}
\paragraph{Data parallelism} is a form of parallelization of computer code across multiple processors in parallel computing environments.
This paradigm is useful for taking advantage of the large amounts of data parallelism that is available in many scientific/numeric applications.
The data parallelism is exploited by performing the same operation on a large amount of data, distributed across the processors of the machine. From the programmer viewpoint, languages based on data-parallel paradigm (such as HPF, sketched in Section \ref{other-appr}) are pretty similar to sequential languages. The main difference is that certain data types are defined to be parallel. Parallel data values consist of a collection of standard, scalar data values.
The data-parallel paradigm has some main virtues that have led to its success.
Parallel data types are typically static in size (e.g. arrays); their distribution across the machine is usually done at compile-time. Any synchronization or communication that is needed to perform an operation on a parallel value is automatically added by the compiler/run-time system.
The processors collectively compute operations on parallel data values;
computation load usually distributed directly linking data values and computations through the owner computes rule. As data values, computation load is statically distributed across the processors of the system.
The data parallelism approach typically offers very good scalability. Because operations may be applied identically to many data items in parallel, the amount of parallelism is dictated by the problem size. Higher amounts of parallelism may be exploited by simply solving larger problems with greater amounts of computation.
Data parallelism is also simple and easy to exploit. Because data parallelism is highly uniform, it can usually be automatically detected by an advanced compiler, without forcing the programmer to manage explicitly processes, communication, or synchronization.
Many scientific applications may be naturally specified in a data-parallel manner. In these settings, programs data layout is often fixed; the most used data structures are large arrays. Operations on whole data structures, such as adding two arrays or taking the inner product of two vectors, are common, as are grid-based methods for solving partial differential equations (PDEs).
In spite of this, data parallelism has a significant drawback: the limited range of applications for which data-parallel is well suited. Applications with data parallelism tend to be static in nature; the control flow of a data-parallel program is mostly data independent. Many applications are more dynamic in nature and do not have these characteristics. To run in parallel, these dynamic applications need to
perform independent operations at the same time. These applications, which may be as simple as recursively computing Fibonacci numbers or as complex as computer chess and n-body simulations, are nearly impossible parallelize using data parallelism.
\paragraph{Task parallelism} is a form of parallelization of computer code across multiple processors in parallel computing environments.
Task parallelism focuses on distributing execution processes across different parallel computing nodes. In the task-parallel paradigm the program consists of a set of (potentially distinct) parallel tasks that interact through explicit communication and synchronization. Task parallelism may be both synchronous and asynchronous. A major advantage of task parallelism is its flexibility.
Many scientific applications contain task parallelism. For example, in a climate model application the atmospheric and ocean circulation may be computed in parallel. A task-parallel language can express this relationship easily, even if different methods are used for the two circulation models. Another natural application of task-parallel languages is reactive systems in which tasks must produce output in response to changing inputs, in a time-dependent manner.
Another common structured paradigm exploits parallelism on different data items through task replication. For example, the elaboration of a video stream may involve the filtering on each single frame. In a task-parallel language the filter may be farmed out by spreading different frames on different worker processes, each of them computing the same function.
In the task parallelism approach the interactions between tasks are explicit, thus the programmer can write programs that exploit parallelism not detectable automatically by compiler techniques.
In general, task parallelism is less dependent on advanced compiler technology than the data parallelism; in many cases, all that is strictly necessary is the translation of task interactions into appropriate low-level primitives on the target architecture.
A disadvantage of the task-parallel programming model is that it requires extra effort from the programmer to create explicit parallel tasks and
manage their communication and synchronization.
Because communication and synchronization are explicit, changing the manner a program is parallelized may require extensive modifications to the program text.
\bigskip
Due to their nature data and task parallelism (unlike the bit level and instruction level parallelism) cannot be fruitfully exploited using a single CPU system but they are well-tailored for multi-processors or cluster computers, typically referred as parallel computers.
For many years parallel computers has been mainly used in high performance computing, but they have spread in recent years as convenient and effective way to increase the computational power of personal computers and workstations due to physical constraints preventing frequency scaling of CPUs. Hence, parallel architectures are becoming the dominant paradigm in computer architecture, mainly in the form of multicore processors \cite{Asanovic:EECS-2006-183}. Indeed, if a problem requires a huge computational capacity to be rapidly solved and such a power cannot be obtained using a single \textit{processing element} (PE) the only suitable solution is to use many processors simultaneously. Traditionally, parallel architectures have been motivated by numerical simulations of complex systems and ``Grand Challenge Problems'' such as:
\begin{itemize}
\item weather and climate forecasting
\item chemical and nuclear reactions simulations
\item biological, human genome analysis
\item geological, seismic activity analysis
\item mechanical devices and electronic circuits' behavior simulations
\end{itemize}
Today, also commercial applications need the development of faster and faster computers. These applications require to process large amounts of data in sophisticated ways. Example applications include:
\begin{itemize}
\item parallel databases, data mining
\item web search engines, web based business services
\item computer-aided medical diagnosis
\item management of national and multi-national corporations
\item advanced graphics and virtual reality, particularly in the entertainment industry
\item networked video and multi-media technologies
\item collaborative working environments
\end{itemize}
Unfortunately, as we already stated before, using several PEs at the same time introduces some difficulties. Among the others: (i) code and data have to be decomposed and distributed among the computational resources, (ii) work and communications of resources have to be simultaneously coordinated and (iii) fault-tolerance has to be managed.
Thus, the design and implementation of software systems that can ease this burden is very important. Indeed, since the early steps of computer science, researchers conceived and designed programming models, systems and tools aiming at supporting the development of parallel applications. Such systems must find a good balance between the simplicity of the interface presented to the programmers and their implementation efficiency. Finding a good trade-off is a grand challenge. Indeed, a very abstract model simplifies the programming activity but can lead to a very inefficient exploitation of computing resources. Instead, a low-level model allows programmers to use efficiently the computational resources but requires tremendous efforts from the programmers when the number of resources grows.
\section{Parallel programming models: \\State-of-the-art}\label{sec:stateofart}
A good way to organize the state of art of parallel programming models for reporting purpose is to divide them with respect to their level of abstraction. Therefore, in this section we report a selection of the main parallel programming models, proposed by computer scientist over the years, classifying them with respect to the level of abstraction provided to programmers. With respect to this aspect, the parallel programming models can be roughly partitioned in two main classes: the implicit parallel models and the explicit ones.
The former completely cover up parallelism to programmers. Typically, they are exploited by functional and logic languages. The latter ask programmers to deal directly with parallelism. These models can be further partitioned, w.r.t. the abstraction perspective, in three categories: high, medium and low-level programming models.
In the remaining of this section we describe for each category, by way of examples, some programming models and tools belonging to it showing the models Pros \& Cons. In particular, Section \ref{functional-logic-model} describes the functional and logic models as an example of implicit models for parallel programming, Section \ref{dataflow-model} shows the data-flow model as a representative of high-level explicit models. In Section \ref{low-level-model} we outline the low-level approaches describing the OpenMP and MPI frameworks. Then, in Section \ref{other-appr} we report some other notable approaches. Finally, we describe the structured approach in Section \ref{structured-model}, it is one of the main medium-level models. Here we describe also some our past contributions in the field (Section \ref{JJPF}).
\subsection{Implicit approaches}
\label{functional-logic-model}
These systems present to programmers a programming model entirely devoid of parallelism and completely isolated from the underlying implementation mechanism. Such systems typically present functional or logical models of computation. They are often referred to as being ``declarative'' systems, since the programmer makes a series of declarations defining the properties of a solution to some problem, rather than specifying a precise series of operations which will lead to the solution. Thus, languages of this type are neither parallel nor sequential, having no notion at all of a flow of control.
Functional languages are based on the lambda calculus. It is a very simple, but powerful language to define expressions and their transformation rules. The only objects present are identifiers, single argument function definitions (``abstractions'') and applications of functions to arguments. A ``program'' consists of a collection of such objects. The program execution is performed applying a top-level function to an argument.
This type of function application is the only operation present and involves the replacement of a function-argument pair with a copy of the function body (from its definition) in which occurrences of the ``free'' variable have been replaced by copies of the actual argument.
This simple system can be shown to provide as much computational power as any other fundamental computing mechanism (e.g. the Turing machine). A particularly powerful aspect of the model is the ability to define ``higher order functions'', namely, functions taking functions as input parameter. Other convenient features such as multiple argument functions, localized definitions and data structures may all be defined as lambda expressions.
In the same way, a high-level functional program is simply a function definition that refers to other functions in its body. A ``call'' of the program involves supplying arguments to this function and ``execution'' consists of using the function definitions (conceptually using the application by substitution technique from the lambda calculus) to obtain an alternative, but equivalent representation of the function and arguments pair, namely a more useful representation of the original program and the ``input''.
The key point of this approach is that execution may progress from the initial to the final representation in any fashion that preserves the equivalence. In particular, it will often be possible to execute many transformation steps concurrently since the conventional problems associated with changes of state have been discarded along with the notions of state and store themselves. A quite common way to represent the program as it evolves is as a graph, in which nodes represent function applications and the children of a node are the (``input'') arguments of the corresponding application. The process of expanding and contracting the graph is referred to as ``graph reduction''.
Exploiting this approach, the parallelization via decomposition is simple. The abstract execution model allows candidate nodes to be expanded at any time, while function applications may be evaluated as soon as arguments are available
Thus, a potentially parallel process is generated every time a node reaches one of these states.
It is important to realize that this approach does not imply that every functional program is a highly parallel one. As a trivial, well-known, example, consider defining a function to compute factorials.
The obvious definition will look something like this:
{\small
\begin{eqnarray*}
{\tt factorial}~{\tt 0}~{\tt =}&~{\tt 1}&\\
{\tt factorial}~{\tt n}~{\tt =}&~{\tt n}&\times~~{\tt factorial}~{\tt (n - 1)}
\end{eqnarray*}
}
Such a function would execute in a sequential way on a typical graph reduction machine, irrespective of the number of available processors. A more complex definition notes that
{\small
\begin{eqnarray*}
{\tt factorial}~~{\tt 0}&~{\tt =}&~{\tt 1}\\
{\tt factorial}~~{\tt n}&~{\tt =}&~{\tt product}~{\tt 1}~{\tt n}\\
{\tt product}~~{\tt a}~~{\tt a}&~{\tt =}&~{\tt a}\\
{\tt product}~~{\tt a}~~{\tt b}&~=&~{\tt (product}~{\tt a}~\lfloor~\frac{{\tt a}~{\tt +}~{\tt b}}{{\tt 2}}~\rfloor)~\times~({\tt product}~(\lfloor~\frac{{\tt a}~{\tt +}~{\tt b}}{{\tt 2}}~\rfloor~{\tt +}~{\tt 1})~{\tt b})
\end{eqnarray*}
}
This definition produces significant potential parallelism. Although declarative systems involve no explicit notion of execution sequence, it is unfortunately clear that, in order to optimize the parallel execution programmers must be aware of the execution mechanisms.
An alternative approach recognizes the difficulty of automating distribution process and introduces program annotations that programmers exploit to drive the execution mechanism in order to
improve its efficiency. Such additions may be argued to move the model out of this category, in that the programmer is now partially responsible (and aware) for the task of parallel decomposition. Similarly, \cite{PaulKelly} discusses a language which allows program partitioning and interconnection structure to be described in a declarative style.
\medskip
Another category of implicit systems consists in parallel logic languages. They are based on Horn clauses, a restricted form of first order logic. The computational model focuses on the definition and investigation of relationships described as predicates, among data objects described as input arguments to these predicates. As in functional programming, the specification of a computation consists of a collection of predicates and clauses. In the logic model the role of the outermost function application, is played by the outermost predicate together with its arguments.
The arguments interpretation is similar: ``execution'' consists of deciding whether the predicate is true given the arguments and the associated definitions. Furthermore, it is possible to specify the outermost predicate with unbound arguments to find bindings to the arguments that allow the predicate to be satisfied, or to determine that no such bindings exist.
At an abstract level, the process of evaluation may be seen as expanding and searching a tree of possibilities presented by consideration of the various dependencies between appropriate predicates and clauses. As with graph reduction, the semantics of pure logic languages often allow this process to proceed at many points in parallel.
Four principal kinds of (implicitly exploitable) parallelism can be identified in logic programs:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textit{Unification parallelism} arises when arguments of a goal are unified with those of a clause head with the same name and arity. The different argument terms can be unified in parallel as can the different subterms in a term \cite{parUnifi}. Unification parallelism is very fine-grained and has been exploited by building specialized processors with multiple unification units.
\item \textit{Or-parallelism} arises when more than one rule defines some relation and a procedure call unifies with more than one rule head; the corresponding bodies can then be executed in parallel with each other. Or-parallelism is a way of efficiently searching for solutions to the query, by exploring alternative solutions in parallel.
\item \textit{Independent and-parallelism} arises when more than one goal is present in the query or in the body of a procedure, and the run-time bindings for the variables in these goals are such that two or more goals are independent of one another, i.e., their resulting argument terms after applying the bindings of the variables are either variable-free or have non-intersecting sets of variables. Parallel execution of such goals result in and-parallelism.
\item \textit{Dependent and-parallelism} arises when two or more goals in the body of a procedure have a common variable and are executed in parallel. Dependent and-parallelism can be exploited in two ways: (i) the two goals can be executed independently until one of them accesses/binds the common variable.
(ii) Once the common variable is accessed by one of the goals, if it is bound to a structure, or stream (the goal generating this binding is called the producer), and this structure is read as an input argument of the other goal (called the consumer) then parallelism can be further exploited by having the consumer goal compute with one element of the stream while the producer goal is computing the next element. Case (i) is very similar to independent and-parallelism. Case (ii) is sometimes also referred to as stream-parallelism and is useful for speeding up producer-consumer interactions.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}
{\scriptsize
\begin{verbatim}
fib(0, 1).
fib(1, 1).
fib(M, N) :- [ M1 is M - 1, fib(M1, N1) ],
[ M2 is M - 2, fib(M2, N2) ],
N is N1 + N2.
\end{verbatim}
}
\caption{Fibonacci program parallelizable with independent and-parallelism}
\label{logic-example}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{logic-example} show a simple program for computing the Fibonacci number. The two lists of goals, each enclosed within square brackets above, have no data-dependencies among themselves and hence can be executed independently in parallel with each other. However, the last subgoal N is N1 + N2 depends on the outcomes of the two and-parallel subgoals, and should start execution only after N1 and N2 get bound. Consider that, as in case of functional languages, the programmers in order to exploit the potential application parallelism should give a proper structure to the program.
It should be pointed out that exist some extensions for logic programming language with explicit constructs for concurrency. They can be largely put into three categories:
\begin{itemize}
\item those that add explicit message passing primitives to Prolog, e.g., Delta Prolog \cite{12074} and CS-prolog \cite{163131}. Multiple Prolog processes are run in parallel that communicate with each other via messages.
\item those that add blackboard primitives to Prolog, e.g., Shared Prolog \cite{92417}. These primitives are used by multiple Prolog processes running in parallel to communicate with each other via the blackboard.
\item those based on guards, committed choice, and data-flow synchronization, e.g., Parlog \cite{5390}, GHC \cite{Ued86}, and Concurrent Prolog \cite{39085}.
\end{itemize}
As for the functional languages, the extensions of parallel logic languages move the approach outside the category of implicit parallel programming models.
Similarities between functional and logic styles are emphasized in \cite{alice}.
\paragraph{Summarizing Pros and Cons}
\emph{Implicit parallel programming models provide programmers a very expressive programming metaphor: programmers can implement parallel application without actually deal with parallelism. Unfortunately, this ease is paid in terms of efficiency. In order to address such performance issues researchers introduced some annotation mechanisms and communication primitives, through which programmers can drive the code parallelization. Nevertheless, such additions place the model out of highly abstract systems category because the programmer exploiting annotations is partly responsible and aware for the task of decomposition.}
\subsection{Explicit models} \label{sec:explicit}
The inefficient exploitation of available parallelism caused by the absence of parallel structure in implicit parallel programs is the main reason why explicit parallel programming models exist. These models are based on the assumption that programmers are often the best judges of how parallelism can be exploited for a particular application. Actually, in nearly every case the use of explicit parallelism will obtain a better efficiency than implicit parallelism models.
\subsection{High-level explicit models: data-flow}
\label{dataflow-model}
The models belonging to this category still not require programmers to deal with the several issues related with parallel programming. For instance communications, fault-tolerance, heterogeneity, data decomposition and task granularity. Programmers are only required to write their applications as a set of independent instructions that interact each other through well-known interfaces, so that automatic tools can execute it in parallel. The data-flow model of computation is the main representative of this class of models.
In the data-flow model (for a deep description see \cite{CullerArvind, 1013209, silc98asynchrony, 612574}) the computations are represented by a graph of ``operator'' or ``instruction'' nodes connected by edges along which data items flow. Each node receives by its input edges the data ``tokens'', it performs some simple, stateless, calculation and distributes resultant data tokens on its output edges. A node may only perform its operation once it has received all the data tokens required, from all of its inputs. Thus, each node may compute in parallel, subject only to the availability of data. The processes of associating output tokens with appropriate operator nodes and of deciding which are ready for execution is known as ``matching'' process.
Under this paradigm there is no current operation, and each operator is free to execute when all its input tokens are available. The model is naturally concurrent, and the concurrency grain depends on the operations grain.
The data-flow model has the single-assignment property. Values are data tokens that are carried from their producing node to the node that consumes them; there is no concept of a variable with a state that can be arbitrarily updated later. In data-flow, identifiers may be used to name these data tokens. Such identifiers are thus either undefined (not yet produced) or carry a single unique value; they cannot be updated. A node with all input data available is called ``fireable''. When a node is ``fireable'' is ready to be run on a data-flow interpreter. Each data-flow interpreter is called ``actor''. The features of a data-flow model were listed by Ackerman in its 1982 milestone paper \cite{ackerman}. They are:
\begin{itemize}
\item side effects free;
\item locality of effect;
\item equivalence of instruction scheduling with data dependencies;
\item single-assignment semantics;
\item an unusual notation for iterations;
\item lack of history sensitivity in procedures.
\end{itemize}
Synchronization is automatically provided by the token transport mechanism. Parallelism is exploited in data-flow architectures by allowing any actor to execute on any processor and by allowing as many enabled actors to fire as there are processors to execute them. When there are a sufficiently large number of processors, only actors that do not have the input data available are not enabled.
A key feature of the model is that the order of actor execution does not affect the result. Thus, the data-flow model naturally achieves high degrees of parallelism. Nevertheless, traditional data-flow presents three major problems when considered for large distributed (grid) environments.
\begin{itemize}
\item The granularity of traditional data-flow is too small for many distributed architectures, for instance related to distributed memory access time (where latencies are measured in hundreds to thousands of microseconds). The overhead of token transport and actor scheduling and instantiation requires that the granularity of computation be at least hundreds of thousands, and perhaps million of instructions.
\item The programming abstraction provided to programmers is quite different with respect to the traditional sequential one.
\end{itemize}
The main difference between this approach and those discussed above is that whereas a graph reducer manipulates the graph by modifying both data and the ``instruction code'' itself, a data-flow graph is statically defined by the program and only data is manipulated.
Data-flow based languages
may be dressed up to resemble sequential imperative languages \cite{50455}, particularly in case of ``scientific'' applications. The compilation process from high-level language to the underlying data-flow graph is quite similar to the process of expansion in graph reduction. It is equivalent to the decomposition phase of parallel implementation.
All the problems of distribution, communication and synchronization are associated with the data-flow graph and the interactions between its node operators. Although the structure of the graph is static, it will only be apparent during (or even after) execution that some sections of the graph were more active than others. Thus, a good distribution scheme is difficult to obtain without any additional information, for instance in the form of programmer annotations.
\subsubsection{Macro-Dataflow approaches}
\label{macrodataflow-model}
The macro data-flow model extends the traditional data-flow model addressing its main problems. There are two principal differences with traditional data-flow. First, the granularity of the actors is considerably larger (indeed in this case they are named ``macro'' actors). This allows to achieve a good scalability when the degree of parallelism, namely the number of recruited PEs, increases. Second, some actors \cite{38811} can maintain state information between firings, providing an effective way to model side-effects and non-determinism, these actors are called ``persistent'' actors.
Some examples of existing and widely used macro-actors implement high-level functions such as: matrix multiplication, Gaussian elimination or image convolution instead of individual machine instructions. Macro actors can be described as follows.
\paragraph{Regular actors} are similar to actors in the data-flow model. Specifically, all regular actors of a given type are functionally equivalent. A regular actor is enabled and may execute when all of its input tokens are available. It performs some computation, generating output tokens that depend only on its input tokens. It may maintain internal state information during the course of a single execution, but no state information is preserved from one execution to another; regular actors, therefore, represent pure functions.
\paragraph{Persistent actors} maintain state information that is preserved from one execution to the next. Output tokens generated by a persistent actor during different executions are not necessarily the same for the same input tokens. The state corresponds to member variables (instance variables) in the object-oriented paradigm. This correspondence implies that several different actors may share the same state, (as an example with the enqueue and dequeue operations on a queue). The model guarantees that the actors that share state will be executed in mutual exclusion, that is, no two actors that share the same state will ever be executing simultaneously. (This can be modeled in stateless data-flow using a single ``state'' token and a non-deterministic merge operator \cite{547755}).
The introduction of state means that the arcs of the program graph no longer model all dependencies in the program; there are implicit dependencies via the shared state. For example, consider the program graph fragment in Figure \ref{hiddenDep}. Suppose that actors A and B share state. If the execution of A occurs first, there is a hidden dependency, based on the state, between A and B. Because of this hidden dependency, the results of the A and B operations depend not only on their arguments and the object history, but also on the order of execution.
\bigskip
If on the one hand the persistent macro actors approach addresses the one limitation of the traditional data-flow model, on the other hand it makes the programming model more complicated and requires to programmers to pay more attention when programming parallel applications. In particular, the introduction of state has one very important consequence: some programs will be deterministic, and others not. Non-determinism is not necessarily bad. There are in fact many ``correct'' non-deterministic applications. Thus, it is the responsibility of the programmer to guarantee higher-level notions of correctness.
Due to the additional complexity they introduce, several existing macro data-flow systems do not support persistent actors.
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[width=250pt]{figure/drawing}
\caption{Hidden Dependency}\label{hiddenDep}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{A notable MDF approach: the Mentat framework}\label{related-work}
Mentat is one of the most known and used macro data-flow system \cite{grimshaw93mentat}. It is an object-oriented parallel processing system for MIMD architectures developed at the University of Virginia. The computation model used in Mentat is a data-driven macro data-flow computation model based on the object-oriented paradigm.
There are two primary components of Mentat: the Mentat Programming Language (MPL) and the Mentat run-time system. MPL is an object-oriented programming language based on C++.
The computational grain of the macro data-flow block is the Mentat class instance, which consists of contained objects (local and member variables), their procedures, and a thread of control. Programmers are responsible for identifying those object classes that are of sufficient computational complexity to allow efficient parallel execution. Instances of Mentat classes are used just like ordinary C++ classes. The data and control dependencies between Mentat class instances involved in invocation, communication, and synchronization are automatically detected and managed by the compiler and run-time system without programmer intervention.
\paragraph{MPL} is an extended C++ designed for developing parallel applications by providing parallelism encapsulation. Parallelism encapsulation takes two forms, intra-object encapsulation and inter-object encapsulation. In intra-object encapsulation of parallelism, callers of a Mentat object member function are unaware of whether the implementation of the member function is sequential or parallel, i.e., whether its
program graph is a single node or a parallel graph. In inter-object encapsulation of parallelism, programmers of code fragments (e.g., a Mentat object member function) need not concern themselves with the parallel execution opportunities between the different Mentat object member functions they invoke.
The basic idea in the MPL is to allow the programmer to specify those C++ classes that are of sufficient computational complexity to warrant parallel execution. Programmers can select which classes should be executed in parallel using a \textbf{mentat} keyword in the class definition. Instances of Mentat classes are called Mentat objects. Mentat classes are very similar to C++ class instance but with some minor differences (described below).
The compiler generates code to construct and execute data dependency graphs in which the nodes are Mentat object member function invocations, and the arcs are the data dependencies found in the program. Thus, it transparently generates inter-object parallelism encapsulation. All the communications and synchronizations are managed by the compiler.
MPL is built around four main extensions to the C++ language. The extensions are Mentat classes, Mentat object instantiation, the return-to-future mechanism, and guarded select/accept statements.
A key feature of Mentat is the transparent encapsulation of parallelism within and between Mentat object member function invocations. The hiding of whether a member function implementation is sequential or parallel is called intra-object parallelism encapsulation.
Similarly, the inter-object parallelism encapsulation consists in the exploitation of parallelism opportunities between Mentat object member function invocations in a transparent way to the programmer.
Intra-object parallelism encapsulation and inter-object parallelism encapsulation can be combined. Indeed, inter-object parallelism encapsulation within a member function implementation is intra-object parallelism encapsulation as far as the caller of that member function is concerned. Thus, multiple levels of parallelism encapsulation are possible, each level hidden from the level above.
Not all class objects should be Mentat objects. In particular, objects that do not have a sufficiently high communication ratio, i.e., whose object operations are not sufficiently computationally complex, should not be Mentat objects.
The programmer defines a Mentat class by using the keyword \textbf{mentat} in the class definition. The programmer may further specify whether the class is persistent, sequential, or regular.
Persistent and sequential objects maintain state information between member function invocations, while regular objects do not. Thus, regular object member functions are pure functions. Because they are pure functions, the system is free to instantiate new instances of regular classes at will. Regular classes may have local variables much as procedures do, and may maintain state information for the duration of a function invocation.
The programmer binds Mentat variables to persistent Mentat objects using two reserved member functions for all Mentat class objects: create() and bind().
The create() call tells the system to instantiate a new instance of the appropriate class whereas the bind() function binds Mentat variables to an already existing instance. The member function destroy() destroys the named persistent Mentat object.
The return-to-future function (\textbf{rtf()}) is the Mentat analog to the return of C. Its purpose is to allow Mentat member functions to return a value to the successor nodes in the macro data-flow graph in which the member function appears.
The select/accept statements of Mentat is a guarded statement that derives directly from the ADA \cite{ada-language} one. Guarded statements permit the programmer to specify a set of entry points to a monitor-like construct. The guards are boolean expressions based on local variables and constants. A guard is assigned to each possible entry point. If the guard evaluates to true, its corresponding entry point is a candidate for execution. The rules vary for determining which of the candidates is chosen to execute. It is common to specify in the language that it is chosen at random. This can result in some entry points never being chosen.
There are two types of guard-actions supported by Mentat: accepts, tests, and non-entries. Accept is similar to the accept of ADA. Tests are used to test whether a particular member function has any outstanding calls that satisfy the guard. When a test guard-action is selected, no parameters are consumed. In Mentat there is no ``else''
clause as in ADA. However, using the priority options, the programmer can simulate one by specifying that the clause is a non-entry statement and giving the guard- statement a lower priority than all other guard-statements. Then, if none of the other guards evaluates to true, it will be chosen.
The priority of the guard-statement determines the order of evaluation of the guards. It can be set either implicitly or explicitly. The token priority determines which call within a single guard-statement priority level will be accepted next. The token priority is the maximum of the priorities of the incoming tokens. Within a single token priority level, tokens are ordered by arrival time.
To give an idea of the programming model in Figure \ref{Mentat-example} we report a simple Mentat program. The program computes recursively the Fibonacci number. It is composed by two classes, the first one recursively computes the Fibonacci number exploiting the second one for computing the sum of partial results. Clearly, in this case the efficiency is low because the amount of computation done by the macro actors computing the mentat object adder\_class is very small.
\begin{figure}
{\scriptsize
\begin{verbatim}
mentat class fibonacci_class {
public:
int fibonacci_class::fibonacci(int n) {
fibonacci_class fib;
adder_class adder;
// if the index is 0 or 1 it returns 1 to return-to-future function
if (n == 0 || n == 1)
rtf(1);
else { // otherwise it call the add method and itself recursively
rtf(adder.add(fib.fibonacci(n - 1), fib.fibonacci(n - 2)));
}
return(1);
}
};
mentat class adder_class {
public:
int adder_class::add(int arg1, int arg2) {
// rtf function pass the result to the successor in data-flow graph
rtf(arg1 + arg2);
return(arg1 + arg2);
}
};
\end{verbatim}
}
\caption{Fibonacci computation with Mentat}
\label{Mentat-example}
\end{figure}
Unfortunately, there are a number of issues and limitation that MPL programmers must be aware of that can lead to unpredictable program behavior, related both to Mentat implementation and model. Among the others:
\begin{itemize}
\item The use of static member variables for Mentat classes is not allowed. Since static members are global to all instances of a class, they would require some form of shared memory between the instances of the object.
\item Mentat classes cannot have any member variables in their public definition. If data members were allowed in the public section, users of that object would need to be able to access that data as if it were local. If the programmer wants the effect of public member variables, appropriate member functions can be defined.
\item Programmers cannot assume that pointers to instances of Mentat classes point to the member data for the instance.
\item Mentat classes cannot have any friend classes or functions. This restriction is necessary because of the independent address space of Mentat classes.
\item It must be possible to determine the length of all actual parameters of Mentat member functions, either at compile-time or at run-time. This restriction follows from the need to know how many bytes of the argument to send. Furthermore, each actual parameter of a Mentat member function must occupy a contiguous region of memory
in order to facilitate the marshaling of arguments.
\item Mentat object member function parameter passing is call-by-value. All parameters are physically copied to the destination object. Similarly, return values are by-value.
\item if a Mentat member function returns a pointer, the programmer must explicitly delete the reference when the function is finished using the value.
\item semantic equivalence to the sequential program is not guaranteed when persistent objects are used. This is trivially true for programs that have select/accept statements; there are no serial equivalents.
\end{itemize}
\paragraph{Summarizing Pros and Cons}
\emph{Data-flow model is inherently parallel, it represents each computation as a graph made by operators and instructions where each node can be potentially executed in parallel. This model permit to programmers to express parallel applications in a very abstract way, indeed programmers are not required to deal with low-level issues related to the running architecture. The main problem of Data-flow model is the fine-granularity of instruction that prevent its exploitation in most distributed architectures and in large grid environments. This limitation led to the development of the macro data-flow model (MDF). The MDF model allows programmers to define code fragment in place of instruction as nodes in DF graph. Unfortunately, such additions impair the high-level abstraction, like in case of the implicit models. Hence, programmers have both to deal with data/application decomposition and to assure semantic equivalence with respect to the sequential program, especially when exploiting persistent actors.}
\subsection{Low-level explicit models: MPI and OpenMP}\label{low-level-model}
The low-level approaches provide to the programmers a programming metaphor where parallelism is represented by means of primitives in the form of special-purpose directives or function calls. Most parallel primitives are related to process synchronization, communication or task partitioning. The total amount of computational cost for executing these primitive is considered as parallelization overhead.
The advantage of explicit parallel programming is the absolute programmer control over the parallel execution. A very skilled parallel programmer takes advantage of explicit parallelism to produce very efficient code. However, programming with explicit parallelism is often difficult and error prone, because of the extra work involved in planning the task division and synchronization of concurrent processes.
In this section we report two of the main approaches to low-level parallel computing: MPI and OpenMP. The former is suitable for distributed architectures whereas the latter is appropriate for multicore and multiprocessor architectures.
\subsubsection{MPI}
MPI is a message-passing library, proposed as a standard by a broadly based committee of vendors, implementors, and programmers. MPI was designed for high performance on both massively parallel machines and on workstation clusters. The Message Passing Interface is meant to provide essential synchronization and communication functionality between a set of processes, mapped into different computer instances, in a language independent way, plus a few features that are language specific. The programming metaphor of MPI is based on the ``process'' concept. An MPI program consists of autonomous processes, executing their own code, in a \textit{Multiple Instructions, Multiple Data stream} (MIMD) style, i.e. Multiple autonomous processors simultaneously executing different instructions on different data. Distributed systems are generally recognized to be MIMD architectures. The processes communicate exploiting MPI communication primitives. Typically, each process executes in its own address space, although shared-memory implementations of MPI are possible. MPI does not specify the execution model for each process. A process can be sequential, or can be multi-threaded, with threads possibly executing concurrently. The intended interaction of MPI with threads is that concurrent threads be all allowed to execute MPI calls, and calls be reentrant; a blocking MPI call blocks only the invoking thread, allowing the scheduling
of another thread. MPI does not provide mechanisms to specify the initial allocation of processes to an MPI computation and their binding to physical processors.
MPI mapping of processes on PEs happens at run-time, through the agent that starts the MPI program, normally called \textbf{mpirun} or \textbf{mpiexec}.
MPI primitives include, but are not limited to, point-to-point rendez-vous type send/receive operations, combining partial results of computations (gathering and reduction operations), choosing between a Cartesian or graph-like logical process topology, exchanging data between process pairs (send and receive operations), synchronizing nodes (barrier operation) as well as obtaining network-related information such as the number of processes in the computing session, current processor identity that a process is mapped to, neighboring processes accessible in a logical topology, and so on. Point-to-point operations come in synchronous, asynchronous, buffered, and ready forms in order to allow both relatively stronger and weaker semantics for the synchronization aspects of a rendezvous-send. Many outstanding operations are possible in asynchronous mode, in most implementations. Figure \ref{mpi-1} reports the main classes of MPI primitives.
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[width=300pt]{figure/mpi-1}
\caption{MPI-1 Routines}\label{mpi-1}
\end{figure}
There are two versions of the MPI standard that are currently popular: version 1.2 (also called MPI-1), which emphasizes message passing and has a static run-time environment, and MPI-2.1 (MPI-2), which includes features such as parallel I/O, dynamic process management and remote memory operations.
Figure \ref{MPI-example} show a simple Hello World MPI program. It defines two roles: master and slave. The master ask slaves to process the ``Hello word'' string and then return it. The master eventually print on screen the string received by slaves. The roles are specified by means of the MPI process id. The process number 0 is the master whereas the others are slaves.
As shown in Figure \ref{MPI-example} MPI Hello World programmer is in charge of:
\begin{itemize}
\item initialize MPI
\item find the available resources and manage them
\item implement by hands a way to differentiate the master and the slaves
\item prepare the data the master sends
\item send the data to slaves
\item make the slaves receive the data
\item implement the slave data processing
\item prepare the data the slaves send
\item make the master receive the data, collecting it and processing it
\item finalize MPI
\end{itemize}
furthermore, he must allocate memory buffers, manage fault(s) and distribute data by hands. It is easy to understand that implement a complex application with MPI is a very difficult and error prone task because MPI programmers must manage all the aspects of the application parallelization. On one hand, it guarantees maximum programming flexibility, but on the other hand such a freedom is paid in terms of programming complexity.
\begin{figure}
{\scriptsize
\begin{verbatim}
#include <mpi.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#define BUFSIZE 128
#define TAG 0
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
char idstr[32], buff[BUFSIZE];
int numprocs, myid, i;
MPI_Status stat;
/* MPI programs start with MPI_Init; all 'N' processes exist thereafter */
MPI_Init(&argc,&argv);
/* find out the number of available PEs */
MPI_Comm_size(MPI_COMM_WORLD,&numprocs);
/* and this processes' rank is */
MPI_Comm_rank(MPI_COMM_WORLD,&myid);
/* At this point, all the programs are running equivalently, the rank is
used to distinguish the roles of the programs in the SPMD model */
if(myid == 0)
{
/* rank 0 process sent a string to all the other processes */
for(i=1;i<numprocs;i++)
{
sprintf(buff, "Hello
MPI_Send(buff, BUFSIZE, MPI_CHAR, i, TAG, MPI_COMM_WORLD);
}
/* rank 0 process sent a string to all the other processes */
for(i=1;i<numprocs;i++)
{
MPI_Recv(buff, BUFSIZE, MPI_CHAR, i, TAG, MPI_COMM_WORLD, &stat);
printf(
}
}
else
{
/* receive from rank 0: */
MPI_Recv(buff, BUFSIZE, MPI_CHAR, 0, TAG, MPI_COMM_WORLD, &stat);
sprintf(idstr, "Processor
strcat(buff, idstr);
strcat(buff, "reporting for duty\n");
/* send to rank 0: */
MPI_Send(buff, BUFSIZE, MPI_CHAR, 0, TAG, MPI_COMM_WORLD);
}
/* MPI Programs end with MPI Finalize */
MPI_Finalize();
return 0;
}
\end{verbatim}
}
\caption{Hello Word example implemented using MPI}
\label{MPI-example}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{OpenMP}
Like MPI, OpenMP (Open Multi-Processing) is a specification defined by a group of major computer hardware and software vendors for multi-platform multiprocessing programming. It consists of a set of compiler directives, library routines, and environment variables that influence run-time behavior. Unlike MPI, it is mainly targeted to shared memory multiprocessing. Indeed, it is used in conjunction with MPI on distributed architectures made of multicore/multiprocessor machines.
OpenMP uses multiple, parallel threads to accomplish parallelism. A thread is a single sequential flow of control within a program. OpenMP uses a directive-based method to tell explicitly to the compiler how to distribute programs across parallel threads.
\begin{figure}
\center
\includegraphics[width=300pt]{figure/openMP_structure}
\caption{OpenMP language extensions}\label{openMP}
\end{figure}
The core elements of OpenMP are the constructs for thread creation, workload distribution (work sharing), data environment management, thread synchronization, user level run-time routines and environment variables. OpenMP programmers exploit such constructs to manage all the aspects of application parallelization. Figure \ref{openMP} shows the classes of existing OpenMP language extensions.
Even if the OpenMP approach to parallel programming has to be considered as a low-level one, OpenMP code is more straightforward than MPI code. This is mainly due to the memory model indeed, relying on a shared memory model. The OpenMP application does not need to deal with message passing hence data are not directly split and divided among PEs but handled through compiler directives.
An OpenMP program is a C++ or Fortran program with OpenMP pragma statements/directives placed at appropriate points. The pragma statement directs the compiler how to process the block of code that follows the pragma. An OpenMP-enabled compiler recognizes the pragma directives and produces a parallelized executable suitable for running on a shared-memory machine. In C/C++, an OpenMP directive has the general form:
\[ {\tt \#\ pragma\ \ omp\ \ directive-name\ [clause,...]\ newline} \]
The \#pragma omp directive tags a block for parallel or various types of work sharing execution, variable scoping and synchronization considerations. One or more clauses are optional and may be in any order. The clauses are used to explicitly define the scoping of enclosed variables.
In OpenMP there are two main constructs:
\begin{itemize}
\item A parallel region is a block of code that will be executed by multiple threads. This is the fundamental parallel construct.
\item A work-sharing construct divides the execution of the enclosed code region among the members of the team that encounter it. Work-sharing constructs do not launch new threads. These constructs are identified by DO/FOR, SECTIONS and WORKSHARE (Fortran only) directives.
\end{itemize}
Since OpenMP is a shared memory programming model, most variables in OpenMP code are visible to all threads by default. However, sometimes private variables are necessary to avoid a race condition and there is a need to pass values between the sequential part and the parallel region. Another important issue is the synchronization and scheduling of the threads. These are managed through clauses appended to the OpenMP directive. Thus, the different types of clauses are Data Scoping, Synchronization and Scheduling clauses.
\begin{figure}
{\scriptsize
\begin{verbatim}
int main (int argc, char *argv[]) {
int nthreads, tid, i, chunk;
float a[N], b[N], c[N];
/* Some initializations */
for (i=0; i < N; i++) a[i] = b[i] = i * 1.0;
chunk = CHUNKSIZE;
#pragma omp parallel shared(a,b,c,nthreads,chunk) private(i,tid)
{
tid = omp_get_thread_num();
if (tid == 0) {
nthreads = omp_get_num_threads();
printf("Number of threads =
}
printf("Thread
#pragma omp for schedule(dynamic,chunk)
for (i=0; i<N; i++) {
c[i] = a[i] + b[i];
printf("Thread
}
} /* end of parallel section */
}
\end{verbatim}
}
\caption{Factorial example in OpenMP}
\label{openMP-example}
\end{figure}
In Figure \ref{openMP-example} we report an OpenMP example program. The example uses two pragma directives. The outer \#pragma omp parallel tags a block for parallel execution. The \textbf{shared()} clause specifies common variables, and \textbf{private()} specifies the variables restricted to exclusive use by a process. The inner \#pragma omp for schedule directive specifies distribution across threads. The threads share the variables a, b, c and chunk; the iteration variable i is private in each thread. The expression tells the compiler to perform parallel execution of the for-loop and to split the iteration space into blocks of size chunk.
The current version of OpenMP presents some issues, some related to the implementation and others related to the model. For instance a reliable error handling, fine-grained mechanisms for controlling thread-processor mapping or synchronization among a subset of threads. The model related issues, clearly more difficult to overcome include inefficient parallelism exploitation in distributed-memory platforms and a limited scalability that actually depends by memory architecture.
\paragraph{Summarizing Pros and Cons}
\emph{Low-level approaches allow programmers to control all the aspects of parallel applications and their execution. Exploiting low-level approaches skilled programmers can implement very efficient parallel applications. The freedom and efficiency allowed by the model are paid in terms of expressiveness and ease of use. Indeed, programmers have to manage ``by hand'' all the issues related to data and program decomposition, fault tolerance, load balancing and communications.}
\subsection{Other notable approaches}\label{other-appr}
Other two noteworthy explicit parallel approaches are Cilk and High Performance Fortran.
The first one is quite similar to OpenMP, indeed it consists in an enriched version of C language, it requires that the computing resources share the main memory hence can be used for programming parallel applications running in multiprocessor machines but not in distributed architecture like clusters. It enriches GNU C with a few Cilk-specific keywords. Using them programmers expose the parallelism identifying elements that can safely be executed in parallel. Using such information the run-time environment, in particular the scheduler, decides during execution how to distribute the work among processors.
The first Cilk keyword is \textbf{cilk}, which identifies a function written in Cilk. Since Cilk procedures can call C procedures directly, but C procedures cannot directly call or spawn Cilk procedures, this keyword is needed to distinguish Cilk code from C code. Other keywords are: spawn, sync, inlet and abort.
The first two keywords are all Cilk programmers have to use to start using the parallel features of Cilk: \textbf{spawn} indicates that the procedure call it modifies can safely operate in parallel with other executing code. Note that from the point of view of the scheduler it is not mandatory to run this procedure in parallel; the keyword only inform the scheduler that it can run the procedure in parallel. sync indicates that execution of the current procedure cannot proceed until all previously spawned procedures have completed and returned their results to the parent frame. The two remaining Cilk keywords are slightly more advanced, and concern the use of inlets. Typically, when a Cilk procedure is spawned, it can only return its results to the parent procedure by putting those results in a variable in the parent's frame, as we assigned the results of our spawned procedure calls in the example to x and y. The alternative is to use an \textbf{inlet}. An inlet is a function internal to a Cilk procedure that handles the results of a spawned procedure call as they return. One major reason to use inlets is that all the inlets of a procedure are guaranteed to operate atomically with regards to each other and to the parent procedure, thus avoiding the bugs that could occur if the multiple returning procedures tried to update the same variables in the parent frame at the same time.
The \textbf{abort} keyword can only be used inside an inlet; it tells the scheduler that any other procedures that have been spawned off by the parent procedure can safely be aborted.
High Performance Fortran is an extension of Fortran 90 defined by the high performance fortran forum with constructs that support data-parallel computations. It consists in a portable language for data-parallel computations. HPF uses a data parallel model of computation to support spreading the work of a single array computation over multiple processors. This allows efficient implementation on both SIMD and MIMD style architectures. It provides a number of basic data parallel functions as built-in array operators and intrinsic functions. It also provides constructs, such as the \textbf{where} and the \textbf{forall}, which assist in programming more complex data parallel functions.
The simplest data parallel operations are the elementwise operations. For any base operation on a data type, programmers can extend that operation to an array operation. For binary (and higher degree) operations, the arrays must have the same shape. The result of the operation is another array of that shape, in which the elements are defined by the elementwise extension of the base operation.
A more advanced set of operations operate on an entire array to produce a single answer, they implement a behavior generally known as reduction. Reduction can be defined for any associative, binary operation that produces a result of the same element type by successively accumulating the results of applying that operation to elements of the array. Commonly used operations include arithmetic operators like addition, multiplication, maximum, and minimum and boolean operators. As an example, HPF programmers can define reduction with addition, usually called sum reduction, over any array whose element type can be added.
\subsection{Structured approach}\label{structured-model}
Highly abstract approaches and low-level approaches represent the two extremes in parallel programming models. The formers completely automate the aspects of parallelization, namely do not ask programmers (at least in their ``pure'' version) to give any information about application, like data distribution and synchronization, communication mechanisms, executing environment or code sequences to run in parallel. The latter, opposite, approaches do not automate anything and ask programmers to deal, almost entirely, with the application parallelization aspects.
As we outlined in previous sections, several researchers have tried to address the limitation of these approaches enriching them with additional features.
Some other work was done trying to conceive alternative models. In particular, since the nineties, several research groups have proposed the \emph{structured parallel programming environments}(SPPE). Since the structured parallel programming model was conceived, several works have been done about it, also from a foundational point of view \cite{lithium:sem:CLSS}, \cite{aldinuc:sem:parco2003}, \cite{128874}. Programming environments relying on this paradigm (i.e. \cite{772854}) ask programmers to explicitly deal with the \emph{qualitative} aspects of parallelism exploitation, namely the application structure and problem decomposition strategies. All the low-level parallelism exploitation related aspects like communication, synchronization, mapping and scheduling are managed by compiler tools and run-time support.
The \emph{structured way} is driven by two observations: that there are some things people do better than compilers, and that there are some things that compilers do better than people. Rather than have either do the complete job, it exploits the comparative advantages of each. Indeed the management of tens to thousands of asynchronous tasks, where timing-dependent errors are quite common, is beyond the capacity of most programmers whereas compilers are very good at ensuring that events happen in the right order and can more readily and correctly manage communication and synchronization than programmers. On the other hand, data decomposition strategies and \textit{computational grain} can be successful managed by programmers but not efficiently by compilers.
The environments following this way are those based on the algorithmic skeleton concept. A skeleton, is a known and widely used pattern of parallelism exploitation originally conceived by Cole \cite{128874} and later on by different research groups to design high-performance structured parallel programming environments.
Basically, structured parallel programming systems allow a parallel application to be coded by properly composing a set of basic parallel skeletons. These basic skeletons usually include skeletons modeling embarrassingly parallel computations (farms), computations structured in stages (pipelines) as well as common data parallel computation patterns (map/forall, reduce, scan). Each skeleton is parametric; in particular, it accepts as a parameter the kind of computation to be performed according to parallelism exploitation pattern it models.
As an example, a farm skeleton takes as a parameter the worker, i.e. the computation to be performed on the single input task (data item). As a further example, a pipeline takes as parameters the pipeline stages. Such parameters may be either parameters modeling sequential portions of code (sequential skeletons) or even other skeletons, in turn. Therefore, a farm skeleton may take as a worker a two stage pipeline. The composition of the two expresses embarrassingly parallel computations where each input task (data item) is processed by two stages. Parallelism is exploited both by using different resources to compute independent input tasks and by using different resources to compute the first and the second stage onto a single input task.
A skeleton (in its original formulation) is formally an higher order function taking one or more other skeletons or portions of sequential code as parameters, and modeling a parallel computation out of them. Cole's skeletons represent parallelism exploitation patterns that can be used (instanced) to model common parallel applications. Later, different authors figure out that skeletons can be used as constructs of an explicitly parallel programming language, actually as the only way to express parallel computations in these languages \cite{darlington:parle:93, orlando-grosso}. Recently, the skeleton concept evolved, and became the coordination layer of structured parallel programming environments (\cite{van:assist:02, skie:PC:1999, Darlington1996}).
In any case, a skeleton can be considered as an abstraction modeling a common, reusable parallelism exploitation pattern.
Skeletons can be provided to the programmer either as language constructs \cite{orlando-grosso, Darlington1996, skie:PC:1999} or as libraries \cite{teti-fgcs, mlws, stigliani:europar:00, kuchen:europar:2002}. Usually, the set of skeletons includes both data-parallel and task parallel patterns.
\subsubsection{Traditional skeleton approaches}\label{old-fashion}
From the nineties, several research groups proposed or currently propose programming environments supporting parallel computations based on the algorithmic skeleton concept. They are implemented as frameworks, languages or libraries. Among the others, we mention Kuchen's C++ MPI skeleton library \cite{kuchen:europar:2002}, Serot's SKiPPER environment, $P^3L$, Lithium, a first version of \muskel and JJPF. In particular, the last one, JJPF, represents our approach to traditional SPPE.
In the rest of this section we present a more detailed description about the programming model of $P^3L$, \muskel and JJPF to describe the ``concept behind'' SPPE models. We developed this last one, whereas all the other skeleton environments presented in this section have been developed by the Parallel and Distributed Architecture Group, part of the Department of Computer Science at University of Pisa. This group has a deep background on skeleton environment, indeed the group began to work in this field from the very beginning the skeleton model were conceived. We collaborated with several researchers belonging to this group, also for the conception and the design of the results presented in this thesis.
\paragraph{\textbf{$P^3L$}}
is a high-level structured explicitly parallel language developed in the nineties \cite{p3l}. Using $P^3L$ parallelism can be expressed only by means of a restricted set of parallel constructs each corresponding to a specific parallel form. Sequential parts are expressed by using an existing language also called the host sequential language of $P^3L$. Being a SPPE its constructs can be hierarchically composed to express more complex parallel forms. This compositional property relies on the semantics associated with the various $P^3L$ constructs and their compositions. In fact, each of them can be thought of as a data-flow module. In $P^3L$ each module computes in parallel or sequentially a function on a given stream of input data and produces an output stream of results. The lengths of both the streams are identical and the ordering is preserved, i.e.
\begin{center}
$[in_1,...,in_n] \rightarrow M \rightarrow [out_1,...,out_n]$
\end{center}
\noindent where $M$ is the data-flow module corresponding to a generic $P^3L$ construct $[in_1,...,in_n]$ is the input stream, $[out_1,...,out_n]$ is the output stream, $n$ is the length of both the streams and every output data item $out_i$ is obtained by applying the function computed by $M$ on the input data item $in_i$. The types of the input and the output interface of each $P^3L$ construct i.e. the types of every $in_i$ and every $out_i$ have to be declared statically. Actually the compiler performs type checking on these interfaces when the $P^3L$ constructs are to be composed. Another feature of $P^3L$ is its interface with the host sequential language. The interface has been designed to make easier portability between different host languages. In fact, sequential parts are completely encapsulated into the constructs of $P^3L$.
Parameter passing between $P^3L$ constructs are handled by linguistic constructs that are external to the specific host sequential language while the data types that can be used to define the interface of the $P^3L$ constructs are a fixed subset of those usually available in the most common languages.
The first $P^3L$ compiler adopted as host sequential language C and C++. The constructs included since the first $P^3L$ compiler were
\begin{itemize}
\item{The \textbf{farm} construct} which models processor farm parallelism. In this form of parallelism a set of identical workers execute in parallel the independent tasks that come from an input stream and produce an output stream of results.
\item{The \textbf{map} construct} which models data parallel computations. In this form of parallelism each input data item from an input stream is decomposed into a set of partitions and assigned to identical and parallel workers. The workers do not need to exchange data to perform their data parallel computations. The results produced by the workers are recomposed to make up a new data item of an output stream of results.
\item{The \textbf{pipe} construct} which models pipeline parallelism. In this form of parallelism a set of stages execute serially over a stream of input data producing an output stream of results.
\item {The \textbf{loop} construct} which models computations where for each input data item a loop body has to be iteratively executed until a given condition is reached and an output data item is produced.
\item{The \textbf{sequential} construct} which corresponds to a sequential process that for each data item coming from an input stream produces a new data item of an output stream
\end{itemize}
The sequential constructs constitute the leaves of the hierarchical composition because the computations performed by them have to be expressed in terms of the host sequential language.
\paragraph{\muskel}
\cite{muskel:qos:pdp:05} is a full Java framework, providing programmers with structured ways of expressing parallel programs. The muskel environment represents a sensible evolution of the Lithium one \cite{teti-fgcs}. It inherits from Lithium the \textit{normal form} \cite{653465} and macro data-flow \cite{Da01PPL, 772854} implementation techniques as well as the general structure of the run-time support.
\textit{Normalization} consists in transforming the original skeleton tree (or composition) into a program that is basically a task farm with sequential workers \cite{pdcs:nf:99}. Such optimization basically substitute skeleton subtrees by skeleton subtrees providing a better performance and efficiency in the target machine resource usage than the original skeleton tree. Previous results demonstrated that full stream parallel skeleton subtrees can be collapsed to a single farm skeleton with a (possibly huge) sequential worker leading to a service time which is equal or even better that the service time of the uncollapsed skeleton tree \cite{128874}.
The \muskel macro data-flow run-time support consists in deriving a graph of macro data-flow blocks from skeleton trees and dispatching them to computational resources running macro-actors.
\muskel adds to Lithium a limited form of resource discovery and fault tolerance features as well as the whole \textit{Application Manager} concept.
The \textit{Application Manager}(AM) is an entity that takes care of assuring that the application non-functional requirement were satisfied. The requirements are specified by programmers in a performance contract. The AM actively observes the application behavior and in case of faults or performance contract violations it reacts aiming to fix the problem, as an example, in case of a computational resource fault it recruits a new resource in the computation.
Using \muskel a programmer can implement parallel programs that match the task farm or the pipeline parallelism exploitation patterns as well as arbitrary composition of the two. Despite the limited amount of patterns supported, however, a large range of applications can be programmed, for instance all embarrassingly parallel applications, parameter sweeping applications and multistage applications.
A task farm computation can be defined just using a Farm object. The Farm constructor takes a parameter representing the computation performed by the farm workers. This computation can be either a sequential computation or another parallelism exploitation pattern (another Farm or a Pipeline one). A pipeline computation can be defined using a Pipeline object. The Pipeline constructor takes two parameters that can either be sequential computation objects or in turn parallel exploitation patterns. Pipelines with more stages can be obtained composing several Pipeline objects.
Then the programmer has to add an \textit{Application Manager} to the application code, and he must also specify the performance contract he pretends to be respected on the target architecture. This is done instantiating an application manager and specifying a performance contract.
\muskel supports two different kinds of contracts. The first one requires a constant parallelism degree, that is, it requires that a constant number of processing elements are dedicated to the parallel execution of our parallel program. The second one requires that a given throughput is maintained in terms of task processed per unit time.
Both of these kinds of contracts can be specified before the computation of the parallel \muskel program actually starts and can be changed during the program execution. The management of the parallel
computation in such a way that the contracts are satisfied is completely handled by an independent execution flow. Therefore, the submission of a new performance contract to the application manager
immediately triggers all those (possibly additional) activities needed to satisfy the contract. The possibility to change the performance contracts during the execution of the parallel applications allows the programmer to implement some kind of application dependent dynamic execution strategy.
Once the program has been specified along with its performance contract the programmer must supply the list/stream of tasks to be computed. When all the elements belonging to the list/stream have been processed, the parallel execution of the program is terminated and the relative results can be fetched.
During the computation of the parallel program the \muskel run-time automatically discovers available processing elements. In case there are no enough resources to satisfy the contract, an error is signaled to the programmer.
As we stated before, in case of faults the Application Manager recruits new resources among the available ones to substitute the faulty one. In case the application manager recognizes that the performance contract specified by the programmer cannot be satisfied, it raises an Exception.
Being any task to be computed a fireable macro data flow instruction, it is completely independent of any other task needed to compute the parallel application. Therefore, it can be scheduled on any one of the available resources. However, the normal form concept implemented in \muskel, only generates fully independent macro data flow instructions. That is, no result of an instruction is needed to compute another instruction. In this case, most of the scheduling problems we just mentioned disappear.
\paragraph{JJPF}\label{JJPF} is a parallel programming framework built on top of plain Java that can run stream parallel applications on several parallel/distributed architectures ranging from tightly coupled workstation clusters to generic workstation networks and grids. In a sense, JJPF represents our approach to old-fashioned structured parallel programming environments.
It directly inherits from the early versions of Lithium and \muskel \cite{teti-fgcs}. Both Lithium and \muskel exploit plain RMI Java technology to distribute computations across nodes, and rely on NFS (the network file system) to distribute the application code to the remote processing elements. JJPF, instead, is fully implemented on top of JINI and Java and relies on the Jini Extensible Remote Invocation (JERI) mechanism to distribute code across the remote processing nodes involved in stream parallel application computation.
JJPF exploits the stream parallel structure of the application in such a way that several distinct goals can be achieved:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textit{load balancing is achieved} across the computing elements participating in the computation
\item processing elements available to participate to the computation of stream parallel application are \textit{automatically discovered and recruited} exploiting standard Jini mechanisms
\item \textit{faulty processing elements are automatically substituted} by fresh ones (if any) in a seamless and automatic way. Therefore, the stream parallel applications computations resist to both node and network faults. Programmers do not need to add a single line of code in his application to deal with faulty nodes/network, nor it has to take any other kind of action to get advantage of this feature.
\end{itemize}
JJPF has been tested using both synthetic and real applications, on both production workstation networks and on clusters, with very nice and encouraging results.
{\sf JJPF} has been designed to provide programmers with an environment supporting the execution of stream parallel applications on a network of workstations, exploiting plain Java technology. Overall JJPF provides a distributed server providing a stream parallel application computation service. Programmers must write their applications in such a way they just exploit an arbitrary composition of task farm and pipeline patterns. Task farm only applications are directly executed by the distributed server, while applications exploiting composition of task farm and pipeline patterns are first processed to get their \textit{normal form}.
A distributed environment that exploits task parallel computations, permits to implement different applications in really different applicative and hardware contexts.
{\sf JJPF} is based on a master-worker architecture. JJPF defines two entities: ``client'', that is the application code (the master), and ``service'', that consists in distributed server instances (the workers) that actually compute results out of input task data to execute client program.
Figure \ref{fig:servizioEcliente} sketches the structure of the two components. The client component basically recruits available services and forks a control thread for each one of them. The control thread, in turn, fetches uncomputed task items from the task vector, delivers them to the remote service and retrieves the computed results, storing them to the result repository. Low-level activities, like resource recruiting, program deployment and data transfer are performed directly by the framework exploiting the JINI technology \cite{jini}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\linewidth]{figure/StateDiagramRete}
\end{center}
\caption{Simplified state diagram for the generic {\sf JJPF}\ \textit{client} (left) and \textit{service} (right)}
\label{fig:servizioEcliente}
\end{figure}
The key concept in {\sf JJPF}\ is that service discovery is automatically performed in the client run time support. Not a single line of code dealing with service discovery or recruiting is to be provided by application programmers.
{\sf JJPF}\ achieves automatic load balancing among the recruited services, due to the scheduling adopted in the control threads managing the remote services. Furthermore, it handles faults in service nodes automatically taking care of the tasks assigned to a service node in such a way that in case the node does not respond any more they can be rescheduled to other service nodes.
This is only possible because of the kind of parallel applications that are supported in {\sf JJPF}, that is stream parallel computations. In this case, there are natural \textit{descheduling points} that can be chosen to restart the computation of one of the input tasks, in case of failure of a service node.
JJPF has demonstrated good scalability both in embarrassingly parallel application and in more ``problematic'' applications.
\section{Open issues in structured approaches}\label{sec:openissues}
Despite being around since long time and despite the progress made in skeletal system design and implementation, the skeleton systems did not take off as expected. Nowadays, the skeleton system usage is actually restricted to small communities grown around the teams that develop the skeleton systems. Cole focused very well the problem in his manifesto \cite{cole:manifesto:02}. Here he stated four principles that have to be tackled in skeletal systems to make them effective and successful:
\paragraph{I) Propagate the concept with minimal conceptual disruption}
It means that skeletons must be provided within existing programming environments without actually requiring the programmers to learn entirely new programming languages. In order to make them widely used by practitioners they should not require further conceptual baggage.
\paragraph{II) Integrate ad-hoc parallelism}
Many parallel applications are not obviously expressible as instances of skeletons. Some have phases that require the use of less structured interaction primitives. For example, Cannon's well-known matrix multiplication algorithm \cite{156619} invokes an initial step in which matrices are skewed across processes in a manner which is not efficiently expressible in many skeletal systems. It is unrealistic to assume that skeletons can provide all the parallelism we need. We must construct our systems to allow the integration of skeletal and ad-hoc parallelism in a well-defined way.
\paragraph{III) Accommodate diversity}
All the existing skeleton systems have a common core of simple skeletons and a variety of more exotic forms. When described informally, the core operations are straightforward. Instead, precise specification reveals variations in semantics that reflect the ways skeletons are applied in real algorithms. The result is that some algorithms, which intuitively seem to represent an instance of a skeleton, cannot be expressed in certain systems because of constraints imposed by the specification. Hence, skeletal systems should provide mechanisms to specialize skeletons, in all those cases where specialization does not radically change the nature of the skeleton, and consequently the nature of the implementation.
\paragraph{IV) Show the pay-back}
A new technology will only gain acceptance if it can be demonstrated that adoption offers some improvement over the status quo. The structural knowledge embedded in skeletons should allow optimization within and across uses that would not be realistically achievable by hand, i.e. demonstrate that the effort required to adopt a skeletal system is immediately rewarded by some kind of concrete results: shorter design and implementation time of applications, increased efficiency, increased machine independence of the application code, etc.
\bigskip
The second and the third points are specifically technical whereas the first and the last one are actually a kind of ``advertising'' ones, in a sense. All these points, however, have impacts on both the way the skeleton systems are designed and on the way they are implemented. The Cole's analysis is not the only one, \cite{advske:pc:06} extends it adding some other features a skeleton environment have to address to be suitable for the computational grids.
In particular, the authors present three more requirements for Skeletal systems:
\paragraph{V) Support code reuse}
that is allow programmers to reuse with minimal effort existing sequential code;
\paragraph{VI) Handle heterogeneity} i.e. implement skeletons in such a way skeleton programs can be run on clusters/networks/grids hosting heterogeneous computing resources (different processors, different operating systems, different memory/disk configurations, etc.);
\paragraph{VII) Handle dynamicity} i.e. implement in the skeleton support mechanisms and policies suitable to handle typical dynamic situations, such as those arising when non-dedicated processing elements are used (e.g. peaks of load that impair load balancing strategies) or from sudden unavailability of processing elements (e.g. network faults, node reboot).
Summarizing, the next generation of Skeletal Systems, that drawing a parallel with web programming model we can refer as ``Skeletons 2.0'', have to integrate ad-hoc parallelism and provide mechanisms to specialize skeletons in order to express customized form of parallel exploitation. They have to support code reuse, handle heterogeneity and dynamicity in order to be exploited in grid environments. Moreover, such features must be provided with minimal conceptual disruption, hence without requiring the programmers to learn entirely new programming languages or environments but integrating ``Skeletons 2.0'' principles inside the existing programming tools, possibly without changing their programming abstraction.
Some Skeletal systems have addressed the ``Skeletons 2.0'' principles to different degrees in different combinations. Next section reports some of the most notable among these systems.
\subsection{Attempts to address issues}
In its ``manifesto'' paper Murray Cole, together with the check-list of issues that next generation of skeleton system should address, sketches the eSkel library \cite{cole:manifesto:02}. eSkel consists in Cole's attempt to address the issues he present in his ``manifesto'' paper.
More in detail, eSkel is a library of C functions and type definitions that extends the standard C binding to MPI with skeletal operations. Its underlying conceptual model is the SPMD distributed memory model, inherited from MPI, and its operations must be invoked from within a program that has already initialized an MPI environment. eSkel provides programmers with some language primitives performing complex operations that can be integrated with the traditional MPI functions. eSkel implements skeletons as collective MPI operations. In \cite{cole:manifesto:02,BenoitCGH05} authors describe how the manifesto issues are addressed in eSkel. eSkel also provides some code reuse facilities (check-list point V) as most C and C++ code can simply be adapted in eSkel programs. In eSkel heterogeneous architectures are supported (VI) through the usage of MPI, much in the sense heterogeneous architectures are supported through the usage of Java in muskel. However, current implementation of eSkel does not support custom, programmer defined, MPI data types in the communication primitives, that actually use MPI\_INT data buffers, and therefore heterogeneous architectures can be targeted using proper MPI implementations just when all the nodes have the same type of processors. No support for dynamicity handling (VII) is provided in eSkel, however.
Some other groups involved in structured parallel programming research, developed programming systems that partially address the issues above presented.
Schaeffer and his group at the University of Alberta that implemented a system were programmers can insert new parallelism exploitation patterns in the system \cite{bromling:parco:2001}. Kuchen Muesli \cite{muesli-home} is basically a C++ library built on top of MPI providing stream parallel skeletons, data parallel objects and data parallel operations as C++ template classes. The programming interface is definitely very good, as the full power of object oriented paradigm along with templates is exploited to provide Muesli programmers with user-friendly skeletons, and consequently C++ programmers can develop parallel applications very rapidly. In particular, Muesli does not require any MPI specific knowledge/action to write a skeleton program. Therefore, point (I) is very well addressed here. Points (II) and (III) are addressed providing the programmer with a full set of (data parallel) operations that can be freely combined. The payback (IV) is mainly related to the OO techniques exploited to provide skeletons. Code reuse (V) is supported as it is supported in eSkel, as programmers can use C++/C code to build their own skeletons as well as sequential code to be used in the skeletons. Even in this case there is limited support to heterogeneity (VI): the MPI code in the Skeleton library directly uses MPI\_BYTE buffers to implement Muesli communications, and therefore MPI libraries supporting heterogeneous architectures may be used just in case the nodes sport the same kind of processor and the same C/C++ compiler tool-set. Dynamicity handling (VII) is not supported at all in Muesli.
Gorlatch's and its research group presented a grid programming environment HOC \cite{gorlatch:hoc:dagstuhl:05}, which provides suitable ways of developing component based grid applications exploiting classical skeleton components. The implementation exploits Web Services technology. Overall, the HOC programming environment addressed principles (I) and (IV). Points (II) and (III) rely on the possibility given to programmers to insert/create new HOCs in the repository. Point (VI) is handled via Web Services. This technology is inherently multiplatform, and therefore heterogeneous target architectures can be easily used to run HOC programs. Point (V) is guaranteed as sequential code can easily (modulus the fact some XML code is needed, actually) be wrapped in Web Services. However, no support to (VII) is included in the current HOC version.
\section{Our efforts in designing ``Skeletons 2.0''\\ systems}\label{sec:ourefforts}
Even though Cole and other research groups, focused on skeleton system, designed and developed skeleton systems that own some of the features required to be a next generation skeleton system, the research for addressing the presented issues is just started. In fact, up to now tools and model that are generally recognized as the best solutions for addressing the issues presented in \cite{cole:manifesto:02} and in \cite{advske:pc:06} simply do not exist. In the Chapters \ref{skeleton_customization}, \ref{muskelWorkflow} and \ref{mdf_as_components} we present some models and the concerning tools that we designed and developed in order to contribute to research for next generation skeleton systems.
More in detail, in Chapter \ref{skeleton_customization} we propose a \textit{macro data-flow based approach} designed supporting the integration of unstructured form of parallelization in skeleton systems, hence addressing the issue number II. To validate the approach we modified a skeleton system that in its original form does not deal with unstructured parallelism: \muskel. We extended \muskel, in collaboration with the research staff that develop it, to integrate it with a methodology that can be used to implement mixed parallel programming environments providing the programmer with both structured and unstructured ways of expressing parallelism.
The methodology is based on data-flow. Structured parallel exploitation patterns are implemented translating them into data-flow graphs executed by a distributed macro data-flow interpreter. Unstructured parallelism exploitation can be achieved by explicitly programming data-flow (sub)graphs. The modified \muskel provides suitable ways to interact with the data-flow graphs derived from structured pattern compilation in such a way that mixed structured and unstructured parallelism exploitation patterns can be used within the same application.
Two mechanisms provided to the \muskel programmers for unstructured parallelism exploitation. First, we provide primitives that allow accessing the fundamental features of the data-flow graph generated out of the compilation of a skeleton program. Namely, methods to deliver data to and retrieve data from data-flow graph. We provide to programmers the ability to instantiate a new graph in the task pool by providing the input task token and to redirect the output token of the graph to an arbitrary data-flow instruction in the pool. Second, we provide the programmer with direct access to the definition of data-flow graphs, in such a way he can describe his particular parallelism exploitation patterns that cannot be efficiently implemented with the available skeletons.
The two mechanisms can be jointly used to program all those parts of the application that cannot be easily and efficiently implementing using the skeletons subsystem.
Unfortunately, this approach is not free from shortcomings In fact exploiting unstructured parallelism interacting directly with data-flow graph requires to programmers to reason in terms of program-blocks instead of a monolithic program. Hence, at a first sight this approach may look like the ones present in the other early macro data-flow models. Nevertheless, we want to point out that the effort required to customize an application made by a composition of existing skeleton is not comparable with the complexity of developing it from scratch as a set of macro data-flow blocks.
In order to ease the generation of macro data-flow blocks, and therefore provide programmers with a easier way to express program-blocks, we exploited some \textit{metaprogramming techniques} that are successfully used for code transformation in fields like web development and component based programming \cite{fraclet, Spring, ejb3}. Exploiting these techniques the programmers are no longer requested to deal with complex application structuring but simply give hints to the metaprogramming support using high-level directives. The directives are used by the support to drive the application transformation. Chapter \ref{muskelWorkflow} presents our efforts aimed at providing metaprogramming tools and models for ease the generation of macro data-flow blocks and their run-time optimization.
In particular, two results are presented. The first is ``Parallel Abstraction Layer'' (PAL). A java annotation \cite{javaAnnotation} based metaprogramming framework that restructures applications at bytecode-level at run-time in order to make them parallel. The parallelization is obtained asynchronously executing the annotated methods. Each method call is transformed in a macro data-flow block that can be dispatched and executed on the available computing resources.
PAL transformations depend on the resources available at run-time, the programmers hints and the available \textit{adapters}. An adapter is a specialized entity that instructs the PAL transformation engine to drive the code transformation depending on the available parallel tools and frameworks.
The other result presented in the chapter concerns the integration of the Aspect Oriented Programming \cite{aop1, AOP} mechanisms (more in detail the AspectJ framework \cite{aspectj}) with our modified \muskel skeleton framework. The first step in this direction was exploiting AspectJ to implement \textit{aspect driven program normalization} (see \cite{pdcs:nf:99}) in \muskel. The second step consisted in testing the integration of \muskel with AspectJ to in a more complex scenario. Hence, we exploited the aspect oriented programming support integrated in \muskel in order to develop \textit{workflows} which structure and processing are optimized at run-time depending on the available computational resources. Let us point out that we introduced metaprogramming techniques for easing the generation of macro data-flow blocks (in particular to address the issue number I) but as a corollary we obtained the possibility to optimize the application and adapt it at run-time with respect to the executing environment (addressing the issues number III and VI).
The other two main issues to address are the support for code reuse (V) and the handling of dynamicity (VII).
As we already discussed when we introduced \muskel, it addresses this last point through the definition of the \emph{Application Manager}. The dynamicity handling is a very important feature for next generation parallel programming systems, especially for the ones designed for computational Grids.
Actually, \muskel framework, at least in its original form, is designed to be exploited in cluster and network of workstations rather than in Grids. Indeed, some of its features limit its exploitation on Grids, in particular:
\begin{itemize}
\item \muskel communicates with the resources it recruits exploiting the RMI protocol, that (at least in its original version) uses TCP ports that are typically blocked by firewall;
\item the computational resources are found by \muskel exploiting multicast communications that are often blocked by firewall;
\item the recruitment of a computational resource requires to \muskel programmers to run a proper application on the resource, hence to have an account on it;
\item the Application Manager is a centralized entity. This represents a twofold limitation in Grid environment: it is a single point of failure and a bottle-neck that curb the scalability of the approach.
\end{itemize}
We addressed most of these limitations exploiting ProActive Parallel Suite \cite{proactive} to implement the macro data-flow distributed interpreters (see the experimental results presented in Chapter \ref{skeleton_customization}). ProActive
provides mechanisms to tunnel RMI communications and ease the deployment of Grid applications. Indeed, it has been successfully used for developing applications in the Grid5000 \cite{grid5000} platform. ProActive support for Grids has became more complete since it began to support the component based development, in particular the support for the CoreGrid Grid Component Model \cite{gcm:coregrid:07}. Indeed, several studies recognized that component technology could be leveraged to ease the development of Grid Application \cite{armstrong99toward, 383872} and a few component based model have been proposed by parallel computing scientific community for programming Grids \cite{cca, DenPerPriRib, gcm:coregrid:07}.
Component-based software development can be considered an evolutionary step beyond object-oriented design. Object-oriented techniques have been very successful in managing the complexity of modern software, but they have not resulted in significant amounts of cross-project code reuse. Furthermore, sharing object-oriented code is difficult because of language incompatibilities, the lack of standardization for inter-object communication, and the need for compile-time coupling of interfaces. Component-based software development addresses issues of language independence (seamlessly combining components written in different programming languages) and component frameworks define standards for communication among components. Finally, the composition compatibility is evaluated providing a meta-language specification for their interfaces.
The GCM represents one of the main European scientific community efforts for designing and developing \cite{gridcomp} a grid component model. We contributed to the design of GCM and its reference implementation together with the research group that developed \muskel and with several European research groups. In particular, we focused our contribution, in the context of the CoreGrid Programming model virtual institute, on GCM autonomic features. Therefore, by designing the autonomic features of GCM components, each component is able to react dynamically to changes in the executing environment. We referred to the \muskel application manager approach, generalizing and extending the approach to make it suitable for components based models. Indeed, each GCM component with a complete support of autonomic features has an \textit{Autonomic Manager} that observes the component behavior. In case the behavior turns out to be different from the one expected the manager trigger a component reconfiguration.
In other words, GCM autonomic features provide programmers with a configurable and straightforward way to implement autonomic grid applications. Hence, they ease the development of application for the Grids. Nevertheless, they rely fully on the application programmer's expertise for the set-up of the management code, which can be quite difficult to write since it may involve the management of black-box components, and, notably, is tailored for the particular component or assembly of them. As a result, the introduction of dynamic adaptivity and self-management might enable the management of grid dynamism, and uncertainty aspects but, at the same time, decreases the component reuse potential since it further specializes components with application specific management code.
In Chapter \ref{mdf_as_components}, we propose \emph{Behavioural Skeletons} as a novel way to describe autonomic components in the GCM framework. Behavioural Skeletons aim to describe recurring patterns of component assemblies that can be (either statically or dynamically) equipped with correct and effective management strategies with respect to a given management goal. Behavioural Skeletons help the application designer to i) design component assemblies that can be effectively reused, and ii) cope with management complexity by providing a component with an explicit context with respect to top-down design (i.e. component nesting). We consider the Behavioural Skeletons, coupled with the CoreGRID Grid Component, a good structured parallel programming model for handling dynamicity (VII), supporting reuse both of functional and non-functional code (V). The model defines characters as the \textit{Skeleton designers} and the \textit{Expert users} that can design new skeletons and customize the existing ones (II and III), whereas, standard \textit{users} can easily (I) exploit the existing ones.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec.1}
The study of the dependence structure between random variables via copula
is a classical problem in statistics and other applications.
The ease of application of copulas has led to their popularity in various areas such as finance, insurance, hydrology and
medical studies; see for example, \citet{Frees}, \citet{Genest} and \citet{Cui}.
This paper examines the mathematical property of copulas by focusing on their lower bound.
Every copula is bounded by Fr\'echet-Hoeffding lower and upper bounds. While Fr\'echet-Hoeffding upper bound corresponds to
the maximum copula, Fr\'echet-Hoeffding lower bound is generally not a copula.
Further, the minimum copula does not exist in general in high dimensions greater than $2$; see, for example, \citet{Kotz2} and \citet{Joe2}.
In the insurance and finance field, the maximum copula corresponds to the concept called comonotonicity \citep{Dhaene}.
In the respect of risk management, comonotonicity is an important concept, because it
can be used to
describe the perfect positive dependence between competing risks. Importantly it provides the solution
to various optimization (maximization) problems.
However, unlike the perfect positive dependence, mainly due to the absence of the minimum copula,
controversy has remained even in the definition of negative extreme dependence
In spite of these difficulties, the need for the concept of negative extreme dependence has remained in insurance and other
applications because it may lead to solutions for related optimization problems.
Many studies have investigated the negative extreme dependence in various contexts.
\citet{Dhaene4}, \citet{Cheung4} and \citet{Cheung6} defined the concept of mutual exclusivity which can be regarded as pairwise countermonotonic movements. On the other hand, \citep{Ruodu} proposed the concept of complete mixability, which can be used to minimize the variance
of the sum of random variables with given marginal distributions.
Many papers have recently been published in this field \citep{Ruodu2, Ruodu3, Ruodu4, Ruodu5}.
While the concepts of mutual exclusivity and complete mixability are both useful in various fields of optimization problems, since their concepts
both depend on the marginal distributions and are problem specific,
they may not provide the general concept of negative dependence.
\citet{Ahn7} proposed a set of negative dependence joint distributions,
which is named as $d$-countermonotonic copulas ($d$-CM).
The definition of $d$-CM is known to be the definition of copula only.
Furthermore, the set of $d$-CM copulas is minimal in terms of concordance ordering:
there is no copula which is strictly smaller in concordance ordering
than the given $d$-CM copula except $d$-CM copulas.
Admitting the absence of the minimum element in multivariate dimensions $d\ge 3$,
the set of minimal copulas can be important in optimization problems.
However, without understanding the further properties of $d$-CM copulas,
choosing the proper $d$-CM copulas for the given optimization problem can be difficult.
Furthermore, as specified in \citet{Ruodu3}, $d$-CM can be too general to be used for the negative extreme dependence
For example, any vector $(V, V, \cdots,V, 1-V)$ with $V$ being a uniform[0,1] random variable is $d$-CM, while it is close to a comonotonic random vector
except the last element.
Hence in this paper, to remove such an almost comonotonic case and emphasize the negative extreme dependence concept,
we consider only a special subset of $d$-CM copulas,
which will be parameterized by the vector $\overrightarrow{w}\in \mathbb{R}_+^d$,
where $\mathbb{R}_+^d$ is a $d$-dimensional positive Euclidean space.
Such set of copulas will be named as $\overrightarrow{w}$-countermonotonic copulas ($\overrightarrow{w}$-CM).
Due to the minimality property of the set of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas, which is inherited from $d$-CM, we expect that the set of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas
might be also useful in various optimization problems.
However, before we discuss the usefulness of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas in optimization problems,
the existence of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas should be first investigated.
While the existence of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas with
$$\overrightarrow{w}=(1,\cdots, 1)\in \mathbb{R}_+^d$$
is well known in the literature,
see, for example, \citet{Ahn7}, existence of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas is not guaranteed for general $\overrightarrow{w}\in \mathbb{R}_+^d$.
This paper provides the equivalence condition for the existence of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas. For the proof and construction of the copula,
we use a simple geometrical method to construct the copula.
A similar result obtained by using an algebraic method can be found in a recent working paper by \citet{Ruodu4}.
Since $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM is the property of the copula only,
the usefulness of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM may be limited to some optimization problems which do not depend on marginal distributions.
\citet{Ruodu3} also note the possible limitedness of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM (hence $\overrightarrow{d}$-CM) in solving optimization problems
by commenting that {\it any dependence concept which does not take into account marginal distributions may fail to
solve optimization problems which depend on marginal distributions}. Variance minimization of the aggregated sum with given marginal distributions,
which is formally stated in \eqref{var.eq} below, is one such example;
detailed literature can be found in \citet{Ruschendorf, Ruschendorf2, Ruodu, Ruodu3}.
As can be intuitively expected, and as will be shown in Section \ref{optim} below, it can be shown that no single copula
universally minimizes the variance of the aggregated sum with arbitrarily given marginals.
However, we will show that using a set of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas rather than a single copula
can minimize the variance of the aggregated sum for varying marginal distributions when restricted to the uniform distribution family.
While our result provides a general solution with no restriction on $\overrightarrow{w}\in\mathbb{R}_+^d$,
a partial solution can be observed in \citet{Ruodu4} for some special cases of $\overrightarrow{w}\in\mathbb{R}_+^d$
where they are mainly interested in so called {\it joint mixability} which aims for the constant aggregated sum.
More detailed results will be provided in Section \ref{optim}.
For a financial application of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM, we provide a new definition of the herd behavior index.
Herd behaviors describe the comovement of members in a group.
Since herd behaviors in the stock markets are observed usually during financial crises \citep{Dhaene2, Ahnhix},
measuring the herd behavior can be important in managing financial risks.
Focusing on the fact that the perfect herd behavior can be modeled with the comonotonicity,
some herd behavior indices that measure the degree of comonotonicity via the concept of the (co)variance have been
proposed \citep{Dhaene2,Daniel14, Ahnhix}.
Measuring the herd behavior using such herd behavior indices can be important as it has been
shown to be an indicator of the market fear.
However, while the concept of comonotonicity is free of marginal distribution (and hence so is the herd behavior),
these herd behavior measures can depend on marginal distributions, as will be shown in Example \ref{ex..1} below. Alternatively,
we define the new herd behavior index based on a weighted average of bivariate Spearman's rho.
This new herd behavior index is not affected by the marginal distributions by definition and will be shown to preserve the concordance ordering.
We also show that the maximum and minimum of the new herd behavior are closely related with comonotonicity and $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows.
We first summarize the study notations, and briefly explain basic copula theory and countermonotonicity theory in Section \ref{sec.2}.
The concept of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM is introduced in Section \ref{sec.3}, and
the existence of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copula is demonstrated in Section \ref{sec.cond}.
Section \ref{optim} applies the concept of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM to variance minimization problems.
The definition and minimization of the new herd behavior index are discussed in in Section \ref{hix.section}, which is followed by the conclusions.
\section{Notations and Preliminary Results}\label{sec.2}
\subsection{Conventions}
Let $d\ge 2$ be integers and $\mathbb{R}^d$ denotes $d$ dimensional Euclidean space. Especially, let
$\mathbb{R}_+^d$ be $d$ dimensional positive Euclidean space.
Further $[a,b]\times [a,b]\cdots\times [a,b] \subseteq \mathbb{R}^d$ is denoted by $[a, b]^d$.
We use $\overrightarrow{\cdot}$ to denote $d$-variate vectors: especially,
lower case $$\overrightarrow {x}=(x_1,x_2,\cdots,x_d)$$ denotes constant vectors in $\mathbb{R}^d$ and
upper case $$\overrightarrow {X}=(X_1,X_2,\cdots,X_d)$$ denotes $d$-variate random vectors.
More specifically
$$\overrightarrow{u}:=(u_1, \cdots, u_d)\quad\hbox{and}\quad \overrightarrow{w}:=(w_1, \cdots, w_d)$$
will be used to denote constant vectors in $[0,1]^d$ and $\mathbb{R}_+^d$, respectively.
Finally, use $V$ to denote a uniform$[0,1]$ random variable.
Unless specified, we assume $\overrightarrow {X}$ be a $d$-dimensional random vector having
$H$ as its cumulative distribution function defined by
\[
H(\overrightarrow {x})=P(X_1 \leq x_1 , \cdots, X_d \leq x_d)
\quad \hbox{for} \quad\overrightarrow {x}\in \mathbb{R}^d,
\]
and the marginal distribution of $X_i$ is $F_i (y):=P(X_i \leq y)$ for $i\in\{1, \cdots, d\}$ and $y\in\mathbb{R}$.
Define $\mathcal{F}_d(F_1, \cdots, F_d)$ to be the Fr\'echet space of $d$-variate random vectors with marginal distribution $F_1, \cdots, F_d$.
Hence, $\overrightarrow{X}\in \mathcal{F}_d(F_1, \cdots, F_d)$.
Equivalently, we also denote $H\in \mathcal{F}_d(F_1, \cdots, F_d)$.
We use $\mathcal{F}_d$ to denote the special case of Fr\'echet space, where all marginal distributions are uniform$[0,1]$.
This paper assumes that marginals distributions are continuous.
According to Sklar (1959), given $H\in\mathcal{F}(F_1, \cdots, F_d)$, there exists a unique function $C:[0,1]^d\rightarrow [0,1]$ satisfying
\[
H({\overrightarrow{x}})=C(F_1 (x_1),\cdots,F_d(x_d)).
\]
The function $C$ is called a copula, which is also a distribution function on $[0,1]^d$.
Further information on copulas can be found, for example, \citet{Cherubini} and \citet{Nelson}.
Any $H\in \mathcal{F}(F_1, \cdots, F_d)$ satisfies
\[
W(F_1(x_1), \cdots, F_d(x_d))\le H(\overrightarrow{x})\le M(F_1(x_1), \cdots, F_d(x_d)), \quad\hbox{for\, all}\quad \overrightarrow{x}\in\mathbb{R}^d,
\]
where
\begin{equation}\label{intro.1}
W(\overrightarrow {u}):=\max\{u_1+\cdots+u_d-(d-1),0 \}\quad \hbox{and}\quad M(\overrightarrow {u}):=\min\{u_1,\cdots, u_d \},
\end{equation}
for $\overrightarrow{u}\in[0,1]^d $. $W$ and $M$ in \eqref{intro.1} are called the Fr\'{e}chet-Hoeffding lower and Fr\'{e}chet-Hoeffding upper bounds, respectively.
Note that $M(F_1, \cdots, F_d)$ is a cumulative distribution of a $d$-variate random vector
while $W(F_1, \cdots, F_d)$ is not in general.
Let $\overline{H}$ be a survival distribution function defined as
\[
\overline{H}(\overrightarrow{x}):=\P{X_1>x_1, \cdots, X_d>x_d}\quad\hbox{for}\quad \overrightarrow{x}\in \mathbb{R}^d.
\]
For $H, H^*\in \mathcal{F}(F_1, \cdots, F_d)$, the concordance ordering $H\prec H^*$ is defined by
\[
H(\overrightarrow {x})\le H^*(\overrightarrow {x}) \quad \hbox{and}\quad \overline{H}(\overrightarrow {x})\le \overline{H^*}(\overrightarrow {x}) \quad\hbox{for all}\quad \overrightarrow {x}\in \mathbb{R}^d.
\]
Furthermore, define $H= H^*$ if $$H(\overrightarrow{x})=H^*(\overrightarrow{x})$$ for any $\overrightarrow{x}\in \mathbb{R}^d$.
Equivalently, denote $\overrightarrow{X}\buildrel {\rm d} \over = \overrightarrow{X^*}$ if $H= H^*$, where the cumulative distribution function of $\overrightarrow{X^*}$ is $H^*$.
Unless specified,
\[
\overrightarrow{U}:=(U_1, \cdots, U_d),\quad\overrightarrow{U^*}:=(U_1^*, \cdots, U_d^*), \quad\hbox{and}\quad\overrightarrow{U^{**}}:=(U_1^{**}, \cdots, U_d^{**})
\]
are $d$-variate random vectors in $\mathcal{F}_d$ having copula $C$, $C^*$ and
$C^{**}$ as cumulative distributions functions, respectively. For example,
\[
\P{U_1\le u_1, \cdots, U_d\le u_d}=C(\overrightarrow{u}
\]
for $\overrightarrow{u}\in [0,1]^d$.
It will be convenient to define the minimal and minimum copulas.
For $d\ge 2$, we define $d$-dimensional copula $C\in \mathcal{F}_d$ as a minimum(maximal) copula if the inequality
\[
C^*\succ(\prec) C
\]
for any $d$-dimensional copula $C^*\in \mathcal{F}_d$.
Similarly, for $d\ge 2$, define $d$-dimensional copula $C\in \mathcal{F}_d$ as a minimal(maximal) copula if the inequality
\[
C^*\prec(\succ) C
\]
for some $d$-dimensional copula $C^*\in \mathcal{F}_d$ implies $C^*= C$.
Define the set of copulas $\mathbb{C}\subseteq \mathcal{F}_d$ to be {\it minimal in set concordance ordering} if any $C\in\mathbb{C}$ and $C^*\in\mathcal{F}_d$ with
\[
C^*\prec C
\]
implies
\[
C^*\in \mathbb{C}.
\]
By definition, $\mathbb{C}$ is minimal in set concordance ordering if $\mathbb{C}$ is empty.
Clearly, the definition of minimality in set concordance ordering is a weaker concept than the definition of minimal copula.
In the minimality of set concordance ordering, the quality of the minimality depends on the size of the set.
For example, Fr\'echet space is minimal in set concordance ordering.
On the other hand, if $\mathbb{C}$ has a single element, the definition of the minimality in set concordance ordering coincides with the definition of the minimal copula.
\subsection{Review of $d$-Countermonotonicity}
Comonotonicity has gained popularity in actuarial science and finance.
Conceptually, a random vector $\overrightarrow {X}$ is comonotonic if all of its components move in the same direction.
Comonotonicity is useful in several areas, such as the bound problems of an aggregate sum \citep{Goovaerts3, Cheung3} and hedging problems \citep{Cheung2}.
Recently, comonotonicity has been used in describing the economic crisis \citep{Dhaene2, Dhaene3, Ahnhix}.
Countermonotonicity is the opposite concept to comonotonicity.
Conceptually, in the bivariate case, a random vector $\overrightarrow {X}$ is countermonotonic if two components move
in the opposite directions.
The following classical results summarize
the equivalent conditions of countermonotonicity in bivariate dimensions.
\begin{definition}\label{def.6}
A set $A\subset \mathbb{R}^2$ is countermonotonic(comonotonic) if the following inequality holds
\[
(x_1-y_1)(x_2-y_2)\le(\ge) 0 \quad\hbox{for all}\quad {\overrightarrow{x}},\,{\overrightarrow{y}}\in \mathbb{R}^2.
\]
$\overrightarrow{X}$ is called countermonotonic(comonotonic) if it has countermonotonic(comonotonic) support.
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm.counter.1}
For a bivariate random vector $\overrightarrow{X}$, we have the following equivalent statements.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[i.] $\overrightarrow{X}$ is countermonotonic
\item[ii.] For any $\overrightarrow{x}\in \mathbb{R}^2$
\begin{equation}\label{eq.counter.4}
\P{{\overrightarrow{X}}\le \overrightarrow{x}}=\max\left\{F_1(x_1)+F_2(x_2)-1,0 \right\}
\end{equation}
\item[iii.] For $\hbox{Uniform\rm($0,1$)}$ random variable $U_1$, we have
\[
{\overrightarrow{X}}\buildrel {\rm d} \over = \left(F_1^{-1}(U_1), F_2^{-1}(1-U_1) \right).
\]
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
While the extension of comonotonicity into multivariate dimensions $d>2$ is straightforward, there is no obvious extension of countermonotonicity
into multivariate dimensions $d>2$.
As discussed in \citet{Ahn7}, the difficulty of the extension of countermonotonicity arises partially due to the lack of minimum copula.
In this paper, we provide a set of minimal copulas, which can be viewed as a natural extension of countermonotonicity in two dimension into
multivariate dimensions.
\section{Weighted Countermonotonicity}\label{sec.3}
As an extension of countermonotonicity or negative extreme dependence in multivariate dimensions, \citet{Ahn7}
introduced the concept of $d$-CM.
While $d$-CM copulas are theoretically interesting, the existence and construction of $d$-CM copulas
with certain parametric functions remain unknown, and it may therefore be hard to apply $d$-CM copulas to various optimization problems.
Furthermore, the concept of $d$-CM may be too general
to describe the negative dependence concept as briefly specified in \citet{Ruodu3},
where the example of $(V, V, \cdots, V, 1-V)$ was given.
Alternatively, \citet{Ahn7} introduced the concept of strict $d$-CM as a special case of $d$-CM,
which is useful in some minimization problems.
However, because of the symmetricity of strict $d$-CM,
it cannot be used for non-symmetric optimization problems, as will be explained in Section \ref{optim}.
For completeness in the paper, we have summarized the definitions and properties of (strict) $d$-CM in the Appendix.
In this section, we introduce a new class of extremal negative dependent copulas,
which will be called $\overrightarrow{w}$-Countermonotonic ($\overrightarrow{w}$-CM) copulas
and can be interpreted as a set of minimal copulas as shown in Corollary \ref{rem.2} below.
Remark \ref{remark1} addresses
that the set of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas can be interpreted as generalized strict $d$-CM, and
further shows that $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas are the subset of $d$-CM copulas.
\begin{definition}\label{def.w.1}
A $d$-variate random vector $\overrightarrow{X}$ is $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM if
\begin{equation*}
\P{\sum\limits_{i=1}^d w_i\, F_i(X_i)=\frac{\sum_{i=1}^{d}w_i}{2}}=1.
\end{equation*}
Equivalently, we say that $H$ is $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM if $\overrightarrow{X}$ is $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM.
Furthermore, when $\overrightarrow{X}$ is $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM, we define $\overrightarrow{w}$ as a shape vector of $\overrightarrow{X}$.
\end{definition}
$\overrightarrow{w}$-CM can be regarded as multivariate extension of countermonotonicity into multivariate dimensions.
First, assume that $\overrightarrow{X}\in\mathcal{F}_2(F_1, F_2)$ is countermonotonic. Then, since $\overrightarrow{X}$ is a continuous random vector,
Theorem \ref{thm.counter.1}. iii concludes that
\[
\begin{aligned}
F_1(X_1)+F_2(X_2) &\buildrel {\rm d} \over = F_1\circ F_1^{-1}(U_1) +F_2\circ F_2^{-1}(1-U_1) \\
\end{aligned}
\]
which in turn implies $\overrightarrow{X}$ is $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM for any $w_1=w_2>0$.
On the other hand, assume that $\overrightarrow{X}$ is $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM with $w_1=w_2>0$. Then by Definition \ref{def.w.1}, we have
\[
F_1(X_1)+F_2(X_2)=1
\]
with probability $1$, which in turn concludes that the support of $\overrightarrow{X}$ is countermonotonic.
So we can conclude that
$\overrightarrow{X}\in\mathcal{F}_2(F_1, F_2)$ is countermonotonic if and only if $\overrightarrow{X}$ is $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM with $w_1=w_2$.
As can be expected from Definition \ref{def.w.1}, $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM is a property of copula only, and this is summarized in the following lemma.
The proof is similar to that of Lemma 1 in \citet{Ahn7}.
However, the result in the following lemma is more useful as it shows that the shape vector is invariant to marginal distributions.
\begin{lemma}
Let $\bf X$ and ${\bf X}^*$ be random vectors from the distribution functions
\[
H=C(F_1, \cdots, F_d) \quad \hbox{and}\quad H^*=C(F_1^*, \cdots, F_d^*),
\]
respectively, where marginal distribution functions, $F_1, \cdots, F_d$, are possibly different from marginal distribution functions, $F_1^*,\cdots, F_d^*$.
Then $\bf X$ is $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM if and only if ${\bf X}^*$ is $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since two random vectors $(F_1(X_1),\cdots, F_d(X_d) )$ and $(F_1^*(X_1^*),\cdots, F_d^*(X_d^*) )$
have copula $C$ as the same distribution functions, we have
\begin{equation}
\P{\sum\limits_{j=1}^d w_1\, F_i(X_i)=\frac{\sum_{i=1}^{d}w_i}{2}}=1,
\end{equation}
if and only if
\begin{equation}
\P{\sum\limits_{j=1}^d w_1\, F_i^*(X_i^*)=\frac{\sum_{i=1}^{d}w_i}{2}}=1.
\end{equation}
Hence we conclude that
$\bf X$ is $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM if and only if ${\bf X}^*$ is $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM.
\end{proof}
In the following definition, we provide the copula version of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM.
Note that, for the property of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM,
it is enough to study the copula version of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM, because $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM is a property of copula only.
Hence, throughout this paper, we will use the following definition as the definition of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM.
\begin{definition}\label{new.def}
A $d$-variate random vector $\overrightarrow{U}$ is $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM if
\begin{equation}\label{eq.strict}
\P{\sum\limits_{i=1}^d w_i\, U_i=\frac{\sum_{i=1}^{d}w_i}{2}}=1.
\end{equation}
Equivalently, we say that $C$ is $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM if $\overrightarrow{U}$ is $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM.
Here, $\overrightarrow{w}$ is called as a shape vector of $\overrightarrow{X}$.
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}\label{remark1}
Note that $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM is $d$-CM with parameter functions
\[
f_i(y)=c_i F_i(y)
\]
for $i\in\{1, \cdots, d\}$ and $y\in \mathbb{R}$, where
$$c_i:=\frac{2\,w_i}{\sum\limits_{j=1}^{d}w_j}.$$
Furthermore, since $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM coincides with strict $d$-CM when $w_1=\cdots=w_d$,
the set of strict $d$-CM copula is the subset of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas.
in the Appendix.
For convenience, we summarize the definitions of $d$-CM and strict $d$-CM in Definition \ref{def.multi3} and Definition \ref{def.multi4} in the Appendix.
\end{remark}
The following corollary explains that the set of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas can be regarded
to have minimality in concordance ordering as a set.
Since $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM is a special case of $d$-CM as shown in Remark \ref{remark1}, the proof of the following corollary is immediate from
\citet{Ahn7}. However, for completeness in the paper, we present the proof in the Appendix.
\begin{corollary}\label{rem.2}
For given $\overrightarrow{w}\in\mathbb{R}_+^d$, let $\mathbb{C}$ be the set of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM: i.e. $\mathbb{C}$ is defined as
$$\mathbb{C}:=\left\{ C\in \mathcal{F}_d\big\vert \hbox{ $C$ is $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM}\right\}.$$
Then $\mathbb{C}$ is minimal in set concordance ordering.
\end{corollary}
As briefly mentioned in Section \ref{sec.1}, since there is no minimum copula available for $d\ge 3$,
it is clear that minimal copulas will play a key role in various minimization problems.
In this sense, Corollary \ref{rem.2} addresses an important property of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas:
the set of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas achieves minimality in the sense that
there are no copulas strictly smaller than the $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copula other than $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas.
Hence, the concept of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM can be useful in various minimization/maximization problems
as will be explained in Section \ref{optim} below. For a discussion of the usage of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas, it is essential to check
the existence of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas as will be shown in the next section.
\section{Condition to Achieve the Weighted Countermonotonicity}\label{sec.cond}
Depending on the given marginal distributions, \eqref{eq.strict} may not be always achieved. For example, for
$(w_1, w_2)=(2,1)$, none of $(U_1, U_2)\in \mathcal{F}_2$
can achieve the condition in \eqref{eq.strict}.
In this section, we provide the equivalence condition of the weight $\overrightarrow{w}\in\mathbb{R}_+^d$
for the existence of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copula.
Note that a similar result can be found in a recent working paper by \citet{Ruodu4},
which explains an algebraic way of constructing $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas.
We first define the set of weights where $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas exists.
\begin{notation}
Define the set of weights in $3$-dimensions as follows
\[
\mathbb{W}_3:=\left\{ (w_1, w_2, w_3)\in \mathbb{R}_+^3 \big\vert\sum\limits_{i=1}^{3}w_i \ge 2\max\{w_1, w_2,w_3\}\right\} .
\]
\end{notation}
Note that the set $\mathbb{W}_3$ is equivalent with the set of the line lengths in triangles (including degenerate triangles).
\begin{lemma}\label{ex.thm0}
For any $\overrightarrow{w}\in \mathbb{W}_3$, there exists $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For convenience, define
\begin{equation}\label{zs}
z_1:=\frac{w_2+w_3-w_1}{2w_2},\;\, z_2:=\frac{w_3+w_1-w_2}{2w_3}\quad \hbox{and} \;\, z_3:=\frac{w_1+w_2-w_3}{2w_1},\;\,\hbox{for some}\;\, (w_1, w_2, w_3)\in \mathbb{R}_+^3.
\end{equation}
and denote $\overrightarrow{u}\in \Phi(\overrightarrow{w})$ if
\[
u_1\,w_1+u_2\,w_2+u_3\,w_3=\frac{w_1+w_2+w_3}{2}.
\]
Now, let us consider the following three points
\[
\overrightarrow{p_1}:=(1,z_1,0),\quad \overrightarrow{p_2}:=(0,1,z_2)\quad \hbox{and} \quad \overrightarrow{p_3}:=(z_3,0,1),
\]
and observe that the points satisfy $\overrightarrow{p_i}\in \Phi(\overrightarrow{w})$ for $i\in\{1,2,3\}$.
Hence any point on the line that connects $\overrightarrow{p_i}$ and $\overrightarrow{p_j}$ is again in $\Phi(\overrightarrow{w})$: i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{my.star}
t\overrightarrow{p_i}+(1-t)\overrightarrow{p_j}\in \Phi(\overrightarrow{w})
\end{equation}
for any $0\le t\le 1$ and $i,j\in\{1,2,3\}$.
Further, by the assumption $\overrightarrow{w}\in\mathbb{W}_3$, the following inequalities can be derived
\[
0\le z_i\le 1 \quad\hbox{for}\quad i\in\{1,2,3\},
\]
which in turn implies
\begin{equation}\label{bp}
t\overrightarrow{p_i}+(1-t)\overrightarrow{p_j}\in [0,1]^3
\end{equation}
for any $0\le t\le 1$ and $i,j\in\{1,2,3\}$.
Note that the trace of \eqref{bp} is triangular in $[0,1]^3$ with vertices lying on $\overrightarrow{p_1}$, $\overrightarrow{p_2}$ and $\overrightarrow{p_3}$.
Now for the given triangle with vertices $\overrightarrow{p_1}$, $\overrightarrow{p_2}$ and $\overrightarrow{p_3}$,
we give positive weights $m_{1,2}$, $m_{2,3}$, $m_{3,1}$ to each edge $\overline{p_1p_2}$, $\overline{p_2p_3}$ and $\overline{p_3p_1}$
such that weights are uniformly distributed on each edge.
Here we assume that that the sum of weights is given as
$m_{1,2}+m_{2,3}+m_{3,1}=1$,
so that the weights on the edges of the triangle define
a random vector $\overrightarrow{X}=(X_1, X_2, X_3)$.
In defining $H$ as the cumulative distribution function of the random vector $\overrightarrow{X}$,
our goal is to show that there exist the weights $(m_{1,2},\,m_{2,3},\,m_{3,1})\in\mathbb{R}_+^3$ which make $H$ a copula.
To show that $H$ is a copula, it is enough to show that $H$ is $2$-increasing and that the marginals of $H$ are a uniform$[0,1]$ distribution \citep{Nelson}.
Since $H$ is defined by the nonnegative weights $m_{12}, m_{23}, m_{31}$ that are distributed on the edges of the triangular,
it is obvious that $H$ is $2$-increasing.
Now, it remains to show that marginals of $H$ are a uniform$[0,1]$ distribution.
Since weights $m_{12}, m_{23}, m_{31}$ are uniformly distributed on each edge, it is enough
to check uniformity on each vertex of the triangle, which is equivalent to show
\begin{equation}\label{3eq}
\P{X_1\le z_1}=z_1,\quad\P{X_2\le z_2}=z_2\quad\hbox{and}\quad \P{X_3\le z_3}=z_3.
\end{equation}
Each equation in \eqref{3eq} is equivalent with
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}\label{3eq2}
z_1&= m_{12}\cdot 0+m_{23} \,z_1 + m_{31}\cdot 1,\\
z_2&= m_{12}\cdot 1 + m_{23} \cdot 0 + m_{31}\,z_2 ,\\
z_3&= m_{12}\,z_3 + m_{23}\cdot 1 + m_{31}\cdot 0 ,\\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
respectively.
The solution of \eqref{3eq2} is
\begin{equation}\label{3sol}
\begin{aligned}
m_{12}=\frac{(1-z_1)(1-z_2)(1-z_3)-(1-z_1)(1-z_2)+(1-z_1)} {(1-z_1)(1-z_2)(1-z_3)+1},\\
m_{23}=\frac{(1-z_1)(1-z_2)(1-z_3)-(1-z_2)(1-z_3)+(1-z_2)} {(1-z_1)(1-z_2)(1-z_3)+1},\\
m_{31}=\frac{(1-z_1)(1-z_2)(1-z_3)-(1-z_3)(1-z_1)+(1-z_3)} {(1-z_1)(1-z_2)(1-z_3)+1}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
While $m_{1,2}+m_{2,3}+m_{3,1}\neq 1$ for general $(z_1, z_2, z_3)\in[0,1]^3$,
a tedious but straightforward calculation shows that, with $(z_1,\,z_2,\,z_3)$ defined in \eqref{zs},
$(m_{1,2}, m_{2,3}, m_{3,1})$ defined in \eqref{3sol} always satisfies $$m_{1,2}+ m_{2,3}+ m_{3,1}=1.$$
Finally, \eqref{my.star} derives that $\overrightarrow{X}$ is $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM.
\end{proof}
While $(z_1,z_2,z_3)$ is some vector in $[0,1]^3$, it is worth mentioning that the definition \eqref{zs} is crucial
to guarantee that the solution $(m_{1,2}, m_{2,3}, m_{3,1})$ of \eqref{3eq} satisfies
\[
m_{1,2}+ m_{2,3}+ m_{3,1}=1.
\]
In other words, $(m_{1,2}, m_{2,3}, m_{3,1})$, which satisfies \eqref{3eq} may not satisfy
\[
m_{1,2}+ m_{2,3}+ m_{3,1}=1
\]
for and arbitrarily given $(z_1, z_2, z_3)\in[0,1]^3$ that does not satisfy the condition \eqref{zs}.
For example, for the arbitrarily given $(z_1, z_2, z_3)=(0.5, 0.3, 0.2)$, the solution $(m_{1,2}, m_{2,3}, m_{3,1})$ of \eqref{3eq} defined in \eqref{3sol} has
\[
m_{1,2}+ m_{2,3}+ m_{3,1}>1.
\]
The following lemma is an extension of Lemma \ref{ex.thm0} into multivariate dimensions $d\ge3$.
\begin{lemma}\label{ex.thm}
For given $\overrightarrow{w}\in\mathbb{R}_+^d$, if there exist disjoint subsets $A$, $B$ and $C$ of $\{w_1, \cdots, w_d\}$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{cond1}
\left(\sum\limits_{w_i\in A} w_i, \sum\limits_{w_i\in B} w_i, \sum\limits_{w_i\in C} w_i \right) \in\mathbb{W}_3\quad\hbox{and}\quad A\cup B\cup C =\left\{w_1, \cdots, w_d \right\},
\end{equation}
then there exists a random vector $\overrightarrow{U}$ whose marginals are uniform[$0,1$] and it satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{cond2}
\sum\limits_{i=1}^{d}w_iU_i=\frac{\sum_{i=1}^{d}w_i}{2}.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\overrightarrow{U}$ be random vectors with marginals being uniform[0,1].
Further, let
\[
\begin{aligned}
V_1:=\sum\limits_{i\in A} U_i, \quad
V_2:=\sum\limits_{i\in B} U_i \quad\hbox{and}\quad
V_3:=\sum\limits_{i\in C} U_i.
\end{aligned}
\]
Now the proofs are trivial if we set $U_i$'s in the same subset as being comonotonic
i.e. $U_i$ and $U_j$ are comonotonic if either $i,j\in A$, $i,j\in B$ or $i,j\in C$.
\end{proof}
The following lemma provides the equivalence condition of \eqref{cond1}, which is more intuitive and easy to verify.
\begin{lemma}\label{contra}
For the given weight $\overrightarrow{w}\in\mathbb{R}_+^d$, we have the following inequality
\begin{equation}\label{contra.1}
\max\{w_1, \cdots, w_d\}\le \sum\limits_{i=1}^d w_i-\max\{w_1, \cdots, w_d\}
\end{equation}
if and only if there exist disjoint subsets $A$, $B$ and $C$ of $\{w_1, \cdots, w_d\}$ satisfying \eqref{cond1}.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First observe that \eqref{cond1} implies \eqref{contra.1} is trivial. Hence it remains to show \eqref{contra.1} implies \eqref{cond1}.
Without loss of generality, let $w_1\ge\cdots\ge w_d$.
For any integer $d\ge 3$, define
\[
w_2^*:=\sum\limits_{i\in \mathbb{Z}_O}w_i \quad\hbox{and}\quad w_3^*:=\sum\limits_{i\in \mathbb{Z}_E}w_i
\]
where $\mathbb{Z}_O:=\{w_i\big\vert i\neq 1 \hbox{ and $i\le d$ is odd number} \}$ and
$\mathbb{Z}_E:=\{w_i\big\vert \hbox{$i\le d$ is even number} \}$.
Then it is straightforward to show that
\begin{equation}\label{contra.2}
w_1+w_2^*\ge w_3^* \quad\hbox{and}\quad w_1+w_3^*\ge w_2^*
\end{equation}
Hence, along with \eqref{contra.2}, if we assume that $\overrightarrow{w}$ satisfies \eqref{contra.1}, we can conclude $(w_1, w_2^*, w_3^*)\in \mathbb{W}_3$,
which in turn implies \eqref{cond1} with $A=\{w_1\}$, $B=\{w_i\big\vert i\in\mathbb{Z}_O \}$ and $C=\{w_i\big\vert i\in\mathbb{Z}_E \}$.
\end{proof}
So far in Lemma \ref{ex.thm} and Lemma \ref{contra}, we have provided sufficient conditions for the existence
$\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copula.
Then the natural question is to check whether they are also necessary conditions or not. The following corollary shows that
the condition in \eqref{contra.1} is also a necessary condition for the existence of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas.
\begin{corollary}\label{cor.wcm}
For the given weight $\overrightarrow{w}\in\mathbb{R}_+^d$, there exists random vector $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM random vector $\overrightarrow{U}$
if and only if $\overrightarrow{w}$ satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{cond.min}
\max\{w_1, \cdots, w_d\}\le \sum\limits_{i=1}^d w_i-\max\{w_1, \cdots, w_d\}.
\end{equation}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
It is enough to show that $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM implies \eqref{cond.min}.
First, consider a weight $(w_1, \cdots, w_d)\in\mathbb{R}_+^d$ such that
one weight, say $w_1$, is greater than the sum of all other weights
\begin{equation}\label{cond.min1}
w_1> \sum\limits_{i=2}^d w_i.
\end{equation}
Then, it is obvious that there does not exist any random vector $\overrightarrow{U}$ whose marginals are uniform[$0,1$] and satisfies \eqref{eq.strict}:
this can be easily verified using the following variance comparison;
\[
\Var{w_1U_1} > \Var{\sum\limits_{i=2}^{d}w_iU_i}.
\]
Hence, we can conclude that there does not exist $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copula under the condition \eqref{cond.min1}, which concludes the claim.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{3dplot.pdf}
\caption{$w$-CM Copula with $(w_1, w_2, w_3)=(5,4,3)$}
\label{figure.100}
\end{figure}
\begin{remark}\label{exit.rem}
For any $\overrightarrow{w}\in \mathbb{R}_+^d$ satisfying \eqref{cond.min}, the choice of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copula is not unique.
For example, in the proof of Lemma \ref{ex.thm0}, we show how to construct $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copula $C$ for $d=3$.
On the other hand, the construction method in the proof of Lemma \ref{ex.thm0} and the following choices of $z_1^*,\,z_2^*,\, z_3^*\in [0,1]$ defined as
\begin{equation*}
z_1^*:=\frac{w_2+w_3-w_1}{2w_3},\;\, z_2^*:=\frac{w_3+w_1-w_2}{2w_1}\quad \hbox{and} \;\, z_3^*:=\frac{w_1+w_2-w_3}{2w_2},
\end{equation*}
and three points $\overrightarrow{p_1^*},\, \overrightarrow{p_2^*},\, \overrightarrow{p_3^*}\in [0,1]^3$ defined as
\[
\overrightarrow{p_1^*}:=(1,0,z_1),\quad \overrightarrow{p_2^*}:=(z_2,1,0)\quad \hbox{and} \quad \overrightarrow{p_3^*}:=(0,z_3,1),
\]
will derive another choice of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copula $C^*$ with $C\neq C^*$.
\end{remark}
In the bivariate case, Corollary \ref{cor.wcm} concludes that $(U_1, U_2)$ being $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM implies that $w_1=w_2$
which coincides with the concept of countermonotonicity as we already mentioned in Section \ref{sec.3}.
The following example shows the numerical example of the construction of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copula
using the logic in the proof of Lemma \ref{ex.thm0}.
\begin{example}
Let $(w_1, w_2, w_3)=(5,4,3)$.
Since $$5=w_1\le w_2+w_3=4+3,$$ we know that $\overrightarrow{w}\in\mathcal{W}_3$ and, by Corollary \ref{cor.wcm},
there exists a $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM random vector $\overrightarrow{U}\in\mathcal{F}_3$. Using the techniques used in
\eqref{ex.thm0}, we can construct $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM random vector $\overrightarrow{U}$ having mass
$m_{12}$, $m_{23}$ and $m_{31}$ uniformly distributed on the each edge $\overrightarrow{p_1p_2}$, $\overrightarrow{p_2p_3}$ and
$\overrightarrow{p_3p_1}$, respectively. Here
\[
\overrightarrow{p_1}=\left(1, \frac{1}{4},0\right), \quad \overrightarrow{p_2}=\left(0, 1,\frac{2}{3}\right)\quad \hbox{and}\quad \overrightarrow{p_3}=\left(\frac{3}{5} ,0 ,1\right)
\]
and
\begin{equation}\label{mass.m}
m_{12}=\frac{6}{11},\quad m_{23}=\frac{3}{11}\quad\hbox{and}\quad m_{31}=\frac{2}{11}
\end{equation}
Hence, for example, we have
\[
\begin{aligned}
C\left(1, 0.25,1/3\right)&=1/3*m_{31}\\
&=\frac{2}{33}.
\end{aligned}
\]
Finally, Figure \ref{figure.100} shows the support of random vector $\overrightarrow{U}$.
\end{example}
\section{Application to the Variance Minimization Problem}\label{optim}
Finding the maximum and the minimum of variance in the aggregated sum with given marginal distributions is the classical optimization problem
\begin{equation}\label{var.eq}
\Var{\sum\limits_{i=1}^{d}X_i},\quad\hbox{for given $X_i\sim F_i$}, \quad i=1, \cdots, d.
\end{equation}
First of all, the maximization of \eqref{var.eq} is straightforward using the comonotonic random vectors.
For the minimization problem with $d=2$, the answer is trivial with countermonotonic random variables.
Regarding general dimensions $d\ge 3$, minimization of \eqref{var.eq} was solved for some cases of marginal distributions \citep{Ruschendorf, Ruschendorf2, Ruodu, Ruodu3}.
However, minimization of \eqref{var.eq} is not easy in general for $d\ge3$.
The following remark, which can be easily derived from Theorem 2.7 of \citet{Dhaene3}, states that variance minimization problems are related with concordance ordering,
which may offer some hints in the minimization of \eqref{var.eq}.
\begin{remark}\label{order.var
Let $F_1, \cdots, F_d$ be distribution functions having finite variances.
If $$\overrightarrow{X^*}, \, \overrightarrow{X}\in\mathcal{F}_d(F_1, \cdots, F_d)$$ with $C^*\prec C$, then
\[
\Var{\sum\limits_{i=1}^{d}X_i^*}\le \Var{\sum\limits_{i=1}^{d}X_i}.
\]
\end{remark}
From the remark, it is clear that the minimization and maximization of \eqref{var.eq}
is related with a minimum and maximum copula.
While maximization of \eqref{var.eq} is related with the comonotonic copula,
due to the absence of the minimum copula for $d\ge3$, the minimization of \eqref{var.eq} is related with
the set of the minimal copulas.
Of course, the choice of the proper set of minimal copulas depends on the marginal distributions.
Among many other choices of the marginal distributions in \eqref{var.eq},
this paper considers the uniform marginal distributions as shown in the following definition, which may be the simplest versions of \eqref{var.eq}.
The following assumption is useful to simplify the notation in several theorems in this section.
\begin{assumption}\label{assm.1}
Assume that $w_1= \max\{w_1, \cdots, w_d\}$.
\end{assumption}
\begin{definition}\label{var.min}
For given $\overrightarrow{w}\in\mathbb{R}_+^d$, define
\begin{equation}\label{min.eq}
m_-(\overrightarrow{w}):=\inf\left\{ \Var{\sum\limits_{i=1}^{d} \widetilde{U_i}}\bigg\vert \,\widetilde{U_i}\,\,\hbox{is uniform$[0,w_i]$ random variables, }\,i=1,\cdots,d\right\}
\end{equation}
and
\[
m_+(\overrightarrow{w}):=\sup\left\{ \Var{\sum\limits_{i=1}^{d} \widetilde{U_i}}\bigg\vert \,\widetilde{U_i}\,\,\hbox{is uniform$[0,w_i]$ random variables, }\,i=1,\cdots,d\right\}.
\]
where $\widetilde{U_i}\,\,\hbox{is uniform$[0,w_i]$ random variables for }i=1,\cdots,d$.
\end{definition}
Equivalently, $m_-(\overrightarrow{w})$ and $m_+(\overrightarrow{w})$ can be written as
\[
m_-(\overrightarrow{w})=\inf\left\{ \Var{\sum\limits_{i=1}^{d} w_iU_i}\bigg\vert \,\overrightarrow{U}\in \mathcal{F}_d\right \}
\]
and
\[
m_+(\overrightarrow{w})=\sup\left\{ \Var{\sum\limits_{i=1}^{d} w_iU_i}\bigg\vert \,\overrightarrow{U}\in \mathcal{F}_d\right\}.
\]
The upper bound
$$m_+(\overrightarrow{w})=\frac{1}{12}\left(\sum\limits_{i=1}^{d}w_i \right)^2$$
is achieved if and only if $\overrightarrow{U}$
is comonotonic \citep{Kaas, Dhaene5, Dhaene}.
Regarding the lower bound, when
\begin{equation}\label{lower.c}
2\,\max\{w_1, \cdots, w_d\} \le \sum\limits_{i=1}^{d} w_i,
\end{equation}
Corollary \ref{cor.wcm} concludes that
\begin{equation*
m_-(\overrightarrow{w})=0.
\end{equation*}
However for $\overrightarrow{w}$ which does not satisfy \eqref{lower.c}, minimization is not straightforward.
For $\overrightarrow{w}\in\mathbb{R}_+^d$ which does not satisfy \eqref{lower.c},
Theorem \ref{lem.m8} below finds the explicit expression for $m_-({\overrightarrow{w}})$.
More importantly, we also show that the minimum $m_-({\overrightarrow{w}})$ is achieved with $\overrightarrow{w^*}$-CM copulas even though
$\overrightarrow{w^*}\in\mathbb{R}_+^d$ may not be the same as $\overrightarrow{w}$.
Finally, Corollary \ref{lem.m1} provides the complete solution for $m_-({\overrightarrow{w}})$ and $m_+({\overrightarrow{w}})$ for any given
$\overrightarrow{w}\in\mathbb{R}_+^d$.
Before we examine the main results, it is convenient to present the following lemma and notations.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem.m}
Let $\overrightarrow{w}\in\mathbb{R}_+^d$ satisfy Assumption \ref {assm.1} and
\begin{equation}\label{my.cond5}
2\,w_1=\sum\limits_{i=1}^{d}w_i.
\end{equation}
Then the following inequality holds
\begin{equation}\label{my.cond}
\cov{U_1, \sum\limits_{i=1}^{d}w_iU_i }\ge 0,
\end{equation}
where the equality holds if and only if $\overrightarrow{U}$ is $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We first prove the inequality \eqref{my.cond} as
\begin{equation*
\begin{aligned}
\cov{U_1, \sum\limits_{i=1}^{d}w_iU_i } &= \sum\limits_{i=1}^{d} \cov{U_1, w_iU_i }\\
&= w_1\Var{U_1} + \sum\limits_{i=2}^{d} w_i {\rm corr}\left[ U_1, U_i \right] \sqrt{\Var{U_1}}\sqrt{\Var{U_i}}\\
&\ge w_1\Var{U_1}-\sum\limits_{i=2}^{d} w_i \sqrt{\Var{U_1}}\sqrt{\Var{U_i}}\\
&=\left[w_1-\sum\limits_{i=2}^{d} w_i \right]\Var{U_1}\\
&=0
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
where the inequality arises from the fact that correlation of any two random variables is greater than $-1$, and the last equality is from the condition
\eqref{my.cond5}.
Furthermore, since $\overrightarrow{w}$ satisfies the condition \eqref{cond.min}, Corollary \ref{cor.wcm}
concludes that the inequality in \eqref{my.cond} becomes equality if and only if
$\overrightarrow{U}$ is $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM.
\end{proof}
\begin{notation}\label{ref.ref}
For given $\overrightarrow{w}\in\mathbb{R}_+^d$, define $\overrightarrow{w^*}:=(w_1^*, \cdots, w_d^*)$ as
\begin{equation}\label{def.w}
w_i^*
:=\begin{cases}
w_i; & \hbox{ if }\;\; 2\, w_i\le \sum\limits_{j=1}^{d}w_j\\
\sum\limits_{j=1}^{d}w_i - w_i ; & \hbox{ if }\;\; 2\, w_i> \sum\limits_{j=1}^{d}w_j
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
for $i=1,\cdots,d$. Then, one can easily confirm $\overrightarrow{w^*}\in\mathbb{R}_+^d$.
Further, let
\[
\begin{aligned}
l(\overrightarrow{w})
&:=\frac{1}{12} \left[\left( 2\,\max\{w_1,\cdots, w_d\}-\sum\limits_{i=1}^{d}w_i\right)_+\right]^2.\\
\end{aligned}
\]
\end{notation}
Since there always exists $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM random vector $\overrightarrow{U}\in\mathcal{F}_d$ for
$\overrightarrow{w}\in\mathbb{R}_+^d$, which satisfies the condition \eqref{cond.min},
we conclude $m_-(\overrightarrow{w})=0$ in this case.
The following proposition provides the tight bound of $m_-(\overrightarrow{w})$ when $\overrightarrow{w}$ does not
satisfy the condition \eqref{cond.min}. The main idea of the proof is to shrink the largest weight so that the new weights satisfy
the condition \eqref{cond.min}, which in turn results in constant summation or zero variance. Then Lemma \ref{lem.m} shows that only the remaining part of the largest weight contributes the lower bound of the variance specified in \eqref{min.eq}.
\begin{theorem}\label{lem.m8}
Let the weight vector $\overrightarrow{w}\in\mathbb{R}_+^d$ satisfy Assumption \ref{assm.1} and
\begin{equation}\label{eq.pp}
2\, w_1> \sum\limits_{i=1}^{d}w_i.
\end{equation}
Then the following inequality holds
\begin{equation}\label{eq.m8}
l(\overrightarrow{w}) \le \Var{\sum\limits_{i=1}^{d} w_iU_i} ,
\end{equation}
where the inequality is attained if and only if\, $\overrightarrow{U}$ is $\overrightarrow{w^*}$-CM.
Furthermore, for any $\overrightarrow{w}\in \mathbb{R}_+^d$ satisfying the condition \eqref{eq.pp}, there exists random vector
$\overrightarrow{U}\in\mathcal{F}_d$ which achieves the equality in \eqref{eq.m8}.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
First, observe
$w_1-w_1^*>0$
for the given $\overrightarrow{w}$ satisfying the condition \eqref{eq.pp}.
Further we have
\begin{equation}\label{lem.m10}
\begin{aligned}
2w_1^*&= 2\left( \sum\limits_{i=1}^{d}w_i-w_1\right)\\
&= \left( \sum\limits_{i=1}^{d}w_i-w_1\right)+\sum\limits_{i=2}^{d}w_i\\
&= \sum\limits_{i=1}^{d}w_i^*.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Since $w_1-w_1^*>0$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{ahnb2}
\begin{aligned}
\Var{\sum\limits_{i=1}^{d}w_iU_i}&=\Var{(w_1-w_1^*)U_1}+\Var{w_1^*U_1+\sum\limits_{i=2}^{d}w_iU_i}\\
&\quad\quad\quad\quad+\cov{(w_1-w_1^*)U_1,\;\; w_1^*U_1+\sum\limits_{i=2}^{d}w_iU_i}\\
&=\Var{(w_1-w_1^*)U_1}+\Var{w_1^*U_1+\sum\limits_{i=2}^{d}w_i^*U_i}\\
&\quad\quad\quad\quad+(w_1-w_1^*)\cov{U_1,\;\; w_1^*U_1+\sum\limits_{i=2}^{d}w_i^*U_i}\\
&\ge \Var{(w_1-w_1^*)U_1}\\
&=\frac{1}{12}(w_1-w_1^*)^2,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where the last inequality is from \eqref{lem.m10} and Lemma \ref{lem.m}.
Furthermore, since variance of the random variable is $0$ if and only if the random variable is constant with probability $1$, Lemma \ref{lem.m} concludes that
the inequality in \eqref{ahnb2} is equality if and only if $\overrightarrow{U}$ is
$\overrightarrow{w^*}$-CM.
Finally, since $\overrightarrow{w^*}$ satisfies the condition \eqref{lem.m10} (hence the condition \eqref{cond.min}),
there always exists $\overrightarrow{w^*}$-CM random vector
$\overrightarrow{U}\in \mathcal{F}_d$, which in turn implies that the equality in \eqref{eq.m8} can be always achieved.
\end{proof}
Based on Theorem \ref{lem.m8},
the following corollary provides the complete solution for the optimization problem in Definition \ref{var.min}.
\begin{corollary}\label{lem.m1}
For the given $\overrightarrow{w}\in\mathbb{R}_+^d$,
the following inequality holds
\begin{equation}\label{eq.m}
l(\overrightarrow{w}) \le \Var{\sum\limits_{i=1}^{d} w_iU_i}
\le \frac{1}{12}\left( \sum\limits_{i=1}^{d}w_i\right)^2.
\end{equation}
The lower bound of \eqref{eq.m} is attained if and only if\, $\overrightarrow{U}$ is $\overrightarrow{w^*}$-CM and
the upper bound of \eqref{eq.m} is attained if and only if\, $\overrightarrow{U}$ is comonotonic.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
The upper bound in \eqref{eq.m} is a classical result which can explained by comonotonic $\overrightarrow{U}$; see \citet{Kaas, Dhaene5, Dhaene} for details.
Hence it is enough to show the lower bound
\begin{equation}\label{eq.m10}
\frac{1}{12} \left[\left( 2\,\max\{w_1, \cdots, w_d\}-\sum\limits_{i=1}^{d}w_i\right)_+\right]^2 \le \Var{\sum\limits_{i=1}^{d} w_iU_i}
\end{equation}
and the equality holds if and only if $\overrightarrow{U}$ is $\overrightarrow{w^*}$-CM.
For the lower bound in \eqref{eq.m}, consider two cases depending on $\overrightarrow{w}$.
First, consider the following condition on $\overrightarrow{w}\in\mathbb{R}_+^d$
\[
2\, \max\{w_1, \cdots, w_d\}- \sum\limits_{i=1}^{d}w_i \le 0.
\]
Since $l(\overrightarrow{w})=0$
in this case, nonnegativeness of the variance shows the left inequality of \eqref{eq.m}.
Furthermore, Corollary \ref{cor.wcm} implies that
the equality in \eqref{eq.m} holds if and only if $\overrightarrow{U}$ is $\overrightarrow{w^*}$-CM.
Finally, for $\overrightarrow{w}$ satisfying
\[
2\, \max\{w_1, \cdots, w_d\}- \sum\limits_{i=1}^{d}w_i > 0,
\]
the same result was summarized in Theorem \ref{lem.m8}.
\end{proof}
\section{Marginal Free Herd Behavior Index}\label{hix.section}
In this section, we define the marginal free measure of dependence which can be interpreted as the measure for the herd behavior.
We first review various herd behavior indices, which measure the degree of comovement or comonotonicity \citep{Dhaene2,Daniel14,Ahnhix}.
While such indices need to be marginal free
(because the concept of comovement or comonotonicity is a definition of copula only),
in Subsection \ref{sub.marginal}, we observe that such indices can be distorted by marginal distributions.
Alternatively, Subsection \ref{def.six} presents a definition of measures of dependence that is free of marginal distributions.
\subsection{Review of the Measures of Dependence}
Herd behavior is a general concept often used in various fields such as financial and psychology
to describe the irrational comovement of members in a group.
The recent financial crises have further highlighted the importance of understanding the herd behavior.
There have been several attempts to measure the herd behaviors through herd behavior indices.
In this subsection, we will briefly review some known herd behavior indices in the financial context.
Let ${\overrightarrow{X}}$ be $d$ individual stock prices at a time $t$ assuming that the current time is fixed at $0$.
For the given ${\overrightarrow{X}}$, the market index $S$ is defined as the weighted sum of the $d$ individual stock prices:
\[
S=\sum\limits_{i=1}^{d}w_iX_i,
\]
where weights $w_i$ can be interpreted as the total number of each stock available in the market.
Since a comonotonic random vector ${\overrightarrow{X^c}}:=(X_1^c, \cdots, X_d^c)$ can be represented as
\[
{\overrightarrow{X^c}}\sim (F_1^{-1}(V), \cdots, F_d^{-1}(V)),
\]
the market index under the comonotonic stock prices assumption,
assuming the marginal distributions of individual stock prices to be unchanged, can be defined as
\[
S^c:=\sum\limits_{i=1}^{d}w_iF^{-1}_{X_i}(V)
\]
Noting the fact that, as shown in Remark \ref{order.var}, the variance of the market index
is maximized when the individual stock prices are comonotonic,
the herd behavior index by \citet{Dhaene2} is defined as
the ratio of variance of the market index to that of the index under the comonotonic assumption.
The following definition defines the simplified version of HIX.
The original version of HIX defined using the option prices can be found in \citet{Dhaene2}.
\begin{equation*}
\hix{\overrightarrow{w}, {\overrightarrow{X}}}:= \frac{{\rm Var}[S]}{{\rm Var}[S^c]}.
\end{equation*}
While HIX is a convenient measure which can measure the herd behavior effectively,
HIX may be sensitive to the marginal distributions \citep{Ahnhix}.
The revised version of HIX (RHIX) defined as
\begin{equation*
\begin{aligned}
\rhix{ \overrightarrow{w},{\overrightarrow{X}}}=\frac{\sum\limits_{i\neq j} w_iw_j{\rm cov}\left( X_i, X_j \right)} {\sum\limits_{i\neq j} w_iw_j {\rm cov}\left( X_i^c, X_j^c \right)}.\\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
is known to reduce the marginal distribution effects \citep{Ahnhix, Ahn10}. The same measure was proposed by \citet{Daniel14}
from a slightly different perspective.
Importantly, original definition of HIX (hence RHIX) can be calculated using the individual option prices and option price of the market
index \citep{Dhaene2, Daniel}, and these measures can be used as predictors of the degree of herd behaviors in the future as
implied by current option prices.
These are the main reasons why HIX and RHIX are favorable herd behavior indices, although
there may be some preference between HIX and RHIX. Of course, HIX and RHIX can also be estimated from the high frequency stock
market data \citep{Ahn10}.
\subsection{Marginal Dependency of RHIX}\label{sub.marginal}
Despite some controversy, if the perfect herd behavior corresponds to comonotonic movement \citep{Dhaene2},
the herd behavior should be a phenomenon that solely depends on the copula.
In this sense, RHIX may be more favorable than HIX, because it is known to reduce the marginal distribution effects \citep{Ahnhix}.
However, as expected from the definition of RHIX (it is defined based on covariances), RHIX cannot thoroughly remove the marginal effects.
Through a simple example, this section explains that such marginal effects in the calculation of RHIX can be arbitrarily large.
For expository purposes, we consider the following {\bf Toy Model} using the bivariate lognormal distribution, which
is frequently used to describe the stock prices.
\begin{toy*}
Consider only two assets $\overrightarrow{X}=(X_1, X_2)$ that follow
a bivariate lognormal distribution with drift vector $\overrightarrow{u}$ and covolatility matrix ${\bf \Sigma}$
which is defined as $${\bf \Sigma}=\left(\begin{array}{c c}
\sigma_1^2 & \rho\sigma_1\sigma_2\\
\rho\sigma_1\sigma_2 & \sigma_2^2
\end{array}\right)
.$$
Note that $\overrightarrow{u}$, $\sigma_1$ and $\sigma_2$ are parameters related with marginal distributions, and
$\rho$ is the only parameter for the (Gaussian) copula; see, for example, \citet{Nelson} and \citet{Cherubini} for more details.
\end{toy*}
Under the {\bf Toy Model}, simple calculation shows that
\begin{equation}\label{rhix.2}
\rhix{{\bf w}, {\bf X}}=\frac{\exp(\rho_{12}\sigma_{1}\sigma_{2})-1}{\exp(\sigma_{1}\sigma_{2})-1}.
\end{equation}
We refer to \citet{Ahnhix} for more detailed calculation for HIX and RHIX under the lognormal model.
Now from \eqref{rhix.2}, the following equality shows that RHIX under the {\bf Toy Model }converges to $0$, when the common
volatility coefficient $\sigma_1=\sigma_2$ increases, regardless of
the copula coefficient $\rho$.
\begin{equation}\label{rhix.cov}
\lim\limits_{\sigma_1=\sigma_2\rightarrow \infty}{\rm RHIX}\left(\overrightarrow{w}, \overrightarrow{X}\right)=0\quad \hbox{for any}
\quad \rho<1.
\end{equation}
Knowing the degeneracy of RHIX as described in \eqref{rhix.cov}, the convergence rate can be important for the practical use of RHIX.
The following example shows the convergence rate of RHIX in \eqref{rhix.cov} under various circumstances.
\begin{example}\label{ex..1}
Figure \ref{figure.1}. (a) and (b) show
the variation of RHIX in the {\bf Toy Model} depending on the varying common volatility $\sigma:=\sigma_1=\sigma_2$
on the different scale time intervals of $(0,0.5)$ and $(0,5)$ respectively.
As shown in Figure \ref{figure.1}. (a), RHIX looks stable around reasonable weekly volatilities of the stock
markets assuming the weekly volatility to be $0.03$.\footnote{The weekly volatility for the S\&P 500 index and IBM from March to May of
2003 were $0.0309$ and $0.0365$ respectively. }
RHIX around yearly volatility ($=0.03\cdot\sqrt{52}\approx 0.22$)
even looks stable.
However, Figure \ref{figure.1}. (b) shows that RHIX slowly but surely decreases and converges to $0$ as $\sigma$ increases.
\end{example}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfloat[RHIX for various $\rho$ on the interval $(0,0.5)$]{%
\includegraphics[width=0.39\textwidth]{RHIX5.pdf}
}
\subfloat[RHIX for various $\rho$ on the interval $(0,5)$]{%
\includegraphics[width=0.54\textwidth]{RHIX50.pdf}
}
\caption{RHIX with volatility effects.}
\label{figure.1}
\end{figure}
\subsection{New Herd Behavior Index: The Marginal Free Measure of Dependence}\label{def.six}
In the following definition, we propose a new herd behavior index that is free of marginal distribution and hence defined in terms of copula only.
\begin{definition}
For a given random vector $\overrightarrow{X}$, Spearman's rho type of the Herd Behavior Index (SIX) is defined as
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\six{\overrightarrow{w},{\overrightarrow{X}}}&:=\frac{\sum\limits_{i<j} w_iw_j\rho_2\left( X_i, X_j \right)} {\sum\limits_{i< j} w_iw_j\rho_2\left( X_i^c, X_j^c \right)},\\
&=\frac{\sum\limits_{i< j} w_iw_j \rho_2\left( X_i, X_j \right)} {\sum\limits_{i< j} w_iw_j},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
where Spearman's rho $\rho_2$ is defined as
\[
\rho_2(X_i, X_j)=3\left(\P{(X_i-X_i^*)(X_j-X_j^{**})>0}- \P{(X_i-X_i^*)(X_j-X_j^{**})<0}\right)
\]
with $(X_i^*, X_j^*)$ and $(X_i^{**}, X_j^{**})$ are independent copies of $(X_i, X_j)$.
Sometimes we use $\six{\overrightarrow{w},H}$ to denote $\six{\overrightarrow{w},{\overrightarrow{X}}}$.
Note that SIX coincides with pairwise Spearman's rho defined in \citet{Schmid2}
with the equal weights $w_1=\cdots=w_d$.
\end{definition}
Since bivariate Spearman's rho does not depend on the marginal distribution, clearly SIX does not depend on the marginal distributions.
Hence, for continuous marginals, we have
\[
\six{\overrightarrow{w},H}=\six{\overrightarrow{w},C}.
\]
Since SIX can be obtained by replacing the covariance terms in RHIX with the Spearman's rho terms,
it can be interpreted as the ratio of the weighted pairwise Spearman's rho of stock prices to
the weighted average of Spearman's rho of stock prices under the comonotonic assumption.
Furthermore, similar to RHIX as in \citet{Ahn10}, SIX can be expressed as the weighted average of the pairwise Spearman's rhos as shown below
\[
\six{\overrightarrow{w},\overrightarrow{X}}=\E{Z}
\]
where
\[
\P{Z=\rho_2(X_i, X_j)}=p_{i,j}
\]
with
\[
p_{i,j}:=\frac{w_iw_j}{\sum\limits_{k\neq l}^{d} w_kw_l}.
\]
Unlike HIX or RHIX, the calculation of SIX using the vanilla option prices may be difficult in reality
because, whereas the calculation of HIX and RHIX requires the option prices on the individual stocks and the market index, the calculation of SIX requires
the option prices related to every pairs of the individual stock prices.
As an alternative, high frequency stock price data can be used for the estimation of SIX: a detailed method for the estimation of
HIX and RHIX using high frequency stock price data can be found in \citet{Ahn10} and a similar method can be applied to the estimation of SIX.
Empirical analysis of herd behaviors in the stock market using stock price data and SIX can be found in \citet{Ahn7}.
\begin{remark}
In the calculation of HIX and RHIX, we have to calculate the variance or covariance under the comonotonic assumptions.
Hence, in the calculation of HIX and RHIX, an assumption on the marginal distributions
is essential as shown in \citet{Ahn10}, where lognormal distributions are assumed.
However, for the calculation of SIX, since Spearman's rho under comonotonic assumption is always $1$ regardless of the marginal distributions,
marginal assumption is not necessary.
\end{remark}
The following example present the representation of SIX in the multivariate log-normal distribution, and confirms
that SIX is free of marginal distribution.
\begin{example}\label{ex.formula}
For $\overrightarrow{w}\in(0,\infty)^d$ and $d$-variate log-normal random vector $\overrightarrow{X}=(X_1, \cdots,X_d)$ with drift vector $\overrightarrow{\mu}$ and covolatility matrix ${\mathbf \Sigma}$, SIX can be represented as
\begin{equation}\label{ex.formula.1}
\begin{aligned}
\six{\bf w, {\bf X}} &=\frac{\sum\limits_{i\neq j}^{d} w_iw_j\frac{6}{\pi}{\rm acrsin}\left(\rho_{i,j} /2\right) }{\sum\limits_{i \neq j}^{d} w_iw_j } \\
&=\sum\limits_{i\neq j}^{d} c_{i,j}\frac{6}{\pi}{\rm acrsin}\left(\rho_{i,j} /2\right) \\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $ \rho_{i,j} = \frac {{\mathbf \Sigma}_{i,j}}{\sqrt {{\mathbf \Sigma}_{i,i}{\mathbf \Sigma}_{j,j}}}$, and the first inequality is from
\citet{Kendall2}.
\end{example}
Spearman's rho preserves the concordance ordering, and one can easily expect that SIX also preserves the concordance ordering.
Hence it is possible to show that the maximum of SIX is achieved with the comonotonic copula.
However, due to the absence of the minimum copula in the Fr\'echet Space, the minimum of SIX is not as clear.
The following theorem provides some properties of SIX and determines the maximum and minimum of SIX.
\begin{theorem}\label{prop.six}
For given $\overrightarrow{w}$, define $S_1:=w_1+\cdots+w_d$ and $S_2:=w_1^2+\cdots+ w_d^2$.
Then, for the given distribution functions $H:=C(F_1, \cdots, F_d)$ and $H^*:=C^*(F_1, \cdots, F_d)$, the following holds:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[i.] If copulas $C,\,C^*\in\mathcal{F}_d$ satisfy $C \prec C^*$, then
$\six{\overrightarrow{w}, H}\le \six{\overrightarrow{w}, H^*}$.
\item[ii.] SIX satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{six.eq.1}
\frac{1}{S_1^2-S_2}\left[ 12 \, l(\overrightarrow{w})-S_2\right] \le \six{\overrightarrow{w}, H} \le 1,
\end{equation}
where the definition of $l(\cdot)$ can be found in Notation \ref{ref.ref}.
\item[iii.] The upper bound of \eqref{six.eq.1} is attained if and only if\, $H$ is comonotonic.
\item[iv.] The lower bound of \eqref{six.eq.1} is attained if and only if
$H$ is $\overrightarrow{w^*}$-CM, where $\overrightarrow{w^*}$ is defined in \eqref{def.w} of Notation \ref{ref.ref}.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The proof of part i comes from the concordance property of Spearman's rho and the fact that SIX is a linear combination of bivariate Spearman's rho.
For the proof of the remaining parts,
note that
\[
\six{\overrightarrow{w}, H}=\six{\overrightarrow{w}, C}
\]
and
\begin{equation} \label {kang.eq1}
\begin{aligned}
\Var{\sum_{i=1}^{d} {w_i U_i}}
&=\E{\left( \sum_{i=1}^{d} {w_i U_i} -c \right)^2}\\
&=c^2 - 2 c\sum_{i=1}^d w_i\E{U_i} + \E{\left( \sum_{i=1}^{d} {w_i U_i} \right)^2}\\
&=c^2 - c\sum_{i=1}^d w_i + \sum_{i=1}^d w_i^2\E{U_i^2} + 2\sum_{i< j} w_i w_j \E{U_iU_j} \\
&=\frac {1}{12}{ S_2} + 2\sum_{i< j} {w_i w_j {\rm Cov} (U_i,U_j)}\\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where a constant $c$ is defined as $$c:=\frac{1}{2}S_1.$$
Now, Theorem \ref{lem.m1} and \eqref{kang.eq1} derive that
\begin{equation} \label {kang.eq100}
l(\overrightarrow{w}) \le\frac {1}{12}{ S_2} + 2\sum_{i< j} {w_i w_j {\rm Cov} (U_i,U_j)}
\le \frac{1}{12}\left( \sum\limits_{i=1}^{d}w_i\right)^2,
\end{equation}
where the first equality in the first inequality is achieved if and only if
$\overrightarrow{U}$ is $\overrightarrow{w^*}$-CM, and the second inequality is achieved
if and only if $\overrightarrow{U}$ is comonotonic.
Now \eqref{kang.eq100} and the following observation
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
\rho_2 (X_i,X_j) &= \rho_2 (U_i,U_j)\\
&=12\; Cov(U_i,U_j),
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
conclude the following inequalities
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{S_1^2-S_2}\left[12\, l(\overrightarrow{w})-S_2\right] \le \six{\overrightarrow{w}, H} \le 1
\end{equation*}
where the first equality holds if and only if
$H$ is $\overrightarrow{w^*}$-CM and the second inequality holds
if and only if $H$ is comonotonic.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Data Analysis}
In this subsection, we analyze the herd behaviors in the US stock market using SIX.
Daily stock prices $\overrightarrow{X}(t)$ of three stocks are collected from Apple, Hewlett-Packard Company and New York Times
in the time interval between $t=$2001/March/01 and $t=$2014/April/09.
Under the lognormal model, the line graph (${\rm SIX}$) in Figure \ref{figure.507} shows estimated SIX,
where SIX at each point is estimated based on 4 month observations.
Similar to \citet{Ahnhix}, three stock prices shows generally strong herd behavior during
the global financial crisis starting from 2008.
Sometimes, we may be interested in the relationship between the the stock prices of three companies only.
For example, we may assume that the stock prices of three companies reflect the preferences
between the traditional media system (newspapers), the traditional internet based media system (computers), and
the mobile internet based media system (smartphones or tablets).
However, strong dependency of the three stock prices may not stand for the strong dependency between three companies in particular,
because the strong comovement of the stock prices during the period
may be the result of the illusion effect caused by devaluation of the whole stock market (the global economic crisis in 2008, for example).
Hence, to understand the actual physical relation between three stock prices,
it can be beneficial to consider the detranded stock price by the market index
(S\&P in this data analysis) defined as follows:
$$\overrightarrow{X^M}(t):=\overrightarrow{X}(t)/S(t),$$
where $S(t)$ is S\&P index.
The dashed line graph (${\rm SIX}^M$)in Figure \ref{figure.507} shows estimated SIX using the adjusted stock price $\overrightarrow{X^M}$ on the same time interval.
Here, we have used the weight $\overrightarrow{w}=(1,1,1)$. Note that, under the lognormal model in \eqref{ex.formula},
specific statistical estimation procedures can be found in \citet{Ahn10}, for example.
From Figure \ref{figure.507}, we can conclude that main source of the comovement during the global financial crisis
is the devaluation of the whole stock market. After removing the comovement effect by the global financial crisis, comovement of adjusted stock prices
$\overrightarrow{X}^M$ is not as strong.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{mysix.pdf}
\caption{SIX from 2001/March/01 to 2014/April/09 with weight vector $(w_1, w_2, w_3)=(1,1,1)$.}
\label{figure.507}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we have provided the set of copulas called $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas, and have shown these to be the minimal in set concordance ordering.
Given the absence of the minimum copula, the minimality can be important in optimization problems.
Especially, we show that the proposed set of copulas minimize the variance of the aggregated sum where
the marginal distributions are given as various uniform distributions.
As shown in Remark \ref{order.var} in Section \ref{optim}, the set of minimal copulas
can be related with the variance of aggregated sum with given marginal distributions.
In this respect, the approach using
$d$-CM copulas, which are the generalized version of $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas, can be shown to be useful in minimizing
the variance of the aggregated sum for some special marginal distributions.
We leave this topic for future research.
Finally, although $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas do not minimize the variance of the aggregated sum in general when the marginal
distributions are not uniform distributions, many other interesting optimization problems have uniform marginals as their solutions.
Optimization of the herd behavior index is one such example. In this paper, we have provided a herd behavior index that
does not depend on the marginal distributions, and showed that the herd behavior index is minimized with $\overrightarrow{w}$-CM copulas.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
For Jae Youn Ahn, this work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea(NRF) grant funded
by the Korean Government (2013R1A1A1076062).
\bibliographystyle{apalike}
|
\section{Introduction}
Observational results on the cosmic microwave background (CMB) and the large scale structure of our universe
continue to provide increasingly strong support for the inflationary paradigm.
While the generic predictions of inflation are in good agreement with data, its theoretical underpinnings remain to be uncovered.
An observable that plays a decisive role in discriminating classes of models are primordial gravitational waves, imprinted in B-mode polarization of the CMB.
Although a detectable level of primordial B-mode is not a must for inflation,
such signal if observed would naturally point us to ``large field" inflationary models\footnote{Among the assumptions in \cite{Lyth:1996im} is that both the scalar and tensor perturbations are generated by vacuum fluctuations. Exceptions involving gravitational waves sourced by particle production during inflation can be found in \cite{Senatore:2011sp,Ozsoy:2014sba,Mirbabayi:2014jqa,Sorbo:2011rz,Cook:2011hg,Barnaby:2012xt,Mukohyama:2014gba,Ferreira:2014zia}.}.
Models in which the inflaton transverses super-Planckian distance in field space are sensitive to the ultraviolet completion of gravity. Thus, a proper formulation of large field models calls for inputs from quantum gravity.
In this regard, axions are a particularly well-motivated inflaton candidate. Other than their abundance in string theory, the approximate shift symmetries that they enjoy serve to protect the inflaton potential over a large field range. Symmetry protection is what
underlies the idea of natural inflation \cite{Freese:1990rb}. Non-perturbative effects breaking an otherwise exact shift symmetry generate a sinusoidal potential with the periodicity of the canonically normalized field set by
the axion decay constant. However, detailed studies \cite{Banks:2003sx,Svrcek:2006yi} surveying different formulations of string theory have concluded that axions with super-Planckian decay constant do not seem to arise in controlled (i.e., weak coupling and large volume) regimes of
string theory.
A way out of this conundrum is to break the periodicity of the axions perturbatively \cite{Silverstein:2008sg,McAllister:2008hb,Palti:2014kza,Marchesano:2014mla,Blumenhagen:2014gta,Hebecker:2014eua,Ibanez:2014kia,Arends:2014qca,McAllister:2014mpa,Franco:2014hsa,Blumenhagen:2014nba,Hebecker:2014kva,Ibanez:2014swa}. Common features in string compactifications such as fluxes, branes, and torsional cycles can provide sources of monodromies, leading to a change in
the axion potential upon transport around a (naive) cycle.
As pointed out in \cite{Marchesano:2014mla}, the monodromy inflation idea can be implemented in supersymmetric compactification (concrete realizations can be found in \cite{Marchesano:2014mla,Blumenhagen:2014gta,Hebecker:2014eua})
if the monodromy is induced by an F-term potential;
the shift symmetry is spontaneously broken rather than explicitly broken,
and the F-term monodromy inflationary models
have a direct connection with the 4d effective framework developed in \cite{Kaloper:2008fb,Kaloper:2011jz,Kaloper:2014zba}. Unlike natural inflation, the form of the inflaton potential is not universal. A variety of potentials have been found \cite{Marchesano:2014mla,McAllister:2014mpa} and thus the signatures of these large field models depend on the sources of monodromy.
Instead of breaking the axion periodicity, the inflaton field range can also be enhanced when one extends natural inflation to multiple axion fields.
Cumulative wisdom from earlier works \cite{Kim:2004rp,Dimopoulos:2005ac,Berg:2009tg} to recent investigations \cite{Choi:2014rja,Higaki:2014pja,Tye:2014tja,Kappl:2014lra,Bachlechner:2014hsa,Ben-Dayan:2014zsa,Long:2014dta,Higaki:2014mwa,Bachlechner:2014gfa,Burgess:2014oma,Gao:2014uha,Kenton:2014gma} has
highlightened several mechanisms for field range enhancements, including kinetic alignment \cite{Dimopoulos:2005ac} from eigenvector delocalization \cite{Bachlechner:2014gfa} and axion decay constant alignment \cite{Kim:2004rp}.
A common feature shared by these multi-axion models is that the field range enhancement
$f_{\rm eff}/f$ is tied to the number of low energy degrees of freedom
(including the axions and the rank of the non-Abelian groups which generate the non-perturbative instanton effects). Thus, the enhancement needed for super-Planckian field
excursion also takes away the elegance and simplicity of natural inflation.
In this paper, we propose a new way to realize large field inflation
without breaking the axion periodicity or introducing large number of fields.
In addition to kinetic mixings and mass mixings arising from the non-perturbative instanton potential, there are in general other mixings in a multi-axion system. In the presence of St\"uckelberg $U(1)$'s, axion mixings are induced from their couplings to the Abelian gauge fields.
Each St\"uckelberg $U(1)$ gauge field gains a mass by eating a combination of axions.
As we will show, these St\"uckelberg couplings not only give a perturbative mass to the combination of axions that are eaten, but also extend the field range of the axions that survive.
The field range enhancement does not require a large number of fields. In one of our simple examples, the low energy degrees of freedom (below the St\"uckelberg $U(1)$ mass scale) involve only a single axion and some chiral fermions that are required in any case for anomaly cancellation. Our proposal is therefore a minimal realization of natural inflation in theories with sub-Planckian axion decay constants.
The axion couplings invoked in this work are rather generic. In fact, the St\"uckelberg mechanism lies at the heart of anomaly cancellation in string theory and arises frequently in D-brane constructions of particle physics\footnote{It was recently pointed out in~\cite{Shiu:2013wxa,Feng:2014eja,Feng:2014cla} that the mass mixings of St\"uckelberg $U(1)$'s provide an interesting and natural portal into dark sectors.}. The lagrangian for the multi-axion system considered here is more general and hence subsumes the considerations of previous proposals. Our generalization thus provides an interesting starting point for further studies of multi-axion inflation, and their statistical
analysis using random matrix theory.
This paper is organized as follows. In section~\ref{sec:mixing} we examine kinetically mixed axions in three different scenarios and the possibility to generate a super-Planckian decay constant in each case. We also discuss the gauge-invariance problem induced by an axion eaten by the Abelian gauge field. In section~\ref{sec:string axions} we implement the axion mixing scenarios in string theory using Type II superstring compactifications with D-branes and provide some explicit examples in the frameworks of intersecting D6-brane models in Type IIA and of intersecting D7-brane models in Type IIB. The concluding remarks are given in section~\ref{sec:con}.
A summary of our conventions can be found in appendix~\ref{A:Conventions}. In appendix~\ref{A:ConsAxions} we offer a short discussion about the definition of the axion decay constant (in two different yet equivalent representation schemes) and how to read off the decay constant for kinetically mixing axions. Appendix~\ref{A:ChiralRotations} contains a brief review on chiral rotations and their relation to the scalar potential for axions. Appendix~\ref{A:Dualisation} provides technical details about the dualization procedure between two-forms and zero-forms in four dimensions. In appendix~\ref{A:Generalisation} we provide the full generalization of the system studied in section~\ref{sec:mixing}. And appendix~\ref{A:Fermion} discusses methods to find an explicit field theoretic model for the set-up analysed in~\ref{Ss:U1mixing}.
\section{Mixing Axions in a Field Theory Setting} \label{sec:mixing}
Axions are CP-odd real scalars whose continuous shift symmetry can only be violated by nonperturbative effects such as gauge instantons, D-brane instantons, etc. However, the residual discrete shift symmetry still constrains how axions interact with other sectors and anticipating some of the considerations presented in section~\ref{sec:string axions}, the effective lagrangian for a system of $N$ axions $a^i$ with $i\in\{1,\ldots, N\}$ can be written as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Eq:GeneralLagrangian}
{\cal S}_{axion}^{\rm eff} &= & \bigintsss \left[- \frac{1}{2}\, \sum_{i,j=1}^N \mathcal{G} _{ij} (\mathrm{d} a^{i}-k^{i}A) \wedge \star_4 (\mathrm{d} a^{j}-k^{j}A) -\frac{1}{g_{1}^{2}} F \wedge \star_4 F -\frac{1}{g_{2}^{2}} \text{Tr}(G\wedge \star_4 G) \right. \notag \\
&& \left. \qquad +\frac{1}{8\pi ^2}\left( \sum_{i=1}^N r_i a^i \right) \text{Tr} ( G \wedge G ) \right],
\end{eqnarray}
where ${\cal G}_{ij}$ represents the metric on the axion moduli space. All axions are assumed to carry a charge $k^i$ under the single $U(1)$ gauge group (with potential $A$, field strength $F$ and gauge coupling $g_1$) and couple simultaneously to the topological density associated with a non-Abelian gauge theory (with field strength $G$ and gauge coupling $g_2$), and the coefficients $r_i$ correspond to model-dependent discrete parameters.\footnote{This set-up can be generalized straightforwardly to configurations of multiple axions carrying charges under multiple $U(1)$ gauge groups and coupling non-perturbatively to various non-Abelian gauge groups, see equation~(\ref{Eq:CompleteGeneralAxionGauge}) of appendix~\ref{A:Generalisation}. For simplicity, we will consider a minimal set-up with respect to the number of gauge groups to illustrate our scenario.}
To simplify the analysis, we choose a basis and a normalization such that all the matter fields carry integer charges under the $U(1)$ and $k^{i}$'s and $r_i$'s are integers\footnote{The integers $k^{i}$'s can be understood as ``axion charges". For closed string axions these charges are geometric in nature, as they depend on how the D-brane supporting the $U(1)$ gauge group wraps the cycles along the internal space, as discussed in section~\ref{Ss:ClosedStringAxions}.
}. The St\"uckelberg type couplings between the axions and the $U(1)$ gauge potential are invariant under the local transformation:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:tran}
\forall \, i: a^i \rightarrow a^i + k^i \eta, \qquad A\rightarrow A+\mathrm{d} \eta.
\end{equation}
By virtue of the St\"uckelberg mechanism the gauge boson acquires a mass when at least one of the $k^i\neq 0$. In case various $k^i$ are different from zero, the gauge boson eats a linear combination of the respective axions with $k^i\neq 0$.
In our set-up, we consider an anomalous coupling of the axions to a strongly coupled non-Abelian gauge group, whose gauge instantons are considered to be the dominant non-perturbative effect in the action (\ref{Eq:GeneralLagrangian}), imposing a periodicity for the linear axion combination of the form:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:CollectiveShiftSymmetry}
\sum_{i=1}^N r_i a^i \simeq \sum_{i=1}^N r_i a^i + 2 \pi.
\end{equation}
The global continuous shift symmetry of the axions, manifestly preserved by the kinetic term for the axions, is therefore explicitly broken for this particular axionic direction. Independently, the axions $a^i$ can couple to other instanton effects (such as D-brane instantons), causing a periodicity of the form:\footnote{For axions charged under a $U(1)$ gauge symmetry, the field identification set by the $U(1)$ gauge symmetry reads:
\begin{eqnarray}
a^i\rightarrow a^i+2\pi k^i\,\nu^i.
\end{eqnarray}
In this respect, the axion periodicity (\ref{Eq:shift}) can be interpreted~\cite{BerasaluceGonzalez:2012vb} as a ``fractional" $1/k^i$ $U(1)$ gauge transformation, or equivalently to a transformation of the axion field under a discrete $\mathbb{Z}_k$ gauge symmetry. Such discrete symmetries remain present at low energies after the St\"uckelberg mechanism has taken place, given that they are also preserved by the non-perturbative corrections. Consequently, discrete $\mathbb{Z}_k$ symmetries can be used to constrain perturbative $n$-point couplings at energies much lower than the St\"uckelberg scale, see e.g.~\cite{Chen:2012jg,BerasaluceGonzalez:2011wy,Anastasopoulos:2012zu,Honecker:2013hda}.}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Eq:shift}
a^i\rightarrow a^i+ 2 \pi \nu^i , \qquad \nu^ i \in \mathbb{Z},
\end{eqnarray}
for each axion separately, yet which do no necessarily contribute effectively to the action (\ref{Eq:GeneralLagrangian}). Which non-perturbative effects contribute to the effective action, is in practice a model-dependent consideration. The most straightforward examples clarifying these statements can be found for closed string axions, which emerge from the dimensional reduction of the various differential $p$-forms along closed $p$-dimensional cycles. In case such a closed $p$-cycle can for instance be deformed due to the presence of massless deformation moduli, the Euclidean D-brane instanton supported by the $p$-cycle will most likely not contribute to the effective superpotential due to the presence of unsaturated fermionic deformation zero-modes. Nonetheless, the axion associated to the ``non-rigid" $p$-cycle is characterised by a periodicity set by the D-brane instanton. We will discuss the instanton contributions more explicitly in section~\ref{Ss:ClosedStringAxions} and the explicit examples considered in section \ref{subsec:ex} will allow us to clarify these statements even further.
In this section, we will investigate the physical effects of kinetic mixing among axions as reflected in the lagrangian (\ref{Eq:GeneralLagrangian}) and discuss configurations for which one of the axion decay constant can exceed the reduced Planck mass. To this end, we distinguish kinetic mixing among axions due to a non-diagonal metric ${\cal G}_{ij}$ on the moduli space (metric mixing) and kinetic mixing due to the St\"uckelberg couplings ($U(1)$ mixing). For simplicity, the number of axions is set to $N=2$, enabling us to highlight the differences between the two mixing scenarios as well. The formulae presented here can be generalized straightforwardly to set-ups with three or more axions, as we lay out in appendix~\ref{A:Generalisation}. Our analysis is divided into three parts: in a first phase purely metric mixing for axions will be considered, after which we continue the analysis with purely $U(1)$ mixing. As a last step we combine both mixing scenarios and discuss the most generic case.
\subsection{Metric Kinetic Mixing}\label{Ss:MetricMixing}
In four dimensional supergravity theories and compactifications of string theories, it is customary for scalar fields to be characterised by non-canonical kinetic terms or a $\sigma$-model like action, which clarifies the presumed presence of the non-trivial metric ${\cal G}_{ij}$ in the lagrangian (\ref{Eq:GeneralLagrangian}). In order to expose the physical effects of this metric at fullest, we simplify the two-axion system by assuming that neither of them is charged under a $U(1)$ gauge field, i.e.~$k^1 = 0 = k^2$.
The kinetic terms for the axions then reduce to the following expression,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Eq:KineticTermsOnlyMetricG}
{\cal S} ^{\rm kin}_{axion} = - \bigintssss \frac{1}{2}\, \sum_{i,j=1}^{2}\mathcal{G}_{ij} (\sigma)\, \mathrm{d} a^i \wedge \star_4 \mathrm{d} a^j,
\end{eqnarray}
where the metric ${\cal G}_{ij}$ on the axion moduli space depends on other (usually CP-even) moduli fields labeled collectively by $\sigma$ encoding geometric information about the internal manifold.\footnote{In general, the axion shift symmetry can take a much more intricate form than an affine realisation of a $U(1)$ symmetry. In that case, the Lie-derivative of the metric with respect to the Killing vector fields has to vanish, see e.g.~\cite{BerasaluceGonzalez:2012vb}, which constrains the dependence of the metric on the axions. In this paper, we will assume that the shift symmetries of the axions are affine realisations of $U(1)$ symmetries, in which case the metric ${\cal G}_{ij}$ does not depend on the axion fields $a_i$.} We will pay more attention to this point in section~\ref{sec:string axions} and assume for now that the moduli fields $\sigma$ are stabilised with non-vanishing vevs. With respect to the axion basis $(a^1, a^2)$ the symmetric metric $\mathcal{G} _{ij}$ reads:
\begin{align}\label{Eq:MetricG}
\mathcal{G} = \left(\begin{array}{cc} {\cal G}_{11} & {\cal G}_{12} \\
{\cal G}_{12} & {\cal G}_{22} \end{array}\right), \qquad \text{with } {\cal G}_{11}, {\cal G}_{12}, {\cal G}_{22} \in \mathbb{R} \backslash \{ 0\}.
\end{align}
The requirement that the metric is positive-definite boils down to the following two constraints by using Sylvester's criterion:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Eq:constraint0}
{\cal G}_{11} >0, \qquad {\cal G}_{11} {\cal G}_{22} -{\cal G}_{12}^2 >0.
\end{eqnarray}
The symmetric matrix ${\cal G}_{ij}$ can be diagonalized to a matrix with eigenvalues:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:MetricMixingMetricEigenvalues}
\lambda_\pm = \frac{1}{2}\left[ ({\cal G}_{11} + {\cal G}_{22}) \pm \sqrt{4 {\cal G}_{12}^2 + ({\cal G}_{11}-{\cal G}_{22})^2} \right],
\end{equation}
with associated normalized eigenvectors:
\begin{equation}
\vec{u}_- = \left(\sin \frac{\theta}{2}, -\cos \frac{\theta}{2} \right), \qquad \vec{u}_+ = \left(\cos \frac{\theta}{2}, \sin \frac{\theta}{2} \right),
\end{equation}
and where the parameter $\theta$ appears through the parametrization:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:MetricMixingParametrisation}
\cos \theta = \frac{{\cal G}_{11}-{\cal G}_{22}}{\sqrt{4 {\cal G}_{12}^2 + ({\cal G}_{11}- {\cal G}_{22})^2}}, \qquad \sin \theta=\frac{2{\cal G}_{12}}{\sqrt{4 {\cal G}_{12}^2 + ({\cal G}_{11}- {\cal G}_{22})^2}}, \qquad \text{with } \,0\leq \theta <2\pi.
\end{equation}
This parametrization enables us to expose the $SO(2)$ rotation used to diagonalize the metric $\mathcal{G} _{ij}$. With these set of manipulations the kinetic action for the axions reduces to a diagonalized form:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:KineticTermsDiagonal}
{\cal S}^{\rm kin}_{axion} = - \bigintssss \left[ \frac{1}{2} \lambda_- \mathrm{d} a^- \wedge \star_4 \mathrm{d} a^- + \frac{1}{2} \lambda_+ \mathrm{d} a^+\wedge \star_4 \mathrm{d} a^+ \right] ,
\end{equation}
where we introduced the new axion basis $(a^-, a^+)$:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:OrthNonDiagKahler}
\left(\begin{array}{c} a^- \\ a^+ \end{array} \right)
= \left( \begin{array}{cc} \sin \frac{\theta}{2} & - \cos \frac{\theta}{2} \\ \cos \frac{\theta}{2} & \sin \frac{\theta}{2} \end{array} \right) \left(\begin{array}{c} a^1 \\ a^2 \end{array} \right).
\end{equation}
In order to correctly determine the effective axion decay constants for $a^-$ and $a^+$ respectively, we also have to apply the $SO(2)$ rotation on the anomalous coupling to $\text{Tr}(G\wedge G)$:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Eq:PotKahlerMixingPhysBasis}
{\cal S}^{\rm anom}_{axion} &=& \frac{1}{8 \pi^2}\, \bigintssss \left[ \left( r_1 \sin \frac{\theta}{2} - r_2 \cos \frac{\theta}{2} \right) a^- + \left( r_1 \cos \frac{\theta}{2} + r_2\sin \frac{\theta}{2} \right) a^+ \right] \, \text{Tr}( G\wedge G) \nonumber \\
&=& \frac{1}{8 \pi^2} \, \bigintssss \left[\tilde a^+ + \tilde a^-\right]\, \text{Tr}( G\wedge G).
\end{eqnarray}
The second equation follows by rescaling the axions such that the anomalous coupling is rewritten in a purely topological form (i.e.~in terms of representation scheme 2 of appendix~\ref{A:ConsAxions}):
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde{a}^{-}\equiv\left( r_1 \sin \frac{\theta}{2} - r_2 \cos \frac{\theta}{2} \right) a^-, \qquad \tilde{a}^+ \equiv \left( r_1 \cos \frac{\theta}{2} + r_2\sin \frac{\theta}{2} \right) \, a^+
\end{eqnarray}
Through the combination of equations (\ref{Eq:KineticTermsDiagonal}) and (\ref{Eq:PotKahlerMixingPhysBasis}) the axion decay constants for the rescaled version of the physical axions ($\tilde a^-$, $\tilde a^+$) can be read off\footnote{In case $\text{gcd}\,(r_1,\,r_2)\neq 1$, a subtlety arises in defining the axion decay constant. Namely, both axion decay constants in (\ref{Eq:metric-decay-const}) have to be divided by $\text{gcd}\,(r_1,\,r_2)$ to obtain the shortest periodicity. The vacuum configuration resulting from the instantons then consists of $\text{gcd}\,(r_1,\,r_2)$ consistent and independent vacua, separated from each other over a distance $2 \pi f_{\tilde a^\pm}$ respectively by domain walls.\label{Foot:GCDr1r2}}:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:metric-decay-const}
f_{\tilde a^-} = \frac{\sqrt{\lambda_-}}{|r_1 \sin \frac{\theta}{2} - r_2 \cos \frac{\theta}{2}|}, \qquad f_{\tilde a^+} = \frac{\sqrt{\lambda_+}}{|r_1 \cos \frac{\theta}{2} + r_2 \sin \frac{\theta}{2}|}.
\end{equation}
At this point, we should also pay attention to the consistency of the change of axion basis with respect to the initial discrete shift symmetry of~(\ref{Eq:shift}). With respect to the physical basis $(\tilde{a}^-,\,\tilde{a}^+)$ this discrete shift symmetry translates into the following shift symmetry:
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde{a}^- &\rightarrow &\tilde{a}^- +2\pi\left(r_1\,\text{sin}^2\frac{\theta}{2}-\frac{r_2}{2}\,\text{sin}\,\theta\right)\nu^1-2\pi\left(\frac{r_1}{2}\,\text{sin}\,\theta -r_2\text{cos}^2\frac{\theta}{2}\right)\nu^2,\\
\tilde{a}^+ &\rightarrow &\tilde{a}^+ +2\pi\left(r_1\,\text{cos}^2\frac{\theta}{2}+\frac{r_2}{2}\,\text{sin}\,\theta\right)\nu^1+2\pi\left(\frac{r_1}{2}\,\text{sin}\,\theta +r_2\,\text{sin}^2\frac{\theta}{2}\right)\nu^2.
\end{eqnarray}
Applying this result to the instanton coupling term in equation (\ref{Eq:PotKahlerMixingPhysBasis}), one observes that this topological term, undergoes a shift proportional to the Pontryagin index multiplied by an integer and $2\pi$,
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal S}^{\rm anom}_{axion} \rightarrow {\cal S}^{\rm anom}_{axion} + \frac{1}{8 \pi^2} \, 2\pi\left(r_1\,\nu^1+r_2\,\nu^2\right) \int \text{Tr}( \,G\wedge G),
\end{eqnarray}
which leaves the path integral invariant (see also appendix~\ref{A:ConsAxions}). Hence, even expressed in terms of the physical basis $(\tilde{a}^-,\,\tilde{a}^+)$, the full theory remains consistent under the initial shift symmetry (\ref{Eq:shift}).
In order to explore the physical range of the axion decay constants given in (\ref{Eq:metric-decay-const}) we consider a numerical example, satisfying the constraints in (\ref{Eq:constraint0}). Let us consider a configuration where the entries in the metric (\ref{Eq:MetricG}) express a large fraction of metric mixing,
\begin{equation}
{\cal G}_{11} \simeq {\cal G}_{22} \simeq 16 \times 10^{32} \text{ GeV}^2, \qquad {\cal G}_{12} \simeq 9 \times 10^{32} \text{ GeV}^2,
\end{equation}
such that the angle $\theta$ can be approximated by the value $\theta \simeq \frac{\pi}{2} - 10^{-3}$. For this parameter choice and setting $r_1= - r_2 =1$, the respective axion decay constants in the physical basis are given by:
\begin{equation}
f_{\tilde a^-} = 1.87 \times 10^{16} \text{ GeV}, \qquad f_{\tilde a^+} = 7.07 \times 10^{19} \text{ GeV } \simeq 30 M_{Pl},
\end{equation}
where $M_{Pl} = (8 \pi G_N)^{-1} \sim 2.4 \times 10^{18}\, \text{GeV}$ corresponds to the reduced Planck mass.
Hence, for a sufficiently large mixing in the moduli space metric, i.e.~${\cal O}({\cal G}_{12}) \simeq {\cal O}({\cal G}_{11}, {\cal G}_{22}) $, and when both axions couple anomalously to the same non-Abelian gauge group with $|r_1| = |r_2|$, one of the physical axions can acquire a super-Planckian decay constant and a hierarchy among the axion decay constants emerges, i.e.~$f_{\tilde a^+} \gg f_{\tilde a^-}$.
Obviously, one is inclined to contemplate whether this large axion decay constant has any chance to prevail and determine the characteristics
of the inflationary potential such that trans-Planckian field excursions can take place during inflation. In order to answer this question, we have to expand the action around the instanton background (\ref{Eq:PotKahlerMixingPhysBasis}), by which the axions acquire their mass. The mass generating effects of instanton contributions can be captured by a cosine-type potential for the axions:
\begin{equation}
V_{axion}^{\rm eff} (\hat a^-, \hat a^+) = \Lambda^4 \left[ 1 - \cos \left( \frac{ \hat a^-}{f_{\tilde a^-}} +\frac{ \hat a^+}{f_{\tilde a^+}} \right) \right] ,
\end{equation}
where we have rescaled the axions (to operate in representation scheme 1)
\begin{eqnarray}
\hat a^+ \equiv f_{\tilde a ^+}\,\tilde a^+ ,\qquad \hat a^- \equiv f_{\tilde a ^-}\,\tilde a^+,
\end{eqnarray}
and the full lagrangian is written as:
\begin{equation}
{\cal S}_{axion} = - \bigintssss \left[ \frac{1}{2} d \hat a^-\wedge \star_4 d \hat a^- + \frac{1}{2} d \hat a^+\wedge \star_4 d \hat a^+ + V_{axion}^{\rm eff} ( \hat a^-, \hat a^+) \star_4 {\bf 1} \right] .
\end{equation}
One observes that the axion basis for which the kinetic terms are diagonalized does not yet correspond to the proper basis which diagonalizes the mass matrix associated to $V_{axion}^{\rm eff}$:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:MassMatrixMetricMixing}
M^2_{ij} = \frac{\partial^2 V_{axion}^{\rm eff} }{\partial \hat a^i \partial \hat a^j} \Bigg|_{\rm min}= \Lambda^4 \left( \begin{array}{cc} f_{\tilde a^+}^{-2} & f_{\tilde a^+}^{-1} f_{\tilde a^-}^{-1} \\ f_{\tilde a^-}^{-1} f_{\tilde a^-}^{-1} & f_{a^-}^{-2} \end{array} \right).
\end{equation}
One can diagonalize this mass matrix through an additional $SO(2)$ rotation:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:TransfoDiagonalInteraction}
\left(\begin{array}{c}\xi \\ \zeta \end{array} \right) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{f_{\tilde a^+}^2 + f_{\tilde a^-}^2}} \left( \begin{array}{cc} f_{\tilde a^+} & - f_{\tilde a^-} \\ f_{\tilde a^-} & f_{\tilde a^+} \end{array}\right) \left(\begin{array}{c} \hat a^+ \\ \hat a^- \end{array} \right),
\end{equation}
under which the full lagrangian reduces to the form,
\begin{equation}
{\cal S}_{axion} = - \bigintssss \left[ \frac{1}{2} d \xi \wedge \star_4 d \xi + \frac{1}{2} d \zeta \wedge \star_4 d \zeta + V_{axion}^{\rm eff} (\zeta) \star_4 {\bf 1} \right],
\end{equation}
and where the effective axion potential only depends on one of the two axions:
\begin{equation}
V_{axion}^{\rm eff} (\zeta) = \Lambda^4 \left[ 1 - \cos\left( \frac{\sqrt{f_{\tilde a^+}^2 + f_{\tilde a^-}^2}}{f_{\tilde a^+} f_{\tilde a^-}} \zeta \right) \right].
\end{equation}
The absence of the axion $\xi$ in the potential can be traced back to the zero eigenvalue of the mass matrix $M_{ij}^2$ in (\ref{Eq:MassMatrixMetricMixing}), while the effective axion decay constant $f_{\rm eff}$,
\begin{equation}\label{f_zeta}
f_{\rm eff} = \frac{f_{\tilde a^+} f_{\tilde a^-} }{\sqrt{f_{\tilde a^+}^2 + f_{\tilde a^-}^2}} ,
\end{equation}
has the correct form to match the other mass eigenvalue. From this expression one can also see that the smallest of the two axion decay constants $(f_{\tilde a^+}, f_{\tilde a^-})$ sets the scale for $f_{\rm eff}$, such that the axion $\zeta$ is not allowed to undertake trans-Planckian excursions.\footnote{Observe that the shift symmetries for the original basis (\ref{Eq:shift}) translate into the desired shift symmetry for $\zeta$ and a more involved one for $\xi$ in the axion basis $(\xi, \zeta)$:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lcl}
\zeta &\rightarrow& \zeta + 2 \pi \, f_{\rm eff} (r_1 \nu^1 + r_2 \nu^2),\\
\xi &\rightarrow& \xi + \frac{2 \pi}{\sqrt{f_{\tilde a^+}^2 + f_{\tilde a^-}^2}} \left[ \nu^1 r_1 \left( f_{\tilde a^+}^2 \cos^2 \frac{\theta}{2} - f_{\tilde a^-}^2 \sin^2 \frac{\theta}{2} \right) + \nu^2 r_2 \left( f_{\tilde a^+}^2 \sin^2 \frac{\theta}{2} - f_{\tilde a^-}^2 \cos^2 \frac{\theta}{2} \right) \right] \\
&& \qquad+ \pi \sqrt{f_{\tilde a^+}^2 + f_{\tilde a^-}^2} \sin \theta \left( r_2 \nu^1 + r_1 \nu^2 \right) .
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Note however that the $\xi$-direction does not couple anomously to the non-Abelian gauge group. In this respect the axion $\xi$ corresponds to a flat direction whose shift symmetry is not broken by the envisioned gauge instanton.
}
Considering for instance the case $f_{\tilde a^+} \gg f_{\tilde a^-}$, for which $f_{\rm eff} \simeq f_{\tilde a^-}$ obviously, one has to conclude that both axion decay constants have to be sufficiently large in order for $f_{\rm eff}$ to be trans-Planckian.
In order to write down the trans-Planckian constraints, we introduce the ratio $\varepsilon$ of the two metric eigenvalues, with
\begin{eqnarray}\label{ratio}
\varepsilon =\sqrt{\frac{\lambda _-}{\lambda _+}}.
\end{eqnarray}
Under the assumption that the largest eigenvalue $\sqrt{\lambda_+}$ lies below the reduced Planck mass, i.e.~$\sqrt{\lambda_+} \ll M_{Pl}$, both dimensionless pre-factors in the expressions of the decay constants (\ref{Eq:metric-decay-const}) are required to be sufficiently large:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{cond}
\frac{\varepsilon}{|r_1\,\text{sin}\,\frac{\theta}{2}-r_2\,\text{cos}\,\frac{\theta}{2}|}\gg 1,\qquad \frac{1}{|r_1\,\text{cos}\,\frac{\theta}{2}+r_2\,\text{sin}\,\frac{\theta}{2}|}\gg 1,
\end{eqnarray}
in order for the effective decay constant $f_{\rm eff}$ to be super-Planckian.
For a small hierarchy between the eigenvalues of the metric (i.e.~$\varepsilon \simeq 1$), these conditions
cannot be satisfied simultaneously.\footnote{The argumentation goes as follows: in the limit where $|r_1\,\text{sin}\,\frac{\theta}{2}-r_2\,\text{cos}\,\frac{\theta}{2}|\rightarrow 0$, one has $\text{tan}\,\frac{\theta}{2}\rightarrow \frac{r_2}{r_1}$ given that both axions couple to the instanton contribution in the original basis, i.e.~$r_i\neq 0$. This implies for the other constraint $|r_1\,\text{cos}\,\frac{\theta}{2}+r_2\,\text{sin}\,\frac{\theta}{2}|\rightarrow \left(r_1+\frac{r_2^2}{r_1}\right)\text{cos}\,\frac{\theta}{2}$. Obviously, $\text{cos}\,\frac{\theta}{2}$ cannot be arbitrarly small, otherwise the other constraint $|r_1\,\text{sin}\,\frac{\theta}{2}-r_2\,\text{cos}\,\frac{\theta}{2}|\ll 1$ cannot be satisfied.}
And also for a large hierarchy between the eigenvalues of the metric (i.e.~$\varepsilon \ll 1$), it is not possible to satisfy both constraints simultaneously, indicating that a super-Planckian axion decay constant $f_{\rm eff}$ is excluded.
Turning the r\^oles of $f_{\tilde a^-}$ and $f_{\tilde a^+}$ around or taking both axion decay constants of the same order $f_{\tilde a^+} \simeq f_{\tilde a^-}$ does not alter the constraints nor the argumentation. Hence, we can safely conclude $f_{\rm eff} < M_{Pl}$.
This simple two-axion model enables us to draw some interesting conclusions regarding axions and their decay constants. The expressions in equation (\ref{Eq:metric-decay-const}) suggest a splitting between the axion decay constants due to metric kinetic mixing, when the off-diagonal entries in the moduli space metric are of the same order as the diagonal ones. Nonetheless, despite the potential presence of a large axion decay constant, there is only one axionic direction $\zeta$ that couples effectively to the nonperturbative correction and the shape of its potential is set by the smallest axion decay constant eliminating the possibility of trans-Planckian displacements for the axion $\zeta$. This behavior can be awarded to the fact that axionic couplings scale inversely with the axion decay constant.
Meanwhile, the orthogonal axionic direction $\xi$ corresponds to a flat direction whose shift symmetry remains unbroken. This observation forms the keystone for the remainder of our story. That is to say, if we interpret the axion $\xi$ as the inflaton candidate, we would have to invoke additional physical effects to create a proper inflationary potential for $\xi$. At this point, we envision three plausible and distinguishable physical effects which could generate a potential for $\xi$ allowing for trans-Planckian displacements:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(1)] {\it Monodromy effects:} A monomial potential of the form $V(\xi) \sim \xi^p$ can be generated through torsional monodromy effects ($p=2$)~\cite{Marchesano:2014mla} or through fluxed induced monodromies ($p\geq2$)~\cite{Marchesano:2014mla,McAllister:2014mpa}, such that the potential takes the simple chaotic inflation form ($p=2$) or even more generic forms. In order to generate a linear type of potential ($p=1$) one could also resort to D-term monodromies~\cite{Silverstein:2008sg,McAllister:2008hb}.
\item[(2)] {\it Alignment effects:} Adding a second strongly coupled non-Abelian gauge group to which both axions (in the initial basis) couple anomalously provides for an additional mass contribution to the potential, reminiscent of the Kim-Nilles-Peloso proposal~\cite{Kim:2004rp}. This second instanton contribution is able to generate a potential for $\xi$ provided that the axion decay constants do not perfectly align. We will come back to this case in more detail in section~\ref{Sss:AlignedNaturalInflation}.
\item[(3)] {\it Abelian $U(1)$ gauge symmetry:} A third alternative consists in adding an Abelian gauge symmetry under which both axions are charged. Due to St\"uckelberg couplings, one of the axions turns into the longitudinal component of the gauge field while the remaining axion will acquire a mass by virtue of the non-perturbative correction. We will study this scenario in detail in sections~\ref{Ss:U1mixing} and \ref{Ss:GenericKineticMixing}.
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{Aligned Natural Inflation}\label{Sss:AlignedNaturalInflation}
Two-axion models have already been considered in the past for inflationary purposes, but the minimal set-up given above seems to be rather suitable to realize (and generalize) the alignment mechanism~\cite{Kim:2004rp} explicitly through metric mixing.
Though aligned natural inflation is not the main point of our paper, we make a digression here to illustrate how kinetic mixing can relax the fine-tuning needed for alignment.
To this end, we consider a two-axion system with non-trivial kinetic terms as in (\ref{Eq:KineticTermsOnlyMetricG}), uncharged under local $U(1)$ symmetries, and coupling anomalously to two distinguishable non-Abelian gauge groups:
\begin{equation}
{\cal S}^{\rm anom}_{axion} =\bigintssss\left[ \frac{1}{8\pi ^2}\left( r_1 a^1 + r_2 a^2 \right) \text{Tr}( G^{(1)} \wedge G^{(1)}) + \frac{1}{8\pi ^2}\left( s_1 a^1 + s_2 a^2 \right) \text{Tr} ( G^{(2)} \wedge G^{(2)})\right] .
\end{equation}
Following the same steps as above to diagonalize the metric and integrating out the strongly coupled gauge sector reproduces effectively the Kim-Nilles-Peloso potential~\cite{Kim:2004rp}:
\begin{equation}
V_{axion}^{\rm eff} = \Lambda_1^4 \left[ 1 - \cos \left( \frac{\hat a^-}{f_1} + \frac{\hat a^+}{g_1} \right) \right] + \Lambda_2^4 \left[ 1 - \cos \left( \frac{\hat a^-}{f_2} + \frac{\hat a^+}{g_2} \right) \right],
\end{equation}
with the axion decay constants given by,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l@{\hspace{0.2in}}l}\label{f and g}
\vspace{0.1in}f_1 = \frac{\sqrt{\lambda_-}}{|r_1 \sin \frac{\theta}{2} - r_2 \cos \frac{\theta}{2}|}, & g_1 = \frac{\sqrt{\lambda_+}}{|r_1 \cos \frac{\theta}{2} + r_2 \sin \frac{\theta}{2}|},\\
f_2 = \frac{\sqrt{\lambda_-}}{|s_1 \sin \frac{\theta}{2} - s_2 \cos \frac{\theta}{2}|}, & g_2 = \frac{\sqrt{\lambda_+}}{|s_1 \cos \frac{\theta}{2} + s_2 \sin \frac{\theta}{2}|}.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
The hatted axion fields $\hat a^\pm \equiv \sqrt{\lambda_\pm} a^\pm$ are introduced to rewrite the kinetic part (\ref{Eq:KineticTermsDiagonal}) in terms of representation scheme 1, in correspondence with~\cite{Kim:2004rp,Kappl:2014lra}. In the case of perfect alignment we obtain the condition:
\begin{equation}
\frac{f_1}{g_1} = \frac{f_2}{g_2} \qquad \Rightarrow \qquad \left|\frac{r_1 \cos \frac{\theta}{2} + r_2 \sin \frac{\theta}{2}}{r_1 \sin \frac{\theta}{2} - r_2 \cos \frac{\theta}{2}}\right| = \left|\frac{s_1 \cos \frac{\theta}{2} + s_2 \sin \frac{\theta}{2}}{s_1 \sin \frac{\theta}{2} - s_2 \cos \frac{\theta}{2}}\right|,
\end{equation}
while deviation from perfect alignment is measured~\cite{Kappl:2014lra} by the parameter $\alpha_{dev}$:
\begin{equation}\label{dev}
\alpha_{dev} \equiv g_2 - \frac{f_2}{f_1} g_1= \frac{\sqrt{\lambda_+} \left( s_1 r_2 - r_1 s_2 \right)}{ \left( \frac{s_1^2 - s_2^2}{2} \sin \theta - s_1 s_2 \cos \theta \right) \left( r_1 \cos \frac{\theta}{2} + r_2 \sin \frac{\theta}{2} \right)}.
\end{equation}
In order for the alignment of the axionic directions to work, $\alpha_{dev}$ has to be tuned appropriately to small values (in comparison to the magnitude of the individual decay constants). In settings where metric kinetic mixing is not taken into account, one is only able to tune discrete parameters (such as $r_i$ and $s_i$), in order to fix the value of $\alpha_{dev}$, see e.g.~\cite{Ben-Dayan:2014zsa,Long:2014dta,Choi:2014rja}. However, due to kinetic metric mixing in the two-axion model an additional continuous parameter $\theta$, is at our disposal and can be used to alleviate the earlier fine-tuning issue of $\alpha_{dev}$.
Let us consider a numerical example to clarify the previous statements. For simplicity, we assume that both scales of the nonperturbative effects are of the same order, i.e.~$\Lambda _1=\Lambda _2=\Lambda$, such that the effective axion decay constant for the almost flat direction is given by~\cite{Kappl:2014lra},
\begin{eqnarray}\label{f_align}
f_{\rm eff}=\frac{f_2\,g_1\,\sqrt{(f_{1}^2+f_{2}^2)(f_{1}^2+g_{1}^2)}}{f_{1}^2\,|\alpha _{dev}|},
\end{eqnarray}
up to leading order in $\alpha _{dev}^{-1}$. In order for the parameter $\alpha _{dev}$ in equation (\ref{dev}) to be small, we see that the integers $r_i$ and $s_i$ should make the denominator as large as possible and make the numerator as small as possible (i.e.~$|s_1\,r_2-s_2\,r_1|=1$). Let us for the sake of argument choose values for $r_i$ and $s_i$ of the order ${\cal O}(1-10)$:
\begin{eqnarray}
r_1=9,\qquad r_2=1, \qquad \qquad s_1=10,\qquad s_2=1.
\end{eqnarray}
For this parameter choice the denominator of $\alpha _{dev}$ can be at most of order $\mathcal{O}(10^3)$. By tuning the continuous parameter $\theta$, say for instance,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Eq:ParameterTuningTheta}
\text{sin}\,\frac{\theta}{2}\approx 0.2195, \qquad \text{cos}\,\frac{\theta}{2}\approx 0.9756,
\end{eqnarray}
we do find a sufficiently small deviation parameter (with respect to the square root of the metric eigenvalue $\lambda _+$),
\begin{eqnarray}
\alpha _{dev}\approx 0.009 \,\sqrt{\lambda _+}.
\end{eqnarray}
Moreover, the hierarchy between the eigenvalues $\lambda_+$ and $\lambda_-$ of the axion metric can be made small, given the tuned value of the continuous parameter $\theta$ in (\ref{Eq:ParameterTuningTheta}), by ensuring that the diagonal entries of the metric do not differ too much from each other, namely when ${\cal G}_{11}/{\cal G}_{22} \sim {\cal O}(1)$.
Under these assumptions the individual axion decay constants $f_i$ and $g_i$ take the following expressions,
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l@{\hspace{0.4in}}l}
f_1\sim \sqrt{\lambda _+},&
f_2\sim \sqrt{\lambda _+}\times 0.8201,\\
g_1\sim \sqrt{\lambda _+}\times 0.1111,&
g_2\sim \sqrt{\lambda _+}\times 0.1002.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
The eigenvalue $\sqrt{\lambda_+}$ can only take values around mass scales lower than the reduced Planck mass $M_{Pl}$. If we consider the window $\sqrt{\lambda_+} \sim {\cal O}(10^{16}-10^{17} {\rm GeV})$, the effective axion decay constant in (\ref{f_align}) can become trans-Planckian:
\begin{eqnarray}
f_{\rm eff}&\sim& 132 \sqrt{\lambda_+}\sim 10\,M_P.
\end{eqnarray}
This numerical example shows that aligned natural inflation occurs as a consequence of metric kinetic mixing due to a non-trivial metric on the axion moduli space.
Furthermore, for reasonable choices of the discrete parameters $(r_i, s_i)_{i=1,2}$ and a mild tuning of the continuous parameter $\theta$ the effective axion decay constant can take on super-Planckian values effortlessly.
\subsection{$U(1)$ Kinetic Mixing}\label{Ss:U1mixing}
An alternative mechanism inducing kinetic mixing among axions relies on their potentially charged nature with respect to the same $U(1)$ gauge symmetry, as expressed by the St\"uckelberg terms in (\ref{Eq:GeneralLagrangian}). We will see in section~\ref{sec:string axions} that these St\"uckelberg couplings emerge naturally in string compactifications (with D-branes)\footnote{Such St\"uckelberg couplings can provide a portal between the Standard Model and the hidden sector \cite{Feng:2014eja,Feng:2014cla}. They are also part of the $U(1)$ lagrangian for milli-charged dark matter scenarios \cite{Shiu:2013wxa}.}, such that the relevant physical effects of this type of mixing on the axion decay constant deserve their own separate analysis. To this end, we consider a two-axion system with diagonal metric $\mathcal{G}$ (${\cal G}_{12} = 0$) and both axions charged under the same local $U(1)$ symmetry, i.e.~$k^1 \neq 0 \neq k^2$. With these assumptions the kinetic terms for the axions in (\ref{Eq:GeneralLagrangian}) read:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Eq:kin-U(1)}
{\cal S}^{\rm kin}_{axion} &=& - \bigintssss \left[ \frac{1}{2}\, {\cal G}_{11}\, (\mathrm{d} a^1 - k^1 A) \wedge \star_4 (\mathrm{d} a^1 - k^1 A) + \frac{1}{2}\, {\cal G}_{22}\, (\mathrm{d} a^2 - k^2 A) \wedge \star_4 (\mathrm{d} a^2 - k^2 A) \right] \notag\\
\end{eqnarray}
Given that both axions are charged under the same $U(1)$ symmetry, the axion eaten by the gauge field is a linear combination of $a^1$ and $a^2$. We can rewrite the kinetic terms as,
\begin{equation}
{\cal S} ^{\rm kin}_{axion} = -\bigintssss\left[ \frac{ M_A^2}{2} ( \mathrm{d} a'^2 - A) \wedge \star_4 ( \mathrm{d} a'^2 - A) + \frac{ M_A^2}{2} \mathrm{d} a'^1 \wedge \star_4 \mathrm{d} a'^1 \right] ,
\end{equation}
by identifying the linear combination of axions eaten by the gauge field $A_{\mu}$, as well as the mass of the gauge boson:
\begin{eqnarray}
a'^2 &=& \frac{{\cal G}_{11}\,k^1\,a^1+{\cal G}_{22}\,k^2\,a^2}{{\cal G}_{11}\,(k^1)^2 +{\cal G}_{22}\,(k^2)^2},\label{a'2}\\
M^{2}_{A}&=& {\cal G}_{11}\,(k^1)^2 + {\cal G}_{22}\,(k^2)^2\label{mass}.
\end{eqnarray}
The linear combination $a'^1$ of the axions $(a^1,a^2)$ orthogonal to the direction $a'^2$,
\begin{eqnarray}
a'^1 = \frac{\sqrt{{\cal G}_{11} {\cal G}_{22}}(k^2\,a^1 -k^1\,a^2)}{{\cal G}_{11}\,(k^1)^2 +{\cal G}_{22}\,(k^2)^2}\label{a'1},
\end{eqnarray}
corresponds to an axion-like state uncharged under the $U(1)$ gauge symmetry. The original Abelian gauge transformation (\ref{Eq:tran})
can be recast in a gauge transformation for the eaten axion $a'^2$ (with charge $k'^2=1$), while the other $a'^1$-direction remains invariant under the gauge transformation ($k'^1=0$):
\begin{eqnarray}
A\rightarrow A+\mathrm{d} \eta,\qquad a'^2\rightarrow a'^2 + \eta, \qquad a'^1\rightarrow a'^1.
\end{eqnarray}
The new axion basis is related to the old axion basis through a rescaling followed by an $SO(2)$ rotation:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{U(1)_tran}
\left(\begin{array}{c}a'^1 \\
a'^2\end{array}\right)=\frac{1}{M_A}\left(\begin{array}{cc}\text{cos}\, \varphi & -\text{sin}\,\varphi\\
\text{sin}\,\varphi & \text{cos}\,\varphi\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}\sqrt{{\cal G}_{11}} & 0\\
0 &\sqrt{{\cal G}_{22}}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c} a^1\\
a^2\end{array}\right),
\end{eqnarray}
where we introduced the parametrization:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Eq:U1mixingparametrisation}
\text{cos}\,\varphi = \frac{\sqrt{{\cal G}_{22}}\,k^2}{M_A},\qquad \text{sin}\, \varphi = \frac{\sqrt{{\cal G}_{11}}\,k^1}{M_A}.
\end{eqnarray}
Under the assumption that both axions couple anomalously to the same non-Abelian strongly coupled gauge group, as presented in (\ref{Eq:GeneralLagrangian}), one should carefully rewrite this topological coupling in terms of the physical axion basis $(a'^1, a'^2)$ as well:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{anom}
{\cal S}^{\rm anom}_{axion}
&=& \frac{1}{8\pi ^2} \,M_A\, \bigintssss \biggl[\biggl(\frac{r_1}{\sqrt{{\cal G}_{11}}} \,\text{cos}\,\varphi -\frac{r_2}{\sqrt{{\cal G}_{22}}}\,\text{sin}\,\varphi\biggr)\,a'^1 +\biggl(\frac{r_1}{\sqrt{{\cal G}_{11}}} \,\text{sin}\,\varphi +\frac{r_2}{\sqrt{{\cal G}_{22}}}\,\text{cos}\,\varphi\biggr)\,a'^2\biggr] \,\text{Tr} ( \, G \wedge G ) \notag\\
&=& \frac{1}{8\pi ^2} \, \bigintssss \left[ \tilde a^1 + \tilde a^2 \right] \, \text{Tr} ( G \wedge G ) \label{Eq:PotentTermU1mixing}
\end{eqnarray}
where we opted once more to rewrite the instantonic coupling in representation scheme~2, with the axion fields $\tilde a^1$ and $\tilde a^2$ given by,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{tilde a}
\tilde{a}^1&=& M_A\biggl(\frac{r_1}{\sqrt{{\cal G}_{11}}} \,\text{cos}\,\varphi -\frac{r_2}{\sqrt{{\cal G}_{22}}}\,\text{sin}\,\varphi\biggr)\,a'^1, \notag \\
\tilde{a}^2&=&M_A\biggl(\frac{r_1}{\sqrt{{\cal G}_{11}}} \,\text{sin}\,\varphi +\frac{r_2}{\sqrt{{\cal G}_{22}}}\,\text{cos}\,\varphi\biggr)\,a'^2.
\end{eqnarray}
This allows us now to read off the effective axion decay constants for the basis ($\tilde a^1$, $\tilde a^2$), purely from the pre-factors in the kinetic terms for ($\tilde a^1$, $\tilde a^2$):\footnote{A similar comment as in footnote~\ref{Foot:GCDr1r2} on page~\pageref{Foot:GCDr1r2} is in order here: in case $\text{gcd}\,(r_1, \,r_2)\neq 1$, the axion decay constants have to be divided by $\text{gcd}\,(r_1,\,r_2)$ to account for the smallest periodicity.}
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:AxionDecayConstantU1}
\begin{array}{rcll}
f_{\tilde{a}^1}&=& \biggl(\frac{r_1}{\sqrt{{\cal G}_{11}}} \,\text{cos}\,\varphi -\frac{r_2}{\sqrt{{\cal G}_{22}}}\,\text{sin}\,\varphi\biggr)^{-1} &= \frac{\sqrt{{\cal G}_{11} {\cal G}_{22}}\,\sqrt{{\cal G}_{11}\,(k^1)^2 +{\cal G}_{22}\,(k^2)^2}}{|r_1\,k^2\,{\cal G}_{22}-r_2\,k^1\,{\cal G}_{11}|},\\
f_{\tilde{a}^2}&=& \biggl(\frac{r_1}{\sqrt{{\cal G}_{11}}} \,\text{sin}\,\varphi +\frac{r_2}{\sqrt{{\cal G}_{22}}}\,\text{cos}\,\varphi\biggr)^{-1}&=\frac{\sqrt{{\cal G}_{11}\,(k^1)^2+{\cal G}_{22}\,(k^2)^2}}{|r_1\,k^1+r_2\,k^2|}.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
As a consistency check we now translate the periodicity (\ref{Eq:shift}) of the axions in the original basis into a discrete shift symmetry for the physical axionic states $(\tilde{a}^1,\,\tilde{a}^2)$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde{a}^1&\rightarrow & \tilde{a}^1 + \frac{2\pi\left(r_1\,{\cal G}_{22} \,k^2-r_2\,{\cal G}_{11}\,k^1\right)\left(k^2\,\nu^1-k^1\,\nu^2\right)}{M_A^2},\notag\\
\tilde{a}^2 &\rightarrow & \tilde{a}^2 +\frac{2\pi\left(r_1\,k^1+r_2\,k^2\right)\left({\cal G}_{11} \,k^1\,\nu^1+{\cal G}_{22} \,k^2\,\nu^2\right)}{M_A^2}, \label{Eq:ShiftU1mixing}
\end{eqnarray}
and verify that the anomalous couplings to the non-Abelian gauge group remain invariant under this shift symmetry:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal S}^{\rm anom}_{axion} \rightarrow {\cal S}^{\rm anom}_{axion} + \frac{1}{8 \pi^2} \, 2\pi\left(r_1\,\nu^1+r_2\,\nu^2\right) \bigintssss \text{Tr}( \,G\wedge G) .
\end{eqnarray}
A similar argument as the one presented in section~\ref{Ss:MetricMixing}, based on the Pontryagin index in the path integral, is valid here to prove the invariance. Recalling that one of the axions ($\tilde a^2$) is charged under a local $U(1)$ symmetry, we notice that the potential term~(\ref{Eq:PotentTermU1mixing}) might no longer be invariant under local $U(1)$ transformations, raising questions about unitarity properties of this simple two-axion system. In the next section, we will see how this conundrum can be solved by introducing chiral fermions charged under the $U(1)$ gauge group and/or by generalized Chern-Simons terms.
Before doing so, let us first see whether a trans-Planckian axion decay constant can be realised in this setting by appropriate choices of the parameters $({\cal G}_{11}, {\cal G}_{22}, r_i, k^i)$.
Without loss of generality, we assume ${\cal G}_{11} >{\cal G}_{22}$, such that we can relate the two eigenvalues ${\cal G}_{11}$ and ${\cal G}_{22}$ through the parameter $\varepsilon$ introduced in (\ref{ratio}), which reduces in the absence of metric kinetic mixing to:
\begin{eqnarray}
\varepsilon ^2 = \frac{{\cal G}_{22}}{{\cal G}_{11}},\,\,\,\,\,\text{with }0<\varepsilon<1.
\end{eqnarray}
Inserting this parameter into (\ref{Eq:AxionDecayConstantU1}) allows us to write the axion decay constant $f_{\tilde a^1}$ as,
\begin{eqnarray}
f_{\tilde a^1}=\frac{\varepsilon\sqrt{{\cal G}_{11}}\sqrt{(k^1)^2+\varepsilon ^2\,(k^2)^2}}{|r_1\,\varepsilon ^2\,k^2-r_2\,k^1|}.
\end{eqnarray}
Next, we assume the following relation between the integer parameters $(r_i, k^i)$,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{condi_riki}
r_1\,k^2=r_2\,k^1,
\end{eqnarray}
such that a high amount of isotropy between the metric entries ${\cal G}_{11}$ and ${\cal G}_{22}$, i.e.~$\varepsilon \rightarrow 1^-$, can enhance the value of the axion decay constant $f_{\tilde a^1}$:
\begin{eqnarray}
f_{\tilde a^1}\sim \sqrt{{\cal G}_{11}}\,\frac{\varepsilon}{1-\varepsilon^2}\sim \frac{\sqrt{{\cal G}_{11}}}{1-\varepsilon^2}.
\end{eqnarray}
Assuming that the square root of the metric eigenvalue ${\cal G}_{11}$ (thus also the St\"uckelberg mass $M_{A}$ in (\ref{mass})) is of the order $10^{17}\,\text{GeV}$,
and that the eigenvalue ${\cal G}_{22}$ is exactly of the same order as ${\cal G}_{11}$, say for instance $\varepsilon ^2=0.99$, we find as a numerical estimate for the decay constant $f_{\tilde a^1}$:
\begin{equation}
f_{\tilde a^1}\sim 10^2\,\sqrt{{\cal G}_{11}}\sim 10^{19}\,\text{GeV}=10\,M_{Pl}.
\end{equation}
Hence, a small deviation from isotropy between the eigenvalues ${\cal G}_{11}$ and ${\cal G}_{22}$ is able to induce a super-Planckian effective axion decay constant for pure $U(1)$ mixing.
Let us also point out that to generate a super-Planckian axion decay constant the eigenvalues ${\cal G}_{11} $ and ${\cal G}_{22}$ do not need to be almost perfectly isotropic and imposing (\ref{condi_riki}) is not absolutely necessary, provided that $|r_1\,\varepsilon ^2\,k^2-r_2\,k^1|$ is sufficiently small. For example, when $r_1=k^1=r_2=1,\,k^2=2$, the axion decay constant $f_{\tilde a^1}$ is super-Planckian when the dimensionless ratio $\varepsilon ^2$ asymptotes to $\frac{1}{2}$:
\begin{eqnarray}
f_{\tilde a^1}=\frac{\varepsilon\sqrt{{\cal G}_{11}}\sqrt{ 1+4\varepsilon ^2}}{|2\varepsilon ^2-1|}\sim \frac{\sqrt{\frac{1}{2}}\sqrt{1+2} \sqrt{{\cal G}_{11}} }{10^{-2}}\sim 10^2\,\sqrt{{\cal G}_{11}}
\sim 10M_{Pl},
\end{eqnarray}
where $\varepsilon ^2=\frac{1}{2}+10^{-2}$ and $\sqrt{{\cal G}_{11}}$ is assumed to be of the order ${\cal O}(10^{17}\,\text{GeV})$. More generally, we can say that an enhancement of the axion decay constant occurs when the ratio $\varepsilon^2$ asymptotes to $r_2 k^1 / r_1 k^2$.
\subsubsection{$U(1)$-invariance \& Generalized Chern-Simons Terms}\label{Sss:GCSterms}
Given that a super-Planckian decay constant can be achieved in this set-up, it is definitely worthwhile to investigate the setting further and ensure that all the gauge symmetries in the system are preserved at all times.
Therefore, let us for the moment consider the subsystem consisting of the charged axion $\tilde a^2$ and the $U(1)$ gauge symmetry with one-form $A$, captured by the action,
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:SubsystempreGCS}
{\cal S}_{sub} = \bigintssss \left[ - \frac{f_{\tilde a^2}^2}{2} \left( d\tilde a^2 - \tilde k^2 A\right) \wedge \star_4 \left( d\tilde a^2 - \tilde k^2 A\right) -\frac{1}{g_{1}^{2}} F \wedge \star_4 F + \frac{1}{8\pi ^2} \tilde a^2 \,\text{Tr} ( \, G \wedge G ) \right],
\end{equation}
which is manifestly invariant under the local $U(1)$ transformation except for the anomalous coupling $\tilde a^2 \, \text{Tr}(G\wedge G)$,
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:LocalU1shift}
A \rightarrow A + \mathrm{d} \eta, \qquad \tilde a^2 \rightarrow \tilde a^2 + \tilde k^2 \eta,
\end{equation}
In this axion basis the charge $\tilde k^2$ is given by,
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:tildek2}
\tilde k^2 = M_A\biggl(\frac{r_1}{\sqrt{{\cal G}_{11}}} \,\text{sin}\,\varphi +\frac{r_2}{\sqrt{{\cal G}_{22}}}\,\text{cos}\,\varphi\biggr) = r_1 k^1 + r_2 k^2.
\end{equation}
The non-invariance of the anomalous coupling indicates the required presence of chiral fermions charged both under the $U(1)$ as well as under the non-Abelian gauge symmetry. More explicitly, if we consider a set of chiral fermions $\psi_L^i$ and $\psi_R^i$ with $i\in\{1,\ldots, n_F\}$, corresponding to the following representations under the respective gauge groups,
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:ChiralSpectrumFermions}
\begin{array}{c|@{\hspace{0.1in}}c@{\hspace{0.2in}}c}
& SU(N) & U(1)\\
\hline
\psi_L^i & R^i_1 & q^i_L\\
\psi_R^i & R^i_2 & q^i_R\\
\end{array}
\end{equation}
the fermions are chirally rotated under the local $U(1)$ gauge transformation in (\ref{Eq:LocalU1shift}). The non-invariance of the fermionic measure in the path integral under this chiral rotation then leads to an anomalous term, see appendix~\ref{A:ChiralRotations} for a brief explanation,
\begin{equation}
\delta {\cal S}_{\rm mixed}^{anom} = \bigintssss \frac{1}{8\pi ^2} {\cal A}^{\rm mix} \eta \,\text{Tr} ( \, G \wedge G ),
\end{equation}
where the anomaly coefficient ${\cal A}^{\rm mix}$ is given by,
\begin{equation}
{\cal A}^{\rm mix} = \sum_{i=1}^{n_F} \left[ \text{Tr}(q_L^i \{T_a^{R^i_1} , T_b^{R^i_1} \} ) - \text{Tr}(q_R^i \{T_a^{\overline{R}^i_2} , T_b^{\overline{R}^i_2} \} ) \right].
\end{equation}
The term $\delta {\cal S}_{\rm mixed}^{anom}$ is able to compensate the transformation of the anomalous coupling $\tilde a^2 \, \text{Tr}(G\wedge G)$ under the $U(1)$ gauge symmetry, provided that the following relation holds:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:U(1)GaugeInvariancenoGCS}
\tilde k^2 + {\cal A}^{\rm mix} = 0.
\end{equation}
Nevertheless, in some models the anomaly coefficient $ {\cal A}^{\rm mix}$ might not suffice to compensate for the $U(1)$ gauge transformation of the anomalous coupling $\tilde a^2 \, \text{Tr}(G\wedge G)$, in which case
$U(1)$ gauge invariance can be restored~\cite{Aldazabal:2002py,Andrianopoli:2004sv,Anastasopoulos:2006cz,DeRydt:2007vg} by introducing a generalized Chern-Simons term (or GCS-term) of the form:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:GCStermU1mixing}
{\cal S}_{sub}^{\rm GCS} = - \bigintssss \frac{1}{8 \pi^2} {\cal A}^{\rm GCS} A \wedge \Omega,
\end{equation}
where $\Omega$ corresponds to the Chern-Simons three-form introduced in appendix~\ref{A:Conventions}. Microscopically, such GCS-terms can be linked to the exchange of massive off-shell closed strings in Type II orientifold models with D-branes~\cite{Anastasopoulos:2006cz}, or emerge due to the presence of internal flux along the internal directions of a six-dimensional manifold suited for string theory compactifications~\cite{Aldazabal:2002py,Andrianopoli:2004sv}. In the presence of a GCS-term, $U(1)$ gauge invariance is guaranteed when the following generalization of relation (\ref{Eq:U(1)GaugeInvariancenoGCS}) is satisfied:
\begin{equation} \label{Eq:U(1)GaugeInvarianceII}
\tilde k^2 + {\cal A}^{\rm mix} + {\cal A}^{\rm GCS} = 0.
\end{equation}
This relation represents only one part of the consistency conditions ensuring $U(1)$ gauge invariance, with the second consistency check played by the vanishing of the pure cubic Abelian $U(1)$ gauge anomaly:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:U(1)GaugeInvarianceI}
{\cal A}^{U(1)^3} = \sum_{i=1}^{n_F} \left[ (q_L^i)^3 - (q_R^i)^3 \right] = 0.
\end{equation}
Quantum consistency of the non-Abelian gauge symmetry on the other hand implies two additional constraints: the vanishing of the pure cubic non-Abelian anomaly coefficient,
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:PureNonAbelianAnomaly}
{\cal A}^{SU(N)^3} = \sum_{i=1}^{n_F} \left[ \text{Tr}(T_a^{R^i_1} \{T_b^{R^i_1} , T_c^{R^i_1} \}) - \text{Tr}(T_a^{\overline{R}^i_2} \{T_b^{\overline{R}^i_2} , T_c^{\overline{R}^i_2} \}) \right] = 0,
\end{equation}
and the vanishing of the mixed Abelian non-Abelian gauge anomaly,
\begin{equation}
{\cal A}^{\rm GCS} - {\cal A}^{\rm mix} = 0, \label{Eq:MixedAbelianNonAbelianAnomaly}
\end{equation}
to which the GCS-term contributes as well if present. In case the mixed anomaly ${\cal A}^{mix}$ does not vanish on its own by virtue of the specific representations of the chiral fermions under the gauge groups, a consistent field theory model requires unequivocally the presence of a GCS-term. For string compactifications with D-branes, the mixed anomaly is canceled by virtue of the generalized Green-Schwarz mechanism and the GCS-term is usually not present. Section~\ref{subsec:ex} contains explicit examples in Type IIA superstring theory with intersecting D6-branes and in Type IIB superstring theory with intersecting D7-branes which do not require GCS-terms and where the cancelation of the mixed anomaly and the preservation of the $U(1)$ gauge symmetry correspond to the same constraint (\ref{Eq:U(1)GaugeInvariancenoGCS}).
Hence, by ensuring gauge invariance for our set-up we extend its field content and reconstruct the most generic lagrangian, including the GCS term, in the basis $(\tilde a^1, \tilde a^2)$:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal S}_{axion}^{\rm full} &= & \bigintssss \left[-\frac{f_{\tilde a^1}^2}{2} d\tilde a^1 \wedge \star_4 d\tilde a^1 - \frac{f_{\tilde a^2}^2}{2} \left( d\tilde a^2 - \tilde k^2 A\right) \wedge \star_4 \left( d\tilde a^2 - \tilde k^2 A\right) -\frac{1}{g_{1}^{2}} F \wedge \star_4 F \notag \right. \\
&&\left. \qquad -\frac{1}{g_{2}^{2}} \text{Tr}(G\wedge \star_4 G) + \frac{1}{8\pi ^2} \left[ \tilde a^1 + \tilde a^2\right] \,\text{Tr} ( \, G \wedge G ) - \frac{1}{8 \pi^2} {\cal A}^{\rm GCS} A \wedge \Omega +\ldots \right], \notag \\
\end{eqnarray}
where the $\ldots$ refer to the terms involving the fermions $\psi_L^i$ and $\psi_R^i$, which will be omitted for the remainder of our story.
The remaining question at this stage concerns the shape of the inflationary potential which has to be extracted from the lagrangian ${\cal S}_{axion}^{\rm full}$. In order to answer this question we have to integrate out the massive $U(1)$ gauge field, as well as the chiral fermions charged under the non-Abelian gauge group. First of all, we adopt the unitary gauge for the gauge potential $A$:
\begin{equation}
A \longrightarrow A + \frac{1}{\tilde k^2} d\tilde a^2,
\end{equation}
such that the lagrangian can be written as:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Eq:LagrFullU1Unitary}
{\cal S}^{\rm full, unitary}_{axion} &=& \bigintssss \left[ - \frac{f_{\tilde a^1}^2}{2} d\tilde a^1 \wedge \star_4 d\tilde a^1 - \frac{(f_{\tilde a^2} \tilde k^2)^2}{2} A \wedge \star_4 A - \frac{1}{g_1^2} F \wedge \star_4 F -\frac{1}{g_{2}^{2}} \text{Tr}(G\wedge \star_4 G) \nonumber \right. \\
&& \qquad + \frac{1}{8\pi^2} \tilde a^1 \text{Tr}(G\wedge G) - \frac{1}{8 \pi^2} {\cal A}^{\rm GCS} A \wedge \Omega + A \wedge \star _4{\cal J}_\psi
\notag \\
&& \left. \qquad + \frac{1}{8\pi^2} \frac{\left(\tilde k^2 + {\cal A}^{\rm GCS} + {\cal A}^{\rm mix}\right)}{\tilde k^2} \tilde a^2 \text{Tr}(G\wedge G) + \ldots
\right].
\end{eqnarray}
The term related to the anomaly ${\cal A}^{\rm mix}$ arises through a chiral rotation of the chiral fermions, as reviewed in more detail in appendix~\ref{A:ChiralRotations}. The current ${\cal J}_\psi$ consists of the vector and axial-vector coupling of the chiral fermions to the $U(1)$ gauge potential $A$, which can be written in local (flat) coordinates as:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:CurrentExpression}
{\cal J}_\psi^\mu = \sum_{i} \left[ (q_L^i) \overline \psi_{L}^i \gamma^\mu \psi_{L}^i + (q_R^i) \overline \psi_{R}^i \gamma^\mu \psi_{R}^i \right].
\end{equation}
In the unitary gauge, the axion $\tilde a^2$ is eaten by the gauge potential and turns into the longitudinal component of the (massive) gauge potential $A$. By virtue of the $U(1)$ gauge invariance (\ref{Eq:U(1)GaugeInvarianceII}) the anomalous coupling of axion $\tilde a^2$ to the non-Abelian gauge group vanishes in the unitary gauge.
Under the assumption that the energy scale at which the St\"uckelberg mechanism takes place is much higher than the scale $\Lambda$ associated to the instanton contributions of the strongly coupled gauge group, we can integrate out the Abelian gauge field $A$.
To this end, we determine its equations of motion:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:EOMgaugefield}
-\frac{1}{g_1^2} d (\star_4 d A) - (f_{\tilde a_2} \tilde k^2)^2 \star_4 A = \frac{ {\cal A}^{\rm GCS}}{8\pi^2} \Omega - \star_4 {\cal J}_\psi.
\end{equation}
The lefthand side corresponds to the usual Proca equation of motion for a massive gauge boson, while the righthand side can be seen as a combination of source terms. Note however that the Chern-Simons three-form and the current are related to each other through the anomalous continuity relation:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:ABJAnomaly}
d(\star_4 {\cal J}_\psi) = - \frac{1}{8\pi^2} {\cal A}^{\rm mix} \, d \Omega = - \frac{1}{8\pi^2} {\cal A}^{\rm mix}\, \text{Tr}(G\wedge G) .
\end{equation}
The Lorenz gauge condition for $A$ follows by taking the exterior derivative at both sides of the equation of motion (\ref{Eq:EOMgaugefield}):
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:Lorenzgauge}
(f_{\tilde a^2} \tilde k^2)^2 d (\star_4 A) = \frac{ {\cal A}^{\rm GCS} + {\cal A}^{\rm mix}}{{\cal A}^{\rm mix}} d( \star_4 {\cal J}_\psi) .
\end{equation}
From this Lorenz gauge condition we can extract an expression for $A$ in terms of the current ${\cal J}_\psi$ (up to a closed 1-form):
\begin{equation}
A = \frac{ {\cal A}^{\rm GCS} + {\cal A}^{\rm mix}}{{\cal A}^{\rm mix}} \frac{1}{(f_{\tilde a_2} \tilde k^2)^2} {\cal J}_\psi.
\end{equation}
Inserting this expression back into the action (\ref{Eq:LagrFullU1Unitary}) allows us to eliminate the gauge potential $A$ in favour of the current ${\cal J}_\psi$:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal S}^{\rm full, unitary}_{axion} &=& \bigintssss \left[ - \frac{f_{\tilde a^1}^2}{2} d\tilde a^1 \wedge \star_4 d\tilde a^1 + \frac{1}{8\pi^2} \tilde a^1 \text{Tr}(G\wedge G) \right. \nonumber \\
&& \qquad \left. + \frac{({\cal A}^{\rm GCS} + {\cal A}^{\rm mix})^2}{2({\cal A}^{\rm mix})^2} \frac{1}{(f_{\tilde a^2} \tilde k^2)^2} {\cal J}_{\psi} \wedge \star_4 {\cal J}_{\psi} + \ldots
\right], \label{Eq:LagrFullU1UnitaryWithoutA}
\end{eqnarray}
and we are left with one axion $\tilde a^1$, one non-Abelian gauge group and a set of chiral fermions charged under the non-Abelian gauge group. By integrating out the massive $U(1)$ gauge boson, four-point couplings among the chiral fermions emerge, suppressed by the squared mass of the gauge boson. Integrating out the chiral fermions and the non-Abelian gauge bosons, for which the procedure is briefly outlined in appendix~\ref{A:ChiralRotations}, yields a cosine-potential for the remaining axion $\tilde a^1$:
\begin{equation}
V_{\rm axion}(\tilde a^1) = \Lambda^4 \left[ 1 - \cos \left(\frac{\tilde a^1}{f_{\tilde a^1}}\right) \right].
\end{equation}
which provides an explicit realisation of natural inflation with a single axion field. In appendix~\ref{A:Fermion} we propose a method to identify a proper spectrum of chiral fermions satisfying the anomaly constraints.
\subsection{Generic Kinetic mixing}\label{Ss:GenericKineticMixing}
With the insights gathered in sections~\ref{Ss:MetricMixing} and \ref{Ss:U1mixing} we can now tackle the most generic case: a two-axion system for which the metric on the axion moduli space is non-diagonal and where both axions are charged under the same $U(1)$ gauge symmetry through St\"uckelberg-couplings. The action is given by the most general form (\ref{Eq:GeneralLagrangian}) with $N=2$ and supplemented with the generalized Chern-Simons term to ensure $U(1)$ gauge invariance:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Eq:GeneralLagrangianWithGCS}
{\cal S}_{axion}^{\rm N=2} &= & \bigintssss \left[ -\frac{1}{2}\, \sum_{i,j=1}^2 \mathcal{G} _{ij} (\mathrm{d} a^{i}-k^{i}A) \wedge \star_4 (\mathrm{d} a^{j}-k^{j}A) -\frac{1}{g_{1}^{2}} F \wedge \star_4 F -\frac{1}{g_{2}^{2}} \text{Tr}(G\wedge \star_4 G) \notag \right.\\
&& \left. \qquad + \frac{1}{8\pi ^2}\left( r_1 a^1 + r_2 a^2 \right) \text{Tr} ( G \wedge G ) - \frac{1}{8 \pi^2}{\cal A}^{\rm GCS} \, A \wedge \Omega \right].
\end{eqnarray}
In order to determine the physical axion basis in which the axion decay constants can be read off properly, one has to combine the manipulations of the previous two sections. \\
\vspace{0.1in}
{\it Step 1: Diagonalizing the metric $ {\cal G}_{ij}$}\\
In the first place the kinetic mixing due to a non-trivial metric on the axion moduli space has to be disengaged. To this end we use the orthogonal transformation introduced in section~\ref{Ss:MetricMixing}, under which also the charges $(k^1, k^2)$ of the axions are now transformed accordingly:
\begin{equation}
\left(\begin{array}{c} a^- \\ a^+ \end{array} \right)\label{pm}
= \left( \begin{array}{cc} \sin \frac{\theta}{2} & - \cos \frac{\theta}{2} \\ \cos \frac{\theta}{2} & \sin \frac{\theta}{2} \end{array} \right) \left(\begin{array}{c} a^1 \\ a^2 \end{array} \right), \qquad
\left(\begin{array}{c} k^- \\ k^+ \end{array} \right) = \left( \begin{array}{cc} \sin \frac{\theta}{2} & - \cos \frac{\theta}{2} \\ \cos \frac{\theta}{2} & \sin \frac{\theta}{2} \end{array} \right) \left(\begin{array}{c} k^1 \\ k^2 \end{array} \right),
\end{equation}
with the same parameter $\theta$ defined through the parametrization (\ref{Eq:MetricMixingParametrisation}).
By virtue of this $SO(2)$ rotation the kinetic terms for the two axions can be written in the following form:
\begin{equation}
{\cal S}_{axion}^{\rm N=2, kin} = -\bigintssss \left[ \frac{1}{2} \lambda_- \left(\mathrm{d} a^- - k^- A \right)\wedge \star_4 \left(\mathrm{d} a^- - k^- A \right) + \frac{1}{2} \lambda_+ \left( \mathrm{d} a^+ - k^+ A \right) \wedge \star_4 \left( \mathrm{d} a^+ - k^+ A \right) \right],
\end{equation}
where the eigenvalues $\lambda_\pm$ are given by (\ref{Eq:MetricMixingMetricEigenvalues}). The kinetic terms for the gauge bosons remain unaltered by this $SO(2)$ rotation and the effects on the anomalous couplings and the generalized Chern-Simons term will be discussed at the end, once the physical axion basis has been found.
\vspace{0.1in}
{\it Step 2: Identifying the eaten axion direction}\\
In the next step we identify the linear combination of axions $(a^-, a^+)$ eaten by the $U(1)$ gauge field $A$. To this end, we rescale the axions and their respective charges:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l@{\hspace{0.2in}}l}\label{tilde}
a^- \rightarrow \tilde a^- \equiv M_{st}^{-1}\,\sqrt{\lambda_-} a^-, & a^+ \rightarrow \tilde a^+ \equiv M_{st}^{-1}\,\sqrt{\lambda_+} a^+,\\
k^- \rightarrow \tilde k^- \equiv M_{st}^{-1}\, \sqrt{\lambda_-} k^-, & k^+ \rightarrow \tilde k^+ \equiv M_{st}^{-1}\,\sqrt{\lambda_+} k^+,
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where $M_{st}$ is the St\"uckelberg mass of the $U(1)$ gauge boson:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Eq:StuckMassFullMixing}
M^2_{st} = \lambda _- \,(k^-)^2 + \lambda _+\,(k^+)^2.
\end{eqnarray}
Next, we use a similar parametrization as the one introduced in (\ref{Eq:U1mixingparametrisation}) from section~\ref{Ss:U1mixing}:
\begin{equation}\label{varphi}
\tilde k^- = \cos \varphi, \qquad \tilde k^+ = \sin \varphi.
\end{equation}
This parametrization allows us to perform the $SO(2)$ transformation on the axion fields in order to extract the physical axion basis:
\begin{equation}
\left(\begin{array}{c} \zeta \\ \xi \end{array}\right) = \left(\begin{array}{cc} \cos \varphi & \sin \varphi \\ - \sin \varphi & \cos \varphi \end{array}\right) \left(\begin{array}{c} \tilde a^- \\ \tilde a^+\end{array}\right),
\end{equation}
where $\zeta$ corresponds to the axion eaten by the $U(1)$ gauge field, and $\xi$ to the orthogonal direction. The resulting kinetic terms for the axions read in the basis $(\zeta, \xi)$:
\begin{equation}
{\cal S}_{axion}^{\rm N=2, kin} = - \bigintssss \left[ \frac{1}{2} \,M_{st}^2\,\left( \mathrm{d} \zeta - A \right)\wedge \star_4 \left( \mathrm{d} \zeta - A \right) + \frac{1}{2}\,M_{st}^2\, \mathrm{d} \xi \wedge \star_4 \mathrm{d} \xi \right].
\end{equation}
From the original gauge symmetry (\ref{Eq:tran}),
we can deduce that the gauge symmetry in the physical axion basis $(\zeta, \xi)$ can be expressed as:
\begin{equation}
A \rightarrow A + \mathrm{d} \eta, \qquad \zeta \rightarrow \zeta + \eta, \qquad \xi \rightarrow \xi.
\end{equation}
In summary, the physical axion basis $(\zeta, \xi)$, in which the kinetic terms take a diagonal form and the axion eaten in the St\"uckelberg mechanism can be identified unambiguously, relates to the original basis $(a^1,a^2)$ through a combination of $SO(2)$ rotations and a rescaling:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:PhysOriginalBasis}
\left(\begin{array}{c} \zeta \\ \xi \end{array}\right) = M_{st}^{-1} \left(\begin{array}{cc} \cos \varphi & \sin \varphi \\ - \sin \varphi & \cos \varphi \end{array}\right) \left( \begin{array}{cc} \sqrt{\lambda_-} & 0 \\0 & \sqrt{\lambda_+} \end{array}\right) \left( \begin{array}{cc} \sin \frac{\theta}{2} & - \cos \frac{\theta}{2} \\ \cos \frac{\theta}{2} & \sin \frac{\theta}{2} \end{array} \right) \left(\begin{array}{c} a^1 \\ a^2 \end{array} \right).
\end{equation}
\vspace{0.1in}
{\it Step 3: Rewriting the anomalous couplings in the physical basis}\\
Now that we have identified the physical basis, it is time to express the anomalous couplings and generalized Chern-Simons term in term of the basis $(\zeta, \xi)$. To this end, we invert the set of transformations in equation (\ref{Eq:PhysOriginalBasis}):
\begin{equation}
\left(\begin{array}{c} a^1 \\ a^2 \end{array} \right) = M_{st}\left( \begin{array}{cc} \sin \frac{\theta}{2} & \cos \frac{\theta}{2} \\ -\cos \frac{\theta}{2} & \sin \frac{\theta}{2} \end{array} \right) \left( \begin{array}{cc} \frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_-}} & 0 \\0 &\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_+}} \end{array}\right) \left(\begin{array}{cc} \cos \varphi & - \sin \varphi \\ \sin \varphi & \cos \varphi \end{array}\right) \left(\begin{array}{c} \zeta \\ \xi \end{array}\right),
\end{equation}
and plug these expressions back into the anomalous couplings and the generalized Chern-Simons terms:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal S}^{\rm anom}_{axion} &=& \frac{1}{8\pi ^2} \bigintssss \left[ \text{Tr} (G\wedge G) M_{st} \left[ \frac{\zeta}{f_{\tilde \zeta}} + \frac{\xi}{f_{\tilde \xi}} \right] - {\cal A}^{\rm GCS} A \wedge \Omega \right] \notag \\
&=& \frac{1}{8\pi ^2} \bigintssss \left[ \left[ \tilde \zeta + \tilde \xi \right] \,\text{Tr} ( \, G \wedge G ) - \frac{1}{8 \pi^2} {\cal A}^{\rm GCS} A \wedge \Omega \right],
\end{eqnarray}
where the second equality results from a rescaling of the axions such that we can read off the axion decay constants in representation scheme 2 for the rescaled physical basis~$(\tilde \zeta, \tilde \xi)$:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{rcl}
f_{\tilde \zeta} &= &\frac{\sqrt{\lambda_+ \lambda_-}}{\left|\sqrt{\lambda_+} \cos \varphi \left( \sin \frac{\theta}{2} \,r_1 - \cos \frac{\theta}{2}\, r_2 \right) + \sqrt{\lambda_-} \sin \varphi \left( \cos \frac{\theta}{2} \,r_1 + \sin \frac{\theta}{2} \,r_2 \right) \right|},\\ \label{f_xi}
f_{\tilde \xi} &= &\frac{\sqrt{\lambda_+ \lambda_-}}{\left|\sqrt{\lambda_+} \sin \varphi \left( \cos \frac{\theta}{2} \,r_2 - \sin \frac{\theta}{2} \,r_1 \right) + \sqrt{\lambda_-} \cos \varphi \left( \cos \frac{\theta}{2}\, r_1 + \sin \frac{\theta}{2} \,r_2 \right) \right|}.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
With respect to the physical basis $(\tilde \zeta, \tilde \xi)$ the lagrangian for the full two-axion system can now be written as:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Eq:GeneralLagrangianWithGCSII}
{\cal S}_{axion}^{\rm N=2} &= & \bigintssss \left[ -\frac{f_{\tilde \zeta}^2}{2} \left( \mathrm{d} \tilde \zeta - k_{\tilde \zeta} A \right)\wedge \star_4 \left( \mathrm{d} \tilde \zeta - k_{\tilde \zeta} A \right) - \frac{f_{\tilde \xi}^2}{2} \mathrm{d} \tilde\xi \wedge \star_4 \mathrm{d} \tilde\xi -\frac{1}{g_{1}^{2}} F \wedge \star_4 F \notag \right. \\
&&\left. \qquad -\frac{1}{g_{2}^{2}} \text{Tr}(G\wedge \star_4 G) + \frac{1}{8\pi ^2}\left( \tilde \zeta + \tilde \xi \right) \text{Tr} ( G \wedge G ) - \frac{1}{8 \pi^2} {\cal A}^{\rm GCS} \, A \wedge \Omega \right].
\end{eqnarray}
Also here we wonder how the periodicity (\ref{Eq:shift}) in the original axion basis translates into a discrete shift symmetry for the physical axion basis $(\zeta, \xi)$:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lcl}
\zeta &\rightarrow& \zeta + 2\pi\,\frac{\left(\sqrt{\lambda _-}\,\text{cos}\,\varphi\,\text{sin}\,\frac{\theta}{2}+\sqrt{\lambda _+}\,\text{sin}\,\varphi\,\text{cos}\,\frac{\theta}{2}\right)\nu^1+\left(-\sqrt{\lambda _-}\,\text{cos}\,\varphi\,\text{cos}\,\frac{\theta}{2}+\sqrt{\lambda _+}\,\text{sin}\,\varphi\,\text{sin}\,\frac{\theta}{2}\right)\nu^2}{M_{st}},\\
\xi &\rightarrow& \xi + 2\pi\,\frac{\left(-\sqrt{\lambda _-}\,\text{sin}\,\varphi\,\text{sin}\,\frac{\theta}{2}+\sqrt{\lambda _+}\,\text{cos}\,\varphi\,\text{cos}\,\frac{\theta}{2}\right)\nu^1+\left(\sqrt{\lambda _-}\,\text{sin}\,\varphi\,\text{cos}\,\frac{\theta}{2}+\sqrt{\lambda _+}\,\text{cos}\,\varphi\,\text{sin}\,\frac{\theta}{2}\right)\nu^2 }{M_{st}},
\end{array}
\end{equation}
and investigate how the anomalous couplings to the non-Abelian gauge group transforms under such a shift:
\begin{equation}
\Delta {\cal S}_{anom} = \frac{1}{8 \pi^2} 2\pi\left(r_1\,\nu^1+r_2\,\nu^2\right)
\bigintssss \, \text{Tr} (G\wedge G),
\end{equation}
with other terms cancelling each other out. In this computation we explicitly included the anomalous coupling for the eaten axion as well.
The global consistency of this model requires the introduction of chiral fermions charged under the non-Abelian gauge group and the $U(1)$ gauge group, analogous to the discussion in section~\ref{Sss:GCSterms}. Non-Abelian gauge invariance is guaranteed provided that the anomaly conditions (\ref{Eq:PureNonAbelianAnomaly}) and (\ref{Eq:MixedAbelianNonAbelianAnomaly}) are satisfied, while the vanishing of the $U(1)$ anomalies is secured by conditions (\ref{Eq:U(1)GaugeInvarianceI}) and (\ref{Eq:U(1)GaugeInvarianceII}), upon replacing the $U(1)$ charge $\tilde k_2$ with the $U(1)$ charge $k_{\tilde \zeta} = M_{st} f^{-1}_{\tilde \zeta}$.
Regarding the massive $U(1)$ boson, we can repeat the same reasoning as in section~\ref{Sss:GCSterms} and integrate out the gauge potential $A$ in favour of the current ${\cal J}_\psi$. Upon integrating out the massive $U(1)$ gauge boson, we are left with the axion $\tilde \xi$ coupling anomalously to the non-Abelian gauge theory. By integrating out the heavy fermions and the non-Abelian gauge bosons we are left with a cosine-potential for the remaining axion $\tilde \xi$, which is interpreted at the end of the road as the inflaton.
We end this section by exploring the physical excursion range of this inflaton-axion by virtue of a closer investigation of the axion decay constant $f_{\tilde \xi}$ in equation~(\ref{f_xi}). First intuition regarding the range of this decay constant can be obtained through a numerical examination of the expression in (\ref{f_xi}). To this end, we assume that the larger eigenvalue $\sqrt{\lambda _+}$ of the axion metric (and thus also the U(1) St\"uckelberg mass $M_{st}$) takes values around an energy scale of the order $10^{17}\,\text{GeV}$:
\begin{equation}
\sqrt{\lambda _+} \sim {\cal O}(10^{16}-10^{17})\,\text{GeV}.
\end{equation}
Then from equations (\ref{pm}), (\ref{tilde}) and (\ref{varphi}) we can deduce the expressions:
\begin{eqnarray}
\text{cos}\,\varphi \sim \varepsilon\left(\text{sin}\,\frac{\theta}{2}\,k^1-\text{cos}\,\frac{\theta}{2}\,k^2\right), \qquad \text{sin}\,\varphi \sim \text{cos}\,\frac{\theta}{2}\,k^1+\text{sin}\,\frac{\theta}{2}\,k^2,
\end{eqnarray}
such that the decay constant $f_{\tilde \xi}$ can be written as,
\begin{equation}\label{f}
f_{\tilde \xi}\sim \frac{\varepsilon \sqrt{\lambda _+}}{\left|\left(\text{cos}\,\frac{\theta}{2}\,k^1+\text{sin}\,\frac{\theta}{2}\,k^2\right)\left(\text{cos}\,\frac{\theta}{2}\,r_2 -\text{sin}\,\frac{\theta}{2}\,r_1\right)+\varepsilon ^2\left(\text{sin}\,\frac{\theta}{2}\,k^1-\text{cos}\,\frac{\theta}{2}\,k^2\right)\left(\text{cos}\,\frac{\theta}{2}\,r_1+\text{sin}\,\frac{\theta}{2}\,r_2\right)\right|},
\end{equation}
where $\varepsilon ^2$ is the ratio between the smaller and the larger eigenvalues of the metric in the axion space as defined in (\ref{ratio}). Based on this expression for the decay constant, we can already discover two regions in the axion moduli where the axion decay constant can enhance to super-Planckian values, namely $\theta = \frac{\pi}{2}$ and $\theta = 0$.
\begin{itemize}
\item[]{\bf Region 1 ($\theta = \frac{\pi}{2}$):}
It is easy to check that for the following choice of discrete parameters:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{wrapping}
r_1=r_2\sim \mathcal{O}(1),\qquad k^1=-k^2\sim \mathcal{O}(1),
\end{eqnarray}
the decay constant reduces to the following simple expression:
\begin{eqnarray}
f_{\tilde \xi}\sim \frac{\varepsilon \,\sqrt{\lambda _+} }{\left(\text{cos}\,\frac{\theta}{2}-\text{sin}\,\frac{\theta}{2}\right)^2+\varepsilon ^2\left(\text{sin}\,\frac{\theta}{2}+\text{cos}\,\frac{\theta}{2}\right)^2}= \frac{\varepsilon \,\sqrt{\lambda _+} }{1+\varepsilon ^2-(1-\varepsilon ^2)\,\text{sin}\,\theta},
\end{eqnarray}
which can grow larger than $\sqrt{\lambda _+} $ when $\varepsilon$ is small enough and $\theta$ asymptotes to $\frac{\pi}{2}$. Indeed when $\theta =\frac{\pi}{2}$, the decay constant scales as,
\begin{eqnarray}
f_{\tilde \xi}\sim \frac{\sqrt{\lambda _+} }{2\varepsilon }.
\end{eqnarray}
If there is a hierarchy between the two eigenvalues $\lambda_+$ and $\lambda_-$, say $\varepsilon \sim {\cal O}(10^{-2})$, then the axion decay constant for $\tilde \xi$ can become super-Planckian, i.e.~$f_{\tilde \xi}\sim 10^2\,\sqrt{\lambda _+} \sim 10\,M_{Pl}$. Expressed in terms of the entries of the axion moduli space metric,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{alpha}
{\cal G}_{11} &=&\frac{\lambda _+}{2}\left[1+\frac{\lambda _-}{\lambda _+}+\left(1-\frac{\lambda _-}{\lambda _+}\right)\text{cos}\,\theta\right]\sim \frac{\lambda _+}{2} ,\\ \label{gamma}
{\cal G}_{22} &=&\frac{\lambda _+}{2}\left[1+\frac{\lambda _-}{\lambda _+}-\left(1-\frac{\lambda _-}{\lambda _+}\right)\text{cos}\,\theta\right]\sim\frac{\lambda _+}{2} ,\\ \label{beta}
{\cal G}_{12} &=& \frac{\lambda _+}{2}\left(1-\frac{\lambda _-}{\lambda _+}\right)\text{sin}\,\theta\sim \frac{\lambda _+}{2},
\end{eqnarray}
a hierarchy $\lambda_- \ll \lambda_+$ among the eigenvalues translates into a configuration with large metric mixing. Hence, if the off-diagonal entries are of the same order as the diagonal ones in the metric on the axion moduli space, and the discrete parameters satisfy the relation (\ref{wrapping}), the decay constant $f_{\tilde \xi}$ for the axion $\tilde \xi$, orthogonal to the axionic direction devoured by the $U(1)$ gauge boson, becomes trans-Planckian.
\item[]{\bf Region 2 ($\theta=0$):}
Also for configurations where there is a small or no hierarchy between the eigenvalues (i.e.~$\varepsilon \rightarrow 1^-$), one can locate regions of isotropy in the parameter space where the axion decay constant takes super-Planckian values. To see this more explicity, let us rewrite the denominator of (\ref{f}) as follows,
\begin{eqnarray}
\text{Denominator}&=&\left|\text{cos}^2\frac{\theta}{2}\,k^1\,r_2-\frac{\sin \theta}{2}\,\left(k^1\,r_1-k^2\,r_2\right)-\text{sin}^2\frac{\theta}{2}\,k^2\,r_1 \right.\notag\\
&& \qquad +\left. \varepsilon ^2 \left[\frac{\sin \theta}{2} \left(k^1\,r_1-k^2\,r_2\right)-\text{cos}^2\frac{\theta}{2}\,k^2\,r_1+\text{sin}^2\frac{\theta}{2}\,k^1\,r_2\right]\right|\notag\\
&=&\left| (1-\varepsilon ^2) \left[ -\frac{\text{sin}\,\theta}{2}\left(k^1\,r_1-k^2\,r_2\right)+k^2\,r_1\,\text{cos}^2\frac{\theta}{2} -k^1\,r_2\,\text{sin}^2\frac{\theta}{2} \right] \right. \nonumber\\
&& \qquad \qquad \qquad\left. + ( k^1 r_2 - k^2 r_1) \phantom{\left[ -\frac{\text{sin}\,\theta}{2}\left(k^1\,r_1-k^2\,r_2\right)+k^2\,r_1\,\text{cos}^2\frac{\theta}{2} -k^1\,r_2\,\text{sin}^2\frac{\theta}{2} \right] } \hspace{-3.5in} \right|.
\end{eqnarray}
Note that for a small amount of metric kinetic mixing, we are located in a region of the parameter space where the angle $\theta$ asymptotes to 0, such that in that limit the denominator can be approximated by,
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\left| (1-\varepsilon ^2) \left[-\frac{\text{sin}\,\theta}{2}\left(k^1\,r_1-k^2\,r_2\right)+k^2\,r_1\,\text{cos}^2\frac{\theta}{2}-k^1\,r_2\,\text{sin}^2\frac{\theta}{2} \right] + k^1 r_2 - k^2 r_1\right| \nonumber \\
&& \qquad \qquad \stackrel{\theta \rightarrow 0}{\longrightarrow} \left| k^1 r_2 - k^2 r_1 \varepsilon^2 \right|.
\end{eqnarray}
Assuming $k^2 r_1 \sim {\cal O}(k^1 r_2)$ and that the parameter $k^1$ and $r_2$ are not monstrously large, the axion decay constant in~(\ref{f}) thus scales roughly as,
\begin{eqnarray}
f_{\tilde \xi}\sim \frac{\varepsilon \, \sqrt{\lambda _+}}{1-\varepsilon ^2}.
\end{eqnarray}
From this estimate one notices that the decay constant $f$ reaches large values in the limit $\varepsilon \rightarrow 1^-$. For instance, if the parameter $\varepsilon \approx 0.995$, we find a trans-Planckian decay constant:
$ f_{\tilde \xi}\sim 10^2\,\sqrt{\lambda _+} \sim 10\,M_{Pl}$.
Naturally, this region of the parameter space resembles the case discussed in section~\ref{Ss:U1mixing}, where no metric mixing occurs at all.
\end{itemize}
To investigate regions of the moduli space where metric mixing occurs and the non-diagonal entries are not of the same order as the diagonal entries (like in region 1), we have to adopt a different strategy. In the first place, we exchange the $\varphi$-parametrization for the charges $(k^-,k^+)$ in the axion decay constant:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:NewADCFullMixing}
f_{\tilde \xi} = \frac{\sqrt{\lambda_+ \lambda_-} M_{st}}{ \cos \frac{\theta}{2} \left( \lambda_+ k^+ r_2 + \lambda_- k^- r_1 \right) + \sin \frac{\theta}{2} \left( \lambda_- k^- r_2 - \lambda_+ k^+ r_1 \right)}.
\end{equation}
Through the expressions~(\ref{pm}) the charges $(k^-,k^+)$ are given in terms of the angle $\theta$ and the original discrete charges $(k^1,k^2)$, implying that the St\"uckelberg mass depends on these parameters as well by virtue of equation~(\ref{Eq:StuckMassFullMixing}). Recall that the continuous parameter $\theta$ measures the amount of metric kinetic mixing through the parametrization:
\begin{equation}
\cos \theta = {\cal G}_{11} \frac{1 - \Sigma^2 }{\lambda_+ - \lambda_-}, \qquad \sin \theta = \frac{2 {\cal G}_{12}}{\lambda_+ - \lambda_-},
\end{equation}
where we introduced the ratio $\Sigma^2 = {\cal G}_{22}/{\cal G}_{11}$ to measure the relative magnitude between the diagonal entries of the axion metric ${\cal G}_{ij}$. Through this parametrization the eigenvalues $\lambda_+$ and $\lambda_-$ can be written in terms of the continuous parameters $\theta$, $\Sigma^2$ and ${\cal G}_{11}$. Upon fixing the discrete parameters $r_i$ and $k^i$ the axion decay constant~(\ref{Eq:NewADCFullMixing}) in units of~$\sqrt{{\cal G}_{11}}$ can be represented through a two-dimensional contour plot spanned by $\Sigma$ and $\theta$. Based on the sign of the non-diagonal metric entry ${\cal G}_{12}$ and the value of $\Sigma$ we can distinguish four different regions in the parameter space $(\Sigma, \theta)$ and assign to each of them a quadrant of a unit circle as depicted in figure~\ref{Fig:ParamQuadr}. In the two-dimensional plot of the parameter space $(\theta, \Sigma)$ one can depict two quadrants simultaneously, and we have chosen to differentiate the regions in the parameter space based on the values of the ratio $\Sigma^2$: $0<\Sigma^2\leq1$ (green in the unit circle) or $\Sigma^2\geq 1$ (blue in the unit circle). We consider three different examples, distinguishable from each other by the relation among the discrete parameters $(r_i,k^i)$. The contour plots for the three different examples are given in figures~\ref{Fig:ContEx1},~\ref{Fig:ContEx2} and~\ref{Fig:ContEx3} respectively. The black areas in these figures correspond to unphysical regions with a complex decay constant. Physical values for $f_{\tilde \xi}$-magnitude follow the color-coding: small (green) to large (red). The white bands denote the region where the axion decay constant enhances to $f_{\tilde \xi} \geq {\cal O}(20-30) \sqrt{{\cal G}_{11}}$. The shape and position of these white bands in the $(\theta, \Sigma)$-plane clearly depends on the relation among the discrete parameters $(r_i,k^i)$ and the sign of ${\cal G}_{12}$. In their center one can locate regions in the moduli space where trans-Planckian axion decay constants $f_{\tilde \xi}$ are possibly realised, depending on the scale of $\sqrt{{\cal G}_{11}}$.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=5cm,height=5cm]{Quadrant.jpg} \begin{picture}(0,0)
\put(0,70){\color{mygr}$0<\Sigma^2 \leq 1$}
\put(-185,70){\color{myblue}$\Sigma^2 \geq 1$}
\put(-65,90){${\cal G}_{12} > 0$} \put(-65,40){${\cal G}_{12} < 0$}
\put(-125,90){${\cal G}_{12} > 0$} \put(-125,40){${\cal G}_{12} < 0$}
\put(-85,145){$\pi/2$}\put(-95,-10){$-\pi/2$}
\end{picture}
\caption{Each quadrant of the unit circle corresponds to a region in the parameter space $(\theta,\Sigma)$, depending on the sign of metric entry ${\cal G}_{12}$ and the relative magnitude between ${\cal G}_{11}$ and ${\cal G}_{22}$, namely $\Sigma^2 \leq 1$ or $\Sigma^2 \geq 1$.\label{Fig:ParamQuadr}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c@{\hspace{0.8in}}c}
\includegraphics[width=5cm, height=5cm]{Example1Region1.jpg} \begin{picture}(0,0) \put(-70,-10){$\theta$} \put(-165,70){$\Sigma$} \end{picture} & \includegraphics[width=5cm, height=5cm]{Example1Region2.jpg} \begin{picture}(0,0) \put(-70,-10){$\theta$} \put(-165,70){$\Sigma$} \end{picture}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Contour plot for example 1 with discrete parameters $2 k^1 = k^2 = 2 r_1 = 2 r_2$, and with $0<\Sigma\leq 1$ (left) or $\Sigma\geq1$ (right). Black regions correspond to unphysical values for $f_{\tilde \xi}$, while the physical values follow the color-coding from small (green) to large (red). \label{Fig:ContEx1}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c@{\hspace{0.8in}}c}
\includegraphics[width=5cm, height=5cm]{Example2Region1.jpg} \begin{picture}(0,0) \put(-70,-10){$\theta$} \put(-165,70){$\Sigma$} \end{picture} & \includegraphics[width=4.9cm, height=4.9cm]{Example2Region2.jpg} \begin{picture}(0,0) \put(-70,-10){$\theta$} \put(-165,70){$\Sigma$} \end{picture}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Contour plot for example 2 with discrete parameters $ k^1 = 2 k^2 = r_1 = 2 r_2$, and with $0<\Sigma\leq 1$ (left) or $\Sigma\geq1$ (right). Black regions correspond to unphysical values for $f_{\tilde \xi}$, while the physical values follow the color-coding from small (green) to large (red). \label{Fig:ContEx2}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c@{\hspace{0.8in}}c}
\includegraphics[width=5cm, height=5cm]{Example3Region1.jpg} \begin{picture}(0,0) \put(-70,-10){$\theta$} \put(-165,70){$\Sigma$} \end{picture} & \includegraphics[width=5cm, height=5cm]{Example3Region2.jpg} \begin{picture}(0,0) \put(-70,-10){$\theta$} \put(-165,70){$\Sigma$} \end{picture}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Contour plot for example 3 with discrete parameters $k^1 = -2 k^2 = r_1 = 2 r_2$, and with $0<\Sigma\leq 1$ (left) or $\Sigma\geq1$ (right). Black regions correspond to unphysical values for $f_{\tilde \xi}$, while the physical values follow the color-coding from small (green) to large (red). \label{Fig:ContEx3}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\section{Implementation in String Theory}\label{sec:string axions}
As already indicated in the introduction, a proper understanding of quantum (gravitational) corrections are crucial to probe the viability and sustainability of any inflationary model. The next chapter in our story of kinetically mixing axions thus consists in embedding the proposed mechanisms of section~\ref{sec:mixing} into string theory, the best framework up-to-date for computing quantum corrections to inflationary models, for recent reviews see e.g.~\cite{McAllister:2007bg,Baumann:2009ni,Cicoli:2011zz,Burgess:2011fa,Baumann:2014nda}. Furthermore, it is also well known~\cite{Witten:1984dg,Barr:1985hk,Choi:1985je,Banks:2003sx,Svrcek:2006yi} by now that axions arise abundantly through compactifications of superstring theories to four spacetime dimensions. In the framework of string inflation, the axions that are mostly used as candidates for the inflaton field emerge from the dimensional reduction of $p$-forms appearing in the NS-NS and RR-sector, the so-called closed string axions.\footnote{In the case of type II superstring compactifications with D-branes, one can also identify two types of open string axions: the Wilson-line arising from the dimensional reduction of the gauge field living on the D-brane world-volume, and the phase of a complex scalar field within a chiral multiplet located at the intersection of two separate D-branes. We will not discuss open string axions any further, as we will not work with them in this section.}
In this section we review some well-known facts about Type II compactifications, which will allow us to argue for the string embedding of the ideas presented in section~\ref{sec:mixing}. An important aspect of this review concerns the origin of the closed string axions in Type II compactifications and how their effective action in four dimensions can be spelled out. Observe that our assumptions about the internal manifold for the dimensional reduction are reduced to a minimum to emphasize the generic character of the effective four dimensional action. Last but not least, we end this section by presenting explicit Type II models.
\subsection{General Observations for Type II Compactifications}
In a first phase we review briefly how closed string axions and the related effective lagrangian in (\ref{Eq:GeneralLagrangian}) arise naturally from the dimensional reduction of type II superstring theory compactified on the product spacetime ${\cal M}_{1,3} \times {\cal X}_6$, where ${\cal M}_{1,3}$ corresponds to a maximally symmetric four dimensional spacetime and ${\cal X}_6$ to a six dimensional internal manifold. Under these assumptions the ten dimensional metric can be factorized as,
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:metricAnsatz}
ds_{10}^2 = \eta_{\mu \nu} (x) dx^\mu dx^\nu + g_{ab} (y) dy^a dy^b,
\end{equation}
where $\{x^\mu\}$ represent the local coordinates of ${\cal M}_{1,3}$ and the coordinates $\{y^a\}$ parametrise the compact manifold ${\cal X}_6$ with metric $g_{ab}$.
\noindent Recall~\cite{Polchinski:1998rr} that the low energy effective action for the ten dimensional massless bosonic string modes of type II superstring theory is given in the string frame by,
\begin{eqnarray}
&{\cal S}_{\rm bulk} &= {\cal S}_{NS} + {\cal S}_{R}, \notag\\
&{\cal S}_{NS}& = \frac{1}{2 \kappa_{10}^2} \int_{{\cal M}_{1,3}\times {\cal X}_6} e^{-2 \Phi} \left[ R \star_{10}{\bf 1} + 4 d \Phi \wedge \star_{10} d\Phi - \frac{1}{2} H_3 \wedge \star_{10} H_3 \right] \\
&{\cal S}_{R}& =- \frac{1}{8 \kappa_{10}^2} \int_{{\cal M}_{1,3}\times {\cal X}_6} \sum_{p } G_{2p} \wedge \star_{10} G_{2p}, \label{Eq:BulkRR}
\qquad \begin{array}{ll}
\text{Type IIA:} & p =1, \ldots, 4\\
\text{Type IIB:} & p =1/2, \ldots, 9/2
\end{array}
\end{eqnarray}
where we opted for the democratic formulation~\cite{Bergshoeff:2001pv} to express the action for the massless RR-modes. The ten dimensional gravitational coupling $\kappa_{10}$ is related to the string scale $\ell_s$ as expressed in equation (\ref{Eq:10dGravStringLength}). Besides the ten dimensional Einstein-Hilbert term ($R\star_{10}{\bf 1}$) and the dilaton $\Phi$ kinetic term, the Neveu-Schwarz action ${\cal S}_{NS}$ also contains the kinetic term for NS three-form $H_3$, which derives locally from the NS-NS two-form, i.e.~$H_3 = dB_2$. The Ramond action ${\cal S}_R$ captures the kinetic terms for all differential RR-forms $C_{2p-1}$, namely $(C_1, C_3, C_5, C_7)$ for Type IIA and $(C_0, C_2, C_4, C_6, C_8)$ for Type IIB superstring theories. Their respective gauge-invariant field strengths $G_{2p}$ are defined as:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Eq:DefFieldStrength}
G_{1} = dC_{0}, \qquad G_{2} = dC_1, \qquad G_{2p} = d C_{2p - 1} - H_3 \wedge C_{2p-3} \; \; \text{ (otherwise)}.
\end{eqnarray}
The action ${\cal S}_R$ fulfills more the r\^ole of a pseudo-action, as the equations of motion resulting from the action have to be supplemented by the duality constraints:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:HodgeDualRRforms10D}
G_{m+1} = (-)^{(m+1)/2} \star_{10} G_{9-m} \, \, (\text{IIA}), \qquad G_{m+1} = (-)^{m/2} \star_{10} G_{9-m} \, \, (\text{IIB}),
\end{equation}
effectively reducing the number of physical degrees of freedom. The democratic formulation might seem a bit involved, but it represents the natural formulation to write down the Chern-Simons action for the D-branes including all RR-forms. More explicitly, the (massless) excitations of a (single) D$p$-brane are captured by an effective $p+1$ dimensional action consisting of the Dirac-Born-Infeld (DBI) part and the Chern-Simons action, which read in the string frame:\footnote{For a stack of $N$ coincident D-branes the gauge group on the collective worldvolume enhances to a non-Abelian gauge group, implying that the DBI-action and Chern-Simons action need to be generalized accordingly to capture the non-Abelian features. For our purposes it suffices to replace $e^{2 \pi \alpha' F}$ by $\text{Tr}(e^{2 \pi \alpha' F})$ in the Chern-Simons action~ (\ref{Eq:DbraneCS}) for a non-Abelian gauge group.}
\begin{eqnarray}
&{\cal S}_{\rm D-brane} &= {\cal S}_{DBI} + {\cal S}_{CS}, \notag \\
&{\cal S}_{DBI} &= - \mu_p \int_{Dp} d^{p+1} \xi \, e^{-\Phi} \sqrt{-\det( \iota^* g + \iota^* B_{2} - 2 \pi \alpha ' {F}_{MN})},\\
&{\cal S}_{CS} &= \mu_p \int_{Dp} \sum_q \iota^* C_{q} \wedge e^{2 \pi \alpha' F- \iota^* B_2}, \label{Eq:DbraneCS}
\end{eqnarray}
with the parameter $\mu_p$ related to the string lengths $\ell_s$ as given in~(\ref{Eq:DbraneStringLength}). $\iota^*$ represents the pullback of the ten dimensional fields to the D$p$-brane worldvolume parametrized by the local coordinates $\xi$.\footnote{Implicitly, we assume that $p>3$ such that the D$p$-brane wraps $p-3$ cycles along the internal space. And in practice, we have D6-brane configurations for Type IIA and D7-brane configurations for Type IIB superstring theory in the back of our minds.} Assuming that the D$p$-brane fills the maximally symmetric spacetime and wraps a $p-3$ dimensional cycle $\Delta_{p-3}$ on the internal space $X_6$ for which $\iota^* B_{2} =0$, we can write the pullback of the ten dimensional metric as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:Pullbackmetric}
\iota^* g = \eta_{\mu \nu} dx^\mu dx^\nu + g_{a b} \frac{\partial y^a}{\partial \xi^k} \frac{\partial \overline y^{\overline\jmath}}{\partial \xi^l} d \xi^k d\xi^l + \text{ D-brane fluctuations },
\end{equation}
and we assume the following decomposition for the gauge field on the D-brane:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:GaugeFieldDecomposition}
F_{MN} = \left( \begin{array}{cc} F_{\mu \nu} & 0 \\ 0 & {\cal F}_{ab} \end{array}\right).
\end{equation}
Regarding the RR-forms, we assume that the $q$-forms are only turned on along the directions of the D-brane such that the pullback acts trivially, i.e.~$\iota^* C_{q} = C_{q}$.
Dimensional reductions of type II superstring theory with and without D-branes have been investigated in various places, see for instance~\cite{Grimm:2004uq,Grimm:2004ua,Jockers:2004yj,Haack:2006cy,Cicoli:2011yh,Grimm:2011dx,Kerstan:2011dy,Camara:2011jg} for detailed discussions on Calabi-Yau orientifold compactifications. Therefore, it is not our intention to repeat these results in great detail. Instead, we wish to highlight some relations which can be obtained without specifying the geometric properties of the internal space ${\cal X}_6$ too explicitly, similar to the approach considered in~\cite{Svrcek:2006yi}.
The dimensional reduction of the (bulk) NS-sector ${\cal S}_{NS}$ to four dimensions is completely equivalent for Type IIA and IIB superstring theory such that we do not yet have to differentiate between the two theories at this point. Inserting the metric ansatz~(\ref{Eq:metricAnsatz}) into the kinetic term for the ten-dimensional metric and comparing to the four-dimensional Einstein-Hilbert action with gravitational coupling $\kappa_4^2$ leads to the well-known relation between the reduced Planck mass $M_{Pl}$ and the string mass scale $M_s$:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:PlanckToString}
\frac{1}{\kappa_4^2} = \frac{1}{\kappa_{10}^2} e^{-2 \langle \Phi \rangle} \text{Vol}({\cal X}_6) \qquad \leadsto \qquad \frac{M_{Pl}^2}{M_{s}^2} = \frac{4 \pi}{g_s^2} \frac{{\cal T}}{6},
\end{equation}
where the string coupling $g_s$ is set by the {\it vev} of the dilaton, i.e.~$g_s = e^{\langle \Phi \rangle}$. We also introduced the dimensionless volume ${\cal T}$ of the internal space ${\cal X}_6$: ${\cal T} = 6 \ell_s^{-6} \text{Vol}({\cal X}_6)$.
A controlled compactification is in the first place characterised by a small string coupling $g_s<1$, so let us assume $g_s \sim 10^{-1}$. As a second requirement the characteristic size of the internal space has to be larger than the string scale $\ell_s$ to sustain geometrical control and keep $\alpha'$ corrections small. This means that the dimensionless volume ${\cal T}$ can lie within the region $10^2 \lesssim {\cal T} \lesssim 10^{30}$, where the (more flexible) upper bound is set by the non-observation of fifth forces assuming an isotropic internal space ${\cal T}$.
Hence, from equation (\ref{Eq:PlanckToString}) we deduce that the window for the string mass scale in Type II compactifications is roughly given by,
\begin{equation}
10^{3} \text{ GeV} \lesssim M_s \lesssim 10^{17} \text{ GeV}.
\end{equation}
A string mass scale larger than the reduced Planck mass would require us to dive into perturbatively uncontrollable regions of the moduli space, with either a large string coupling $g_s>1$ or a small internal volume ${\cal T}<1$.
Also the dimensional reduction of the Dirac-Born-Infeld-action ${\cal S}_{DBI}$ is very analogous for both Type II superstring theories. Only the dimensionality of the cycles wrapped by the D$p$-branes will differ. Under the assumptions of equations (\ref{Eq:Pullbackmetric}) and (\ref{Eq:GaugeFieldDecomposition}), and by ignoring the D-brane fluctuations in the pullback of the metric the DBI-action reduces to a Yang-Mills type action (at leading order in $\alpha'$) with tree-level gauge coupling given by,
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:GaugeCouplingReduction}
\frac{2\pi}{g^2_{YM}} = \frac{1}{g_s} \frac{1}{\ell_s^{p-3}} \Gamma_\Delta({\cal F}),
\end{equation}
where we introduce the function $\Gamma_\Delta({\cal F})$ (with a slightly different notation than~\cite{Haack:2006cy}):
\begin{equation}
\Gamma_\Delta({\cal F}) \equiv \int_{\Delta_{p-3}} d^{p-3} \xi \sqrt{\det(\iota^*g_{(6)} + 2 \pi \alpha' { \cal F}_{a b})}.
\end{equation}
In the absence of internal flux ${\cal F}$ the function reduces to
\begin{equation}
\Gamma_\Delta({\cal F} = 0) = \text{Vol} (\Delta_{p-3}),
\end{equation}
where $\Delta_{p-3}$ represents the $p-3$ dimensional subspace wrapped by the D$p$-brane on the internal manifold ${\cal X}_6$. In supersymmetric compactifications of Type IIB superstring theory with D7-branes, a non-trivial internal flux ${\cal F}$ can give rise~\cite{Jockers:2004yj,Haack:2006cy} to field-dependent D-terms involving the K\"ahler moduli. For Type IIA compactifications with D6-branes, the flux corresponds to a flat connection, such that the function $\Gamma_\Delta({\cal F})$ reduces to the volume of the internal three-cycle wrapped by the D6-brane.
Recalling that the string coupling $g_s$ has to be smaller than one to be in the perturbative regime of Type II string theory, we conclude that the gauge theory on the D-brane worldvolume is weakly (strongly) coupled when the volume of the cycle $\Delta_{p-3}$ wrapped by the D-brane is large (small) in comparison to the string length. Notice, however, that this statement is only true at tree-level.
Once massive string state contributions are taken into account through gauge threshold corrections at one-loop, the one-loop gauge kinetic functions can receive positive or negative contributions scaling with other moduli than the volume of the three-cycle $\Delta_{p-3}$.
In the case of substantial negative contributions, one might even expect the gauge theory to be strongly coupled when a D-brane wraps a (classically) large cycle.\footnote{The observation regarding gauge treshold corrections has been exploited recently to discuss gauge coupling unification~\cite{Gmeiner:2009fb,Honecker:2012qr} and lower bounds on the string mass scale~\cite{Honecker:2013mya} in global intersecting D6-brane models on toroidal orbifolds. In the area of large field inflation, it is the dependence of the gauge threshold corrections on geometric moduli that has prompted the authors of~\cite{Abe:2014pwa,Abe:2014xja} to use them as a building block in the construction of axionic inflation models with a trans-Planckian decay constant.} In this respect clear-cut statements about the coupling strength of the gauge theory on the D-brane worldvolume can only be made for explicit examples of D-brane configurations.
If the compactification is not asymmetric, we generically expect
the size of the $p-3$ dimensional cycle to be set by the volume of the entire manifold, i.e.~$\text{Vol} (\Delta_{p-3}) \sim \sqrt{{\cal T}}$.
\footnote{In principle, we should also assume that the internal cycle $\Delta_{p-3}$ wrapped by the D-brane has the smallest volume within its homology class. In mathematical terms, this assumption can be recast in the existence of a calibration form $\phi$ on the internal space such that the volume of the internal cycle $\Delta_{p-3}$ equals the integrated pullback of the calibration form $\phi\big|_{\Delta_{p-3}}$ with respect to $\Delta_{p-3}$. In case the internal space allows for a Calabi-Yau geometry, such calibration forms can be naturally identified by virtue of the K\"ahler two-form or Calabi-Yau three-form and can be used to express the geometric conditions for the D-branes to be supersymmetric, see e.g.~\cite{Koerber:2010bx} for a review.}
\subsection{The Effective Action for Closed String Axions}\label{Ss:ClosedStringAxions}
Axion-like fields arise abundantly from the various differential $q$-forms in the massless closed string spectrum upon dimensional reduction, which has motivated the extensive use of these states as candidate inflatons in stringy inflationary models. In our discussion we will focus on the closed string axions emerging from the RR-sector through the dimensional reduction of various massless $q$-forms, and
for concreteness, we illustrate such reduction with
axions associated to the $C_3$ form in Type IIA and to the $C_4$ form in Type IIB. The (bulk) RR-action ${\cal S}_{RR}$ can be dimensionally reduced for both $q$-forms with field strength defined in equation (\ref{Eq:DefFieldStrength}) in the same manner. Namely, decomposing the $q$-form $C_q$ with respect to a basis of harmonic forms $\alpha_i$ for the cohomology group $H^q({\cal X}_6)$:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:DecompPforms}
C_{q} = \frac{1}{2\pi} \sum_{i=1}^{b_q} a^i (x)\, \alpha_i (y) + \ldots ,
\end{equation}
already exposes the coefficients $a^i(x)$ as scalar fields along the four dimensional spacetime ${\cal M}_{1,3}$. In this expression $b_q = b_q ({\cal X}_6) = \text{dim } H^q({\cal X}_6)$ represents the $q^{th}$ Betti number of the internal manifold ${\cal X}_6$, and the factor $2 \pi$ has been introduced to ensure a periodicity of $2\pi$ for the scalar field $a^i$. The $\ldots$ stands for the decomposition with respect to a basis of harmonic forms in $H^k({\cal X}_6)$ with degree $k<q$. Next, we introduce a basis of closed $q$-cycles $\gamma_i$ for the homology group $H_q({\cal X}_6,\mathbb{Z})$ that is (de Rham) dual to the basis of closed $q$-forms $\alpha_i$:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:PoincareDual}
\ell_s^{-q} \int_{\gamma_ j} \alpha_i = \ell_s^{-6} \int_{{\cal X}_6} \alpha_i \wedge \beta^j = {\delta_{i}}^j.
\end{equation}
In the second expression we exploit Poincar\'e-duality to introduce a basis $\beta^j$ of $(6-q)$-forms for the cohomology group $H^{6-q}({\cal X}_6)$. Note that the $C_3$ form of Type IIA requires a small adjustment as both the $\alpha_i$ and the $\beta^j$-basis have to fit in the cohomology group $H^{3}({\cal X}_6)$. In that case the indices $i, j$ will run from $1$ to $\frac{1}{2}b_3$ and the basis $(\alpha_i, \beta^j)$ forms a symplectic basis for $H^{3}({\cal X}_6)$. Recalling that the various $q$-forms are related through Hodge duality (\ref{Eq:HodgeDualRRforms10D}) in ten dimensions we can play the same game for the Hodge-dual $C_{8-q}$ form and decompose it with respect to the basis $\beta^i$:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:DecompPformsII}
C_{8-q} = \sum_{i=1}^{b_{6-q}} D_{(2)i} \wedge \beta^{i} + \ldots,
\end{equation}
where the $\ldots$ include the decomposition with respect to the bases of other cohomology groups. The two-forms $D_{(2)i}$ can be seen as the four dimensional Hodge duals of the scalar fields $a^i$. Observe that the decomposition of the self-dual $C_4$ form of Type IIB contains both the axions $a^i$ as well as their Hodge dual 2-forms $D_{(2)i}$.
Let us now focus on the kinetic terms for the $C_q$ form and its dual form in the RR-action (\ref{Eq:BulkRR}),
\begin{equation}
{\cal S}_{R} = - \frac{1}{8 \kappa_{10}^2} \int_{{\cal M}_{1,3}\times {\cal X}_6} \left[ G_{q+1} \wedge \star_{10} G_{q+1} + G_{9-q} \wedge \star_{10} G_{9-q} + \ldots \right],
\end{equation}
and perform the dimensional reduction over ${\cal X}_6$ using the decomposition of the forms in (\ref{Eq:DecompPforms}) and (\ref{Eq:DecompPformsII}) respectively:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:DimRedResultAxions}
{\cal S}_{R} = - \frac{1}{4 \ell_s^2} \int_{{\cal M}_{1,3}}\left[ d a^i \wedge \star_4 d a^j {\cal K}_{ij} + d D_{(2)i} \wedge \star_4 d D_{(2)_j} {\cal K}^{ij} + \ldots \right],
\end{equation}
where we introduced the moduli-dependent metric ${\cal K}_{ij}$ on the axion moduli space:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:MetricAxionModuliSpace}
{\cal K}_{ij} = \frac{1}{2\pi \ell_s^6} \int_{{\cal X}_6} \alpha_i \wedge \star_6 \alpha_j,
\end{equation}
and its inverse ${\cal K}^{ij}$:
\begin{equation}
{\cal K}^{ij} = \frac{2\pi}{\ell_s^6} \int_{{\cal X}_6} \beta^i \wedge \star_6 \beta^j.
\end{equation}
For a generic compact manifold ${\cal X}_6$ with metric $g_{ab}$ it is rather difficult to compute the metric ${\cal K}_{ij}$ on the axion moduli space, as it would require an explicit form for the internal metric $g_{ab}$ as well as knowledge about all possible deformations of the internal metric. By adding geometric structures to the internal space ${\cal X}_6$, allowing for instance a Calabi-Yau structure, one can provide more details about the metric on the axion moduli space. It is for instance well known that the moduli space of a Calabi-Yau manifold is spanned by two types of deformations: complex structure deformations and K\"ahler deformations, see e.g.~\cite{Candelas:1990pi}. The massless scalars $a^i$ are regrouped with these deformations into complex coordinates which parametrise the moduli space of ${\cal X}_6$. Locally, the moduli space can be written as the direct product of the two complex submanifolds ${\cal M}_{\text{K\"ahler}} \times {\cal M}_{\rm Complex}$, each with a K\"ahler structure and each parametrized by one type of deformations. An additional orientifold projection along the internal space is required to bring the amount of four dimensional spacetime supersymmetry down to ${\cal N} = 1$ supersymmetry for Type IIA and Type IIB superstring theory. For Type II superstring theory on a Calabi-Yau orientifold, the moduli space can still be written as a direct product $\hat{\cal M}_{\text{K\"ahler}} \times \hat{\cal M}_{\rm Complex}$, with $\hat{\cal M}_{\text{K\"ahler}} \subsetneq {\cal M}_{\text{K\"ahler}}$ and $\hat{\cal M}_{\rm Complex} \subsetneq {\cal M}_{\rm Complex}$. The subspaces $\hat{\cal M}_{\text{K\"ahler}}$ and $\hat{\cal M}_{\rm Complex}$ are not necessarily K\"ahler manifolds, but the metric on these subspaces are inherited from the ${\cal N}=2$ parent spaces upon applying the orientifold projection. Hence, for Type II Calabi-Yau orientifold compactifications the metric ${\cal K}_{ij}$ on the axion moduli space will depend explicitly on the set of deformations tied to the associated axions: complex structure moduli $U^i$ in the case of Type IIA and K\"ahler moduli $T^i$ in the case of Type IIB.
For a consistent embedding of the effective field theory approach in section~\ref{sec:mixing} into superstring theory, one implicitly assumes that the respective moduli have been stabilised at energy scales below the Kaluza Klein-scale and higher than the energy scale at which action~(\ref{Eq:GeneralLagrangian}) is valid.
The appearance of the field strengths $G_{p}$ is mandated by gauge invariance, such that ten dimensional kinetic terms for the $q$-forms in the RR sector lead upon dimensional reduction to standard kinetic terms for the fields $a^i$ (and their Hodge duals) as presented in equation~(\ref{Eq:DimRedResultAxions}), and thus only yield derivative interactions involving $a^i$ or $D_{(2)i}$. This observation suggests the existence of a shift symmetry for the fields $a^i$ inherited from the remnants of the gauge invariance of the $C_q$ forms and justifies the interpretation of the scalars $a^i$ as axions. The shift symmetry of the axions is, however, broken by nonperturbative effects, such as D-brane instantons and gauge instantons. The strength of a Euclidean D-brane wrapping the $q$-cycle $\gamma_i$ is set by its instanton amplitude~\cite{Blumenhagen:2009qh,Ibanez:2012zz}:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:StringyInstantonAmplitude}
e^{-S_{E_{q-1}}} = e^{- \frac{2\pi}{\ell_s^{q}} \left(\frac{1}{g_s } {\rm Vol}(\gamma_i) + i\, \bigintssss_{\gamma_i} C_q \right)} = e^{- \frac{2\pi}{\ell_s^{q}} \frac{1}{g_s } {\rm Vol} (\gamma_i) -i\, a^i },
\end{equation}
where we inserted the decomposition~(\ref{Eq:DecompPforms}) in the last equality. The amplitude of the D-brane instanton is determined by the volume of the wrapped cycle (measured in units of string length $\ell_s$), while its phase corresponds to the axion $a^i$. The non-perturbative coupling in $g_s$ thus breaks the continuous shift symmetry of the axion $a^i$ to a discrete shift symmetry, which clarifies the assumed periodicity in~(\ref{Eq:shift}). As a direct consequence we can conclude that the moduli space for $b_q$ closed string axions corresponds to a $b_q$~dimensional torus $T^{b_q}$ endowed with metric ${\cal K}_{ij}$ as defined in equation~(\ref{Eq:MetricAxionModuliSpace}). Gauge instantons on the other hand are characterised by an amplitude:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:GaugeInstantonAmplitude}
e^{-S_{gauge}} = e^{- |I_n| \left( \frac{8 \pi^2}{g_{YM}^2} + i\, \theta \right)},
\end{equation}
with $I_n$ the topological instanton number as introduced in (\ref{Eq:PontryaginIndex}) and $\theta$ the axionic direction coupling anomalously to the non-Abelian gauge group, thereby breaking the shift symmetry along the $\theta$-direction down to a discrete shift symmetry justifying the assumed periodicity in~(\ref{Eq:CollectiveShiftSymmetry}).
In string theory, gauge field theory instantons can be interpreted as a particular type of D-brane instantons, namely as Euclidean D$(p-4)$-branes lying on top of the D$p$-branes while wrapping the cycle $\Delta_{p-3}$.
Expression~(\ref{Eq:GaugeCouplingReduction}) allows us to compare the strength between the stringy D-brane instantons in~(\ref{Eq:StringyInstantonAmplitude}) and the gauge instantons in~(\ref{Eq:GaugeInstantonAmplitude}) (if both types of instantons are present), from which we can conclude that the stringy D-brane instanton amplitude on a $(p-3)$-cycle $\gamma_i\neq \Delta_{p-3}$ is subleading with respect to the gauge instanton amplitude provided:
\begin{equation}
\frac{{\rm Vol} (\Delta_{p-3})}{{\rm Vol} (\gamma_i)} < \frac{1}{2} .
\end{equation}
In order to determine the effective contribution of an instantonic effect to an explicit model, one has to integrate over the moduli space of the instanton solution. The integration measure over the instanton moduli space decomposes into bosonic instanton zero-modes (expressing the position, the size and possible deformations of the instanton) and fermionic instanton zero-modes (related to broken supersymmetries, to the superpartners of the deformations and to chiral fermions located at the intersections between instantonic branes and/or D-branes). The instanton corrections will only contribute if all fermionic zero modes can be saturated, which has to be checked explicitly for each instanton in each individual model.
Which linear combinations of closed string axions couple to the gauge instantons can be read off from the dimensional reduction of the D-brane Chern-Simons action (\ref{Eq:DbraneCS}) upon identifying the topological $G\wedge G$ term as introduced in (\ref{Eq:GeneralLagrangian}). For the first time, we will have to distinguish between Type IIA and Type IIB, given that the dimensionality of the D-branes differs for both string theories. On the bright side, the usefulness of the democratic formulation will be truly exposed by the reduction of the D-brane Chern-Simons action to four dimensions. \\
\noindent {\bf D6-branes in Type IIA}\\
For a D6-brane wrapping a three-cycle $\Delta_3$ along ${\cal X}_6$ the relevant terms in the Chern-Simons action are captured by,
\begin{equation}
{\cal S}_{CS}^{D6} = \mu_6 \int_{{\cal M}_{1,3} \times {\Delta}_3} C_5 \wedge (2 \pi \alpha ') F + \frac{1}{2}C_3 \wedge (2 \pi \alpha ')^2 F \wedge F + \ldots.
\end{equation}
The three-cycle $\Delta_3$ can be decomposed in terms of the closed three-cycles $(\gamma_i, \delta^j)$, serving as the de Rham-duals to the symplectic basis $(\alpha_i, \beta^j)$ respectively:
\begin{equation}
\Delta_{3} = \sum_{i=1}^{b_3/2} \left( r^i \gamma_i + p^i \delta^i \right), \qquad \text{ with } r^i , p^i \in \mathbb{Z}.
\end{equation}
Plugging in both the expansions (\ref{Eq:DecompPforms}) and (\ref{Eq:DecompPformsII}) for the $C_3$ and $C_5$ form respectively, as well as the decomposition of the three-cycle $\Delta_3$, yields the following expression:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:CSD6reduction}
{\cal S}_{CS} = \frac{1}{8\pi^2} \sum_{i=1}^{b_3/2} r^i \int_{{\cal M}_{1,3}} a^i F\wedge F + \frac{1}{ \ell_s^2} \sum_{j=1}^{b_3/2} p^j \int_{{\cal M}_{1,3}} D_{(2) j} \wedge F + \ldots.
\end{equation}
The first term resembles indeed the non-perturbative coupling of axions to the topological charge density of a gauge group, while the second term corresponds to the dual description of the St\"uckelberg coupling between an Abelian gauge field and CP-odd scalars. Geometrically, a $C_3$-axion $a^i$ couples to the topological term $F\wedge F$ when the three-cycle $\Delta_3$ wraps its associated three-cycle $\gamma_i$ (i.e.~$r^i \neq 0$). And non-vanishing St\"uckelberg charges $p^j\neq0$ under a D6-brane $U(1)$ gauge group arise for those axions $a^i$ whose associated Poincar\'e dual three-cycle $\delta^i$ is wrapped by the D6-brane.
Note that we have tried to take a minimalistic stance in the dimensional reduction, by assuming as little as possible concerning the geometry of the internal space or the embedding of the D6-brane in ${\cal X}_6$. One can be more explicit by considering type IIA superstring theory on a Calabi-Yau orientifold, for which the axions emerging from $C_3$ form the CP-odd partners of the complex structure moduli. In this Calabi-Yau orientifold setting the dimensional reduction~\cite{Grimm:2011dx,Kerstan:2011dy,Camara:2011jg} is much more involved than presented here, due to the presence of the orientifold projection and of additional moduli describing the position of the D-brane which we ignore here.\\
\noindent {\bf D7-branes in Type IIB}\\
D7-branes are embedded on four-dimensional cycles $\Delta_4$ along ${\cal X}_6$ and can be written in terms of a basis of closed 4-cycles $\gamma_i$, (de Rham) dual to the basis of harmonic 4-forms $\alpha_i$ on ${\cal X}_6$ introduced above:
\begin{equation}
\Delta_{4} = \sum_{i=1}^{b_4} r^i \gamma_i , \qquad \text{ with } r^i \in \mathbb{Z}.
\end{equation}
For axions associated to the RR-form $C_4$ there is only one term in the Chern-Simons part of the D7-brane action of particular interest:
\begin{equation}
{\cal S}^{D7}_{CS} = \frac{\mu_7}{2} \int_{{\cal M}_{1,3} \times {\cal X}_6} C_4 \wedge (2 \pi \alpha ')^2 F \wedge F,
\end{equation}
but the term yields both the anomalous coupling and the St\"uckelberg coupling depending on the interpretation of the flux $F$:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:CSD7reduction}
{\cal S}^{D7}_{CS} = \frac{1}{8\pi^2} \sum_{i=1}^{b_4} r^i \int_{{\cal M}_{1,3}} a^i F\wedge F + \frac{1}{\ell_s^2} \sum_{i=1}^{b_2} p^i({\cal F}) \int_{{\cal M}_{1,3}} D_{(2)i} \wedge F.
\end{equation}
The first term results from interpreting the flux $F\wedge F$ as the topological charge density along ${\cal M}_{1,3}$, while the second term arises by taking one of the $F$-factors as the flux ${\cal F}$ along the internal direction on $\Delta_4$. This ambiguity is a direct consequence of the self-duality of the four-form $C_4$.
In analogy with the D6-brane reduction we introduced the symbol $p^i({\cal F})$ which now also depends on the flux ${\cal F}$ apart from the embedding of the 4-cycle $\Delta_4$:
\begin{equation}
p^i({\cal F}) \equiv \frac{1}{2 \pi} \frac{1}{\ell_s^2} \int_{\Delta_4} \beta^i \wedge {\cal F} \in \mathbb{Z}.
\end{equation}
Hence, when the four-cycle $\Delta_4$ wraps a four-cycle $\gamma_i$ in geometric terms, its associated axion $a^i$ will couple to the topological density $F\wedge F$. For the axion to be charged under the $U(1)$ gauge group supported by the D-brane, the four-cycle $\Delta_4$ has to wrap the four-cycle that is Poincar\'e-dual to the two-cyle supporting the internal flux ${\cal F}$.
Also here we have tried to avoid making particular assumptions about the geometric features of ${\cal X}_6$ or of the four-cycle $\Delta_4$. In case ${\cal X}_6$ is taken to be a Calabi-Yau orientifold various geometric aspects can be expressed in a more explicit way thanks to the virtues of complex geometry~\cite{Jockers:2004yj,Haack:2006cy}. The $C_4$ axions fit within the same ${\cal N}=1$ supermultiplet as the K\"ahler moduli for a compactification set-up where the holomorphic involution maps the Calabi-Yau three-form to minus itself.\footnote{If the orientifold projection leaves the Calabi-Yau three-form invariant, the axions emerging from the reduction of the $C_4$-form recombine with the scalars associated to the reduction of the NS-NS $B_2$ form. Moreover, there are no $O7$-planes whose charges can compensate the D7-brane charges. Hence, such an orientifold projection does not seem to provide a favourable setting for the string embedding of our ideas.}
\noindent Despite the fact that axions emerge from different $q$-forms for type IIA and type IIB superstring respectively, we obtain the same four-dimensional effective field theory for the axions:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Eq:ReducedEFTAxions}
{\cal S}_{axion} &=& \frac{1}{2 \ell_s^2} \int_{{\cal M}_{1,3}} \left[ -\frac{1}{2} d a^i \wedge \star_4 d a^j {\cal K}_{ij} - \frac{1}{2} d D_{(2)i} \wedge \star_4 d D_{(2)_j} {\cal K}^{ij} + 2 \sum_{i} p^i D_{(2) i} \wedge F \right] \nonumber \\
&& + \frac{1}{8\pi^2} \sum_{i} r^i \int_{{\cal M}_{1,3}} a^i F\wedge F.
\end{eqnarray}
In order to end up with an action written in the form of (\ref{Eq:GeneralLagrangian}), the two-forms $D_{(2)i}$ have to be dualised to their Hodge-dual 0-forms following the procedures outlined in appendix~\ref{A:Dualisation}. By applying these dualization methods on the action in (\ref{Eq:ReducedEFTAxions}), we find the following dual action (with two-forms $D_i$ eliminated):
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:ReducedEFTAxionsFinal}
{\cal S}_{axion} = -\frac{1}{2 \ell_s^2} \int_{{\cal M}_{1,3}} \left[ \frac{1}{2} \left(d a^i - 2 p^iA\right) \wedge \star_4 \left(d a^j - 2 p^j A\right) {\cal K}_{ij} \right] + \frac{1}{8\pi^2} \sum_{i} r^i \int_{{\cal M}_{1,3}} a^i F\wedge F ,
\end{equation}
which is exactly of the same type as proposed in (\ref{Eq:GeneralLagrangian}). The missing kinetic terms for the gauge fields follow from the dimensional reduction of the DBI-action for the D-brane. For a stack of $N$ coincident D$p$-branes with a non-Abelian gauge group the topological term $F\wedge F$ has to be replaced by $\text{Tr}(G\wedge G)$, with $G$ the field strength of the non-Abelian gauge group. And with this last consideration it is now clear how the effective action in (\ref{Eq:GeneralLagrangian}) emerges from string theory compactifications with moduli space metric ${\cal G}_{ij} = (2 \ell_s^2)^{-1} {\cal K}_{ij}$. Note that the axions $a^i$ are represented as dimensionless fields in (\ref{Eq:ReducedEFTAxionsFinal}) and that the eigenvalues of ${\cal G}_{ij}$ are measured in units of the string mass scale $M_s$. Hence, the numerical examples presented in section~\ref{sec:mixing} should be seen in the light of a high string scale mass $M_s \sim {\cal O} (10^{16}-10^{17} \text{GeV})$.
The couplings in (\ref{Eq:CSD6reduction}) and (\ref{Eq:CSD7reduction}) following from the reduction of the D-bane Chern-Simons action form the building blocks
for the Green-Schwarz-mechanism in four dimensions by which the mixed Abelian-non-Abelian and cubic Abelian gauge anomalies cancel. The Green-Schwarz terms associated to (\ref{Eq:CSD6reduction}) and (\ref{Eq:CSD7reduction}) usually suffice to cancel these gauge anomalies. Furthermore, the pure non-Abelian gauge anomalies vanish automatically when the RR tadpole cancelation conditions are satisfied.
In section~\ref{Sss:GCSterms} we indicated that in situations where the anomaly coefficient also contains a non-symmetric part, a generalized Chern-Simons term has to be introduced to ensure $U(1)$ gauge invariance, as discussed in more detail in~\cite{Anastasopoulos:2006cz,DeRydt:2007vg}.
One could wonder whether this generalized Chern-Simon term can be obtained directly from string theory, thereby offering a microscopic explanation for its required presence. To this end, the authors of~\cite{Anastasopoulos:2006cz} derived Chern-Simons terms directly from string theory by computing the appropriate open and closed string amplitudes (for D5-D9 brane modelbuilding scenarios on toroidal orientifolds). Generalized Chern-Simons terms also arise from the D-brane Chern-Simons action in case the internal manifold of a string theory compactification allows for non-vanishing fluxes and the $U(1)$ gauge symmetry descends from the closed string sector, as shown in~\cite{Aldazabal:2002py} by using the descent formalism of Wess and Zumino. Whether or not generalized Chern-Simons terms are required is thus a model-dependent consideration, as is the question how these terms arise microscopically within a string model.
\subsection{Some Explicit Examples}\label{subsec:ex}
\subsubsection{Factorizable D6-branes in Type IIA on Toroidal Orientifolds}\label{Ss:ExampleFactD6branes}
The toroidal orientifold $T^6/\Omega\mathcal{R}$ is probably the easiest internal space ${\cal X}_6$ that comes to mind to clarify the set-up in section~\ref{Ss:U1mixing} through explicit examples. To simplify their construction, the six-dimensional torus is taken to be of the factorizable type $T_{(1)}^2 \times T_{(2)}^2 \times T_{(3)}^2$, where each two-torus can be parametrized by a complex coordinate $z^{i = 1,2,3}$ respectively with periodicity relations:
\begin{equation}
z^i \simeq z^i +1, \qquad z^i \simeq z^i + \tau^i,
\end{equation}
and where the parameter $\tau^i$ corresponds to the modular parameter for torus $T_{(i)}^2$.\footnote{To emphasize the structural properties of the background, we simplify the coordinate-dependent expressions by considering dimensionless coordinates $z^i$, i.e.~the dimensionful coordinates have been divided by $\ell_s$, such that also the three-forms $\alpha_i$ and $\beta^i$ are dimensionless.} Considering Type IIA string theory on $T^6$ leads to a four dimensional theory with a maximal amount of supersymmetry, namely ${\cal N}=8$ supersymmetry. To reduce the amount of supersymmetry by a factor $1/2$, one usually introduces an orientifold projection $\Omega\mathcal{R}(-)^{F_L}$, consisting of a worldsheet parity $\Omega$, a projection $(-)^{F_L}$ by the left fermion number and an anti-holomorphic involution ${\cal R}$ acting on the coordinates as:
\begin{equation}
{\cal R} (z^i) = \overline z^i, \qquad \forall\, i = 1,2,3.
\end{equation}
The orientifold projection has to be a symmetry of the torus lattice, which constrains the torus lattice to be rectangular ({\bf a}-type lattice) or tilted ({\bf b}-type lattice), as depicted in figure~\ref{Fig:T2Lattices}. For a tilted two-torus lattice the angle $\theta_i$ between the two basic one-cycles is set by the ratio $R_2^{(i)}/R_1^{(i)}$, namely $\cos \theta_i = \frac{1}{2} \frac{R_2^{(i)}}{R_1^{(i)}}$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c@{\hspace{1in}}c}
\includegraphics[width=4cm]{T2Rect.pdf} \begin{picture}(0,0) \put(-65,90){$T_{(i)}^2$} \put(-10,-10){$\pi_{2i-1}$} \put(-130,70){$\pi_{2i}$} \put(0,35){{\color{myblue4}O6}} \put(0,0){{\color{myblue4}O6}} \put(-65,-15){$R_1^{(i)}$} \put(-135,35){$R_2^{(i)}$} \put(-105,-10){{\color{mygr} $x^{i}$}} \put(-125,15){{\color{mygr} $y^{i}$}} \end{picture} & \includegraphics[width=3cm]{T2Tilted.pdf} \begin{picture}(0,0) \put(-65,110){$T_{(i)}^2$} \put(-5,35){$\pi_{2i-1}$} \put(-100,70){$\pi_{2i}$} \put(0,0){{\color{myblue4}O6}} \put(-40,10){$R_1^{(i)}$} \put(-105,35){$R_2^{(i)}$} \put(-65,-10){{\color{myorange} $x^{i}$}} \put(-95,15){{\color{myorange} $y^{i}$}} \put(-60,35){\color{mypurple} $\theta_i$} \end{picture} \\
& \\
\end{tabular}
\caption{(left) {\bf a}-type lattice for a rectangular two-torus $T_{(i)}^2$ with area $R_1^{(i)} R_2^{(i)}$ and modular parameter $\tau^{(i)} = i\, R_2^{(i)}/ R_1^{(i)}$, and (right) {\bf b}-type lattice for a tilted two-torus $T_{(i)}^2$ with area $R_1^{(i)} R_2^{(i)} \sin \theta_i$ and modular parameter $\tau^{(i)} = R_2^{(i)}/ R_1^{(i)} e^{i\, \theta_i}$. On a rectangular lattice the fixed planes under the $\Omega\mathcal{R}$-projection are located at $\text{Im}\,(z^i) = 0$ and $\text{Im}\,(z^i) = 1/2$, while a tilted torus-lattice only has one fixed plane under the $\Omega\mathcal{R}$-projection, namely $\text{Im}\,(z^i) = 0$. The basic one-cycles $\pi_{2i-1}$ and $\pi_{2i}$ transform as follows under the $\Omega\mathcal{R}$-projection: $\pi_{2i-1} \stackrel{\Omega\mathcal{R}}{\longrightarrow} \pi_{2i-1} - 2b^i \pi_{2i}$ and $\pi_{2i} \stackrel{\Omega\mathcal{R}}{\longrightarrow} - \pi_{2i}$, where the discrete parameter $b^i$ captures whether the two-torus $T^{2}_{(i)}$ is rectangular $(b^i = 0)$ or tilted $(b^i=1/2)$. \label{Fig:T2Lattices}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
When considering D6-branes on type IIA orientifolds it is easier to work with the real coordinates $(x^i, y^i)$ on torus $T_{(i)}^2$, with periodicity conditions:
\begin{equation}
x^i \simeq x^i +n , \qquad y^i \simeq y^i + b^i n+ m, \qquad n,m \in \mathbb{Z}
\end{equation}
in line with the representation in figure~\ref{Fig:T2Lattices}, and $b^i=0 \left(\frac{1}{2}\right)$ for a rectangular (tilted) lattice. The $\Omega\mathcal{R}$ projection acts as follows on these coordinates:
\begin{equation}
(x^i, y^i) \stackrel{\Omega\mathcal{R}}{\longrightarrow} (x^i, -y^i).
\end{equation}
In this coordinate system the symplectic basis $(\alpha_i, \beta^i)$ introduced in (\ref{Eq:PoincareDual}) reads:
\begin{equation} \label{Eq:SymplecticBasisT6OR}
\begin{array}{c@{\hspace{0.4in}}c}
\alpha_0 = d x^1 \wedge dx^2 \wedge dx^3, & \beta^0 = dy^1 \wedge dy^2 \wedge dy^3,\\
\alpha_1 = d x^1 \wedge dy^2 \wedge dy^3, & \beta^1 = dy^1 \wedge dx^2 \wedge dx^3,\\
\alpha_2 = d y^1 \wedge dx^2 \wedge dy^3, & \beta^2 = dx^1 \wedge dy^2 \wedge dx^3,\\
\alpha_3 = d y^1 \wedge dy^2 \wedge dx^3, & \beta^3 = dx^1 \wedge dx^2 \wedge dy^3,
\end{array}
\end{equation}
and the metric on the six-dimensional torus in this coordinate system is given by:
\begin{equation}
g_{ab} = {\rm diag} \left((R_1^{(1)} \sin \theta_1 )^2,(R_1^{(2)} \sin \theta_2)^2,(R_1^{(3)} \sin \theta_3)^2,(R_2^{(1)})^2,(R_2^{(2)})^2,(R_2^{(3)})^2\right).
\end{equation}
In order to accommodate the D6-branes we have to introduce a proper basis of three-cycles on $T^6/\Omega\mathcal{R}$, which will depend on the shape of the two-torus lattices. For example, for the {\bf aaa} lattice configuration of $T^6/\Omega\mathcal{R}$ the basis of $\Omega\mathcal{R}$-even three-cycles $\gamma_i$ and $\Omega\mathcal{R}$-odd three-cycles $\delta^i$ is given by:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:SympBasisT6}
\begin{array}{c@{\hspace{0.4in}}c}
\gamma_0 = [\pi_1] [\pi_3] [\pi_5] , & \delta^0 = [\pi_2] [\pi_4] [\pi_6], \\
\gamma_1 = [\pi_1] [\pi_4] [\pi_6] , & \delta^1 = [\pi_2] [\pi_3] [\pi_5], \\
\gamma_2 = [\pi_2] [\pi_3] [\pi_6] , & \delta^2 = [\pi_1] [\pi_4] [\pi_5], \\
\gamma_3 = [\pi_2] [\pi_4] [\pi_5] , & \delta^3 = [\pi_1] [\pi_3] [\pi_6].
\end{array}
\end{equation}
This basis of three-cycles is de Rahm-dual with respect to the symplectic basis of three-forms $(\alpha_i, \beta^j)$:
\begin{equation}
\int_{\gamma_j} \alpha_i = {\delta_{i}}^j, \qquad \int_{\delta^j} \beta^i = {\delta^{i}}_j.
\end{equation}
The only non-vanishing intersections between the three-cycles are then given by:
\begin{equation}
\gamma_i \cdot \delta^j = - \delta^j \cdot \gamma_i = {\delta_i}^j.
\end{equation}
As there are four $\Omega\mathcal{R}$-even three-cycles $\gamma^i$ on $T^6/\Omega\mathcal{R}$, the reduction of the $C_3$ form leads to four independent closed string axions $a^i$ with periodicity $2 \pi$, following the discussion in section~\ref{Ss:ClosedStringAxions}. The metric ${\cal K}_{ij}$ of (\ref{Eq:MetricAxionModuliSpace}) on the four-dimensional axion moduli space is diagonal and can be expressed as:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:MetricExampleT6}
{\cal K}_{ij} = {\rm diag} \left( u_1 u_2 u_3, \frac{u_1}{u_2 u_3}, \frac{u_2}{u_1 u_3}, \frac{u_3}{u_1 u_2} \right),
\end{equation}
by introducing the parameters $u_i$:
\begin{equation}
u_i = \frac{R_2^{(i)}}{R_1^{(i)} \sin \theta_i}.
\end{equation}
Note that $\theta_1 = \theta_2 = \theta_3 = \frac{\pi}{2}$ in case all three two-tori are rectangular.
With all the geometric utensils at hand, we can start considering an explicit model with factorizable D6-branes. The three-cycle $\Pi_x$ wrapped by a D6$_x$-brane along $T^6/\Omega\mathcal{R}$ can be decomposed in terms of the basis $(\gamma_i, \delta^j)$ as:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:DecompositionBraneORCycles}
\Pi_x = r_x^i \, \gamma_i + s_x^i\, \delta^i.
\end{equation}
In case of a factorizable three-cycle $\Pi_x$, the integer coefficients $r_x^i$ and $s_{x}^{i}$ can be written in terms of the torus wrapping numbers $(n_x^1,m_x^1;n_x^2, m_x^2; n_x^3, m_x^3)$ describing how the three-cycle wraps each two-torus individually:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:ExpFact3WrapNum}
\begin{array}{l@{\hspace{0.4in}}l}
r_x^0 = n_x^1 n_x^2 n_x^3, & s_x^0 = m_x^1 m_x^2 m_x^3,\\
r_x^1 = n_x^1 m_x^2 m_x^3, & s_x^1 = m_x^1 n_x^2 n_x^3,\\
r_x^2 = m_x^1 n_x^2 m_x^3, & s_x^2 = n_x^1 m_x^2 n_x^3,\\
r_x^3 = m_x^1 m_x^2 n_x^3, & s_x^3 = n_x^1 n_x^2 m_x^3,
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where $n_x^i, m_x^i \in \mathbb{Z}$ for $i\in \{1,2,3\}$. We consider a D6-brane stack $a$ supporting the gauge group $U(1)_a$ and a D6-brane stack $b$ supporting the gauge group $U(N_b)$ with wrapping numbers presented in table~\ref{tab:TorusWrappingFactModel}.
\mathtab{
\begin{array}{|c||@{\hspace{0.4in}}c@{\hspace{0.4in}}|@{\hspace{0.2in}}c@{\hspace{0.2in}}||c|}
\hline
\multicolumn{4}{|c|}{\text{\bf Factorizable D6-branes on $T^6/\Omega\mathcal{R}$ for rectangular two-tori}} \\
\hline \hline
\text{stack} & \text{torus wrapping numbers} & r_x^i = 0, \quad s_x^i = 0 &\text{gauge group}\\
\hline \hline
a & (n_a^1, m_a^1; n_a^2, m_a^2; 1,0)&r_a^1 = 0 = r_a^2 , \quad s_a^0 = 0 = s_a^3 & U(1)_a\\
b& (n_b^1, m_b^1; n_b^2, m_b^2; 0,1)& r_b^0 = 0 = r_b^3, \quad s_b^1 = 0 = s_b^2 & U(N_b)\\
\hline
\end{array}
}{TorusWrappingFactModel}{Two-stack D6-brane configuration with factorizable three-cycles supporting a gauge factor $U(1)_a\times U(N_b)$ on the toroidal orientifold $T^6/\Omega\mathcal{R}$.}
For the D6-brane configuration given in table~\ref{tab:TorusWrappingFactModel}, the effective action for the four axions can be written as,
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal S}_{axion} &=& \bigintssss
\left[ - \frac{1}{2 \ell_s^2} \sum_{i=0,3} {\cal K}_{ii} (d a^i - N_b s^i_b A_b) \wedge\star_4 (d a^i - N_b s^i_b A_b) + \frac{1}{8 \pi^2} \left( r_a^0 a^0 + r_a^3 a^3 \right) F_a \wedge F_a \right. \nonumber \\
&&\qquad - \frac{1}{2 \ell_s^2} \sum_{l=1,2} {\cal K}_{ll} (d a^l - s^l_a A_a) \wedge\star_4 (d a^l - s^l_a A_a) + \frac{1}{8 \pi^2} \left( r^1_b a^1 + r^2_b a^2 \right) \text{Tr}(G_b \wedge G_b) \nonumber\\
&& \left. \qquad+ \frac{1}{8 \pi^2} \left( r^1_b a^1 + r^2_b a^2 \right) N_b ( F_b \wedge F_b) \right] . \label{Eq:EffAxionModelFactDbranes}
\end{eqnarray}
With this D6-brane configuration the axions $(a^0, a^3)$ and $(a^1, a^2)$ form two decoupled systems of axions, such that we can focus only on the second one. A linear combination of the axions $(a^1, a^2)$ couples anomalously to the $U(1)_b$ field strength, but this coupling is ignored as the $U(1)_b$ gauge field acquires a mass due to the St\"uckelberg mechanism involving the other two axions $(a^0, a^3)$ and the Abelian $U(1)_b$ does not give rise to gauge instantons. Hence, only the second line in the action (\ref{Eq:EffAxionModelFactDbranes}) will be considered and matches the set-up discussed in section~\ref{Ss:U1mixing}. Applying the formulae, and in particular equation (\ref{Eq:AxionDecayConstantU1}), from that section straightforwardly to the current two-axion system yields the following decay constant (in units of the string scale mass $M_s$):
\begin{equation}
f_{\tilde a_1} = \sqrt{\frac{u_1 u_2}{u_3}} \frac{\sqrt{(u_1)^2 (s_a^1)^2 + (u_2)^2 (s_a^2)^2 }}{\left|r_b^1 s_a^2 (u_2)^2 - r_b^2 s_a^1 (u_1)^2 \right|} M_s,
\end{equation}
for the axionic direction $\tilde a^1$ not absorbed by the $U(1)_a$ gauge boson. At the enhancement point, where the denominator of the axion decay constant becomes small, the internal geometry of $T_{(1)}^2\times T_{(2)}^2$ has to be chosen such that the parameters $u_1$ and $u_2$ exhibit a form of isotropy:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:EnhancementPointT6Rect}
r_b^1 s_a^2 (u_2)^2 \simeq r_b^2 s_a^1 (u_1)^2.
\end{equation}
In order to appreciate the meaning of this relation, we introduce the axio-dilaton $S$ and the three complex structure moduli $U_i$ defined as:
\begin{equation}
S \equiv e^{-\Phi} \int_{\gamma_0} \Omega_3 + i \, \int_{\gamma_0} C_3, \quad U_i \equiv e^{-\Phi} \int_{\gamma_i} \Omega_3 + i \, \int_{\gamma_i} C_3 \quad i =1,2,3,
\end{equation}
with $\Phi$ the ten dimensional dilaton, and $\Omega_3$ the Calabi-Yau three-form which reads in terms of the symplectic basis three-cycles on the {\bf aaa} lattice:
\begin{equation} \label{Eq:ComplexStructureModuli}
\Omega_3 = \prod_{i=1}^3 R^{(i)}_1 \alpha_0 - \sum_{i=1}^3 R^{(i)}_1 R^{(j)}_2 R^{(k)}_2 \alpha_i - i \prod_{i=1}^3 R^{(i)}_2 \beta^0 + i \sum_{i=1}^3 R^{(i)}_2 R^{(j)}_1 R^{(k)}_1 \beta^i,
\end{equation}
with $(i,j,k)$ an even permutation of $(1,2,3)$. The isotropy condition (\ref{Eq:EnhancementPointT6Rect}) can now be written in terms of the complex structure moduli $U_1$ and $U_2$ as:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:EnhIsoFactDbranes}
r_b^1 s_a^2 (\text{Re}\, U_1)^2 \simeq r_b^2 s_a^1 (\text{Re}\, U_2)^2,
\end{equation}
which should be read as an isotropy relation between $U_1$ and $U_2$ in the complex structure moduli space.
Note however that this point of the moduli space does not correspond to a supersymmetric configuration for the D6-branes wrapping lagrangian three-cycles on the orientifold $T^6/\Omega\mathcal{R}$. It is well-known that factorizable three-cycles wrapped by supersymmetric D6-branes are calibrated with respect to the same Calabi-Yau three-form $\Omega_3$ as the O6-planes, which boils down to the condition:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:SUSYreqD6branes}
\varphi^1_x + \varphi^2_x + \varphi^3_x = 0 \text{ mod } 2\pi,
\end{equation}
where the angle $\varphi^i_x$ represents the angle between the O6-plane and the D6-brane $\Pi_x$ on two-torus $T^{2}_{(i)}$:
\begin{equation}
\tan \varphi^i_x = \frac{m_x^i + b^i n_x^i}{n_x^i} u_i.
\end{equation}
It is not difficult to show that the enhancement requirement (\ref{Eq:EnhancementPointT6Rect}) is incompatible with the supersymmetry requirement (\ref{Eq:SUSYreqD6branes}) for both D6-brane stacks $a$ and $b$. Let us therefore start from the assumption that the $b$-stack is wrapped along a special lagangian three-cycle and in order to be more explicit we specify the torus wrapping numbers $(n_b^1, m_b^1; n_b^2, m_b^2) = (1,-1;1,-1)$. The angles $\varphi_b^1$ and $\varphi_b^2$ are then chosen such that the $b$-stack corresponds to a supersymmetric three-cycle satisfying (\ref{Eq:SUSYreqD6branes}), which sets the values for the ratios $u_1$ and $u_2$. As a last step, the torus wrapping numbers of the $a$-stack are chosen in compliance with equation (\ref{Eq:EnhancementPointT6Rect}) in such a way that the respective three-cycle can be seen as a three-cycle slightly deviating from the three-cycle with wrapping numbers $(1,0;1,0;1,0)$ by a rotation over a small angle along $T_{(1)}^2\times T_{(2)}^2$. In table~\ref{tab:ExampleAStackT6Factoris} we list some explicit examples of $a$-stack configurations obtained through this method.
\mathtab{
\begin{array}{|@{\hspace{0.2in}}c@{\hspace{0.2in}}|@{\hspace{0.2in}}c@{\hspace{0.2in}}c@{\hspace{0.2in}}|@{\hspace{0.2in}}c@{\hspace{0.2in}}|@{\hspace{0.2in}}c@{\hspace{0.2in}}|}
\hline
\multicolumn{5}{|c|}{\text{\bf $a$-stack configuration for SUSY $b$-stack on $T^6/\Omega\mathcal{R}$}}\\
\hline \hline
(\varphi_b^1,\varphi_b^2,\varphi_b^3) & u_1 & u_2 & (n_a^1, m_a^1; n_a^2, m_a^2)& (\varphi_a^1,\varphi_a^2,\varphi_a^3) \\
\hline
(-\frac{\pi}{3}, -\frac{\pi}{6}, \frac{\pi}{2}) & \sim\sqrt{3} & \sim 1/\sqrt{3} & (8,1;4,1) & \sim (12^{\circ},8^{\circ},0)\\
(-\frac{\pi}{4}, -\frac{\pi}{4}, \frac{\pi}{2}) & \sim 1 &\sim 1 & (4,1;4,1) & \sim (14^{\circ},14^{\circ},0)\\
(-\frac{\pi}{6}, -\frac{\pi}{3}, \frac{\pi}{2}) & \sim 1/\sqrt{3} & \sim\sqrt{3} & (4,1;8,1) & \sim (8^{\circ},12^{\circ},0) \\
\hline
\end{array}
}{ExampleAStackT6Factoris}{Overview of some explicit D-brane configurations for the $a$-stack: the supersymmetric $b$-stack configuration are represented by the angles in the first column, while the second column provides the parametric values for the ratios $u_1$ and $u_2$. The third column lists the torus wrapping number along $T_{(1)}^2 \times T_{(2)}^2$ for the $a$-stack, corresponding to the non-supersymmetric angles in the fourth column.}
Even though the closed string sector on $T^6/\Omega\mathcal{R}$ preserves ${\cal N} = 4$ supersymmetry, the open string sector associated to the D-brane configurations in tables~\ref{tab:TorusWrappingFactModel} and~\ref{tab:ExampleAStackT6Factoris} do not preserve any supersymmetry, indicating the possible presence of non-vanishing NS-NS tadpoles. The NS-NS tadpoles are an artefact of the wrong vacuum and can be remediated by a shift of the NS-NS background fields. The consistency of the model is rather measured by the vanishing of the RR tadpoles:
\begin{equation} \label{Eq:RRTadpoleCancel}
\sum_x N_x (\Pi_x + \Pi_{x}') = 4 \Pi_{O6}.
\end{equation}
For the D6-brane configurations listed in table~\ref{tab:ExampleAStackT6Factoris} one can easily check that the RR tadpole cancelation conditions are not satisfied. In order for the RR tadpoles to vanish one can introduce additional stacks of D6-branes whose RR charges compensate the RR charges of the $a$-stack, $b$-stack and O6-planes. Given the sum of the RR charges of the latter we expect the additional stacks to be wrapped along non-supersymmetric three-cycles as well. Moreover, there might be additional contributions to the RR tadpoles upon introducing fluxes intended to stabilize the various K\"ahler and complex structure moduli. We postpone the introduction of a consistent moduli stabilization scheme for future research and leave the RR tadpoles uncanceled for now. As an immediate consequence thereof, the cubic $SU(N_b)$ non-Abelian gauge anomalies are not automatically canceled. And unless the spectrum of chiral fermions is particularly constrained, the two-stack set-up is plagued by gauge anomalies.
\begin{table}[h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\hline \multicolumn{3}{c}{Overview of Chiral Spectrum for Factorizable D6-branes}\\
\hline \hline
sector & $SU(N_b)_{(Q_a,Q_b)}$ & multiplicity \\
\hline
$ab$ & $( {\bf \overline N_b})_{(1,-1)}$ & $\left|(n_a^1 + m_a^1) (n_a^2 + m_a^2)\right|$\\
$ab'$ & $( {\bf \overline N_b})_{(-1,-1)}$& $\left|-(n_a^1 - m_a^1) (n_a^2 - m_a^2)\right|$\\
$bb'$&$(\overline \mathbf{Anti}_b)_{(0,-2)}$& $\left|-4 \right|$ \\
$bb'$&$(\mathbf{Sym}_b)_{(0,2)}$ & 4\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Chiral Spectrum for the two-stack D6-brane models on $T^6/\Omega\mathcal{R}$ considered in table~\ref{tab:TorusWrappingFactModel} with wrapping numbers $(n_b^1, m_b^1; n_b^2, m_b^2) = (1,-1;1,-1)$ for the $b$-stack. For the explicit examples in table~\ref{tab:ExampleAStackT6Factoris} the relations $n_a^i > m_a^i>0$ with $i=1,2$ are valid.\label{tab:ChiralSpectrum2StackModel}}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Using the generic chiral spectrum listed in table~\ref{tab:ChiralSpectrum2StackModel} the cubic $SU(N_b)$ non-Abelian gauge anomaly coefficient associated to the two-stack models in tables~\ref{tab:TorusWrappingFactModel} and~\ref{tab:ExampleAStackT6Factoris} can be determined:
\begin{equation}
{\cal A}^{SU(N_b)^3} =\Big[ - 2 n_a^1 n_a^2 - 2 m_a^1 m_a^2 \Big] + \Big[ - (N_b - 4) 4 + (N_b + 4) 4 \Big],
\end{equation}
where the first part on the righthand side comes from the chiral fermions in the anti-fundamental representation and the second part from the chiral fermions in (anti-) symmetric representation of $SU(N_b)$. One can easily check that this anomaly coefficient does not vanish for any of the explicit models considered in table~\ref{tab:ExampleAStackT6Factoris}, implying that supplementary D6-brane stacks intersecting chirally with the $b$-stack are inevitable for the consistency of these models. Next, we can also consider the mixed Abelian non-Abelian anomaly coefficients for the D6-brane set-up in tables~\ref{tab:TorusWrappingFactModel} and~\ref{tab:ExampleAStackT6Factoris} :
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal A}^{U(1)_a-SU(N_b)^2} &=& n_a^1 m_a^2 + n_a^2 m_a^1
= - s_a^1 r_b^1 - s_a^2 r_b^2 , \label{Eq:MixedAbeliannonAbelian1}\\
{\cal A}^{U(1)_b-SU(N_b)^2} &=& - n_a^1 n_a^2 - m_a^1 m_a^2 + 16
= - r_a^0 s_b^0 - r_a^3 s_b^3 +16 , \label{Eq:MixedAbeliannonAbelian2}
\end{eqnarray}
and the Abelian anomaly coefficients:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal A}^{U(1)_a^3} &=& N_b \left( 2n_a^1 m_a^2 +2 m_a^1 n_a^2 \right) = - 2 N_b \left( s_a^1 r_b^1 + s_a^2 r_b^2 \right) = {\cal A}^{U(1)_a - U(1)_b^2} , \label{Eq:MixedAbelianAbelian1}\\
{\cal A}^{U(1)_b^3} &=& - N_b \left( 2 n_a^1 n_a^2 + 2 m_a^1 m_a^2 -32 \right) = - N_b \left(2 r_a^0 s_b^0 + 2 r_a^3 s_b^3 -32 \right) , \label{Eq:MixedAbelianAbelian2}\\
{\cal A}^{U(1)_b - U(1)_a^2} &=& - N_b \left(2 n_a^1 n_a^2 + 2 m_a^1 m_a^2 \right) = -N_b \left( r_a^0 s_b^0 + r_a^3 s_b^3 \right) . \label{Eq:MixedAbelianAbelian3}
\end{eqnarray}
Note that the anomaly coefficient ${\cal A}^{U(1)_a-SU(N_b)^2} $ matches the charge $\tilde k^2$ of the axion $\tilde a^2$ serving as the longitudinal component of the massive $U(1)_a$ gauge boson, namely:
\begin{equation}
{\cal A}^{U(1)_a-SU(N_b)^2} = - s_a^1 r_b^1 - s_a^2 r_b^2 = - \tilde k^2,
\end{equation}
implying that constraint~(\ref{Eq:U(1)GaugeInvariancenoGCS}) is trivially satisfied in this set-up and that a GCS-term is not required to ensure $U(1)_a$ gauge invariance. This is an immediate consequence of the generalized Green-Schwarz mechanism, by which also the other mixed Abelian non-Abelian and Abelian anomalies vanish. Hence, only the non-vanishing RR tadpoles and related non-Abelian gauge anomalies remain a worrisome element for this set-up.
One could try to remediate the non-vanishing RR tadpoles by considering the D6-brane setting on the toroidal orbifold $T^6/\mathbb{Z}_2\times \mathbb{Z}_2$ (with discrete torsion $\eta=-1$), for which global intersecting D6-brane models with vanishing RR tadpoles were found~\cite{Blumenhagen:2005tn}. On this background, one can consider fractional three-cycles consisting of a bulk three-cycle (inherited from the ambient space $T^6$) and exceptional three-cycles stuck at the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ fixed loci of the orbifold action. The bulk part of such a fractional three-cycle can easily be played by the D6-brane configuration given in table~\ref{tab:TorusWrappingFactModel}. Given the technicalities of the exceptional three-cycles, we refrain from introducing the required algebraic elements to fully appreciate those fractional three-cycles and postpone the search for global models on $T^6/(\mathbb{Z}_2\times \mathbb{Z}_2\times \Omega\mathcal{R})$ to future work. Nonetheless, we can already speculate about potential D-brane instanton corrections on $T^6/(\mathbb{Z}_2\times \mathbb{Z}_2\times \Omega\mathcal{R})$ (with discrete torsion) coupling to the closed string axions $a^1$ and $a^2$, using reasonings and arguments analogous to~\cite{Cvetic:2007ku}. The axion $a^1$ couples to Euclidean D-branes wrapping the $\Omega\mathcal{R}\mathbb{Z}_2^{(1)}$-plane, while the axion $a^2$ couples to Euclidean D-branes wrapping the $\Omega\mathcal{R}\mathbb{Z}_2^{(2)}$-plane.
Given that both axions are charged under the $U(1)_a$ symmetry, their respective D-brane instanton amplitude violates the $U(1)_a$ symmetry. The violation of the $U(1)_a$ symmetry can be traced back to the presence of additional charged zero-modes arising at the intersections between the D6$_a$-brane and the Euclidean D2-branes wrapping the $\Omega\mathcal{R}\mathbb{Z}_2^{(1)}$-plane or $\Omega\mathcal{R}\mathbb{Z}_2^{(2)}$-plane respectively. These fermionic zero-modes can be saturated due to interactions with charged matter fields whose collective $U(1)_a$ charge cancels the $U(1)_a$ charge violation by the instanton amplitude~\cite{Blumenhagen:2006xt,Ibanez:2006da,Blumenhagen:2009qh,Ibanez:2012zz}. Moreover, deformation zero modes for the Euclidean D-branes wrapping the $\Omega\mathcal{R}\mathbb{Z}_2^{(1,2)}$-planes are absent due to the rigid nature of the respective three-cycles. Nonetheless, it is the choice of the exotic O6-plane that determines which of the four O6-plane is $\Omega\mathcal{R}$-invariant and supports $O(1)$-instantons, as expressed by the topological condition in table 10 of~\cite{Forste:2010gw} (see also~\cite{Honecker:2011sm}). In case the $\Omega\mathcal{R}$-plane or the $\Omega\mathcal{R}\mathbb{Z}_2^{(3)}$-plane are chosen as the exotic O6-plane, neither the $\Omega\mathcal{R}\mathbb{Z}_2^{(1)}$ nor the $\Omega\mathcal{R}\mathbb{Z}_2^{(2)}$-plane support $O(1)$-instantons, implying that additional effects are needed to lift the universal fermionic zero-modes of the $U(1)$-type D-brane instantons.\footnote{Generically, $U(1)$-type D-brane instanton contributions are also expected from the Euclidean D2-branes wrapping the cycle $\Pi_a$. From the wrapping numbers in table~\ref{tab:TorusWrappingFactModel} one can however deduce that the axions $a^1$ and $a^2$ do not couple to these D-brane instantons.} Based on these considerations, we expect the anomalous coupling of the axions $a^1$ and $a^2$ to the gauge instantons in (\ref{Eq:EffAxionModelFactDbranes}) to be the dominant non-perturbative effect generating the cosine-type potential for $\tilde a_1$.
One might wonder whether the characteristics of the two-stack models in tables~\ref{tab:TorusWrappingFactModel} and~\ref{tab:ExampleAStackT6Factoris} are influenced by the chosen {\bf aaa} lattice configuration of $T^6/\Omega\mathcal{R}$. Let us therefore pick the {\bf aab} lattice configuration, where only the third two-torus is tilted, and investigate whether this lattice configuration offers better perspectives with respect to model building. We still use the orthogonal coordinate system $(x^i, y^i)_{i=1,2,3}$ introduced in the previous section such that the symplectic basis of three-forms $(\alpha_i, \beta^j)$ is still given by~(\ref{Eq:SymplecticBasisT6OR}). The tiltedness of $T_{(3)}^2$ does alter the basis of $\Omega\mathcal{R}$-even and $\Omega\mathcal{R}$-odd three-cycles:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:BasisT6tiltedT3}
\begin{array}{l@{\hspace{0.4in}}l}
\gamma_0 = 2 [\pi_1] [\pi_3] [\pi_5] - [\pi_1] [\pi_3] [\pi_6] , & \delta^0 = [\pi_2] [\pi_4] [\pi_6], \\
\gamma_1 = [\pi_1] [\pi_4] [\pi_6] , & \delta^1 = 2 [\pi_2] [\pi_3] [\pi_5] - [\pi_2] [\pi_3] [\pi_6], \\
\gamma_2 = [\pi_2] [\pi_3] [\pi_6] , & \delta^2 = 2 [\pi_1] [\pi_4] [\pi_5]- [\pi_1] [\pi_4] [\pi_6], \\
\gamma_3 = 2 [\pi_2] [\pi_4] [\pi_5] - [\pi_2] [\pi_4] [\pi_6] , & \delta^3 = [\pi_1] [\pi_3] [\pi_6].
\end{array}
\end{equation}
The basis of three-cycles are still de Rahm-dual to the basis of three-forms:
\begin{equation}
\int_{\gamma_j} \alpha_i = c_i\, {\delta_{i}}^j, \qquad \int_{\delta^j} \beta^i = d_i\, {\delta^{i}}_j,
\end{equation}
but an additional constant $c_i$ or $d_i$ slips in: $ c_0 = 2c_1 = 2 c_2 = c_3=2$ and $2 d_0 = d_1 = d_2 = 2 d_3 = 2$. Moreover, the lattice of $\Omega\mathcal{R}$-even and $\Omega\mathcal{R}$-odd three-cycles does no longer form a uni-modular lattice:
\begin{equation}
\gamma_i \cdot \delta^j = - \delta^j \cdot \gamma_i = 2 {\delta_i}^j.
\end{equation}
The reduction of the $C_3$ form, as reviewed in section~\ref{Ss:ClosedStringAxions}, yields a closed string axion $\xi^i$ for each of the $\Omega\mathcal{R}$-even three-cycles $\gamma^i$ with periodicity $2\pi/c_i$. The decomposition of a factorizable three-cycle $\Pi_x$ according to (\ref{Eq:DecompositionBraneORCycles}) leads to the following coefficients:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:CoeffDecompT6ORtiltedT3}
\begin{array}{l@{\hspace{0.4in}}l}
r_x^0 = \frac{1}{2} n_x^1 n_x^2 n_x^3, & s_x^0 = m_x^1 m_x^2 (m_x^3 + \frac{1}{2} n_x^3),\\
r_x^1 = n_x^1 m_x^2 (m_x^3 + \frac{1}{2} n_x^3), & s_x^1 = \frac{1}{2} m_x^1 n_x^2 n_x^3,\\
r_x^2 = m_x^1 n_x^2 (m_x^3 + \frac{1}{2} n_x^3), & s_x^2 = \frac{1}{2} n_x^1 m_x^2 n_x^3,\\
r_x^3 = \frac{1}{2} m_x^1 m_x^2 n_x^3, & s_x^3 = n_x^1 n_x^2 (m_x^3+ \frac{1}{2} n_x^3),
\end{array}
\end{equation}
with $n_x^i, m_x^i \in \mathbb{Z}$ for $i\in \{1,2,3\}$. One can repeat the steps leading up to action~(\ref{Eq:EffAxionModelFactDbranes}) for the {\bf aab} lattice configuration, yet there are no substantial differences with respect to the {\bf aaa} lattice configuration. More explicitly, the $T_{(3)}^{2}$ tiltedness alters the torus wrapping numbers for the $a$-stack: $a= (n_a^1, m_a^1; n_a^1, m_a^1; 2,-1)$, but leads to the same effective action as in~(\ref{Eq:EffAxionModelFactDbranes}). Furthermore, the discussion below that action remains valid as well, such that physical considerations regarding action~(\ref{Eq:EffAxionModelFactDbranes}) are lattice independent for factorizable D6-brane models on $T^6/\Omega\mathcal{R}$.
\subsubsection{Non-factorizable D6-branes in Type IIA on Toroidal Orientifolds}\label{Ss:ExampleNonFactD6branes}
In the factorizable D6-brane set-up of the previous section it was implicitly assumed that the $U(1)$ gauge group participating in the St\"uckelberg mechanism does not correspond to the center of a $U(N)$ gauge group supported by a stack of $N$ D6-branes. However, if we consider for a moment that the St\"uckelberg $U(1)$ is indeed the center of a non-Abelian gauge group, we might also be able to associate the instanton background responsible for the axion potential to this $U(N)$ gauge group. In this respect, a single stack of $N$ D6-branes would provide a minimal realization of the model discussed in section~\ref{Ss:U1mixing}. Keeping the number of axions charged under this $U(1)$ equal to two, one can deduce from expression~(\ref{Eq:ExpFact3WrapNum}) that the corresponding D6-brane configuration is not realizable using factorizable three-cycles. As an alternative route we investigate whether such a D6-brane configuration can be consistently obtained by using so-called {\it non-factorisable} three-cycles on $T^6/\Omega\mathcal{R}$.
The factorizable three-cycles in~(\ref{Eq:CoeffDecompT6ORtiltedT3}) live in the homology group $[H_1(T^2,\mathbb{Z})]^3$, which forms an eight-dimensional sublattice $\Lambda_8$ spanned by the basis $(\gamma_i, \delta^i)$ of the homology group $H_3(T^6,\mathbb{Z})$ of all three-cycles. Note however that the sum $\Pi_c = \Pi_a + \Pi_b$ of two factorizable three-cycles $\Pi_a$ and $\Pi_b$ is not necessarily factorizable, yet the three-cycle $\Pi_c$ is a three-cycle in the sublattice $\Lambda_8$ and can be decomposed in terms of the basis $(\gamma_i, \delta^i)$. This means that for a generic three-cycle $\Pi_x \in \Lambda_8$, its coefficients $r_x^i$ and $s_x^i$ are not necessarily decomposable in terms of one-cycle wrapping numbers $(n_x^i, m_x^i)$ as in expression~(\ref{Eq:CoeffDecompT6ORtiltedT3}) and its coefficients do not necessarily satisfy~\cite{Rabadan:2001mt,Cremades:2002cs} specific relations as is the case for factorizable three-cycles, such as for instance $r_x^0 s_x^3 = r_x^1 s_x^2 = r_x^2 s_x^1 = r_x^3 s_x^0$. Non-factorizable three-cycles on the $\Lambda_8$-lattice can result from a brane recombination process of two factorizable three-cycles, when the volume of the non-factorizable three-cycle is smaller than the volumes of the two factorizable three-cycles (in the same homology class).
Releasing the geometrically appealing picture of factorizable D6-branes will provide us with some additional freedom, which will allow us to satisfy the constraints from section~\ref{Sss:GCSterms} in an explicit example. Let us thus consider a stack of $N_a$ D6-branes wrapping a non-factorizable three-cycle $\Pi_a$ and a single D6-brane wrapping a non-factorizable three-cycle $\Pi_b$ whose presence is required to ensure vanishing RR tadpoles. In terms of the basis of three-cycles $(\gamma_i, \delta^j)$ from (\ref{Eq:SympBasisT6}) the respective three-cycles can be decomposed as:\footnote{For simplicity, we assumed that none of the axions is charged under the $U(1)$ gauge group supported by the $b$-stack. One could consider a more generic D6-brane configuration where the axions $a^0$ and $a^1$ are charged under $U(1)_b$ through St\"uckelberg charges $s_b^0$ and $s_b^1$ respectively.}
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:NonFact3cyclesExp}
U(N_a): \Pi_a = r_a^2 \gamma_2 + r_a^3 \gamma_3 + s_a^2 \delta^2 + s_a^3 \delta^3,\qquad U(1)_b:
\Pi_b = r_b^i \gamma_i.
\end{equation}
The coefficients $r_x^i$ associated to the $\Omega\mathcal{R}$-even cycles will be determined later on when discussing the RR tadpole cancelation conditions. The effective action for the four axions is given by:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal S}_{axion} &=& \bigintssss
\left[ - \frac{1}{2 \ell_s^2} \sum_{i=0,1} {\cal K}_{ii} d a^i \wedge\star_4 d a^i - \frac{1}{2 \ell_s^2} \sum_{l=2,3} {\cal K}_{ll} (d a^l - N_a s^l_a A_a) \wedge\star_4 (d a^l - N_a s^l_a A_a) \right. \nonumber \\
&&\qquad + \frac{1}{8 \pi^2} \left( r^2_a a^2 + r^3_a a^3 \right) \text{Tr}(G_a \wedge G_a) + + \frac{1}{8 \pi^2} \left( r^2_a a^2 + r^3_a a^3 \right) N_a F_a \wedge F_a \nonumber\\
&& \left. \qquad+ \frac{1}{8 \pi^2} \left( \sum_{i=0}^3 r_b^i a^i \right) ( F_b \wedge F_b) \right] . \label{Eq:EffAxionModelNonFactDbranes}
\end{eqnarray}
Due to the last anomalous coupling, the axion system does not perfectly decouple as the previous model, but the absence of $U(1)_b$ gauge instantons allows us to treat the four axions as two decoupled axion systems $(a^0,a^1)$ and $(a^2,a^3)$. Focusing on the second axion system, we observe that a linear combination is absorbed by the $U(1)_a$ gauge boson, by which the latter acquires its mass, while the orthogonal direction remains uncharged under the Abelian gauge symmetry and couples anomalously to the non-Abelian gauge group with axion decay constant:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:ADCNonFactD6branes}
f_{\tilde a_1} = \sqrt{\frac{u_2 u_3}{u_1}} \frac{\sqrt{(u_2)^2 (s_a^2)^2 + (u_3)^2 (s_a^3)^2 }}{\left|r_a^2 s_a^3 (u_3)^2 - r_a^3 s_a^2 (u_2)^2\right| } M_s.
\end{equation}
The axion decay constant follows from a straightforward computation by inserting the metric components~(\ref{Eq:MetricExampleT6}) and the $U(1)$ charges into the expression~(\ref{Eq:AxionDecayConstantU1}). The denominator of the axion decay constant acquires a small value in regions of the moduli space where the following relation is valid:
\begin{equation}
r_a^2 s_a^3 (u_3)^2 \simeq r_a^3 s_a^2 (u_2)^2, \quad \text{ or } \quad r_a^2 s_a^3 (\text{Re}\, U_2)^2 \simeq r_a^3 s_a^2 (\text{Re}\, U_3)^2,
\end{equation}
where we used the expressions for the complex structure moduli introduced in (\ref{Eq:ComplexStructureModuli}) to obtain the second relation. Note also the similarities between this isotropy relation and the isotropy relation~(\ref{Eq:EnhIsoFactDbranes}) for the model with factorisable three-cycles.
Next, we focus on RR tadpoles for this two-stack model, which cancel provided the following relations among the coefficients $r_x^i$ are satisfied:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:RRtadpolesNonFact}
r_b^0 = 16, \quad r_b^1 = 0, \quad N_a r_a^2 = - r_b^2, \quad N_a r_a^3 = - r_b^3.
\end{equation}
An immediate consequence of the vanishing RR tadpoles is the cancelation of the non-Abelian anomalies. This can be checked explicitly by determining the chiral spectrum for this two-stack model as in table~\ref{tab:ChiralSpectrum2StackModelNonFact} and by computing the associated cubic anomaly coefficient:
\begin{equation}
{\cal A}^{SU(N_a)^3} =-2 (s_a^2 r_b^2 + s_a^3 r_b^3) - (N_a+4) (r^2_a s_a^2 + r_a^3 s_a^3) - (N_a-4) (r^2_a s_a^2 + r_a^3 s_a^3),
\end{equation}
where the first contribution comes from the chiral states in the (anti-)fundamental representation, the second and third term from the chiral states in the symmetric and anti-symmetric representation respectively. The cubic anomaly coefficient vanishes upon imposing the last two relations in~(\ref{Eq:RRtadpolesNonFact}).
\begin{table}[h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\hline \multicolumn{3}{c}{Overview of Chiral Spectrum for Non-factorizable D6-branes}\\
\hline \hline
sector & $SU(N_b)_{(Q_a,Q_b)}$ & multiplicity \\
\hline
$ab$ & $( {\bf N_a})_{(1,-1)}$ & $\left| - s_a^2 r_b^2 - s_a^3 r_b^3\right|$\\
$ab'$ & $( {\bf N_a})_{(1,1)}$& $\left| - s_a^2 r_b^2 - s_a^3 r_b^3\right|$\\
$aa'$&$( \mathbf{Anti}_a)_{(2,0)}$& $\left|-r_a^2 s_a^2 - r_a^3 s_a^3 \right|$ \\
$aa'$&$(\mathbf{Sym}_a)_{(2,0)}$ & $\left|-r_a^2 s_a^2 - r_a^3 s_a^3 \right|$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Chiral Spectrum for the two-stack non-factorizable D6-brane models on $T^6/\Omega\mathcal{R}$ considered in eq.~(\ref{Eq:NonFact3cyclesExp}).\label{tab:ChiralSpectrum2StackModelNonFact}}
\end{center}
\end{table}
To investigate the $U(1)_a$ gauge invariance constraint we have to consider the mixed Abelian non-Abelian anomaly coefficient associated to the $U(1)_a-SU(N_a)^2$ triangle diagram:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal A}^{U(1)_a - SU(N_a)^2}
= - N_a (r_a^2 s_a^2 + r_a^3 s_a^3) = - \tilde k^2.
\end{eqnarray}
The last equality implies the conservation of $U(1)_a$ gauge invariance as expressed in~(\ref{Eq:U(1)GaugeInvariancenoGCS}), such that a GCS-term is not required for this model. The other anomaly coefficients can be calculated from the chiral spectrum in table~\ref{tab:ChiralSpectrum2StackModelNonFact}, in analogy with the discussion in the previous section. Let us for instance focus on the anomaly coefficient of the mixed $U(1)_a-U(1)_b^2$ triangle diagram:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal A^{U(1)_a-U(1)_b^2}= - 2 N_a(r^2_b s^2_a+r^3_b s^3_a)= 2 N_a^2(r^2_as^2_a+r^3_as^3_a),
\end{eqnarray}
where we have used the tadpole condition (\ref{Eq:RRtadpolesNonFact}) in the second equality. This computation serves as an additional check for the $U(1)_a$ gauge invariance, that is to say, the $U(1)_a$ gauge variation of the $F_b\wedge F_b$ coupling terms in (\ref{Eq:EffAxionModelNonFactDbranes}) is cancelled by the anomalous $U(1)_a-U(1)_b^2$ triangle diagram. Thus, a GCS-term mixing the $U(1)_a$ gauge potential with the $U(1)_b$ field strength is not required for the gauge consistency of this model either. Thus, the generalized Green-Schwarz mechanism acts as the underlying mechanism in the intersecting D6-brane models to ensure the cancelation of Abelian anomalies and mixed Abelian non-Abelian anomalies and thereby also the quantum consistency of the models.
Considerations regarding other instanton contributions apart from the $SU(N_a)$ gauge instantons follow the same line of reasoning as for the factorizable D6-branes in the previous section, upon lifting the D6-brane configuration to the toroidal orbifold $T^6/\mathbb{Z}_2\times \mathbb{Z}_2$ with discrete torsion. The axions $a^2$ and $a^3$ couple to D-brane instantons whose Euclidean worldvolumes wrap the three-cycles parallel to the $\Omega\mathcal{R}\mathbb{Z}_2^{(2)}$-plane and $\Omega\mathcal{R}\mathbb{Z}_2^{(3)}$-plane respectively on this background. If we choose a background configuration where neither the $\Omega\mathcal{R}\mathbb{Z}_2^{(2)}$-plane nor the $\Omega\mathcal{R}\mathbb{Z}_2^{(3)}$-plane are chosen to be the exotic O6-plane, then the Euclidean D-branes do not support $O(1)$-instantons but rather $U(1)$-instantons, which will contribute effectively only if all fermionic zero modes are saturated.
A last consideration concerns the amount of supersymmetry preserved by the two-stack non-factorizable D6-brane set-up in (\ref{Eq:NonFact3cyclesExp}). In order for the D6-brane to preserve supersymmetry, its corresponding three-cycle $\Pi_x$ has to wrap a special lagrangian submanifold which can be expressed in geometric terms as, see e.g.~\cite{Forste:2010gw}:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:SUSYCondGeneric}
\omega_{(1,1)}\big|_{\Pi_x} = 0, \qquad \text{Im}\,\left(\int_{\Pi_x} \Omega_3 \right) = 0, \qquad \text{Re}\,\left(\int_{\Pi_x} \Omega_3 \right) > 0,
\end{equation}
where the first relation expresses a condition on the pull-back of the K\"ahler two-form $\omega_{(1,1)}$ to the three-cycle $\Pi_x$, and $\Omega_3$ is the same calibration form as the one used for the O6-planes. It is not difficult to show that these conditions are satisfied for supersymmetric factorizable D-branes, provided relation (\ref{Eq:SUSYreqD6branes}) is satisfied. For non-factorizable D6-branes, it is much harder to compute the pull-back of the K\"ahler two-form to the respective three-cycle due to the non-factorizability. Given that the non-factorizable three-cycles in (\ref{Eq:NonFact3cyclesExp}) correspond to three-cycles within the lattice $\Lambda_8$, we still expect them to wrap lagrangian subspaces. The remaining two calibration conditions on the other hand can be computed straightforwardly for the non-factorizable three-cycles in (\ref{Eq:NonFact3cyclesExp}). Based on the RR tadpole cancelation conditions (\ref{Eq:RRtadpolesNonFact}) one can then deduce that only one of the two stacks preserves the same supersymmetry as the O6-planes, while the other stack violates the third condition in (\ref{Eq:SUSYCondGeneric}).
To end this section, let us have a look at an explicit example with a modest non-Abelian $U(N_a)$ gauge group with gauge factor $N_a=3$. A point in the parameter space for which both the super-Planckian condition~(\ref{Eq:ADCNonFactD6branes}) and the tadpole condition~(\ref{Eq:RRtadpolesNonFact}) are satisfied, is specified in the first place by the wrapping numbers of the three-cycles for both stacks:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l@{\hspace{0.6in}}l}
r^2_a=r^3_a=1, & r^0_b = 16, \, \, r^1_b= 0, \\
s^2_a=2,\, \, s^3_a=3, & r^2_b=r^3_b= - 3.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
For this choice of parameters, the chiral spectrum in line with table~\ref{tab:ChiralSpectrum2StackModelNonFact} contains the following states: $15 \times ({\bf 3})_{(1,-1)} + 15 \times ({\bf 3})_{(1,1)} + 5 \times ({\bf 3}_{A})_{(-2,0)} + 5 \times (\overline{\bf 6}_{S})_{(-2,0)} $ in the respective representations under the gauge factor $SU(3)_{U(1)_a \times U(1)_b}$. In the region of the parameter space where the ratio $u_3/u_2$ asymptotes to the value $\sqrt{2}/\sqrt{3}$, the axion decay constant (\ref{Eq:ADCNonFactD6branes}) reaches trans-Planckian values for a high enough string scale, e.g.~$M_s~\sim~10^{17}~\text{GeV}$:
\begin{equation}
f_{\tilde a^1} \approx \frac{M_{s}}{3}\times 10^3 \sim 10M_{Pl}.
\end{equation}
In conclusion, this two stack set-up with non-factorizable intersecting D6-branes forms an explicit string theory example of the effective field theory model discussed in section~\ref{Ss:U1mixing}.
\subsubsection{D7-branes in Type IIB on Swiss-Cheese Calabi-Yau's}
In order to find explicit stringy examples characterized by metric mixing and $U(1)$ mixing as analyzed in section~\ref{Ss:GenericKineticMixing}, we
now turn to backgrounds other than toroidal orbifolds. Metric kinetic mixing is expected for Calabi-Yau backgrounds with a Swiss-cheese type structure, where the volume ${\cal T}$ of the internal space is controlled by the volume $\tau_\ell$ of one large four-cycle $D_b$ subtracted by the volumes $\tau_s$ of small four-cycles $D_s$, which arise as blow-up cycles upon resolving the $\mathbb{Z}_n$ singularities in the Calabi-Yau manifold.\footnote{In this set-up the volumes of the four-cycles are measured with respect to the string length $\ell_s$, and we work with conventions for which basis 4-forms $\alpha_i$ and 2-forms $\beta^i$ are dimensionless.} Considering such Swiss-Cheese Calabi-Yau three-folds allows us to kill two birds with one stone by sketching how the set-up from section~\ref{Ss:GenericKineticMixing} can be realized in Type IIB string theory with intersecting D7-branes, as anticipated in section~\ref{Ss:ClosedStringAxions}.
When considering Type IIB string theory on a Calabi-Yau three-fold ${\cal X}_6$, the metric ${\cal K}_{ij}$ on the $C_4$ axion moduli space in (\ref{Eq:MetricAxionModuliSpace}) can be seen~\cite{Candelas:1990pi,Strominger:1985ks,Grimm:2004uq} as the K\"ahler metric resulting from a K\"ahler potential ${\cal K}$ expressed in the volumes $\tau_i$ of the four-cycles with $i\in \{1,\ldots, h^{11}\}$. The volumes of the four-cycles relate to the K\"ahler deformations $t_i$ through the relations:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:KahlerDefVolume4Cycle}
\tau_i = \frac{1}{2} \int_{\gamma_i} J\wedge J = \frac{1}{2} \kappa_{i j k} t^j t^k, \qquad i,j,k \in \{1, \ldots,h^{1,1}\},
\end{equation}
where the K\"ahler two-form $J$ is expanded with respect to a basis of harmonic (1,1)-forms $\beta^i$, the Poincar\'e duals to the basis of four-cycles $\gamma_i$: $J=t^\ell \beta^\ell -\sum_{s=1}^{h^{11}-1} t^s \beta^s$. The coefficients $\kappa_{ijk}$ correspond to the triple intersection numbers for the basis $\beta^i$. The $C_4$ axions are defined as in equation (\ref{Eq:DecompPforms}) with respect to the basis of four-cycles $\gamma_i$. For a Swiss-Cheese type Calabi-Yau the K\"ahler potential then takes the schematic form (in the large volume limit):
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:GenKaehlerSwissCheese}
{\cal K} = -2 \ln {\cal T} =- 2 \ln \left( \frac{\sqrt{2}}{3} a_\ell {\tau_\ell}^{3/2} - \frac{\sqrt{2}}{3} \sum_{s=1}^{h^{11}-1} b_s {\tau_s}^{3/2} \right), \qquad a_\ell, b_s \in \mathbb{R}.
\end{equation}
This form of the K\"ahler potential results from expressing the K\"ahler deformations in terms of the four-cycle volumes through~(\ref{Eq:KahlerDefVolume4Cycle}) and inserting the inverted expressions into the internal volume ${\cal T} = \frac{1}{6} \kappa_{ijk} t^i t^j t^k$. The effective four dimensional theory upon dimensional reduction preserves ${\cal N}=1$ supersymmetry when considering the orientifold ${\cal X}_6/\Omega\mathcal{R}(-)^{F_L}$ of the Swiss-Cheese Calabi-Yau three-fold. The appropriate orientifold projection $\Omega\mathcal{R}(-)^{F_L}$ consists of a worldsheet parity $\Omega$, a projection $(-)^{F_L}$ involving the left fermion number $F_L$ and an involution ${\cal R}$, which will be chosen here such that $h^{11} = h^{11}_+$ and $h^{11}_- = 0$ for the remainder of our discourse.\footnote{This has as an immediate consequence that the axions associated to the NS-NS 2-form $B_2$ and RR 2-form $C_2$ are projected out from the start. Choosing a different orientifold projection where not all of the $C_2$-axions are projected out, one could consider stringy realizations of the set-up in section~\ref{Ss:GenericKineticMixing} using the $C_2$-axions, as proposed in~\cite{short}.}
Intuition gathered from sections~\ref{Ss:GenericKineticMixing}, \ref{Ss:ExampleFactD6branes} and~\ref{Ss:ExampleNonFactD6branes} suggests us to consider Swiss-Cheese Calabi-Yau's with Hodge number $h_+^{11}\geq 3$: given that large axion decay constants seem to be connected to isotropy relations among volume moduli and the validity of the large volume limit approach prohibits a vanishing value for the internal volume ${\cal T}$, we are naturally led to consider Swiss-Cheese Calabi-Yau's with 3 or more K\"ahler moduli. An intensive search through databases of constructed Calabi-Yau three-folds reveals that such Swiss-Cheese Calabi-Yau's are abundantly present~\cite{Gray:2012jy,Altman:2014bfa} and some of them were already fruitful in the past to investigate various aspects regarding D7-brane model building, see e.g.~\cite{Blumenhagen:2007sm,Collinucci:2008sq,Cicoli:2011qg}. Let us thus consider a Swiss-Cheese type Calabi-Yau with $h^{11}_+ = 3$ and for simplicity we assume the presence of a certain amount of isotropy among the volumes of the small four-cycles $\tau_1$ and $\tau _2$:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:IsotropySwissCheeseCY}
\tau_1 \sim \tau_2, \qquad b_1 \sim b_2.
\end{equation}
With these two assumptions we can expand the metric on the axion moduli space in powers of $\varepsilon^2 \equiv \tau_1/\tau_\ell$:
\begin{equation}
{\cal K}_{ij} = \frac{\partial^2 {\cal K} }{\partial \tau_i \partial \tau_j} = \frac{1}{\tau_\ell^2} \left(\begin{array}{ccc}3 & -\frac{9 b_1}{2a_\ell} \varepsilon & -\frac{9 b_1}{2a_\ell} \varepsilon \\
-\frac{9 b_1}{2a_\ell} \varepsilon & \frac{3 b_1}{2a_\ell} \frac{1}{\varepsilon} & {\cal O}(\varepsilon^2) \\
-\frac{9 b_1}{2a_\ell} \varepsilon & {\cal O}(\varepsilon^2) & \frac{3 b_1}{2a_\ell} \frac{1}{\varepsilon} \end{array}\right),
\end{equation}
where we neglect entries of order ${\cal O}(\varepsilon^2)$ and higher in the limit where $\tau_1 \ll \tau_\ell$. With this simple setting a small amount of metric kinetic mixing among axions can be built in from the start.
Next, we introduce a single D7-brane supporting the $U(1)_a$ gauge group under which the axions $a^1$ and $a^2$, associated to the four-cycles $\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_2$ respectively, are charged. In order for the axions to acquire St\"uckelberg charges, we have to turn on an internal flux ${\cal F}_a$ as reviewed in section~\ref{Ss:ClosedStringAxions}:
\begin{equation}
{\cal F}_a = f_a^1 \beta^1 + f_a^2 \beta^2, \qquad f_a^i \in \mathbb{Q}_0.
\end{equation}
Note that we turn on the internal flux ${\cal F}_a$ along the two-forms that are Poincar\'e dual to the four-cycles wrapped by the $U(1)_a$ stack: \begin{equation}
\gamma_{a} = n_a^1 \gamma_1 + n_a^2 \gamma_2, \qquad n_a^i \in \mathbb{Q}_0.
\end{equation}
With respect to this D7-brane configuration the charge vector $(p^\ell, p^1, p^2)$ is given by:
\begin{equation}
p^\ell =0, \qquad p^1 = \frac{1}{4 \pi} \frac{f_a^1 n_a^1}{b_1^2} , \qquad p^2 = \frac{1}{4 \pi} \frac{f_a^2 n_a^2}{b_1^2},
\end{equation}
where we used the triple intersection numbers adapted to the basis in which the K\"ahler potential (\ref{Eq:GenKaehlerSwissCheese}) has been expressed:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:TripleIntersectionNum}
I_3 = \frac{1}{a_\ell^2} \gamma_\ell^3 + \frac{1}{b_1^2} \gamma_1^3 + \frac{1}{b_2^2} \gamma_2^3 \stackrel{(\ref{Eq:IsotropySwissCheeseCY})}{=} \frac{1}{a_\ell^2} \gamma_\ell^3 + \frac{1}{b_1^2} \gamma_1^3 + \frac{1}{b_1^2} \gamma_2^3,
\end{equation}
with $a_\ell^{-2}, b_1^{-2}, b_2^{-2} \in \mathbb{Z}$. Notice that the D7-brane configuration is chosen in such a way that only the two axions associated to the small four-cycles $\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_2$ are charged under the $U(1)_a$ gauge group supported by the $a$-stack.
\footnote{Intuitively one might expect a D7-brane stack to wrap only a single four-cycle. Note that the expression for the internal volume ${\cal T}$ in (\ref{Eq:GenKaehlerSwissCheese}) is closely related to the explicit form of the triple intersection numbers in (\ref{Eq:TripleIntersectionNum}) and is thus only valid in this particular basis of four-cycles. This particular basis of four-cycles consists of linear combinations of $\Omega\mathcal{R}$-even four-cycles used to define the resolved Calabi-Yau manifold in terms of toric geometry. In this respect a D7-brane wrapping a linear combination of four-cycles $\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_2$ results naturally from a configuration where the D7-brane wraps a single $\Omega\mathcal{R}$-even four-cycle in the original toric geometry basis.
}
Thirdly, we also introduce a stack of $N_b$ D7-branes wrapping a four-cycle $\gamma_b$ such that both axions $a^1$ and $a^2$ couple anomalously to the $U(N_b)$ gauge group supported by the D7-brane stack:
\begin{equation}
\gamma_b = m_b^1 \gamma_1 + m_b^2 \gamma_2, \qquad m_b^i \in \mathbb{Q}_0.
\end{equation}
In order to prevent that the axions $a^1$ and $a^2$ are charged under the $U(1)_b$ center of the non-Abelian gauge group, we assume that the vector bundle along the internal directions is flat. Taking all these elements into account, we find that the effective action for the three axions $a^l$, $a^1$ and $a^2$ in this set-up is given by:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal S}_{axion} &=& \bigintssss
\left[ - \frac{1}{2 \ell_s^2} \sum_{i,j\in\{\ell,1,2\}} {\cal K}_{ij} (d a^i - p^i A_a) \wedge\star_4 (d a^j - p^j A_a) + \frac{1}{8 \pi^2} \left( n_b^1 a^1 + n_b^2 a^2 \right) (F_a \wedge F_a) \right. \nonumber\\
&& \left. \qquad + \frac{1}{8 \pi^2} \left( m_b^1 a^1 + m_b^2 a^2 \right) \text{Tr}(G_b \wedge G_b) + \frac{1}{8 \pi^2} \left( m_b^1 a^1 + m_b^2 a^2 \right) N_b (F_b \wedge F_b) \right].
\end{eqnarray}
Determining the decay constants for the axions and the axionic direction eaten by the $U(1)_a$ gauge boson requires us to apply the same steps as presented in section~\ref{Ss:GenericKineticMixing} for the three-axion system. As a first step, we diagonalize the metric ${\cal K}_{ij}$ on the axion moduli space, whose eigenvalues are given by:
\begin{equation}
\lambda_+ \simeq \frac{3}{\tau_\ell^2} + {\cal O}(\varepsilon^3) , \qquad \lambda_- \simeq \frac{3 b_1}{ 2 a_\ell} \frac{1}{\varepsilon \tau_\ell^2} + {\cal O}(\varepsilon^3), \qquad \lambda_3 = \frac{3 b_1}{ 2 a_\ell} \frac{1}{\varepsilon \tau_\ell^2} ,
\end{equation}
such that the kinetic terms for the axions can be written as,
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal S}_{axion}^{\rm kin} &\ni& \bigintssss
\left[ - \frac{1}{2 \ell_s^2} \lambda_+ \left( d a^+ - \frac{p^+}{\pi} A_a \right) \wedge \star_4 \left( d a^+ - \frac{p^+}{\pi} A_a \right) \right. \nonumber\\
&& \qquad \quad - \frac{1}{2 \ell_s^2} \lambda_- \left( d a^- - \frac{p^-}{\pi} A_a \right) \wedge \star_4 \left( d a^- - \frac{p^-}{\pi} A_a \right) \nonumber\\
&& \qquad \quad \left. - \frac{1}{2 \ell_s^2} \lambda_3 \left( d a^3 - \frac{p^3}{\pi} A_a \right) \wedge \star_4 \left( d a^3 - \frac{p^3}{\pi} A_a \right) \right],
\end{eqnarray}
where also the St\"uckelberg charges have to be expressed in terms of the new axion basis:
\begin{equation}
\left(
\begin{array}{c} p^+ \\ p^- \\ p^3 \end{array} \right) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}\sqrt{1+ 18 \varepsilon^4}} \left(\begin{array}{ccc} \sqrt{2} & 3\sqrt{2}\varepsilon^2 & 3\sqrt{2}\varepsilon^2\\
0& - \sqrt{1+18 \varepsilon^4}&\sqrt{1+18 \varepsilon^4} \\
-6 \varepsilon^2& 1& 1\\
\end{array} \right) \left(\begin{array}{c} p^\ell \\ p^1 \\ p^2 \end{array} \right) = \left( \begin{array}{c} {\cal O}(\varepsilon^2) \\ \frac{p^2-p^1}{\sqrt{2}} \\ \frac{p^2+p^1}{\sqrt{2}} \end{array}\right).
\end{equation}
From the righthand side we deduce that the charge of the axion $a^+$ under the $U(1)_a$ gauge symmetry is negligible, such that only the axions $a^-$ and $a^3$ are characterized by St\"uckelberg charges.
In order to determine the axion decay constants, we also have to write down the anomalous couplings to the gauge groups in terms of the new axion basis:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal S}_{axion}^{anom} &=& \frac{1}{8 \pi^2} \bigintssss \left[ \left( \frac{m_b^2-m_b^1}{\sqrt{2}} a^- + \frac{m_b^2+m_b^1}{\sqrt{2}} a^3 \right) \text{Tr}(G_b \wedge G_b) \right. \nonumber \\
&& \qquad \quad + \left( \frac{n_b^2-n_b^1}{\sqrt{2}} a^- + \frac{n_b^2 + n_b^1}{\sqrt{2}}a^3 \right) (F_a \wedge F_a) \nonumber \\
&& \qquad \quad \left. +\left( \frac{m_b^2-m_b^1}{\sqrt{2}} a^- + \frac{m_b^2+m_b^1}{\sqrt{2}} a^3 \right) N_b(F_b \wedge F_b) \right].
\end{eqnarray}
Once the $SU(N_b)$ instanton background is taken into consideration, a cosine-type potential for the axions will be generated, and therefore only the anomalous coupling to the non-Abelian gauge group deserves our attention in the remainder of this discussion. Combining the kinetic part and the potential terms for the axions $(a^-, a^3)$ we notice that the effective action for this two-axion system matches the set-up from section~\ref{Ss:U1mixing}. Applying the analysis from that section to this two-axion system, we can identify a linear combination $\tilde a^2$ of the axions $(a^-, a^3)$ as the axionic direction absorbed by the $U(1)_a$ gauge boson which acquires a St\"uckelberg mass of the order:
\begin{equation}
M_a = \sqrt{ \frac{3 b_1}{ 2 a_\ell} \frac{1}{\varepsilon \tau_\ell^2} } \sqrt{(p^1)^2 + (p^2)^2} M_s .
\end{equation}
The orthogonal linear combination $\tilde a^1$ of $(a^-, a^3)$ then survives as the inflaton candidate coupling to the non-Abelian gauge group with an axion decay constant (\ref{Eq:AxionDecayConstantU1}) given by:
\begin{equation}
f_{\tilde a^1} = \sqrt{ \frac{3 b_1}{ 2 a_\ell} \frac{1}{\varepsilon \tau_\ell^2} } \frac{\sqrt{(p^1)^2 + (p^2)^2}}{ \left| p^1 m_b^2 - m_b^1 p^2 \right|} M_s.
\end{equation}
Large axion decay constants ($f_{\tilde a^1} \gg M_s$) can be found in regions of the parameter space where $p^1 m_b^2 - m_b^1 p^2$ asymptotes to zero:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:SwissCheeseACDIsotropy1}
f_a^1 n_a^1 m_b^2 \simeq m_b^1 f_a^2 n_a^2.
\end{equation}
At first sight this condition seems rather restrictive, but it should actually be combined with the isotropy relations in (\ref{Eq:IsotropySwissCheeseCY}). By relaxing the latter conditions, a trans-Planckian decay constant is realized for a sufficiently high string scale $M_s \sim {\cal O}(10^{16}-10^{17})$ GeV, provided that the following isotropy relation between the volumes $\tau_1$ and $\tau_2$ of the small four-cycles is valid:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:SwissCheeseACDIsotropy2}
\frac{\tau_1}{\tau_2} \simeq \frac{b_1^2\, (m_b^2 + m_b^1)^2\, (f_a^2 n_a^2 -f_a^1 n_a^1)^2}{b_2^2\, (m_b^2 - m_b^1)^2\, (f_a^2 n_a^2 +f_a^1 n_a^1)^2}.
\end{equation}
In this expression $b_1$ and $b_2$ are constants fixed by the geometry of the internal space, $m_b^i$, $n_a^i$ and $f_a^i$ are integer (or at most rational) parameters which can be freely chosen. This latter isotropy condition seems more flexible and easier to satisfy from a model building perspective than the one in (\ref{Eq:SwissCheeseACDIsotropy1}), but we have to keep in mind that the K\"ahler moduli are constrained to lie within the K\"ahler cone such that the volumes of all curves and four-cycles on ${\cal X}_6$ are positive. It has to be verified for a specific Swiss-Cheese Calabi-Yau whether the isotropy condition in (\ref{Eq:SwissCheeseACDIsotropy2}) is compatible with the K\"ahler cone constraints.
Similar to the D6-branes models in the previous sections, the quantum consistency of these D7-brane models relies on the vanishing of the RR tadpoles (D3-brane and D7-brane tadpoles) and the cancelation of mixed anomalies by virtue of the generalized Green-Schwarz mechanism~\cite{Plauschinn:2008yd,Blumenhagen:2008zz}. Discussing the quantum consistency is facilitated when considering an explicit Swiss-Cheese Calabi-Yau background with specific orientifold projection, which we will postpone for future work. Nevertheless, we can already speculate that for the considered D7-brane configurations all anomalies involving an Abelian gauge factor can be canceled through the generalized Green-Schwarz mechanism and a GCS-term is not required to restore $U(1)_a$ gauge invariance. More explicitly, at the intersections between the $a$-stack and the $b$-stack we expect the presence of chiral matter in the bifundamental representation under the respective gauge groups with multiplicity:
\begin{equation}
I_{ab} = \bigintssss_{{\cal X}_6} \Big(c_1({\cal F}_a) - c_1({\cal F}_b)\Big) \wedge [\gamma_a] \wedge [\gamma_b] = \frac{f_a^1 n_a^1 m_b^1}{b_1^2} + \frac{f_a^2 n_a^2 m_b^2}{b_2^2} \in \mathbb{Z} ,
\end{equation}
where $c_1({\cal F}_{a,b})$ corresponds to the first Chern-class of the respective gauge bundles ${\cal F}_{a,b}$ and $[\gamma_{a,b}]$ denote the Poincar\'e dual two-forms to the respective four-cycles $\gamma_{a,b}$. Similar expressions can be written down for the $ab'$, $aa'$ and $bb'$ sectors. The anomaly coefficients for the triangle diagrams associated to the chiral anomaly match the couplings for the Green-Schwarz diagrams, such that the sum of both types of diagram equals zero for the mixed Abelian non-Abelian and the pure Abelian anomalies. The cubic non-Abelian $SU(N_b)$ gauge anomaly on the other hand vanishes provided that the RR tadpoles vanish.
The presence of a $U(1)$ bundle along $\gamma_a$ also induces a moduli-dependent Fayet-Iliopoulos term $\xi_a$:
\begin{equation}
\xi_a = \frac{1}{{\cal T}} \bigintssss [\gamma_a] \wedge c_1({\cal F}_a) \wedge J = \frac{1}{{\cal T}} \left( \frac{n_a^1 f_a^1}{b_1^2} t^1 + \frac{n_a^2 f_a^2}{b_2^2} t^2 \right).
\end{equation}
In combination with the scalar fields $\phi^{(i)}$ from the chiral D7-brane sector charged under $U(1)_a$ gauge group with charge $q^{(i)}_a$, the associated D-term potential scales as,
\begin{equation}
V_D \sim \left( \sum_{i} q^{(i)}_a \left| \phi^{(i)} \right|^2 - \xi_a \right)^2.
\end{equation}
In order for this D-term to vanish, there exist two possible options: either the FI-term $\xi_a$ vanishes, or there is a scalar field (singlet under the $SU(N_b)$ gauge group) whose vacuum expectation value matches the FI-term. In case neither of the two options can be met, the non-vanishing D-term potential might indicate that the considered D7-brane configuration is not supersymmetric. A second issue, absent in the intersecting D6-brane picture but instrumental for the consistency of the D7-brane models, concerns the presence of Freed-Witten anomalies, whenever the D7-branes are wrapped on four-cycles which do not admit a spin structure~\cite{Freed:1999vc}. In order to cancel the Freed-Witten anomalies associated to non-spin four-cycles, the internal flux supported by the D-branes has to contain a contribution that is half-integer quantized.
Once a specific Swiss-Cheese Calabi-Yau is chosen and a consistent D7-brane model is constructed according to the set-up given above, one has to determine whether there exist (rigid) Euclidean D3-brane instantons wrapping the four-cycles associated to the axions $a^1$ and $a^2$ and verify that their instanton amplitudes are suppressed with respect to the gauge instanton responsible for the axion potential. Yet, the biggest and most exciting challenge in this framework will consist in tying the aforementioned D7-brane configuration to the mechanisms responsible for stabilizing the volumes $\tau_i$ of the four-cycles, allowing us to find a dynamical explanation for the isotropy relation (\ref{Eq:SwissCheeseACDIsotropy2}).
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec:con}
In this paper, we proposed a new mechanism to obtain an effective
super-Planckian axion decay constant in theories where the axion periodicities are intrinsically sub-Planckian. Our mechanism involves neither monodromy nor
alignment of the axion decay constants, but kinetic mixing effects among 2 or more axions. The simplicity of our approach brings several virtues.
First of all, the field range enhancement we obtained with kinetic and $U(1)$ mixings is not tied to the number of low energy degrees of freedom (such as the number of axions or the rank of non-Abelian gauge groups).
In fact, the simplest model we presented involves only two axions, a $U(1)$ and a small rank non-Abelian gauge group\footnote{
Some chiral fermions charged under it are also needed but they are there in any case for anomaly cancellation (their presence is implicit in models that invoke non-perturbative instanton potentials).}.
The simplicity of our scenario further enables us to {\it explicitly} integrate out the heavy fields to obtain an effective single axion lagrangian, providing a minimal realization of natural inflation.
Unlike the alignment mechanism \cite{Kim:2004rp},
the effective field range in our scenario is enhanced not by a fine-tuning of discrete parameters, but rather by fine-tuning continuous moduli-dependent quantities.
Thus, the requirement enhancement $f_{eff}/f \gtrsim 100$ can be satisfied much more readily.
Our mechanism is also different from monodromy inflation in that there is only a single branch of the potential. Hence, there is no additional requirement on model building for the tunneling between different branches to be suppressed. While our scenario applies generally to field theories with multiple axions, it is most naturally realized in string theory, as exposed by the explicit examples consisting of intersecting D6-branes in Type IIA and intersecting D7-branes in Type IIB string theory.
As is inevitable in string inflation models, moduli stabilization is a major challenge. While our scenario may seem to impose additional requirements on moduli stabilization, it is interesting to note that the effective axion decay constant is enhanced (or reduced) at symmetric points in the moduli space and thus the tuning needed in fact may be natural from a moduli stabilization standpoint.
The kinetic and $U(1)$ mixings invoked in this work appear rather generically in string compactifications. Axions in string theory are typically mixed kinetically (at tree level) and St\"uckelberg couplings are in fact a necessity for anomaly cancellation in string theory.
The lagrangian for the multi-axion system considered here is thus more general, and subsumes that of previous proposals. The general lagrangian presented in appendix \ref{A:Generalisation} thus provides a well-motivated starting point for further studies of multi-axion inflation, both in terms of model building and statistical studies. It would be interesting to carry out a
random matrix analysis of an ensemble of lagrangians of the form of eq.~(\ref{Eq:CompleteGeneralAxionGauge}).
Other than inflation, a broader range of axion decay constants made possible by axion mixings may find applications in other contexts~\cite{short}. It would also be interesting to find explicit string compactifications realizing the inflationary conditions outlined in this work, perhaps in conjunction with realistic particle physics features.
We hope to return to these issues in future work.
\acknowledgments
We would like to thank Kiwoon Choi,
Michele Cicoli, Daniel Junghans,
Luis Ib\'a\~nez, Fernando Marchesano, Francisco Pedro, Jan Rosseel, Pablo Soler and Angel Uranga for useful discussions and suggestions. G.S. and F.Y. are supported in part by the DOE grant DE-FG-02-95ER40896 and the HKRGC grants
HUKST4/CRF/13G, 604231 and 16304414.
W.S. was initially supported by the {\it Cluster of Excellence `Precision Physics, Fundamental Interactions and Structure of Matter' (PRISMA)} DGF no. EXC 1098 and
the DFG research grant HO 4166/2-1, but is now supported by the ERC Advanced Grant SPLE under contract ERC-2012-ADG-20120216-320421, by the grant FPA2012-32828 from the MINECO, and the grant SEV-2012-0249 of the ``Centro de Excelencia Severo Ochoa" Programme. W.S.~would also like to thank the European COST action MP1210 ``The String Theory Universe" for a Short Term Scientific Mission Grant.
|
\section*{Acknowledgment}
\ifCLASSOPTIONcaptionsoff
\newpage
\fi
\bibliographystyle{unsrt}
\section{Introduction}
Phase noise arises due to the instability of oscillators \cite{Demir2000} in communication systems
such as satellite communication \cite{CasiniDVBS2PN2004},
microwave links \cite{DurisiICC2013} or optical fiber communication \cite{TkachDFB1986}.
The statistical characterization of the phase noise depends on the application.
In systems with phase-locked loops (PLL),
the residual phase noise follows a Tikhonov distribution \cite{ViterbiPLL1963}.
In Digital Video Broadcasting DVB-S2, an example of a satellite communication system,
the phase noise process is modeled by the sum of the outputs of two infinite-impulse response filters
driven by the same white Gaussian noise process \cite{CasiniDVBS2PN2004}.
In optical fiber communication, the phase noise in laser oscillators
is modeled by a Wiener process \cite{TkachDFB1986}.
A commonly studied \emph{discrete-time} channel model is
\begin{align}
Y_k = \Xsymb{k} ~ e^{j \Theta_k} + Z_k
\label{eq:dt-pn-ch}
\end{align}
where $\{Y_k\}$ are the output symbols, $\{\Xsymb{k}\}$ are the input symbols, $\{\Theta_k\}$ is the phase noise process and
$\{Z_k\}$ is additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN).
For example,
Katz and Shamai \cite{Katz2004} studied the model (\ref{eq:dt-pn-ch}) when $\{\Theta_k\}$ is
independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.) according to $p_{\Theta}(\cdot)$,
when $\Theta$ is uniformly distributed (called a non-coherent AWGN channel)
and
when $\Theta$ has a Tikhonov (or von Mises) distribution (called a partially-coherent AWGN channel).
The i.i.d. Tikhonov phase noise models the residual phase error in systems
with phase-tracking devices, e.g., phase-locked loops (PLL) and ideal interleavers/deinterleavers.
Katz and Shamai \cite{Katz2004} characterized some properties of the capacity-achieving distribution.
Tight lower bounds on the capacities of memoryless non-coherent and partially coherent AWGN channels
were computed by solving an optimization problem numerically in \cite{Katz2004} and \cite{Hou2003PCAWGN}, respectively.
Lapidoth studied in \cite{LapidothPhaseNoise2002} a phase noise channel (\ref{eq:dt-pn-ch}) at high SNR.
He considered both memoryless phase noise and phase noise with memory.
He showed that the capacity grows \emph{logarithmically} with the SNR with a pre-log factor 1/2,
where the pre-log is due to amplitude modulation only.
The phase modulation contributes a bounded number of bits only.
Dauwels and Loeliger \cite{Dauwels2008} proposed
a particle filtering method to compute information rates for discrete-time continuous-state channels with memory
and applied the method to (\ref{eq:dt-pn-ch}) for Wiener phase noise and auto-regressive-moving-average (ARMA) phase noise.
Barletta, Magarini and Spalvieri \cite{BarlettaLB}
computed lower bounds on information rates for (\ref{eq:dt-pn-ch}) with Wiener phase noise
by using the auxiliary channel technique proposed in \cite{Arnold2006}
and they computed upper bounds in \cite{BarlettaUB}.
They also developed a lower bound based on Kalman filtering in \cite{Barletta2012KalmanLB}.
Barbieri and Colavolpe \cite{Barbieri2011}
computed lower bounds with an auxiliary channel slightly different from \cite{BarlettaLB}.
Capacity bounds are developed for a multi-input multi-output (MIMO) extension of
the discrete-time model (\ref{eq:dt-pn-ch}) in \cite{DurisiITA2013,DurisiCommTrans2014}.
A far less-studied model is the continuous-time model for phase noise channels,
also called a \emph{waveform} phase noise channel, see Fig. \ref{fig:waveform_basic}.
The received waveform $r(t)$ is
\begin{align}
r(t) = x(t) \ e^{j \theta(t)} + n(t),
\text{ for } t \in \mathbb{R}
\label{eq:waveform_ch_intro}
\end{align}
where $x(t)$ is the transmitted waveform
while $n(t)$ and $\theta(t)$ are additive noise and phase noise, respectively.
\begin{figure
\centering
\resizebox{ \ifdefined\twocolumnmode 0.85\columnwidth \else 0.6\textwidth \fi }{!}{\input{\TexFigPath waveform_ch_basic}}
\caption{Waveform phase noise channel.}
\label{fig:waveform_basic}
\end{figure}
Continuous-time \emph{white} phase noise was recently considered in \cite[Section IV.C]{Goebel2011} and \cite{LucaWhiteISIT2014, LucaWhiteCROWN2014}.
We study the waveform channel (\ref{eq:waveform_ch_intro}) with \emph{Wiener} phase noise.
A detailed description of the channel is given in Sec. \ref{sec:ct-model}.
This model is reasonable, for example, for optical fiber communication with low to intermediate power and laser phase noise,
see \cite{Foschini1988IT, Foschini1988Comm, FoschiniCom1989}.
Since the sampling of a continuous-time Wiener process yields a discrete-time Wiener process (Gaussian random walk),
it is tempting to use the model (\ref{eq:dt-pn-ch})
with $\{\Theta\}$ as a discrete-time Wiener process.
However, this ignores the effect of \emph{filtering} prior to sampling.
It was pointed out in \cite{Foschini1988IT} that
``even coherent systems relying on amplitude modulation
(phase noise is obviously a problem in systems employing phase modulation)
will suffer some degradation due to the presence of phase noise''.
This is because the filtering converts phase fluctuations to amplitude variations.
It is worth mentioning that filtering is necessary before sampling to limit the variance of the noise samples.
The model (\ref{eq:dt-pn-ch}) thus does not fit the channel (\ref{eq:waveform_ch_intro})
and it is not obvious whether a pre-log 1/2 is achievable.
The model that takes the effect of filtering into account is
\begin{align}
Y_k = \Xsymb{k} H_k + N_k
\label{eq:dt-noncoherent-fade}
\end{align}
where $\{H_k\}$ is a fading process.
The model (\ref{eq:dt-noncoherent-fade}) falls in the class of non-coherent fading channels,
i.e., the transmitter and receiver have knowledge of the distribution of the fading process $\{H_k\}$,
but have no knowledge of its realization.
For such channels, Lapidoth and Moser showed in \cite{Lapidoth2003} that,
at high SNR, the capacity grows \emph{double-logarithmically} with the SNR,
when the process $\{H_k\}$ is stationary, ergodic, and \emph{regular}.
Rather than using a filter and sampling its output at the symbol rate,
we use a multi-sample receiver, i.e., a filter whose output is sampled many times per symbol.
We show that this receiver achieves a rate that grows \emph{logarithmically} with the SNR
if the number of samples per symbol grows with the cubic root of the SNR.
Furthermore, we show that a pre-log of 1/2 is achievable through amplitude modulation.
We also show for an approximate multi-sample model that phase modulation contributes 1/4 to the pre-log factor at high SNR,
if the oversampling factor grows with the square root of SNR.
We corroborate the results of the high-SNR analysis with numerical simulations at finite SNR.
This paper collects and extends results presented in \cite{GhozlanISIT2013,GhozlanGLOBECOM2013,GhozlanISIT2014}.
Benefits of oversampling were reported for other problems.
For example, in some digital storage systems, it was shown by numerical simulations
that oversampling can increase the information rate
\cite{PighiOversampling2007}.
In a low-pass-filter-and-limiter (nonlinear) channel, it was found that oversampling
(with a factor of 2) offers a higher information rate
\cite{GilbertOversampling1993}.
It was demonstrated in \cite{KochOversamp2010} that doubling the sampling rate recovers some of the loss in capacity
incurred on the bandlimited Gaussian channel with a one-bit output quantizer.
For non-coherent block fading channels, it was shown in \cite{DorpinghausOversamp2014} that
by doubling the sampling rate the information rate grows logarithmically at high SNR with a pre-log $1-1/N$ rather than
$1-Q/N$ which is the pre-log achieved by sampling at symbol rate
($N$ is the length of the fading block and $Q$ is the rank of the covariance matrix of the discrete-time channel gains within each block).
This paper is organized as follows.
The continuous-time model is described in Sec. \ref{sec:ct-model}
and the discrete-time models of the matched filter receiver and the multi-sample receiver are described in Sec. \ref{sec:dt-models}.
We derive a lower bound on the capacity in Sec. \ref{sec:high-snr} based on amplitude modulation
and show that the pre-log factor is at least 1/2 if the oversampling factor grows with the cubic root of the SNR.
We develop algorithms to compute tight lower bounds on the information rates
of a multi-sample receiver in Sec. \ref{sec:lower-bound}.
In Sec. \ref{sec:num-sim}, we report the results of numerical simulations
which demonstrate the importance of increasing the oversampling factor with the SNR to achieve higher rates.
We derive a lower bound on the rate achieved by phase modulation for an approximate multi-sample discrete-time model in Sec. \ref{sec:ph-mod-approx}
and we show that phase modulation contributes at least 1/4 to the pre-log factor,
resulting in an overall pre-log factor of 3/4 when both amplitude and phase modulation are used.
This is achieved by using an oversampling factor tha grows with the square root of the SNR.
In Sec. \ref{sec:open}, we summarize our results and mention some open problems.
Finally, we conclude with Sec. \ref{sec:conc}.
\section{Waveform Phase Noise Channel}
\label{sec:ct-model}
We use the following notation:
$j=\sqrt{-1}$ ,
$^*$ denotes the complex conjugate,
$\delta_D$ is the Dirac delta function,
$\lceil \cdot \rceil$ is the ceiling operator.
We use $X^k$ as a shorthand for $(X_1,X_2,\ldots,X_k)$.
Suppose the transmit-waveform is $x(t)$ and
the receiver observes
\begin{align}
r(t) = x(t) \ e^{j \theta(t)} + n(t)
\label{eq:rx_waveform}
\end{align}
where $n(t)$ is a realization of a white circularly-symmetric complex Gaussian process $N(t)$ with
\begin{align}
&\mathbb{E}\left[ N(t) \right] = 0 \nonumber \\
&\mathbb{E}\left[ N(t_1) N^*(t_2) \right] = \sigma^2_N ~ \delta_D(t_2-t_1).
\label{eq:Nt_statistics}
\end{align}
The phase $\theta(t)$ is a realization of a Wiener process $\Theta(t)$:
\begin{align}
\Theta(t) = \Theta(0) + \int_0^t W(\tau) d\tau
\label{eq:Thetat}
\end{align}
where $\Theta(0)$ is uniform on $[-\pi,\pi)$ and
$W(t)$ is a real Gaussian process with
\begin{align}
&\mathbb{E}\left[ W(t) \right] = 0 \nonumber \\
&\mathbb{E}\left[ W(t_1) W(t_2)\right] = 2\pi \beta ~ \delta_D(t_2-t_1) .
\label{eq:Wt_statistics}
\end{align}
The processes $N(t)$ and $\Theta(t)$ are independent of each other and independent of the input.
$N_0 = 2 \sigma^2_N$ is the single-sided power spectral density of the additive noise.
We define
$U(t) \equiv \exp(j \Theta(t))$.
The auto-correlation function of $U(t)$ is
\begin{align}
R_U(t_1,t_2)
= \mathbb{E}\left[ U(t_1) U^*(t_2)\right]
= \exp\left(- \pi \beta |t_2-t_1| \right)
\end{align}
and the power spectral density of $U(t)$ is
\begin{align}
S_U(f)
= \int_{-\infty }^{\infty} R_U(t,t+\tau) \ e^{-j 2\pi f \tau} d\tau
= \frac{1}{\pi} \frac{\beta/2}{(\beta/2)^2+ f^2}.
\end{align}
The spectrum is said to have a Lorentzian shape.
We have
$\beta = f_{\text{FWHM}} = 2 f_{\text{HWHM}}$
where
$f_{\text{FWHM}}$ is the full-width at half-maximum
and
$f_{\text{HWHM}}$ is the half-width at half-maximum.
Let $T$ be the transmission interval, then
the transmitted waveforms must satisfy the power constraint
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}\left[\frac{1}{T} \int_0^{T} |X(t)|^2 dt \right] \leq \mathcal{P}
\label{eq:finitesupport_waveform_power_constraint}
\end{align}
where $X(t)$ is a random process whose realization is $x(t)$.
\section{Discrete-time Models}
\label{sec:dt-models}
\subsection{Transmitter}
Let $(\xsymb{1},\xsymb{2},\ldots,\xsymb{\nsymb})$
be the codeword sent by the transmitter.
Suppose the transmitter uses a unit-energy pulse $g(t)$ whose time support is $[0,\Ts]$
where $\Ts$ is the symbol interval (see Fig. \ref{fig:pulse-shaping-tx}).
\begin{figure
\centering
\resizebox{\ifdefined\twocolumnmode 0.5\columnwidth \else 0.33\textwidth \fi}{!}{\input{\TexFigPath tx_modulated_pulses}}
\caption{Transmitter: pulse-shaping filter.}
\label{fig:pulse-shaping-tx}
\end{figure}
The waveform sent by the transmitter is
\begin{align}
x(t) = \sum_{m=1}^{\nsymb} \xsymb{m} \ g(t-(m-1) \Ts).
\label{eq:xt_modulated_rect}
\end{align}
\subsection{Matched Filter Receiver}
\label{sec:dt-model-mf}
The received signal $r(t)$ is fed to a matched filter and
the output $y(t)$ of the filter is sampled at symbol rate (also called Baud rate) as illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:rx_matched_filter}.
\begin{figure
\centering
\resizebox{\ifdefined\twocolumnmode 1\columnwidth \else 0.6\textwidth \fi}{!}{\input{\TexFigPath rx_matched_filter}}
\caption{Matched filter receiver with symbol rate sampling.}
\label{fig:rx_matched_filter}
\end{figure}
The $k$-th output sample is
\begin{align}
y_k
&= r(t) \star g^*(\Ts-t) |_{t=k \Ts} \nonumber \\
&= \xsymb{k} \ \int_{- \infty}^{\infty} e^{j \theta(\tau)} ~ |g(\tau-(k-1) \Ts)|^2 d\tau + n_k
\end{align}
where $k=1,\ldots,\nsymb$, $\star$ denotes convolution
and $n_k$ is the part of the output due to the additive noise.
Therefore, we have the discrete-time model
\begin{align}
Y_k = \Xsymb{k} H_k + N_k
\label{eq:dt-mfrx-full}
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
H_k \equiv \int_{- \infty}^{\infty} e^{j \theta(\tau)} ~ |g(\tau-(k-1) \Ts)|^2 d\tau.
\label{eq:Hk}
\end{align}
The transmitter and receiver know the distribution of the fading process $\{H_k\}$
but have no knowledge of its realization.
For this model, Lapidoth and Moser showed in \cite{Lapidoth2003} that,
at high SNR, the capacity grows \emph{double-logarithmically} with the SNR
when the process $\{H_k\}$ is stationary, ergodic, and \emph{regular}.
A commonly-used approximation for $H_k$ is
\ifdefined\twocolumnmode{
\begin{align*}
&\int_{- \infty}^{\infty} e^{j \theta(\tau)} ~ |g(\tau-(k-1) \Ts)|^2 d\tau \\
&\approx
e^{j \theta(k\Ts)} \int_{- \infty}^{\infty} |g(\tau-(k-1) \Ts)|^2 d\tau
\end{align*}
}\else{
\begin{align*}
\int_{- \infty}^{\infty} e^{j \theta(\tau)} ~ |g(\tau-(k-1) \Ts)|^2 d\tau
\approx
e^{j \theta(k\Ts)} \int_{- \infty}^{\infty} |g(\tau-(k-1) \Ts)|^2 d\tau
\end{align*}
}\fi
which yields the approximate discrete-time model
\begin{align}
Y_k = \Xsymb{k} ~ e^{j \theta(k \Ts)} + N_k.
\label{eq:dt-mfrx-approx}
\end{align}
\subsection{Multi-sample Receiver}
\label{sec:dt-model-multisample}
Consider next a multi-sample receiver (see Fig. \ref{fig:rx_oversamp}).
Let $L$ be the number of samples per symbol ($L \geq 1$)
and define the sample interval as
\begin{align}
\Delta = \frac{\Ts}{L}.
\label{eq:Delta_def}
\end{align}
The received waveform $r(t)$ is filtered using an integrator over a sample interval to give the output signal
\begin{align}
y(t)
&= \int_{t - \Delta}^{t} r(\tau) \ d\tau.
\label{eq:yt}
\end{align}
The signal $y(t)$ is a realization of a random process $Y(t)$ that
is sampled at $t = k \Delta$,
$k = 1, \ldots, \nsamp = \nsymb L$.
\begin{figure
\centering
\resizebox{\ifdefined\twocolumnmode 1\columnwidth \else 0.6\textwidth \fi}{!}{\input{\TexFigPath rx_oversamp}}
\caption{Multi-sample receiver.}
\label{fig:rx_oversamp}
\end{figure}
Hence, we have the discrete-time model in which the $k$-th output sample is
\begin{align}
Y_k = \Xsymb{\lceil k/L \rceil} \Delta \ e^{j \Theta_k} \ F_k + N_k
\label{eq:Yk}
\end{align}
where
$Y_k \equiv Y(k \Delta)$,
$\Theta_k \equiv \Theta( (k-1) \Delta )$,
\begin{align}
F_k \equiv \frac{1}{\Delta} \int_{(k-1) \Delta}^{k \Delta}
g\left(\tau-\left(\left\lceil\frac{k}{L}\right\rceil -1\right) \Ts\right)
e^{j(\Theta(\tau)-\Theta_k)} \ d\tau
\label{eq:Fk_def_tlim}
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
N_k
&\equiv \int_{(k-1) \Delta}^{k \Delta} N(\tau) \ d\tau.
\label{eq:Nk_def}
\end{align}
The process $\{N_k\}$ is an i.i.d. circularly-symmetric complex Gaussian process with
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}[ N_k] &= 0
\label{eq:N_mean}
\\
\mathbb{E}[ N_k N_\ell^* ] &= \sigma^2_N \Delta \ \delta_K[\ell-k]
\label{eq:N_covar}
\\
\mathbb{E}[ N_k N_\ell ] &= 0
\label{eq:N_pseudocovar}
\end{align}
where $\delta_K[\cdot]$ is the Kronecker delta.
The process $\{\Theta_k\}$ is the discrete-time Wiener process:
\begin{align}
\Theta_k = \Theta_{k-1} + W_k
\end{align}
for $k = 2, \ldots, n$,
where
$\Theta_1$ is uniform on $[-\pi,\pi)$ and
$\{W_k\}$ is an i.i.d. real Gaussian process with mean $0$ and $\mathbb{E}[ |W_k|^2 ] = 2\pi \beta \Delta$, i.e.,
the probability density function (pdf) of $W_k$ is $p_{W_k}(w) = G(w;0,\sigma^2_W)$ where
\begin{align}
G(w;\mu,\sigma^2) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi \sigma^2}} \exp\left( - \frac{(w-\mu)^2}{2 \sigma^2} \right)
\end{align}
and $\sigma^2_W = 2 \pi \beta \Delta$.
The random variable $(W_k \mod 2\pi)$ is a \emph{wrapped Gaussian} and its pdf is
\begin{align}
p_{W}(w;\sigma^2) = \sum_{i=-\infty}^{\infty} G(w-2 i \pi;0,\sigma^2).
\end{align}
Moreover, $\{F_k\}$ and $\{W_k\}$ are independent of $\{N_k\}$ but not independent of each other.
Equations (\ref{eq:finitesupport_waveform_power_constraint}) and (\ref{eq:xt_modulated_rect})
imply the power constraint
\begin{align}
\frac{1}{\nsymb} \sum_{m=1}^{\nsymb} \mathbb{E}[|\Xsymb{m}|^2] \leq P \equiv \mathcal{P} \Ts.
\label{eq:dt_power_constraint}
\end{align}
The signal-to-noise ratio $\textsf{SNR}$ is defined as
\begin{align}
\textsf{SNR} \equiv \frac{P}{\sigma^2_N \Ts} = \frac{\mathcal{P}}{\sigma^2_N}.
\end{align}
\section{High SNR}
\label{sec:high-snr}
In this section, we study rectangular pulses, i.e., we consider
\begin{align}
g(t) \equiv \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\sqrt{1/\Ts}, & 0 \leq t <\Ts, \\
0, & \text{otherwise}.
\end{array}
\right.
\label{eq:rect_pulse_def}
\end{align}
It follows that $F_k$ in (\ref{eq:Fk_def_tlim}) becomes
\begin{align}
F_k \equiv \frac{1}{\Delta} \int_{(k-1) \Delta}^{k \Delta} e^{j(\Theta(\tau)-\Theta_k)} \ d\tau.
\label{eq:Fk_def}
\end{align}
The process $\{F_k\}$ is i.i.d. (see Appendix A.1).
For the $k$th input symbol, we have $L$ outputs,
so it is convenient to group the $L$ samples per symbol in one vector
\begin{align} \textbf{Y}_k \equiv (Y_{(k-1) L + 1},Y_{(k-1) L + 2},\ldots,Y_{(k-1) L + L}). \label{eq:Yveck_def} \end{align}
We use $\textbf{Y}^k$ as a shorthand for $(\textbf{Y}_1,\textbf{Y}_2,\ldots,\textbf{Y}_k)$.
The capacity of a point-to-point channel is given by
\begin{align}
C(\textsf{SNR}) = \lim_{\nsymb \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{\nsymb} \sup I(X^\nsymb;\textbf{Y}^\nsymb)
\label{eq:capacity-def}
\end{align}
where the supremum is over all joint distributions
of the input symbols satisfying the power constraint.
For a given input distribution, the achievable rate $R$ is
\begin{align}
R(\textsf{SNR}) = I(X;\textbf{Y}) \equiv \lim_{\nsymb \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{\nsymb} I(X^\nsymb;\textbf{Y}^\nsymb).
\label{eq:I_X_Y-def}
\end{align}
We define $X_A \equiv |X|$ and $\Phi_X \equiv \angle X$
where $\angle$ denotes the phase angle (also called the argument) of a complex number.
We decompose the mutual information using the chain rule into two parts:
\begin{align}
I(X^\nsymb;\textbf{Y}^\nsymb)
&= I(X_{A}^\nsymb;\textbf{Y}^\nsymb) + I(\Phi_X^\nsymb;\textbf{Y}^\nsymb|X_{A}^\nsymb).
\label{eq:I_X1n_Y1n}
\end{align}
Define
\begin{align}
I(X_{A};\textbf{Y})
&\equiv \lim_{\nsymb \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{\nsymb} I(X_{A}^\nsymb;\textbf{Y}^\nsymb)
\label{eq:I_XA_Y-def}
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
I(\Phi_{X};\textbf{Y}|X_{A})
&\equiv \lim_{\nsymb \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{\nsymb} I(\Phi_{X}^\nsymb;\textbf{Y}^\nsymb|X_{A}^\nsymb) .
\label{eq:I_PhiX_Y|XA-def}
\end{align}
It follows from (\ref{eq:I_X_Y-def})--(\ref{eq:I_PhiX_Y|XA-def}) that
\begin{align}
I(X;\textbf{Y}) = I(X_A;\textbf{Y}) + I(\Phi_{X};\textbf{Y}|X_{A}) .
\label{eq:I_X_Y}
\end{align}
The first term represents the contribution of the amplitude modulation while
the second term represents the contribution of the phase modulation.
\subsection{Amplitude Modulation}
\label{sec:amplitude-lower-bound}
Consider first the contribution of amplitude modulation.
Suppose that $X_{A}^\nsymb$ is i.i.d.
so that
\begin{align}
I(X_{A}^\nsymb;\textbf{Y}^\nsymb)
&\stackrel{(a)}{=} \sum_{k=1}^\nsymb I(X_{A,k};\textbf{Y}^\nsymb|X_{A}^{k-1}) \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(b)}{=} \sum_{k=1}^\nsymb H(X_{A,k}) - H(X_{A,k}|\textbf{Y}^\nsymb ~ X_{A}^{k-1}) \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(c)}{\geq} \sum_{k=1}^\nsymb I(X_{A,k};\textbf{Y}_k) \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(d)}{\geq} \sum_{k=1}^\nsymb I(X_{A,k};V_k)
\label{eq:I_XA1n_Y1n_LB}
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
V_k = \sum_{\ell=1}^L |Y_{(k-1)L+\ell}|^2.
\label{eq:V_def}
\end{align}
Step
$(a)$ follows from the chain rule of mutual information,
$(b)$ follows from the independence of $X_{A,1},X_{A,2},\ldots,X_{A,n}$,
$(c)$ holds because conditioning does not increase entropy, and
$(d)$ follows from the data processing inequality.
Since $X_{A}^\nsymb$ is identically distributed, then $V^\nsymb$ is also identically distributed and
we have, for $k \geq 2$,
\begin{align}
I(X_{A,k};V_k) = I(X_{A,1};V_1).
\label{eq:I_XAk_Vk}
\end{align}
In the rest of this section, we consider only one symbol ($k=1$) and drop the time index.
Moreover, we set $\Ts=1$ for simplicity.
By combining (\ref{eq:V_def}) and (\ref{eq:Yk}), we have
\begin{align}
V
&= \sum_{\ell=1}^L \left( X_A^2 \Delta^2 |F_\ell|^2 + 2 X_A \Delta \Re[ e^{j \Phi_X} e^{j \Theta_\ell} F_\ell N_\ell^* ] + |N_\ell|^2 \right) \nonumber \\
&= X_A^2 \Delta G+ 2 X_A \Delta Z_1 + Z_0
\label{eq:V_direct}
\end{align}
where $G$, $Z_1$ and $Z_0$ are defined as
\begin{align}
G &\equiv \frac{1}{L} \sum_{\ell=1}^L |F_\ell|^2
\label{eq:G_def} \\
Z_1 &\equiv \sum_{\ell=1}^L \Re[ e^{j \Phi_X} e^{j \Theta_\ell} F_\ell N_\ell^* ]
\label{eq:Z1_def} \\
Z_0 &\equiv \sum_{\ell=1}^L |N_\ell|^2.
\label{eq:Z0_def}
\end{align}
The second-order statistics of $Z_1$ and $Z_0$ are (see Appendix A.2)
\begin{align}
\begin{array}{ll}
\mathbb{E}[ Z_1 ] = 0 & \textsf{Var}[ Z_1 ] = \mathbb{E}[G] {\sigma^2_N}/{2} \\
\mathbb{E}[ Z_0 ] = \sigma^2_N & \textsf{Var}\left[ Z_0 \right] = \sigma^4_N \Delta \\
\mathbb{E}\left[ Z_1 (Z_0-\mathbb{E}[Z_0]) \right] = 0.
\end{array}
\label{eq:second-order-stats}
\end{align}
By using the Auxiliary-Channel Lower Bound Theorem in \cite[Sec. VI]{Arnold2006}, we have
\begin{align}
I(X_A;V)
&\geq \mathbb{E}[-\log{q_V(V)}] - \mathbb{E}[-\log{q_{V|X_A}(V|X_A)}]
\label{eq:I_XA_V_LB_AuxCh}
\end{align}
where $q_{V|X_A}(v|x_A)$ is an arbitrary auxiliary channel and
\begin{align}
q_V(v) = \int p_{X_A}(x_A) q_{V|X_A}(v|x_A) dx_A
\label{eq:QV_def}
\end{align}
where $p_{X_A}(\cdot)$ is the \emph{true} input pdf,
i.e.,
$q_V(\cdot)$ is the output pdf obtained by connecting the true input source to the auxiliary channel.
Note that $\mathbb{E}[\cdot]$ is the expectation according to the \emph{true} distribution of $X_A$ and $V$.
We point out that any auxiliary channel gives a valid lower bound;
the ``closer'' the auxiliary channel is to the true channel, the tighter the lower bound.
We choose the auxiliary channel
\begin{align}
V^{\textsf{auxiliary}}
&= X_A^2 \Delta \tilde{G} + 2 X_A \Delta \tilde{Z}_1 + \tilde{Z}_0
\label{eq:V_auxiliary}
\end{align}
where $\tilde{G}$, $\tilde{Z}_1$ and $\tilde{Z}_0$ are defined as
\begin{align}
\tilde{G} &\equiv 1
\label{eq:Gtilde_def} \\
\tilde{Z}_1 &\equiv \sum_{\ell=1}^L \Re[ e^{j \Phi_X} e^{j \Theta_\ell} N_\ell^* ]
\label{eq:Z1tilde_def} \\
\tilde{Z}_0 &\equiv \sigma_N^2.
\label{eq:Z0tilde_def}
\end{align}
We make a few remarks to motivate our choice of the auxiliary channel:
\begin{itemize}
\item $G$ converges to 1 (in mean square) as $L \rightarrow \infty$ (see (\ref{eq:lim_E(G-1)2}) in Appendix A.4).
\item Since $N_\ell$ is circularly-symmetric complex Gaussian,
then $e^{j \Phi_X} e^{j \Theta_\ell} N_\ell^*$ is also circularly-symmetric complex Gaussian with the same variance of $N_\ell$.
It follows that $\tilde{Z}_1$ is Gaussian since it is a linear combination of Gaussian random variables.
More specifically, the random variable $\tilde{Z}_1$ is Gaussian with mean zero and variance $\sigma_N^2/2$.
In addition, $Z_1$ converges to $\tilde{Z}_1$ (in mean square) as $L \rightarrow \infty$.
This can be shown by computing (using steps similar to (\ref{eq:EZ12}) in Appendix A.2)
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}\left[ |Z_1-\tilde{Z}_1|^2 \right] = \frac{1}{2} \sigma^2_N \Delta L ~ \mathbb{E}[|F_1-1|^2]
\end{align}
and using (\ref{eq:limit_E(F-1)2}) in Appendix A.3 to get
\begin{align}
\lim_{L \rightarrow \infty} \mathbb{E}\left[ |Z_1-\tilde{Z}_1|^2 \right]
= \frac{1}{2} \sigma^2_N ~ \lim_{a \rightarrow 1} \mathbb{E}[|F_1-1|^2]
= 0.
\end{align}
\item $Z_0$ converges to $\sigma_N^2$ (in mean square) as $L \rightarrow \infty$.
This follows directly by taking the limit of $\textsf{Var}(Z_0)$ given in (\ref{eq:second-order-stats}):
\begin{align}
\lim_{L \rightarrow \infty} \mathbb{E}\left[ (Z_0-\sigma_N^2)^2 \right]
= \lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} \sigma_N^4 \Delta
= 0.
\end{align}
\end{itemize}
In summary, the conditional distribution $q_{V|X_A}$ of the auxiliary channel is
\begin{align}
q_{V|X_A}(v|x_A)
= \frac{1}{\sqrt{4 \pi x_A^2 \Delta^2 \sigma^2_N}}
\exp\left(- \frac{(v-x_A^2 \Delta - \sigma^2_N)^2}{4 x_A^2 \Delta^2 \sigma^2_N} \right).
\label{eq:Q_V|XA}
\end{align}
It follows that
\ifdefined\twocolumnmode{
\begin{align}
&\mathbb{E}[ -\log( q_{V|X_A}(V|X_A) ) ]
= \mathbb{E}\left[ \frac{(V-X_A^2 \Delta - \sigma^2_N)^2}{4 X_A^2 \Delta^2 \sigma^2_N} \right] \nonumber \\& \qquad \qquad
+ \log{\Delta}
+ \frac{1}{2} \log(4 \pi\sigma^2_N)
+ \frac{1}{2} \mathbb{E}[ \log(X_A^2) ].
\label{eq:log_Q_V|XA_original}
\end{align}
}\else{
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}[ -\log( q_{V|X_A}(V|X_A) ) ]
= \mathbb{E}\left[ \frac{(V-X_A^2 \Delta - \sigma^2_N)^2}{4 X_A^2 \Delta^2 \sigma^2_N} \right]
+ \log{\Delta}
+ \frac{1}{2} \log(4 \pi\sigma^2_N)
+ \frac{1}{2} \mathbb{E}[ \log(X_A^2) ].
\label{eq:log_Q_V|XA_original}
\end{align}
}\fi
By using (\ref{eq:V_direct}), we have
\ifdefined\twocolumnmode{
\begin{align}
&\left( V-X_A^2 \Delta - \sigma^2_N \right)^2 \nonumber\\
&= \left( X_A^2 \Delta (G-1) + 2 X_A \Delta Z_1 + (Z_0-\sigma^2_N) \right)^2 \nonumber\\
&=X_A^4 \Delta^2 (G-1)^2
+ 4 X_A^2 \Delta^2 Z_1^2
+ (Z_0-\sigma^2_N)^2 \nonumber\\&
+ 4 X_A^3 \Delta^2 (G-1) Z_1
+ 2 X_A^2 \Delta (G-1) (Z_0-\sigma^2_N) \nonumber \\&
+ 4 X_A \Delta Z_1 (Z_0-\sigma^2_N)
\end{align}
}\else{
\begin{align}
\left( V-X_A^2 \Delta - \sigma^2_N \right)^2
&= \left( X_A^2 \Delta (G-1) + 2 X_A \Delta Z_1 + (Z_0-\sigma^2_N) \right)^2 \nonumber\\
&=X_A^4 \Delta^2 (G-1)^2
+ 4 X_A^2 \Delta^2 Z_1^2
+ (Z_0-\sigma^2_N)^2
+ 4 X_A^3 \Delta^2 (G-1) Z_1
+ 2 X_A^2 \Delta (G-1) (Z_0-\sigma^2_N) \nonumber \\&
+ 4 X_A \Delta Z_1 (Z_0-\sigma^2_N)
\end{align}
}\fi
and hence, by using (\ref{eq:second-order-stats}), we have
\ifdefined\twocolumnmode{
\begin{align}
&\mathbb{E}\left[ \frac{(V-X_A^2 \Delta - \sigma^2_N)^2}{4 X_A^2 \Delta^2 \sigma^2_N} \right] \nonumber\\
&=\frac{1}{4 \sigma^2_N} \mathbb{E}[ X_A^2 ] \mathbb{E}\left[ (G-1)^2 \right]
+ \frac{1}{ \sigma^2_N} \mathbb{E}[ Z_1^2 ] \nonumber\\&
+ \frac{1}{4 \Delta^2 \sigma^2_N} \mathbb{E}\left[ \frac{1}{X_A^2} \right] \mathbb{E}\left[ (Z_0-\sigma^2_N)^2 \right]
+ \frac{1}{ \sigma^2_N} \mathbb{E}[X_A] \mathbb{E}\left[ (G-1) Z_1 \right] \nonumber\\&
+ \frac{1}{2 \Delta \sigma^2_N} \mathbb{E}[G-1] \mathbb{E}[Z_0-\sigma^2_N]
+ \frac{1}{ \Delta \sigma^2_N} \mathbb{E}\left[ \frac{1}{X_A}\right] \mathbb{E}\left[ Z_1 (Z_0-\sigma^2_N) \right] \nonumber \\
&=\frac{1}{4 \sigma^2_N} P \ \mathbb{E}\left[ (G-1)^2 \right]
+ \frac{1}{2} \mathbb{E}[G]
+ \frac{\sigma^2_N}{4 \Delta} \mathbb{E}\left[ \frac{1}{X_A^2} \right]
\label{eq:big_expectation}
\end{align}
}\else{
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}\left[ \frac{(V-X_A^2 \Delta - \sigma^2_N)^2}{4 X_A^2 \Delta^2 \sigma^2_N} \right]
&=\frac{1}{4 \sigma^2_N} \mathbb{E}[ X_A^2 ] \mathbb{E}\left[ (G-1)^2 \right]
+ \frac{1}{ \sigma^2_N} \mathbb{E}[ Z_1^2 ]
+ \frac{1}{4 \Delta^2 \sigma^2_N} \mathbb{E}\left[ \frac{1}{X_A^2} \right] \mathbb{E}\left[ (Z_0-\sigma^2_N)^2 \right] \nonumber\\&
+ \frac{1}{ \sigma^2_N} \mathbb{E}[X_A] \mathbb{E}\left[ (G-1) Z_1 \right]
+ \frac{1}{2 \Delta \sigma^2_N} \mathbb{E}[G-1] \mathbb{E}[Z_0-\sigma^2_N]
+ \frac{1}{ \Delta \sigma^2_N} \mathbb{E}\left[ \frac{1}{X_A}\right] \mathbb{E}\left[ Z_1 (Z_0-\sigma^2_N) \right] \nonumber \\
&=\frac{1}{4 \sigma^2_N} P \ \mathbb{E}\left[ (G-1)^2 \right]
+ \frac{1}{2} \mathbb{E}[G]
+ \frac{\sigma^2_N}{4 \Delta} \mathbb{E}\left[ \frac{1}{X_A^2} \right]
\label{eq:big_expectation}
\end{align}
}\fi
where we also used (see Appendix A.2)
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}\left[ (G - 1) Z_1 \right] = 0.
\end{align}
Substituting (\ref{eq:big_expectation}) into (\ref{eq:log_Q_V|XA_original}) and using $\mathbb{E}[G] \leq 1$ yield
\ifdefined\twocolumnmode{
\begin{align}
&\mathbb{E}[ -\log( q_{V|X_A}(V|X_A) ) ] \nonumber \\
&\leq \log{\Delta}
+ \frac{1}{2} \log(4 \pi\sigma^2_N)
+ \frac{1}{2} \mathbb{E}[ \log(X_A^2) ] \nonumber \\&
+ \frac{P}{4 \sigma^2_N} \mathbb{E}\left[ (G-1)^2 \right] + \frac{1}{2} + \frac{\sigma^2_N}{4 \Delta} \mathbb{E}\left[ \frac{1}{X_A^2} \right].
\label{eq:log_Q_V|XA}
\end{align}
}\else{
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}[ -\log( q_{V|X_A}(V|X_A) ) ]
&\leq \log{\Delta}
+ \frac{1}{2} \log(4 \pi\sigma^2_N)
+ \frac{1}{2} \mathbb{E}[ \log(X_A^2) ]
+ \frac{P}{4 \sigma^2_N} \mathbb{E}\left[ (G-1)^2 \right] + \frac{1}{2} + \frac{\sigma^2_N}{4 \Delta} \mathbb{E}\left[ \frac{1}{X_A^2} \right].
\label{eq:log_Q_V|XA}
\end{align}
}\fi
It is convenient to define $X_P \equiv X_A^2$.
We choose the input distribution
\begin{align}
p_{X_P}(x_P) = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\frac{1}{\lambda} \exp\left(-\frac{x_P-P_{\min}}{\lambda}\right), & x_P \geq P_{\min} \\
0, & \text{otherwise}
\end{array}
\right.
\label{eq:P_XP}
\end{align}
where $0 < P_{\min} < P$ and $\lambda = P - P_{\min}$,
so that
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}[X_P] = \mathbb{E}[X_A^2] = P.
\label{eq:E_XP}
\end{align}
It follows from (\ref{eq:QV_def}) and (\ref{eq:P_XP}) that
\begin{align}
q_V(v)
&= \int_{P_{\min}}^\infty \frac{1}{\lambda} \exp\left(-\frac{x_P-P_{\min}}{\lambda}\right) ~ q_{V|X_P}(v|x_P) ~ dx_P \nonumber \\
&\leq \exp( P_{\min}/\lambda ) ~ F_{V}(v)
\label{eq:QV_FV_ineq}
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
q_{V|X_P}(v|x_P) = q_{V|X_A}(v|\sqrt{x_P})
\label{eq:Q_V|XP}
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
f_V(v)
&\equiv \int_{0}^\infty \frac{1}{\lambda} \exp\left(-\frac{x_P}{\lambda}\right) \ q_{V|X_P}(v|x_P) dx_P.
\label{eq:F_V_def}
\end{align}
The inequality (\ref{eq:QV_FV_ineq}) follows from the non-negativity of the integrand.
By combining (\ref{eq:Q_V|XA}), (\ref{eq:Q_V|XP}), (\ref{eq:F_V_def}) and making the change of variables $x=x_P \Delta$, we have
\ifdefined\twocolumnmode{
\begin{align}
&f_V(v) \nonumber\\
&= \int_0^\infty \frac{e^{-{x}/(\lambda \Delta)}}{\lambda \Delta}
\frac{1}{\sqrt{4 \pi x \Delta \sigma^2_N}} \exp\left(- \frac{(v-x - \sigma^2_N)^2}{4 x \Delta \sigma^2_N} \right) dx \nonumber \\
&= \frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda \Delta (\lambda \Delta + 4 \Delta \sigma^2_N)}} ~\times \nonumber\\& \quad
\exp\left( \frac{2}{4 \Delta \sigma^2_N} \left[ v-\sigma^2_N - |v-\sigma^2_N| \sqrt{1+\frac{4 \Delta \sigma^2_N}{\lambda \Delta}} \right] \right)
\label{eq:F_V}
\end{align}
}\else{
\begin{align}
f_V(v)
&= \int_0^\infty \frac{e^{-{x}/(\lambda \Delta)}}{\lambda \Delta}
\frac{1}{\sqrt{4 \pi x \Delta \sigma^2_N}} \exp\left(- \frac{(v-x - \sigma^2_N)^2}{4 x \Delta \sigma^2_N} \right) dx \nonumber \\
&= \frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda \Delta (\lambda \Delta + 4 \Delta \sigma^2_N)}} ~
\exp\left( \frac{2}{4 \Delta \sigma^2_N} \left[ v-\sigma^2_N - |v-\sigma^2_N| \sqrt{1+\frac{4 \Delta \sigma^2_N}{\lambda \Delta}} \right] \right)
\label{eq:F_V}
\end{align}
}\fi
where we used equation (140) in Appendix A of \cite{Moser2012}:
\begin{align}
&\int_0^\infty \frac{1}{a} \exp\left(-\frac{x}{a}\right)
\frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi b x}} \exp\left(- \frac{(u-x)^2}{b x} \right) dx \nonumber\\&
= \frac{1}{\sqrt{a (a + b)}}
\exp\left( \frac{2}{b} \left[ u - |u| \sqrt{1+\frac{b}{a}} \right] \right).
\end{align}
Therefore, we have
\ifdefined\twocolumnmode{
\begin{align}
&\mathbb{E}[ -\log( f_V(V) ) ] \nonumber\\
&= \frac{1}{2} \log(\Delta^2 (\lambda^2 + 4 \lambda \sigma^2_N)) \nonumber \\&
- \frac{1}{2 \Delta \sigma^2_N} \left[ \mathbb{E}[V-\sigma^2_N] - \mathbb{E}[|V-\sigma^2_N|] \sqrt{1+\frac{4 \sigma^2_N}{\lambda}} \right] \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(a)}{\geq} \log(\Delta \lambda) +
\frac{1}{2 \sigma^2_N \Delta} \mathbb{E}[V-\sigma^2_N] \left[ \sqrt{1+\frac{4 \sigma^2_N}{\lambda}} - 1 \right] \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(b)}{\geq} \log(\Delta \lambda)
\label{eq:log_F_V}
\end{align}
}\else{
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}[ -\log( f_V(V) ) ]
&= \frac{1}{2} \log(\Delta^2 (\lambda^2 + 4 \lambda \sigma^2_N))
- \frac{1}{2 \Delta \sigma^2_N} \left[ \mathbb{E}[V-\sigma^2_N] - \mathbb{E}[|V-\sigma^2_N|] \sqrt{1+\frac{4 \sigma^2_N}{\lambda}} \right] \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(a)}{\geq} \log(\Delta \lambda) +
\frac{1}{2 \sigma^2_N \Delta} \mathbb{E}[V-\sigma^2_N] \left[ \sqrt{1+\frac{4 \sigma^2_N}{\lambda}} - 1 \right] \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(b)}{\geq} \log(\Delta \lambda)
\label{eq:log_F_V}
\end{align}
}\fi
where
$(a)$ holds because the logarithmic function is monotonic and $\mathbb{E}[| \cdot |] \geq \mathbb{E}[ \cdot ]$, and
$(b)$ holds because
\begin{align}
&\mathbb{E}[V-\sigma^2_N] \nonumber \\
&= \mathbb{E}[X_A^2] \Delta \mathbb{E}[G] + 2 \mathbb{E}[X_A] \Delta \mathbb{E}[Z_1] + \mathbb{E}[Z_0] - \sigma^2_N \nonumber \\
&= P \Delta \mathbb{E}[G] \geq 0.
\end{align}
The monotonicity of the logarithmic function and (\ref{eq:QV_FV_ineq}) yield
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}[ -\log( q_{V}(V) ) ]
&\geq \mathbb{E}\left[ -\log\left( e^{P_{\min}/\lambda} f_V(V) \right) \right] \nonumber \\
&\geq \log{\Delta} + \log{\lambda}
- \frac{P_{\min}}{\lambda}
\label{eq:log_Q_V}
\end{align}
where the last inequality follows from (\ref{eq:log_F_V}).
It follows from (\ref{eq:I_XA_V_LB_AuxCh}), (\ref{eq:log_Q_V|XA}) and (\ref{eq:log_Q_V}) that
\ifdefined\twocolumnmode{
\begin{align}
I(X_A;V)
&\geq
\log{\lambda}
- \frac{P_{\min}}{\lambda}
- \frac{1}{2} \log(4 \pi\sigma^2_N)
- \frac{1}{2} \mathbb{E}[ \log(X_A^2) ] \nonumber \\&
- \frac{P}{4 \sigma^2_N} \mathbb{E}\left[ (G-1)^2 \right] - \frac{1}{2} - \frac{\sigma^2_N}{4 \Delta} \mathbb{E}\left[ \frac{1}{X_A^2} \right].
\label{eq:I_XA_V_LB}
\end{align}
}\else{
\begin{align}
I(X_A;V)
&\geq
\log{\lambda}
- \frac{P_{\min}}{\lambda}
- \frac{1}{2} \log(4 \pi\sigma^2_N)
- \frac{1}{2} \mathbb{E}[ \log(X_A^2) ]
- \frac{P}{4 \sigma^2_N} \mathbb{E}\left[ (G-1)^2 \right] - \frac{1}{2} - \frac{\sigma^2_N}{4 \Delta} \mathbb{E}\left[ \frac{1}{X_A^2} \right].
\label{eq:I_XA_V_LB}
\end{align}
}\fi
If $P_{\min} = P/2$, then $\lambda = P - P_{\min} = P/2$ and we have
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}\left[ \frac{1}{X_P} \right]
\leq \frac{1}{P_{\min}}
= \frac{2}{P}
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}\left[ \log\left( X_P \right) \right]
&= \int_{\lambda}^\infty \frac{1}{\lambda} e^{-(x-\lambda)/\lambda} \log(x) dx \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(a)}{=} \log\lambda + \int_{1}^\infty e^{-(u-1)} \log(u) du \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(b)}{\leq} \log\lambda + 1
\end{align}
where
$(a)$ follows by the change of variables $u = x/\lambda$, and
$(b)$ holds because $\log(u) \leq u-1$ for all $u > 0$.
Substituting into (\ref{eq:I_XA_V_LB}), we obtain
\ifdefined\twocolumnmode{
\begin{align}
I(X_A;V) - \frac{1}{2} \log{\textsf{SNR}}
&\geq - 2 - \frac{1}{2} \log(8 \pi)
- \frac{1}{2 \textsf{SNR} \Delta} \nonumber\\&
- \frac{1}{4} \textsf{SNR} ~ \mathbb{E}\left[ (G-1)^2 \right].
\label{eq:I_XA_V_LB_AuxCh_final}
\end{align}
}\else{
\begin{align}
I(X_A;V) - \frac{1}{2} \log{\textsf{SNR}}
&\geq - 2 - \frac{1}{2} \log(8 \pi)
- \frac{1}{2 \textsf{SNR} \Delta}
- \frac{1}{4} \textsf{SNR} ~ \mathbb{E}\left[ (G-1)^2 \right].
\label{eq:I_XA_V_LB_AuxCh_final}
\end{align}
}\fi
By combining (\ref{eq:I_XA_Y-def}), (\ref{eq:I_XA1n_Y1n_LB}), (\ref{eq:I_XAk_Vk}) and (\ref{eq:I_XA_V_LB_AuxCh_final}), we have
\ifdefined\twocolumnmode{
\begin{align}
I(X_A;\textbf{Y}) - \frac{1}{2} \log{\textsf{SNR}}
&\geq - 2 - \frac{1}{2} \log(8 \pi)
- \frac{1}{2 \textsf{SNR} \Delta} \nonumber\\&
- \frac{1}{4} \textsf{SNR} ~ \mathbb{E}\left[ (G-1)^2 \right].
\label{eq:I_XA_Y_LB}
\end{align}
}\else{
\begin{align}
I(X_A;\textbf{Y}) - \frac{1}{2} \log{\textsf{SNR}}
&\geq - 2 - \frac{1}{2} \log(8 \pi)
- \frac{1}{2 \textsf{SNR} \Delta}
- \frac{1}{4} \textsf{SNR} ~ \mathbb{E}\left[ (G-1)^2 \right].
\label{eq:I_XA_Y_LB}
\end{align}
}\fi
Suppose $L$
grows with $\textsf{SNR}$ such that
\begin{align}
L = \left\lceil \beta \sqrt{\textsf{SNR}} \right\rceil.
\label{eq:L_sqrtsnr}
\end{align}
Since $\Delta = 1/L$, then we have
\begin{align}
\lim_{\textsf{SNR} \rightarrow \infty} {\textsf{SNR} \Delta} = \infty
\text{ and }
\lim_{\textsf{SNR} \rightarrow \infty} \textsf{SNR} \Delta^2 = \frac{1}{\beta^2}
\end{align}
which implies
\begin{align}
\lim_{\textsf{SNR} \rightarrow \infty} \left[ I(X_A;\textbf{Y}) - \frac{1}{2} \log{\textsf{SNR}} \right]
&\geq - 2 - \frac{1}{2} \log(8 \pi)
- \frac{\pi^2}{36}
\label{eq:I_XA_Y_LB_limit}
\end{align}
because
\ifdefined\twocolumnmode{
\begin{align}
&\lim_{\textsf{SNR} \rightarrow \infty} \textsf{SNR} ~ \mathbb{E}\left[ (G-1)^2 \right] \nonumber\\&
= \lim_{\textsf{SNR} \rightarrow \infty} \textsf{SNR} \Delta^2
\cdot
\lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} \frac{\mathbb{E}[ \left(G - 1 \right)^2 ]}{\Delta^2} \nonumber\\&
= \frac{1}{\beta^2} \cdot \frac{(\pi\beta)^2}{9}
= \frac{\pi^2}{9}.
\end{align}
}\else{
\begin{align}
\lim_{\textsf{SNR} \rightarrow \infty} \textsf{SNR} ~ \mathbb{E}\left[ (G-1)^2 \right]
= \lim_{\textsf{SNR} \rightarrow \infty} \textsf{SNR} \Delta^2
\cdot
\lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} \frac{\mathbb{E}[ \left(G - 1 \right)^2 ]}{\Delta^2}
= \frac{1}{\beta^2} \cdot \frac{(\pi\beta)^2}{9}
= \frac{\pi^2}{9}.
\end{align}
}\fi
This can be shown by writing
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}[ \left(G - 1\right)^2 ]
&= \mathbb{E}[ \left(G - \mathbb{E}[G]\right)^2 ]
+ \left(\mathbb{E}[G] - 1\right)^2
\end{align}
then computing
\begin{align}
\lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} \frac{\mathbb{E}[ \left(G - 1 \right)^2 ]}{\Delta^2}
= \lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} \frac{\textsf{Var}(G)}{\Delta^2}
+ \lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} \frac{\left(\mathbb{E}[G] - 1\right)^2}{\Delta^2}
= \frac{(\pi \beta)^2}{9}.
\label{eq:limit_E(G-1)2}
\end{align}
by using (see (\ref{eq:limits_VarG}) and (\ref{eq:limits_EG_minus_1_squared}) in Appendix A.4)
\begin{align*}
\lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} \frac{\textsf{Var}(G)}{\Delta^2}
= 0
\text{ and }
\lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} \frac{\left(\mathbb{E}[G] - 1\right)^2}{\Delta^2}
= \frac{(\pi \beta)^2}{9}.
\end{align*}
The main result of this section is summarized in following theorem.
\begin{theorem}
\label{theorem:oversamp-fullmodel}
If $L = \lceil \beta \sqrt{\textsf{SNR}} \rceil$ and
the input $X_A^n$ is i.i.d. such that
$(|X_k|^2-P/2)$ is exponentially distributed with mean $P/2$,
i.e., $|X_k|^2$ is distributed according to $p_{X_P}$ where
\begin{align}
p_{X_P}(|x|^2) = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\frac{2}{P} \exp\left(1-\frac{2|x|^2}{P}\right), & |x|^2 \geq P/2 \\
0, & \text{otherwise}
\end{array}
\right.
\label{eq:shifted_exp_distrib}
\end{align}
then
\begin{align}
\lim_{\textsf{SNR} \rightarrow \infty} I(X_A;\textbf{Y}) - \frac{1}{2} \log{\textsf{SNR}}
\geq - 2 - \frac{1}{2} \log(8 \pi) - \frac{\pi^2}{36}.
\label{eq:I_XA_Y_fullmodel_theorem}
\end{align}
\end{theorem}
The lower bound is achieved by the double-filtering\footnote{We borrow the term ``double-filtering'' from \cite{Foschini1988IT}.}
receiver structure shown in Fig. \ref{eq:rx_double_filtering}.
\begin{figure*
\centering
\resizebox{\ifdefined\twocolumnmode 0.8\textwidth \else \textwidth \fi}{!}{\input{\TexFigPath rx_double_filtering}}
\caption{Double filtering receiver.}
\label{eq:rx_double_filtering}
\end{figure*}
As a result, the capacity pre-log satisfies
\begin{align}
\lim_{\textsf{SNR} \rightarrow \infty} \frac{C(\textsf{SNR})}{\log{\textsf{SNR}}} \geq \frac{1}{2}
\end{align}
which follows from Theorem \ref{theorem:oversamp-fullmodel} and $C(\textsf{SNR}) \geq I(X;\textbf{Y}) \geq I(X_A;\textbf{Y})$.
The capacity thus grows logarithmically at high SNR with a pre-log factor of at least 1/2.
\color[rgb]{0,0,0}\subsection*{Remarks}
\begin{itemize}
\item
There is a wide literature on the design of receivers for the channel model
(\ref{eq:dt-pn-ch})
with discrete-time Wiener phase noise,
e.g., see \cite{ShamaiProc2000}, \cite{Barbieri2007}, \cite{Spalvieri2011}, \cite{Barbieri2011} and references therein.
One may want to use these designs, which raises the following question:
``when is it justified to approximate the non-coherent fading model (\ref{eq:dt-noncoherent-fade}) with the discrete-time phase noise model (\ref{eq:dt-pn-ch})?''
Our result suggests that this approximation may be justified
when the phase variation is small over one symbol interval
(i.e., when the phase noise linewidth is small compared to the symbol rate)
\emph{and} also the SNR is low to moderate.
Note that the SNR at which the high-SNR asymptotics start to manifest themselves depends on the application.
\item
The authors of \cite{Foschini1988Comm} treated on-off keying transmission in the presence of Wiener phase noise
by using a double-filtering receiver, which is composed of
an intermediate frequency (IF) filter, followed by an envelope detector (square-law device) and then a post-detection filter.
They showed that by optimizing the IF receiver bandwidth the double-filtering receiver outperforms the single-filtering (matched filter) receiver.
Furthermore, they showed via computer simulation that the optimum IF bandwidth increases with the SNR.
This is similar to our result in the sense that
we require the number of samples per symbol to increase with the SNR
in order to achieve a rate that grows logarithmically with the SNR.
\item
Dallal and Shamai \cite{ShamaiCom91}
derived an upper bound on the error probability of (a variant of) the double filtering receiver
for systems employing noncoherent demodulation, such as frequency shift keying (FSK), on-off keying (OOK) and pulse-position modulation (PPM).
Relevant analysis can be found in \cite{ShamaiIT92}, \cite{Shamai93} and references therein.
The analysis in such papers typically involves moments of filtered Wiener phase noise.
Dallal and Shamai \cite{ShamaiCom94} examined coding schemes that do not use double filtering receivers.
More specifically, the suggested coding scheme in \cite{ShamaiCom94}
is a concatenated code with differential modulation and differential detection of binary phase-shift keying (BPSK) signals.
They studied binary convolutional codes with a rate-1/$L$ repetition code as the inner code.
They also studied dual convolutional codes and Reed-Solomon block codes as outer codes
with either simplex (maximal length) or bi-orthogonal (first-order Reed-Muller and Hadamard codes) as inner codes.
\item
One can achieve a pre-log of $1/2$ with $L$ less than $\lceil \beta \sqrt{\textsf{SNR}} \rceil$.
For instance,
suppose we use the auxiliary channel (\ref{eq:V_auxiliary})
with the same $\tilde{Z}_1$ and $\tilde{Z}_0$ defined in (\ref{eq:Z1tilde_def}) and (\ref{eq:Z0tilde_def}), respectively,
but set $\tilde{G} = \mathbb{E}[G]$ rather than $\tilde{G} = 1$ as in (\ref{eq:Gtilde_def}).
By using steps similar to the steps used to derive (\ref{eq:I_XA_Y_LB}), we obtain
\ifdefined\twocolumnmode{
\begin{align}
I(X_A;\textbf{Y}) - \frac{1}{2} \log{\textsf{SNR}}
&\geq - 2 - \frac{1}{2} \log(8 \pi)
- \frac{1}{2 \textsf{SNR} \Delta} \nonumber\\&
- \frac{1}{4} \textsf{SNR} ~ \mathbb{E}\left[ (G-\mathbb{E}[G])^2 \right].
\end{align}
}\else{
\begin{align}
I(X_A;\textbf{Y}) - \frac{1}{2} \log{\textsf{SNR}}
&\geq - 2 - \frac{1}{2} \log(8 \pi)
- \frac{1}{2 \textsf{SNR} \Delta}
- \frac{1}{4} \textsf{SNR} ~ \mathbb{E}\left[ (G-\mathbb{E}[G])^2 \right].
\end{align}
}\fi
Now choose
\begin{align}
L = \left\lceil \sqrt[3]{\beta^2 \textsf{SNR}} \right\rceil.
\end{align}
Since $\Delta = 1/L$, it follows that
\begin{align}
\lim_{\textsf{SNR} \rightarrow \infty} {\textsf{SNR} \Delta} = \infty
\text{ and }
\lim_{\textsf{SNR} \rightarrow \infty} \textsf{SNR} \Delta^3 = \frac{1}{\beta^2}.
\end{align}
Moreover, we have (see Appendix A.3)
\ifdefined\twocolumnmode{
\begin{align}
\lim_{\textsf{SNR} \rightarrow \infty} \textsf{SNR} ~ \textsf{Var}(G) &
= \lim_{\textsf{SNR} \rightarrow \infty} \textsf{SNR} \Delta^3
\cdot
\lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} \frac{\textsf{Var}(G)}{\Delta^3} \nonumber\\&
= \frac{1}{\beta^2} \cdot \frac{4(\pi\beta)^2}{45}
= \frac{4\pi^2}{45}.
\end{align}
}\else{
\begin{align}
\lim_{\textsf{SNR} \rightarrow \infty} \textsf{SNR} ~ \textsf{Var}(G)
= \lim_{\textsf{SNR} \rightarrow \infty} \textsf{SNR} \Delta^3
\cdot
\lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} \frac{\textsf{Var}(G)}{\Delta^3}
= \frac{1}{\beta^2} \cdot \frac{4(\pi\beta)^2}{45}
= \frac{4\pi^2}{45}.
\end{align}
}\fi
Hence, we have
\begin{align}
\lim_{\textsf{SNR} \rightarrow \infty} I(X_A;\textbf{Y}) - \frac{1}{2} \log{\textsf{SNR}}
&\geq - 2 - \frac{1}{2} \log(8 \pi)
- \frac{\pi^2}{45}.
\label{eq:I_XA_Y_LB_limit_cubicroot}
\end{align}
This means that a pre-log of $1/2$ is achieved if the oversampling factor $L$ grows with the cubic root of SNR.
\end{itemize}
\section{Rate Computation at Finite SNR}
\label{sec:lower-bound}
In this section, we develop algorithms to compute the information rate numerically.
We change the notation in this section as follows: we denote the input \emph{symbols} with a subscript ``symb'', i.e.,
the input codeword is $(X_{\text{symb},1}, X_{\text{symb},2}, \ldots, X_{\text{symb},\nsymb})$
and we use $X_k$ to denote the $k$th input \emph{sample} which is defined by
\begin{align}
X_k
= X_{\text{symb},\lceil k/L \rceil} ~ g\left( (k \text{ mod } L) \Delta\right).
\label{eq:Xk_def}
\end{align}
We write (\ref{eq:Yk}) as
\begin{align}
Y_k = X_{\text{symb},\lceil k/L \rceil} \Delta \ e^{j \Theta_k} \ F_k + N_k.
\label{eq:Yk-numsec}
\end{align}
The information rate $I(X;Y)$ is defined as
\begin{align}
I(X;Y)
&\equiv \lim_{\nsymb \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{\nsymb} I({X}_{\text{symb}}^\nsymb;\textbf{Y}^\nsymb)
= \lim_{\nsymb \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{\nsymb} I(X^n;Y^n)
\label{eq:IXY}
\end{align}
where the last equality follows from the definitions (\ref{eq:Xk_def}) and (\ref{eq:Yveck_def}).
One difficulty in evaluating (\ref{eq:IXY}) is that the joint distribution of $\{F_k\}$ and $\{W_k\}$ is not available in closed form.
Even the distribution of $F_k$ is not available in closed form
(there is an approximation for small linewidth, see (16) in \cite{Foschini1988Comm}).
However, we can numerically compute tight lower bounds on $I(X;Y)$ by using the auxiliary-channel technique described
in (\ref{eq:I_XA_V_LB_AuxCh}) and (\ref{eq:QV_def}). That is, we have
\begin{align}
I(X;Y)
&\geq \underline{I}(X;Y)
= \mathbb{E}\left[\log\left( \frac{q_{Y|X}(Y|X)}{q_Y(Y)} \right)\right]
\label{eq:I_X_Y_LB_AuxCh}
\end{align}
where $q_{Y|X}(\cdot|\cdot)$ is an arbitrary auxiliary channel and
\begin{align}
q_Y(y) = \sum_{\tilde{x}} p_{X}(\tilde{x}) q_{Y|X}(y|\tilde{x})
\end{align}
where $p_{X}$ is the \emph{true} distribution of $X$.
The distribution $q_Y(\cdot)$ is the output distribution obtained by connecting the true input source to the auxiliary channel.
Using this result, we can compute a lower bound on $I(X;Y)$ by using the following algorithm \cite{Arnold2006}:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Sample a long sequence $(x^n, y^n)$ according to the \emph{true} joint distribution of $X^n$ and $Y^n$;
\item Compute $q_{Y^n|X^n}(y^n|x^n)$
and
\begin{align}
q_{Y^n}(y^n) = \sum_{\tilde{x}^n} p_{X^n}(\tilde{x}^n) q_{Y^n|X^n}(y^n|\tilde{x}^n)
\end{align}
where $p_{X^n}$ is the true distribution of $X^n$;
\item Estimate $\underline{I}(X;Y)$ using
\begin{align}
\underline{I}(X;Y) \approx
\frac{1}{\nsymb}\log\left( \frac{q_{Y^n|X^n}(y^n|x^n)}{q_{Y^n}(y^n)} \right).
\end{align}
\end{enumerate}
\paragraph*{Auxiliary Channel I}
Consider the auxiliary channel
\begin{align}
\Psi_k
= X_k \Delta \ e^{j \Theta_k} + N_k
\label{eq:Psik_def}
\end{align}
where $\{\Theta_k\}$ and $\{N_k\}$ are defined in Sec. \ref{sec:dt-model-multisample}
and
$X_k$ is defined by (\ref{eq:Xk_def}).
The channel output $\Psi$ is the same as $Y$ in (\ref{eq:Yk-numsec}) \emph{except} that $F_k$ is replaced by 1 or more generally with $g\left( (k \mod L) \Delta\right)$.
The channel is described by
the conditional distribution
\begin{align}
p_{\Psi^n|X^n}(y^n|x^n)
&=\int_{\theta^n} p_{\Theta^n,\Psi^n|X^n}(\theta^n,y^n|x^n) \ d\theta^n
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
&p_{\Theta^n,\Psi^n|X^n}(\theta^n,y^n|x^n) \nonumber \\ \qquad
&= \prod_{k=1}^{n} p_{\Theta_k|\Theta_{k-1}}(\theta_k|\theta_{k-1}) \
p_{\Psi|X,\Theta}(y_k|x_k,\theta_k)
\label{eq:p_Theta_Psi|X}
\end{align}
with
\begin{align}
p_{\Theta_k|\Theta_{k-1}}(\theta|\tilde{\theta}) =
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
p_{W}(\theta-\tilde{\theta}; \sigma^2_W), & k \geq 2 \\
1/(2\pi), & k = 1
\end{array}
\right.
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
p_{\Psi|X,\Theta}(y|x,\theta)
= \frac{1}{\pi \sigma^2_N \Delta} \exp\left(- \frac{\left|y - x ~ e^{j \theta} \right|^2}{\sigma^2_N \Delta} \right).
\label{eq:p_Y|XTheta}
\end{align}
The channel $p_{\Psi^n|X^n}$ has continuous states $\theta^n$,
which makes step 2 of the algorithm computationally infeasible.
\paragraph*{Auxiliary Channel II}
We use the following auxiliary channel for the numerical simulations:
\begin{align}
\Upsilon_k
= X_k \Delta \ e^{j S_k} + N_k
\label{eq:Upsilonk_def}
\end{align}
which has the conditional probability
\begin{align}
p_{\Upsilon^n|X^n}(y^n|x^n)
&=\sum_{s^n \in \mathcal{S}^n} p_{S^n,\Upsilon^n|X^n}(s^n,y^n|x^n)
\end{align}
where $\mathcal{S}$ is a \emph{finite} set and
\begin{align}
&p_{S^n,\Upsilon^n|X^n}(s^n,y^n|x^n) \nonumber \\ \qquad
&= \prod_{k=1}^{n} p_{S_k|S_{k-1}}(s_k|s_{k-1}) \
p_{\Psi|X,\Theta}(y_k|x_k,s_k)
\label{eq:p_S_Upsilon|X}
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
p_{S_k|S_{k-1}}(s|\tilde{s}) =
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
Q(s|\tilde{s}), & k \geq 2 \\
1/|\mathcal{S}|, & k = 1.
\end{array}
\right.
\end{align}
Next, we describe our choice of $\mathcal{S}$ and $Q(\cdot|\cdot)$.
We partition $[-\pi,\pi)$ into $S$ intervals with equal lengths
and pick the mid points of these intervals to be the elements of $\mathcal{S}$,
i.e., we have
\begin{align}
\mathcal{S} = \left\{ \hat{s}_i : i = 1,\ldots,S \right\}
\text{ where }
\hat{s}_i = i \frac{2 \pi}{S} - \frac{\pi}{S} - \pi
.
\end{align}
The state transition probability $Q(\cdot|\cdot)$ is chosen similar to \cite{BarlettaLB} and \cite{BarlettaUB}:
\begin{align}
Q(s|\tilde{s}) =
\frac{2\pi}{S}
{\int_{(\phi,\tilde{\phi}) \in \mathcal{R}(s) \times \mathcal{R}(\tilde{s})}
p_{W}(\phi-\tilde{\phi};\sigma^2_W) \ d\phi d\tilde{\phi}}
\end{align}
where $\mathcal{R}(s) = [ s- {\pi}/{S} , s + {\pi}/{S} )$, i.e.,
$\mathcal{R}(s)$ is the interval whose midpoint is $s$.
The larger $S$ and $L$ are, the better the auxiliary channel (\ref{eq:Upsilonk_def}) approximates the actual channel (\ref{eq:Yk-numsec}).
We remark that the auxiliary channel gives a \emph{valid} lower bound on $I(X;Y)$ even for small $S$ and $L$.
\subsection{Computing The Conditional Probability}
Suppose the input $X^n$ has the distribution $p_{X^n}$.
A Bayesian network for $X^n,S^n,\Upsilon^n$ is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:bayesian_net_general}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\resizebox{\ifdefined\twocolumnmode \columnwidth \else 0.75\textwidth \fi}{!}{\input{bayesian_net_general}}
\caption{Bayesian network for ${X^n,S^n,\Upsilon^n}$ for $n=9$.}
\label{fig:bayesian_net_general}
\end{figure}
The probability $p_{\Upsilon^n|X^n}(y^n|x^n)$ can be computed using
\begin{align}
p_{\Upsilon^n|X^n}(y^n|x^n)
= \sum_{s \in \mathcal{S}} \rho_n(s)
\end{align}
where we recursively compute
\begin{align}
\rho_{k}(s)
& \equiv p_{S_k,\Upsilon^k|X^n}(s,y^k|x^n) \label{eq:rho_def} \\
&\stackrel{(a)}{=} \sum_{\tilde{s} \in \mathcal{S}} p_{S_{k-1},S_k,\Upsilon^k|X^n}(\tilde{s},s,y^k|x^n) \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(b)}{=} \sum_{\tilde{s} \in \mathcal{S}}
\rho_{k-1}(\tilde{s}) \
p_{S_k,\Upsilon_k|S_{k-1},\Upsilon^{k-1},X^n}(s,y_k|\tilde{s},y^{k-1},x^n) \nonumber \\
&= \sum_{\tilde{s} \in \mathcal{S}}
\rho_{k-1}(\tilde{s}) \
Q(s|\tilde{s}) \
p_{\Psi|X,\Theta}(y_k|x_k,s)
\label{eq:rho_recursive_general}
\end{align}
with the initial value
$\rho_{0}(s) = 1/|\mathcal{S}|$.
Step $(a)$ is a marginalization,
$(b)$ follows from Bayes' rule and the definition of $\rho_k$ in (\ref{eq:rho_def}),
while (\ref{eq:rho_recursive_general}) follows from the structure of Fig. \ref{fig:bayesian_net_general}.
We remark that (\ref{eq:rho_recursive_general}) is the same as with independent $X_1,\ldots,X_n$,
e.g., see equation (9) in \cite[Sec. IV]{MTR2013}.
\subsection{Computing The Marginal Probability}
Define $\textbf{X}_m \equiv (X_{(m-1) L + 1},X_{(m-1) L + 2},\ldots,X_{(m-1) L + L})$.
Suppose the input \emph{symbols} are i.i.d. and
$\Xsymb{m} \in \mathcal{X}$ where $\mathcal{X}$ is a finite set.
Therefore, $p_{X^n}$ has the form
\begin{align}
p_{X^n}(x^n)
&= \prod_{m=1}^{\nsymb} p_{\textbf{X}}(\textbf{x}_m).
\end{align}
A Bayesian network for $X^n,S^n,\Upsilon^n$ is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:bayesian_net_oversamp}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\resizebox{\ifdefined\twocolumnmode \columnwidth \else 0.75\textwidth \fi}{!}{\input{bayesian_net_oversamp}}
\caption{Bayesian network for ${X^n,S^n,\Upsilon^n}$ for $n=9$ and $L=3$.}
\label{fig:bayesian_net_oversamp}
\end{figure}
The probability $p_{\Upsilon^n}(y^n)$ can be computed using
\begin{align}
p_{\Upsilon^n}(y^n)
= \sum_{s \in \mathcal{S}} \psi_{\nsymb}(s)
\end{align}
where $\psi_{m}(s) \equiv p_{S_{m L},\textbf{Y}^m}(s,\textbf{y}^m) $
which can be computed using the recursion:
\begin{align}
&\psi_{m}(s) \label{eq:psi_recursive} \\
&= \sum_{\tilde{\textbf{x}} \in \mathcal{X}_L} p_{\textbf{X}}(\tilde{\textbf{x}}) \
\sum_{\tilde{s} \in \mathcal{S}} \psi_{m-1}(\tilde{s}) \
p_{S_{m L},\textbf{Y}_m|S_{(m-1)L},\textbf{X}_m}(s,\textbf{y}_m|\tilde{s},\tilde{\textbf{x}})
\nonumber
\end{align}
with the initial value
$\psi_{0}(s) = 1/|\mathcal{S}|$.
The set $\mathcal{X}_L$ is
\begin{align}
\mathcal{X}_L = \{ x \cdot (g(\Delta),g(2\Delta),\ldots,g(L\Delta) ): x \in \mathcal{X} \}.
\end{align}
We remark that $|\mathcal{X}_L| = |\mathcal{X}|$ and not $|\mathcal{X}|^L$.
Next, we define
\begin{align}
\chi_{m,L}(s,\tilde{s},\tilde{\textbf{x}}) = p_{S_{m L},\textbf{Y}_m|S_{(m-1)L},\textbf{X}_m}(s,\textbf{y}_m|\tilde{s},\tilde{\textbf{x}})
\label{eq:chi_def}
\end{align}
for $s,\tilde{s} \in \mathcal{S}$ and $\tilde{\textbf{x}} \in \mathcal{X}_L$.
Computing $\chi_{m,L}(s,\tilde{s},\tilde{\textbf{x}})$ is similar
to computing $\rho_n$ (see (\ref{eq:rho_recursive_general})).
Intuitively, this is because a block of $L$ samples in Fig. \ref{fig:bayesian_net_oversamp} has a structure similar to Fig. \ref{fig:bayesian_net_general}.
More precisely,
$\chi_{m,L}(s,\tilde{s},\tilde{\textbf{x}})$ can be computed recursively by using
\begin{align}
&\chi_{m,\ell}(s,\tilde{s},\tilde{\textbf{x}}) \label{eq:chi_recursive} \\
&= \sum_{ \varsigma \in \mathcal{S} }
\chi_{m,\ell-1}(\varsigma,\tilde{s},\tilde{\textbf{x}}) \
Q\left( s| \varsigma \right) \
p_{\Psi|X,\Theta} \left( y_{(m-1)L+\ell}|\tilde{x}_{\ell}, s\right)
\nonumber
\end{align}
with the initial value
\begin{align}
\chi_{m,0}(s,\tilde{s},\tilde{\textbf{x}}) = \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
1, & s=\tilde{s} \\
0, & \text{otherwise}.
\end{array}
\right.
\label{eq:chi_init}
\end{align}
Therefore, computing $p_{\Upsilon^n}(y^n)$ involves two levels of recursion:
1) recursion over the symbols as described by (\ref{eq:psi_recursive}) and
2) recursion over the samples within a symbol as described by (\ref{eq:chi_recursive}).
\section{Numerical Simulations}
\label{sec:num-sim}
We use two pulses with a symbol-interval time support:
\begin{itemize}
\item
A unit-energy square pulse
\begin{align}
g_1(t) =
\frac{1}{\sqrt{\Ts}} \text{rect}\left(\frac{t}{\Ts}\right)
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
\text{rect}(t) \equiv \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
1, & |t| \leq 1/2 , \\
0, & \text{otherwise}.
\end{array}
\right.
\label{eq:rect_def}
\end{align}
\item
A unit-energy cosine-squared pulse
\begin{align}
g_2(t) =
\frac{1}{\sqrt{\Ts/2}} \cos^2\left(\frac{\pi t}{\Ts}\right) \text{rect}\left(\frac{t}{\Ts}\right).
\end{align}
\end{itemize}
The first step of the algorithm is to sample a long sequence according to the true joint distribution of $X^n$ and $Y^n$.
To generate samples according to the original channel (\ref{eq:Yk-numsec}),
we must accurately represent digitally the continuous-time waveform (\ref{eq:rx_waveform}).
We use a simulation oversampling rate $L_{\text{sim}}$ = 1024 samples/symbol.
After the filter (\ref{eq:yt}), the receiver has $L$ samples/symbol distributed according to (\ref{eq:Yk-numsec}).
Next, to choose a proper sequence length, we follow the approach suggested in \cite{Arnold2006}:
for a candidate length, run the algorithm about 10 times (each with a new random seed)
and check whether all estimates of the information rate agree up to the desired accuracy.
We used $\nsymb = 10^4$ unless otherwise stated.
For efficient implementation of (\ref{eq:rho_recursive_general}),
$p_{\Psi|X,\Theta}(\cdot|\cdot,\cdot)$
can be factored out of the summation to yield:
\begin{align}
\rho_{k}(s)
&= p_{\Psi|X,\Theta}(y_k|x_k,s)
\overbrace{\sum_{\tilde{s} \in \mathcal{S}} \rho_{k-1}(\tilde{s}) \ Q(s|\tilde{s})}^{\rho^\prime_{k}(s)}
\label{eq:rho_recursive_general_implement}
\end{align}
Moreover,
since $Q(\cdot|\cdot)$ can be represented by a circulant matrix due to symmetry,
$\rho^\prime_k(\cdot)$ can be computed efficiently using the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT).
Similarly, the computation of (\ref{eq:chi_recursive}) can be done efficiently
by factoring out $p_{\Psi|X,\Theta}(\cdot|\cdot,\cdot)$ and
by using the FFT.
\subsection{Excessively Large Linewidth}
\newcommand{\SimFigPath}{./figures-uber-newlegend/}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width= {\ifdefined\twocolumnmode \columnwidth \else 0.66\textwidth \fi}]{\SimFigPath uber_qam16_fhwhm125_sqrtx_optrx_long_osr.eps}
\caption{Lower bounds on rates for 16-QAM, square transmit-pulse and multi-sample receiver at $f_{\text{HWHM}} \Ts = 0.125$.}
\label{fig:16qam_fhwhm125_sqrtx_optrx_osr}
\end{figure}
Suppose $f_{\text{HWHM}} \Ts = 0.125$ and the input symbols are independently and uniformly distributed (i.u.d.) 16-QAM.
Fig. \ref{fig:16qam_fhwhm125_sqrtx_optrx_osr} shows an estimate of $\underline{I}(X;Y)$
for a square transmit-pulse,
i.e., $g(t) = g_1(t-\Ts/2)$
and an $L$-sample receiver
with $L=4,8,16$ and $S=16,32,64$.
The curves with $S=64$ are indistinguishable from the curves with $S=32$ over the entire SNR range for all values of $L$,
and hence $S=32$ is adequate up to 25 dB.
Even $S=16$ is adequate up to 20 dB.
The important trend in Fig. \ref{fig:16qam_fhwhm125_sqrtx_optrx_osr}
is that higher oversampling rate $L$ is needed at high $\textsf{SNR}$
to extract all the information from the received signal.
For example,
$L=4$ suffices up to $\textsf{SNR}$ $\sim$ 10 dB,
$L=8$ suffices up to $\textsf{SNR}$ $\sim$ 15 dB but
$L \geq 16$ is needed beyond that.
It was pointed out in \cite{Arnold2006} that the lower bounds can be interpreted as
the information rates achieved by mismatched decoding.
For example, $\underline{I}(X;Y)$ for $L=8$ and $S \geq 32$ in Fig. \ref{fig:16qam_fhwhm125_sqrtx_optrx_osr} is essentially
the information rate achieved by a multi-sample (8-sample) receiver
that uses maximum-likelihood decoding for the simplified channel (\ref{eq:Psik_def})
when it is operated in the original channel (\ref{eq:Yk-numsec}).
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width= {\ifdefined\twocolumnmode \columnwidth \else 0.66\textwidth \fi}]{\SimFigPath uber_qam16_fhwhm125_cos2tx_optrx_long_osr.eps}
\caption{Lower bounds on rates for 16-QAM, cosine-squared transmit-pulse and multi-sample receiver at $f_{\text{HWHM}} \Ts = 0.125$.}
\label{fig:16qam_fhwhm125_cos2tx_optrx_osr}
\end{figure}
Fig. \ref{fig:16qam_fhwhm125_cos2tx_optrx_osr} shows an estimate of $\underline{I}(X;Y)$
for a cosine-squared transmit-pulse,
i.e., $g(t) = g_2(t-\Ts/2)$
and an $L$-sample receiver
at $L=4,8,16$ and $S=16,32,64$.
We find that $S = 32$ suffices up to $\sim$ 25 dB.
We see in Fig. \ref{fig:16qam_fhwhm125_cos2tx_optrx_osr}
the same trend in Fig. \ref{fig:16qam_fhwhm125_sqrtx_optrx_osr}:
higher $L$ is needed at higher $\textsf{SNR}$.
Comparing Fig. \ref{fig:16qam_fhwhm125_sqrtx_optrx_osr} with Fig. \ref{fig:16qam_fhwhm125_cos2tx_optrx_osr} indicates that
the square pulse is better than the cosine-squared pulse for the same oversampling rate $L$.
It might seem strange the the cosine-squared pulse curves are substantially lower
than the square pulse curves despite taking into account the pulse shape in the auxiliary
channel model, see (\ref{eq:Upsilonk_def}) and (\ref{eq:Xk_def}).
One obtains insight on this effect with the following Gedankenexperiment.
Suppose we use a pulse that is narrow and peaky in time.
Then an integrate-and-dump receiver with oversampling puts out
essentially only one useful sample per symbol.
One may as well, therefore, use only one sample per symbol.
\subsection{Large Linewidth}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width= {\ifdefined\twocolumnmode \columnwidth \else 0.66\textwidth \fi}]{\SimFigPath uber_psk16_fhwhm12_sqrtx_optrx_long_osr.eps}
\caption{Lower bounds on rates for 16-PSK, square transmit-pulse and multi-sample receiver at $f_{\text{HWHM}} \Ts = 0.0125$.}
\label{fig:16psk_fhwhm12_sqrtx_optrx_osr}
\end{figure}
As the linewidth decreases, the benefit of oversampling at the receiver becomes apparent only at higher $\textsf{SNR}$.
For example, for $f_{\text{HWHM}} \Ts = 0.0125$ and i.u.d. 16-PSK input,
Fig. \ref{fig:16psk_fhwhm12_sqrtx_optrx_osr} shows an estimate of $\underline{I}(X;Y)$
for a square transmit-pulse
and an $L$-sample receiver
at $L=1,2,4,8,16$ and $S=64$.
We see that
$L=4$ suffices up to $\textsf{SNR}$ $\sim$ 19 dB,
$L=8$ suffices up to $\textsf{SNR}$ $\sim$ 24 dB and
only beyond that $L \geq 16$ is necessary.
We conclude from Fig. \ref{fig:16qam_fhwhm125_sqrtx_optrx_osr}--\ref{fig:16psk_fhwhm12_sqrtx_optrx_osr} that
the required $L$ depends on
1) the linewidth $f_{\text{FWHM}}$ of the phase noise;
2) the pulse $g(t)$; and
3) the $\textsf{SNR}$.
\subsection{Comparison With Other Models}
We compare the discrete-time model of the multi-sample receiver
with other discrete-time models.
The simulation parameters for our model (GK) are $\nsymb = 10^4$, $L = 16$ (with $L_{\text{sim}} = 1024$) and
$S=64$ for 16-QAM ($S=128$ was too computationally intensive) and $S=128$ for QPSK.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width= {\ifdefined\twocolumnmode \columnwidth \else 0.66\textwidth \fi}]{\SimFigPath comparison.eps}
\caption{Comparison of information rates for different models.}
\label{fig:raheli_comparison}
\end{figure}
In Fig. \ref{fig:raheli_comparison}, we show curves
for the Baud-rate model used in
\cite{Barbieri2011} and \cite{Dauwels2008}--\cite{Barletta2012KalmanLB}.
The model is (\ref{eq:dt-pn-ch}) where the phase noise is a Wiener process whose noise increments have variance $\gamma^2$.
We set $\gamma^2 = 2 \pi \beta \Ts$.
The simulation parameters for the Baud-rate model are $\nsymb = 10^5$ and $S=128$.
We also show curves for the Martal\`{o}-Tripodi-Raheli (MTR) model \cite{MTR2013} in Fig. \ref{fig:raheli_comparison}.
For the sake of comparison, we adapt the model in \cite{MTR2013}
from a square-root raised-cosine pulse to a square pulse
and write the ``matched'' filter output $\{V_m\}$ as
\begin{align}
V_m = \sum_{\ell = 1}^L \Psi_{(m-1)L+\ell}
\end{align}
where $m=1,\ldots,\nsymb$ and $\Psi_k$ is defined in (\ref{eq:Psik_def}).
The auxiliary channel is
\begin{align}
Y_m = X_{\text{symb},m} ~ e^{j \Theta_m} + Z_m,
\qquad m \geq 1
\end{align}
where
the process $\{Z_m\}$ is an i.i.d. circularly-symmetric complex Gaussian process with mean $0$ and
$\mathbb{E}[ |Z_m|^2 ] = \sigma^2_N \Ts$
while the process $\{\Theta_m\}$ is a first-order Markov process (not a Wiener process)
with a time-invariant transition probability,
i.e., for $k \geq 2$ and all $\theta_k,\theta_{k-1} \in [-\pi,\pi)$, we have
$p_{\Theta_k|\Theta_{k-1}}(\theta_k|\theta_{k-1}) = p_{\Theta_2|\Theta_1}(\theta_k|\theta_{k-1})$.
Furthermore, the phase space is quantized to a finite number $S$ of states
and the transition probabilities are estimated by means of simulation.
The probabilities are then used to compute a lower bound on the information rate.
The simulation parameters for the MTR model are $\nsymb = 10^5$, $L=16$ and $S=128$.
We see that the Baud-rate and MTR models saturate at a rate well below
the rate achieved by the multi-sample receiver.
Moreover, the multi-sample receiver achieves
the full 4 bits/symbol and 2 bits/symbol of 16-QAM and QPSK, respectively, at high SNR.
\section{High SNR Revisited}
\label{sec:ph-mod-approx}
In this section, we focus on the contribution of phase modulation to capacity.
However, solving the problem for the model given by (\ref{eq:Yk}) seems difficult.
The model we adopt in this section does not include the effect of filtering modeled by $\{F_k\}$.
More specifically, the $k$th output of the simplified approximate model is
\begin{align}
Y_k = X_{\lceil k/L \rceil} \Delta \ e^{j \Theta_k} + N_k
\label{eq:Yk_approx}
\end{align}
where $X_k$ is $k$th input \emph{symbol} and $\{\Theta_k\}$ and $\{N_k\}$ are the same processes defined in Sec. \ref{sec:dt-model-multisample}.
First, we show in Sec. \ref{sec:awgn-phase} that phase modulation achieves an information rate with a pre-log of 1/2 in an AWGN channel.
Even though this result is already known (e.g., see \cite{Blachman1953}, \cite{WynerPolyphase1966} or \cite{Goebel2011}),
the technique used in the proof is useful, as we will see.
We show in Sec. \ref{sec:approxmodel-phase} that the contribution of phase modulation to the pre-log is at least 1/4 for the approximate model in (\ref{eq:Yk_approx}).
\subsection{Phase Modulation in AWGN Channels}
\label{sec:awgn-phase}
\input{awgn-phase}
\subsection{Phase Modulation in Phase Noise Channels}
\label{sec:approxmodel-phase}
In this section, we study the contribution of the phase modulation to the capacity of the channel (\ref{eq:Yk_approx}) at high SNR.
We assume that $\Ts=1$ and $\sigma_N^2=1$ for simplicity.
By using the chain rule, we have
\begin{align}
I(\Phi_{X}^n;\textbf{Y}^n|X_{A}^n)
&= \sum_{k=1}^n I(\Phi_{X,k};\textbf{Y}^n|X_{A}^n,\Phi_{X}^{k-1}) \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(a)}{\geq} \sum_{k=2}^n I(\Phi_{X,k};\textbf{Y}^n|X_{A}^n,\Phi_{X}^{k-1}) \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(b)}{\geq} \sum_{k=2}^n I(\Phi_{X,k};\tilde{Y}_k |X_{A}^n,\Phi_{X}^{k-1})
\label{eq:I_PhiX1n_Y1n|XA1n_LB1}
\end{align}
where
$\tilde{Y}_k$ is a deterministic function of $(\textbf{Y}^n,X_{A}^n,\Phi_{X}^{k-1})$.
Inequality $(a)$ follows from the non-negativity of mutual information
and $(b)$ follows from the data processing inequality.
At high SNR, we use some intuition to choose a reasonable processing of
$(\textbf{Y}^n,X_{A}^n,\Phi_{X}^{k-1})$ for decoding $\Phi_{X,k}$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item
Since only the past inputs $X^{k-1}$ are available,
the future outputs $\textbf{Y}_{k+1}^n$ are not very useful for estimating $\Theta_{(k-1)L}$.
\item
Since $\{\Theta_k\}$ is a first-order Markov process,
the most recent past input symbol $X_{k-1}$ and the most recent output sample $Y_{(k-1)L}$ are the most useful for estimating $\Theta_{(k-1)L}$.
A simple estimator is
\begin{align}
e^{j \widehat{\Theta}_{(k-1)L}}
\equiv \frac{Y_{(k-1)L}}{X_{k-1} \Delta}
&= e^{j \Theta_{(k-1)L}} + \frac{N_{(k-1)L}}{X_{k-1} \Delta} \nonumber\\
&= e^{j \Theta_{(k-1)L}} \left( 1 + \tilde{Z}_{k-1}^* \right)
\label{eq:Theta_hat}
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
\tilde{Z}_k \equiv \frac{N_{kL}^* \ e^{-j \Theta_{kL}} }{X_k^* \Delta}.
\label{eq:Zk_tilde_def}
\end{align}
\item
Given the current input amplitude $|X_k|$ and the estimate of $\Theta_{(k-1)L}$,
the first sample $Y_{(k-1)L+1}$ in $\textbf{Y}_k$ is the most useful for decoding $\Phi_{X,k}$
because the following samples become increasingly corrupted by the phase noise.
We scale $Y_{(k-1)L+1}$ to normalize the variance of the additive noise and write
\begin{align}
\frac{Y_{(k-1)L+1}}{\sqrt{\Delta}}
= \bigg( |X_k| \sqrt{\Delta} e^{j\Phi_{X,k}} + \tilde{N}_k \bigg) e^{j \Theta_{(k-1)L+1}}
\label{eq:Y_normalized}
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
\tilde{N}_{k} \equiv \frac{N_{(k-1)L+1} \ e^{-j \Theta_{(k-1)L+1}} }{\sqrt{\Delta}}.
\label{eq:Nk_tilde_def}
\end{align}
\end{enumerate}
To summarize, we choose
\begin{align}
\tilde{Y}_k
= \frac{Y_{(k-1)L+1}}{\sqrt{\Delta}} \left( \frac{Y_{(k-1)L}}{X_{k-1} \Delta} \right)^*.
\label{eq:Yk_tilde_def}
\end{align}
It follows from (\ref{eq:Yk_tilde_def}), (\ref{eq:Theta_hat}) and (\ref{eq:Y_normalized}) that
\begin{align}
\tilde{Y}_k
= \bigg( |X_k| \sqrt{\Delta} e^{j\Phi_{X,k}} + \tilde{N}_k \bigg) \left( 1 + \tilde{Z}_{k-1} \right) e^{j W_{(k-1)L+1}}
\label{eq:Yk_tilde}
\end{align}
where $\tilde{N}_k$ and $\tilde{Z}_{k-1}$ are statistically independent and
\begin{align}
&\tilde{N}_k \sim \mathcal{N}_{\mathbb{C}}(0,1) \\
&\tilde{Z}_{k-1} \Big| \{|X_{k-1}|=|x_{k-1}|\} \sim \mathcal{N}_{\mathbb{C}}\left(0,\frac{1}{|x_{k-1}|^2 \Delta}\right).
\label{eq:Z_given_X}
\end{align}
The notation (\ref{eq:Z_given_X}) means that,
conditioned on $\{|X_{k-1}|=|x_{k-1}|\}$, $\tilde{Z}_{k-1}$ is a Gaussian random variable
with mean $0$ and variance $1/(|x_{k-1}|^2 \Delta)$.
Moreover, $W_{(k-1)L+1}$ is statistically independent of $\tilde{N}_k$ and $\tilde{Z}_{k-1}$.
The choice of $\tilde{Y}_k$ in (\ref{eq:Yk_tilde_def}) implies that
\begin{align}
I(\Phi_{X,k};\tilde{Y}_k |X_{A}^n,X^{k-1})
&= I(\Phi_{X,k};\tilde{Y}_k |X_{A,k},X_{k-1}).
\label{eq:I_PhiX_Ytilde_LEBOWSKI}
\end{align}
Define $\tilde{\Phi}_{Y,k} \equiv \angle{\tilde{Y}_k}$ and
\begin{align}
&q_{\tilde{\Phi}_{Y}|\Phi_{X}} \left(\phi_y \big| \phi_x \right)
\equiv \frac{\exp(\alpha \cos(\phi_y-\phi_x) )}{2 \pi I_0(\alpha)}.
\label{eq:q_PhiY|PhiX_new}
\end{align}
Furthermore, define
\begin{align}
&q_{\tilde{\Phi}_{Y,k}|X_{A,k},X_{k-1}}\left(\phi_y \big| |x_k|,x_{k-1} \right) \nonumber\\&
\equiv \int_{-\pi}^{\pi}
p_{\Phi_{X,k}|X_{A,k},X_{k-1}} \left(\phi_x \big| |x_k|,x_{k-1} \right)
q_{\tilde{\Phi}_{Y}|\Phi_{X}} (\phi_y | \phi_x)
d\phi_x \nonumber\\&
= \frac{1}{2 \pi}.
\label{eq:q_PhiY_new}
\end{align}
The last equality holds because $X_1,\ldots,X_n$ are statistically independent
and $\Phi_{X,k}$ is independent of $X_{A,k}$ with a uniform distribution on $[-\pi,\pi)$.
We have
\ifdefined\twocolumnmode{
\begin{align}
&I(\Phi_{X,k};\tilde{Y}_k |X_{A,k},X_{k-1}) \nonumber\\
&\stackrel{(a)}{\geq} I(\Phi_{X,k};\tilde{\Phi}_{Y,k} |X_{A,k},X_{k-1}) \nonumber\\
&\stackrel{(b)}{\geq}
\mathbb{E}\left[\log q_{\tilde{\Phi}_{Y}|\Phi_{X}} (\tilde{\Phi}_{Y,k}|\Phi_{X,k}) \right] \nonumber\\& -
\mathbb{E}\left[\log q_{\tilde{\Phi}_{Y,k}|X_{A,k},X_{k-1}} \Big(\tilde{\Phi}_{Y,k} \big| |X_k|,X_{k-1} \Big) \right] \nonumber\\
&\stackrel{(c)}{=} \log(2\pi) - \log( 2 \pi I_0(\alpha) ) + \alpha \mathbb{E}\left[ \cos(\tilde{\Phi}_{Y,k}-\Phi_{X,k}) \right] \nonumber\\
&= - \log( I_0(\alpha) ) + \alpha \mathbb{E}\left[ \cos(\tilde{\Phi}_{Y,k}-\Phi_{X,k}) \right] \nonumber\\
&\stackrel{(d)}{\geq} \frac{1}{2} \log\alpha - \alpha
+ \alpha \mathbb{E}\left[ \cos(\tilde{\Phi}_{Y,k}-\Phi_{X,k}) \right] \nonumber\\
&\geq \frac{1}{2} \log{\alpha} - \alpha \frac{\sigma^2_{W}}{2} - \frac{4 \alpha}{\textsf{SNR} \Delta}
\label{eq:I_PhiX_Ytilde_LB_LEBOWSKI}
\end{align}
}\else{
\begin{align}
&I(\Phi_{X,k};\tilde{Y}_k |X_{A,k},X_{k-1}) \nonumber\\
&\stackrel{(a)}{\geq} I(\Phi_{X,k};\tilde{\Phi}_{Y,k} |X_{A,k},X_{k-1}) \nonumber\\
&\stackrel{(b)}{\geq}
\mathbb{E}\left[\log q_{\tilde{\Phi}_{Y}|\Phi_{X}} (\tilde{\Phi}_{Y,k}|\Phi_{X,k}) \right] -
\mathbb{E}\left[\log q_{\tilde{\Phi}_{Y,k}|X_{A,k},X_{k-1}} \Big(\tilde{\Phi}_{Y,k} \big| |X_k|,X_{k-1} \Big) \right] \nonumber\\
&\stackrel{(c)}{=} \log(2\pi) - \log( 2 \pi I_0(\alpha) ) + \alpha \mathbb{E}\left[ \cos(\tilde{\Phi}_{Y,k}-\Phi_{X,k}) \right] \nonumber\\
&= - \log( I_0(\alpha) ) + \alpha \mathbb{E}\left[ \cos(\tilde{\Phi}_{Y,k}-\Phi_{X,k}) \right] \nonumber\\
&\stackrel{(d)}{\geq} \frac{1}{2} \log\alpha - \alpha
+ \alpha \mathbb{E}\left[ \cos(\tilde{\Phi}_{Y,k}-\Phi_{X,k}) \right] \nonumber\\
&\geq \frac{1}{2} \log{\alpha} - \alpha \frac{\sigma^2_{W}}{2} - \frac{4 \alpha}{\textsf{SNR} \Delta}
\label{eq:I_PhiX_Ytilde_LB_LEBOWSKI}
\end{align}
}\fi
where
$(a)$ follows from the data processing inequality,
$(b)$ follows by extending the result of the auxiliary-channel lower bound theorem in \cite[Sec. VI]{Arnold2006},
$(c)$ follows from (\ref{eq:q_PhiY|PhiX_new}) and (\ref{eq:q_PhiY_new}),
$(d)$ follows from (\ref{eq:BesselI0_UB})
and the last inequality holds because
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}\left[\cos(\tilde{\Phi}_{Y,k}-\Phi_{X,k})\right]
\geq 1 - \frac{\sigma^2_{W}}{2} - \frac{4}{\textsf{SNR} \Delta}
\end{align}
for $\textsf{SNR} \Delta > 2$,
as we will show.
Define
\begin{align}
S_k
&\equiv 1 + \tilde{Z}_k
\label{eq:Sk_def} \\
\hat{Y}_k
&\equiv |X_k| \sqrt{\Delta} e^{j\Phi_{X,k}} + \tilde{N}_k.
\label{eq:Yk_hat_def}
\end{align}
Therefore, we have
\begin{align}
& \mathbb{E}\left[\cos(\tilde{\Phi}_{Y,k}-\Phi_{X,k})\right] \nonumber\\
&\stackrel{(a)}{=} \mathbb{E}\left[\cos(W_{(k-1)L+1}+\Phi_{S,k-1}+\hat{\Phi}_{Y,k}-\Phi_{X,k}) \right] \nonumber\\
&\stackrel{(b)}{=} \mathbb{E}\left[\cos(W_{(k-1)L+1}+\Phi_{S,k-1})\right] \mathbb{E}\left[\cos(\hat{\Phi}_{Y,k}-\Phi_{X,k}) \right] \nonumber\\&
- \mathbb{E}\left[\sin(W_{(k-1)L+1}+\Phi_{S,k-1})\right] \mathbb{E}\left[\sin(\hat{\Phi}_{Y,k}-\Phi_{X,k}) \right]
\label{eq:Ecos_PhiYtilde_minus_PhiX}
\end{align}
where $\Phi_{S,k} \equiv \angle{S_k}$
and $\hat{\Phi}_{Y,k} \equiv \angle{\hat{Y}_k}$.
Step
$(a)$ follows from (\ref{eq:Yk_tilde})
while step
$(b)$ follows from the trigonometric relation
$\cos(A+B) = \cos(A) \cos(B) - \sin(A) \sin(B)$
and that $W_{(k-1)L+1}+\Phi_{S,k-1}$ is independent of $\hat{\Phi}_{Y,k}$ and $\Phi_{X,k}$.
Given $X_{A,k}=|x_k|$, $\hat{Y}_k$ is statistically the same as $Y$ in (\ref{eq:ring_Y_def}) with $R=|x_k|\sqrt{\Delta}$,
and therefore we have from Lemma \ref{lemma:awgn-lemma-trig} that
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}\left[ \cos(\hat{\Phi}_{Y,k}-\Phi_{X,k}) \bigg| X_{A,k}=|x_k| \right]
&\geq 1 - \frac{1}{|x_k|^2 \Delta}
\label{eq:Ecos_PhiYhat_minus_PhiX} \\
\mathbb{E}\left[ \sin(\hat{\Phi}_{Y,k}-\Phi_{X,k}) \bigg| X_{A,k}=|x_k| \right]
&=0.
\label{eq:Esin_PhiYhat_minus_PhiX}
\end{align}
Equations (\ref{eq:Ecos_PhiYtilde_minus_PhiX}) and (\ref{eq:Esin_PhiYhat_minus_PhiX}) imply that
we do not need to compute $\mathbb{E}\left[\sin(W_{(k-1)L+1}+\Phi_{S,k-1})\right]$.
We have
\ifdefined\twocolumnmode{
\begin{align}
& \mathbb{E}\left[\cos(W_{(k-1)L+1}+\Phi_{S,k-1})\right] \nonumber\\
&= \mathbb{E}\left[\cos(W_{(k-1)L+1})\right] \mathbb{E}\left[\cos(\Phi_{S,k-1})\right] \nonumber\\&
- \mathbb{E}\left[\sin(W_{(k-1)L+1})\right] \mathbb{E}\left[\sin(\Phi_{S,k-1})\right]
\label{eq:Ecos_W_plus_PhiS}
\end{align}
}\else{
\begin{align}
& \mathbb{E}\left[\cos(W_{(k-1)L+1}+\Phi_{S,k-1})\right] \nonumber\\
&= \mathbb{E}\left[\cos(W_{(k-1)L+1})\right] \mathbb{E}\left[\cos(\Phi_{S,k-1})\right]
- \mathbb{E}\left[\sin(W_{(k-1)L+1})\right] \mathbb{E}\left[\sin(\Phi_{S,k-1})\right]
\label{eq:Ecos_W_plus_PhiS}
\end{align}
}\fi
because $W_{(k-1)L+1}$ and $\Phi_{S,k-1}$ are independent.
Since $W_{(k-1)L+1}$ is Gaussian with mean 0 and variance $\sigma^2_W = 2\pi\beta \Delta$,
the characteristic function of $W_{(k-1)L+1}$ is
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}\left[ e^{j W_{(k-1)L+1}} \right]
= e^{- \sigma^2_{W}/2}
\label{eq:E_expjW}
\end{align}
and by using the linearity of expectation, we have
\begin{align}
&\mathbb{E}\left[ \cos(W_{(k-1)L+1}) \right]
= \Re\left[ \mathbb{E}\left[ e^{j W_{(k-1)L+1}} \right] \right]
= e^{- \sigma^2_{W}/2}
\label{eq:Ecos_W} \\
&\mathbb{E}\left[ \sin(W_{(k-1)L+1}) \right]
= \Im\left[ \mathbb{E}\left[ e^{j W_{(k-1)L+1}} \right] \right]
= 0
\label{eq:Esin_W}
\end{align}
where $\Re[\cdot]$ and $\Im[\cdot]$ denote the real and imaginary parts, respectively.
Given $X_{k-1}=x_{k-1}$, $S_{k-1}$ is distributed as $Y$ in (\ref{eq:ring_Y_def}) with $R=|x_{k-1}|\sqrt{\Delta}$.
By using Lemma \ref{lemma:awgn-lemma-trig}, we have
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}\left[\cos(\Phi_{S,k-1}) \bigg| X_{k-1}=x_{k-1} \right]
&\geq 1 - \frac{1}{|x_{k-1}|^2 \Delta}.
\label{eq:Ecos_PhiS}
\end{align}
It follows from (\ref{eq:Ecos_W_plus_PhiS}), (\ref{eq:Ecos_W}), (\ref{eq:Esin_W}) and (\ref{eq:Ecos_PhiS}) that
\ifdefined\twocolumnmode{
\begin{align}
&\mathbb{E}\left[\cos(W_{(k-1)L+1}+\Phi_{S,k-1})\right] \nonumber\\&
\geq e^{- \sigma^2_{W}/2} \left(1 - \mathbb{E}\left[\frac{1}{|X_{k-1}|^2}\right] \frac{1}{\Delta} \right).
\label{eq:Ecos_W_plus_PhiS_LB}
\end{align}
}\else{
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}\left[\cos(W_{(k-1)L+1}+\Phi_{S,k-1})\right]
\geq e^{- \sigma^2_{W}/2} \left(1 - \mathbb{E}\left[\frac{1}{|X_{k-1}|^2}\right] \frac{1}{\Delta} \right).
\label{eq:Ecos_W_plus_PhiS_LB}
\end{align}
}\fi
By combining (\ref{eq:Ecos_PhiYtilde_minus_PhiX}), (\ref{eq:Ecos_PhiYhat_minus_PhiX}), (\ref{eq:Esin_PhiYhat_minus_PhiX})
(\ref{eq:Ecos_W_plus_PhiS_LB}), we have
(for $P\Delta > 2$)
\begin{align}
&\mathbb{E}\left[\cos(\tilde{\Phi}_{Y,k}-\Phi_{X,k})\right] \nonumber\\
&\geq e^{- \sigma^2_{W}/2}
\left(1 - \mathbb{E}\left[\frac{1}{|X_{k-1}|^2}\right] \frac{1}{\Delta} \right)
\left(1 - \mathbb{E}\left[\frac{1}{|X_k|^2 }\right] \frac{1}{\Delta} \right) \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(a)}{\geq} e^{- \sigma^2_{W}/2} \left(1 - \frac{2}{P \Delta}\right)^2 \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(b)}{\geq} e^{- \sigma^2_{W}/2} - \frac{4}{P \Delta} \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(c)}{\geq} 1 - \frac{\sigma^2_{W}}{2} - \frac{4}{P \Delta}
\label{eq:Ecos_PhiYtilde_minus_PhiX_LB}
\end{align}
where
$(a)$ holds because $|X_k|^2 \geq P/2$ and $|X_{k-1}|^2 \geq P/2$,
while
$(b)$ follows from $e^{- \sigma^2_{W}/2} \leq 1$ and the non-negativity of $4/(P\Delta)^2$ and
$(c)$ follows from $e^{-x} \geq 1 - x$.
It follows from (\ref{eq:I_PhiX1n_Y1n|XA1n_LB1}), (\ref{eq:I_PhiX_Ytilde_LEBOWSKI}) and (\ref{eq:I_PhiX_Ytilde_LB_LEBOWSKI}) that
\begin{align}
\frac{1}{\nsymb} I(\Phi_{X}^\nsymb;\textbf{Y}^\nsymb|X_{A}^\nsymb)
&\geq \frac{\nsymb-1}{\nsymb}
\left[ \frac{1}{2} \log{\alpha} - \alpha \pi\beta\Delta - \frac{4 \alpha}{\textsf{SNR} \Delta} \right].
\label{eq:I_PhiX1n_Y1n|XA1n_LB2}
\end{align}
Hence, we have
\begin{align}
I(\Phi_{X};\textbf{Y}|X_{A})
&= \lim_{\nsymb \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{\nsymb} I(\Phi_{X}^\nsymb;\textbf{Y}^\nsymb|X_{A}^\nsymb) \nonumber \\
&\geq \frac{1}{2} \log{\alpha} - \alpha \pi\beta\Delta - \frac{4 \alpha}{\textsf{SNR} \Delta}.
\label{eq:I_PhiX_Y|XA_LB_LEBOWSKI}
\end{align}
Setting $\alpha = \textsf{SNR}\Delta$ (the signal-to-noise ratio in one \emph{sample}) gives
\begin{align}
I(\Phi_{X};\textbf{Y}|X_{A})
&\geq \frac{1}{2} \log{\textsf{SNR}\Delta} - \pi\beta \textsf{SNR}\Delta^2 - 4.
\label{eq:I_PhiX_Y|XA_LB_simple_alpha}
\end{align}
Choosing $L = \lceil \beta \sqrt{\textsf{SNR}} \rceil$ as in (\ref{eq:L_sqrtsnr}) and using $\Delta = 1/L$, we have
\begin{align}
\lim_{\textsf{SNR} \rightarrow \infty} \sqrt{\textsf{SNR}} \Delta = \frac{1}{\beta}
\text{ and }
\lim_{\textsf{SNR} \rightarrow \infty} \textsf{SNR} \Delta^2 = \frac{1}{\beta^2}.
\label{eq:snr-limits}
\end{align}
Therefore, by taking the limit of $\textsf{SNR}$ tending to infinity, we have
\begin{align}
\lim_{\textsf{SNR} \rightarrow \infty} I(\Phi_{X};\textbf{Y}|X_{A}) - \frac{1}{4} \log{\textsf{SNR}}
\geq \log{\frac{1}{\beta}}-\frac{\pi}{\beta}-4.
\label{eq:inforate-phase-contrib}
\end{align}
The last equation implies that phase modulation contributes $1/4$ to the pre-log of the information rate.
We remark that, since the lower bound (\ref{eq:I_PhiX_Y|XA_LB_LEBOWSKI}) is valid for any $\alpha>0$,
one can optimize over $\alpha$ to get the tightest lower bound as follows
\begin{align}
I(\Phi_{X};\textbf{Y}|X_{A})
&\geq \max_{\alpha>0} \frac{1}{2} \log{\alpha} - \alpha \left( \pi \beta \Delta + \frac{4}{\textsf{SNR} \Delta} \right) \nonumber \\
&= \frac{1}{2} \log{\frac{1}{2 \pi \beta \Delta + \frac{8}{\textsf{SNR} \Delta}}} - \frac{1}{2} \nonumber\\
&= \frac{1}{2} \log{\frac{\textsf{SNR} \Delta}{2 \pi \beta \textsf{SNR} \Delta^2 + 8}} - \frac{1}{2}.
\label{eq:I_PhiX_Y|XA_LB_best_alpha}
\end{align}
For $L = \left\lceil \beta \sqrt{\textsf{SNR}} \right\rceil$, we have
from (\ref{eq:snr-limits}) and (\ref{eq:I_PhiX_Y|XA_LB_best_alpha})
\begin{align}
\lim_{\textsf{SNR} \rightarrow \infty} I(\Phi_{X};\textbf{Y}|X_{A}) - \frac{1}{4} \log{\textsf{SNR}}
\geq -\log{\beta(2 \pi + 8 \beta)}-\frac{1}{2}.
\label{eq:inforate-phase-contrib-best_alpha}
\end{align}
We find that the optimum $\alpha$ (the $\alpha$ that gives the tightest lower bound)
does not yield a pre-log better than that of $\alpha = \textsf{SNR}\Delta$.
The main result of this section is summarized in Theorem \ref{theorem:oversamp-approxmodel}.
\begin{theorem}
\label{theorem:oversamp-approxmodel}
Consider the discrete-time model in (\ref{eq:Yk_approx}).
If $L = \lceil \beta \sqrt{\textsf{SNR}} \rceil$ and
the input $X^n$ is i.i.d. with $\arg(X_k)$ independent of $|X_k|$ for $k=1,\ldots,n$ such that
$\arg(X_k)$ is uniformly distributed over $[-\pi,\pi)$ and
$(|X_k|^2-P/2)$ is exponentially distributed with mean $P/2$,
then
\begin{align}
\lim_{\textsf{SNR} \rightarrow \infty} I(X_{A};\textbf{Y}) - \frac{1}{2} \log{\textsf{SNR}}
\geq - 2 - \frac{1}{2} \log(8 \pi)
\label{eq:I_XA_Y_approxmodel_theorem}
\end{align}
and
\begin{align}
\lim_{\textsf{SNR} \rightarrow \infty} I(\Phi_{X};\textbf{Y}|X_{A}) - \frac{1}{4} \log{\textsf{SNR}}
\geq \log{\frac{1}{\beta}}-\frac{\pi}{\beta}-4.
\label{eq:I_PhiX_Y|XA_approxmodel_theorem}
\end{align}
\end{theorem}
Moreover, (\ref{eq:I_PhiX_Y|XA_approxmodel_theorem}) and (\ref{eq:I_XA_Y_approxmodel_theorem})
are achieved by the receiver structure shown in Fig. \ref{fig:two-stage}.
\begin{figure
\centering
\resizebox{\ifdefined\twocolumnmode \columnwidth \else 0.75\textwidth \fi}{!}{\input{./fig-tikz-new/two-stage-explicit1}}
\caption{Two-stage decoding in a multi-sample receiver.
The upper branch is part of the double filtering receiver for amplitude decoding.
The lower branch is a phase-noise tracker which outputs an estimate
$\hat{\theta}_{k-1}$ of the phase noise where $\hat{\theta}_{k-1} = \arg(y_{k-1}/\hat{x}_{m-1})$ where $m = \lceil k/L \rceil$ (cf. (\ref{eq:Theta_hat})).
The phase decoder uses the estimate of the phase noise $\hat{\theta}_{k-1}$ and the estimated amplitude $\hat{x}_{A,m}$
to produce an estimate $\hat{\phi}_{X,m}$ of the phase of $x_m$.
}
\label{fig:two-stage}
\end{figure}
The proof of (\ref{eq:I_XA_Y_approxmodel_theorem}) is similar to the proof in
Sec. \ref{sec:amplitude-lower-bound} for the full model and hence the proof is omitted.\footnote{
The inequality (\ref{eq:I_XA_Y_LB}) is valid for the approximate model except that $G$ is set to $1$, because $F_k=1$ in the approximate model.
Hence, the term $-\pi^2/36$ in (\ref{eq:I_XA_Y_fullmodel_theorem}) does not appear in (\ref{eq:I_XA_Y_approxmodel_theorem}).}
As a corollary of Theorem \ref{theorem:oversamp-approxmodel},
the capacity pre-log for the approximate model (\ref{eq:Yk_approx}) satisfies
\begin{align}
\lim_{\textsf{SNR} \rightarrow \infty} \frac{C(\textsf{SNR})}{\log{\textsf{SNR}}} \geq \frac{3}{4}.
\label{eq:prelog_approxmodel}
\end{align}
The corollary follows from Theorem \ref{theorem:oversamp-approxmodel} by using $C(\textsf{SNR}) \geq I(X;\textbf{Y}) = I(X_{A};\textbf{Y}) + I(\Phi_{X};\textbf{Y}|X_{A})$.
This shows that the capacity grows logarithmically at high SNR with a pre-log factor of at least 3/4.
It is worth pointing out that the phase modulation pre-log of 1/4 requires only 2 samples per symbol
for which the time resolution, $1/\Delta$, grows as the square root of the SNR.
It is interesting to contemplate whether another receiver, e.g., a non-coherent receiver,
can achieve the maximum amplitude modulation pre-log of 1/2 but requires only 1 sample per symbol.
If so, one would need only 3 samples per symbol to achieve a pre-log of 3/4.
\section{Summary and Open Problems}
\label{sec:open}
The known results at high SNR are summarized in Tables \ref{table:asymptotic_capacity} and \ref{table:asymptotic_rate}.
The conjecture in Table \ref{table:asymptotic_capacity} is based on
our belief that $\{H_k\}$ in (\ref{eq:Hk}) is stationary, ergodic and regular, i.e.,
its "present" cannot be predicted precisely from its "past" \cite{Lapidoth2005}.
If this is true, it follows that the capacity grows double-logarithmically with SNR according to Lapidoth and Moser\cite{Lapidoth2003}.
For the model \emph{without} filtering, it is not known whether phase modulation with oversampling can achieve a pre-log greater than $1/4$.
For the model \emph{with} filtering, Barletta and Kramer \cite{BarlettaISIT2015} recently showed that phase modulation with oversampling also achieves a pre-log of at least 1/4; we do not know if more is possible.
It is worth mentioning that the results in \cite{GhozlanISIT2013} and \cite{GhozlanISIT2014}
were obtained by letting the number of samples $L$ per symbols grow with SNR:
\begin{align}
L = \left\lceil \beta \sqrt{\textsf{SNR}} \right\rceil.
\end{align}
However, this is not necessarily the optimum (minimum) oversampling factor to achieve the aforementioned pre-logs.
For the model with filtering, we indeed showed in Sec. \ref{sec:high-snr} that a pre-log of 1/2 can be achieved using
\begin{align}
L = \left\lceil \beta\sqrt[3]{\textsf{SNR}} \right\rceil
\end{align}
but it is not clear whether this is optimal.
For the model without filtering, Barletta and Kramer \cite{BarlettaITW2015} showed that if
\begin{align}
L = \left\lceil \textsf{SNR}^\alpha \right\rceil
\end{align}
where $0 < \alpha \leq 1$, then the capacity pre-log is at most $(1+\alpha)/2$
which implies that $L \propto \sqrt{\textsf{SNR}}$ is optimal for achieving a pre-log of 3/4.
The impact of oversampling on the capacity of
non-Wiener phase noise channels, or multi-input multi-output (MIMO) phase noise channels,
are also interesting open problems.
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.25}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{Asymptotic Capacity} \label{table:asymptotic_capacity}
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|} \hline
Model & Baud Rate Sampling ($L=1$) \\
& $C(\textsf{SNR})$ \\ \hline
Without Filtering (\ref{eq:dt-mfrx-approx}) & $(1/2) \log{\textsf{SNR}}$ \cite{LapidothPhaseNoise2002} \\
With Filtering (\ref{eq:dt-mfrx-full}) & $\log\log{\textsf{SNR}}$ (conjecture) \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\caption{Asymptotic Achievable Rate} \label{table:asymptotic_rate}
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|} \hline
Model & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{Oversampling} \\ \cline{2-3}
& Amplitude Mod. & Phase Mod. \\
& $I(X_A;\textbf{Y})$ & $I(\Phi_{X};\textbf{Y}|X_{A})$ \\ \hline
Without Filtering (\ref{eq:Yk_approx}) & $(1/2) \log{\textsf{SNR}}$ \cite{GhozlanISIT2013} & $\geq$ $(1/4) \log{\textsf{SNR}}$ \cite{GhozlanISIT2014}\\
With Filtering (\ref{eq:Yk}) & $(1/2) \log{\textsf{SNR}}$ \cite{GhozlanISIT2013} & $\geq$ $(1/4) \log{\textsf{SNR}}$ \cite{BarlettaISIT2015}\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conc}
We studied a waveform channel impaired by Wiener phase noise and AWGN.
A discrete-time channel model based on filtering and oversampling was derived.
The model accounts for the filtering effects on the phase noise.
It is shown that, at high SNR, the multi-sample receiver achieves rates that grow logarithmically with SNR
with at least a 1/2 pre-log factor,
if the number of samples per symbol grows with the cubic root of the SNR.
In addition, we computed via numerical simulations lower bounds on the information rates achieved by the multi-sample receiver.
We observed that the required oversampling rate depends on
the linewidth of the phase noise, the shape of the transmit-pulse and the signal-to-noise ratio.
The results demonstrate that multi-sample receivers increase the information rate
for both strong and weak phase noise at high SNR.
We compared our results with the results obtained by using other discrete-time models.
Finally, we showed for an approximate discrete-time model of the multi-sample receiver
that phase modulation achieves a pre-log of at least 1/4 while amplitude modulation achieves a pre-log of 1/2,
if the number of samples per symbol grows with the square root of the SNR.
Thus, we demonstrated that the overall capacity pre-log is $3/4$ which is
greater than the capacity pre-log of the (approximate) discrete-time Wiener phase noise channel with only one sample per symbol.
\appendices
\section{}
\subsection*{Appendix A.1}
\begin{itemize}
\item Wiener process:
The Wiener process $\Theta(t)$
is a Gaussian process with the second-order statistics \cite[Sec. 3.8.1]{Gardiner1985}
\begin{align}
&\mathbb{E}\left[ \Theta(t)-\Theta(0) \right] = 0 \nonumber \\
&\mathbb{E}\left[ (\Theta(t_1)-\Theta(0)) (\Theta(t_2)-\Theta(0)) \right] = 2\pi \beta \min\{t_1,t_2\}.
\label{eq:Thetat_statistics}
\end{align}
\begin{property}
\label{prop:increm_independent}
The Wiener process has independent increments, i.e.,
increments over disjoint time intervals are independent.
\end{property}
\begin{property}
\label{prop:increm_var}
An increment $\Theta(t_2) - \Theta(t_1)$ is Gaussian with
\begin{align}
\textsf{Var}\left( \Theta(t_2) - \Theta(t_1) \right)
&= 2 \pi \beta |t_2 - t_1|.
\end{align}
\end{property}
\item The process $\{F_k\}$
\begin{remark} \label{remark:Fk_iid}
The process $\{F_k\}$ is an i.i.d. process (if the pulse is rectangular).
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
The independence follows from Property \ref{prop:increm_independent}
and because functions of independent random variables are also independent.
The identical distribution property follows from the rectangular pulse shape\footnote{
If the pulse is not rectangular, the process $\{F_k\}$ is not identically distributed
because the phase noise $e^{j\Theta(t)}$ is weighted in a given sample interval according to the pulse shape.}
and that the integrations are over increments of a Wiener process with equal length.
\end{proof}
\end{itemize}
\subsection*{Appendix A.2}
\begin{itemize}
\item Moments of Gaussian random variables:
\begin{remark}
If $X \sim \mathcal{N}_\mathbb{R}(0,\sigma^2)$, then $\mathbb{E}[ X^4 ] = 3 \sigma^4$.
\label{remark:real_gauss_4th_moment}
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
If $Z \sim \mathcal{N}_\mathbb{C}(0,\sigma^2)$, then $\mathbb{E}[ |Z|^4 ] = 2 \sigma^4$.
\label{remark:cc_gauss_4th_moment}
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
If $Z \sim \mathcal{N}_\mathbb{C}(0,\sigma^2)$, then $\mathbb{E}\left[ Z |Z|^2 \right]=0$.
\label{remark:cc_gauss_3rd_moment}
\end{remark}
Remark \ref{remark:real_gauss_4th_moment} follows from \cite[eq (4.54)]{kobayashi2011probability}
while remarks \ref{remark:cc_gauss_4th_moment} and \ref{remark:cc_gauss_3rd_moment} follow from
\cite[eq (8.117)]{kobayashi2011probability}.
\item $\mathbb{E}[ Z_1 ] = 0 $
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}[ Z_1 ]
&\stackrel{(a)}{=} \mathbb{E}\left[ \sum_{\ell=1}^L \Re[ e^{j \Phi_X} e^{j \Theta_\ell} F_\ell N_\ell^* ] \right] \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(b)}{=} \sum_{\ell=1}^L \Re\left[ \mathbb{E}[ e^{j \Phi_X} e^{j \Theta_\ell} F_\ell ] \mathbb{E}[ N_\ell^* ] \right] \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(c)}{=} 0
\label{eq:EZ1}
\end{align}
Step
$(a)$ follows from the definition (\ref{eq:Z1_def}),
$(b)$ follows because $\{N_k\}$ is independent of $\Phi_X$, $\{\Theta_k\}$ and $\{F_k\}$, and
$(c)$ follows from (\ref{eq:N_mean}).
\item $\mathbb{E}[ Z_1^2 ] = \mathbb{E}[G] {\sigma^2_N \Delta L}/{2}$
\ifdefined\twocolumnmode{
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}[ Z_1^2 ]
&\stackrel{(a)}{=} \mathbb{E}\bigg[ \sum_{\ell=1}^L \sum_{k=1}^L
\Re[ e^{j \Phi_X} e^{j \Theta_\ell} F_\ell N_\ell^* ]
\Re[ e^{j \Phi_X} e^{j \Theta_k} F_k N_k^* ] \bigg] \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(b)}{=} \mathbb{E}\bigg[ \sum_{\ell=1}^L \sum_{k=1}^L \frac{1}{2} \Re[
e^{-j 2\Phi_X} e^{-j \Theta_\ell-j \Theta_k} F_\ell^* F_k^* N_\ell N_k
\nonumber \\& \qquad \qquad \qquad \ +
e^{j \Theta_\ell-j \Theta_k} F_\ell F_k^* N_\ell^* N_k] \bigg] \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(c)}{=} \sum_{\ell=1}^L \sum_{k=1}^L \frac{1}{2} \Re \Big[
\mathbb{E}[ e^{-j 2\Phi_X} e^{-j \Theta_\ell-j \Theta_k} F_\ell^* F_k^* N_\ell N_k ]
\nonumber \\& \qquad \qquad \quad \ +
\mathbb{E}[ e^{j \Theta_\ell-j \Theta_k} F_\ell F_k^* N_\ell^* N_k] \Big] \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(d)}{=} \sum_{\ell=1}^L \sum_{k=1}^L \frac{1}{2} \Re\Big[
\mathbb{E}[ e^{-j 2\Phi_X} e^{-j \Theta_\ell-j \Theta_k} F_\ell^* F_k^*] \mathbb{E}[N_\ell N_k]
\nonumber \\& \qquad \qquad \quad \ +
\mathbb{E}[ e^{j \Theta_\ell-j \Theta_k} F_\ell F_k^*] \mathbb{E}[N_\ell^* N_k] \Big] \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(e)}{=} \frac{1}{2} \sigma^2_N \Delta \sum_{\ell=1}^L \mathbb{E}[|F_\ell|^2] \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(f)}{=} \frac{1}{2} \sigma^2_N \Delta L ~ \mathbb{E}[G]
\label{eq:EZ12}
\end{align}
}\else{
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}[ Z_1^2 ]
&\stackrel{(a)}{=} \mathbb{E}\bigg[ \sum_{\ell=1}^L \sum_{k=1}^L
\Re[ e^{j \Phi_X} e^{j \Theta_\ell} F_\ell N_\ell^* ]
\Re[ e^{j \Phi_X} e^{j \Theta_k} F_k N_k^* ] \bigg] \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(b)}{=} \mathbb{E}\bigg[ \sum_{\ell=1}^L \sum_{k=1}^L \frac{1}{2} \Re[
e^{-j 2\Phi_X} e^{-j \Theta_\ell-j \Theta_k} F_\ell^* F_k^* N_\ell N_k
+
e^{j \Theta_\ell-j \Theta_k} F_\ell F_k^* N_\ell^* N_k] \bigg] \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(c)}{=} \sum_{\ell=1}^L \sum_{k=1}^L \frac{1}{2} \Re \Big[
\mathbb{E}[ e^{-j 2\Phi_X} e^{-j \Theta_\ell-j \Theta_k} F_\ell^* F_k^* N_\ell N_k ]
+
\mathbb{E}[ e^{j \Theta_\ell-j \Theta_k} F_\ell F_k^* N_\ell^* N_k] \Big] \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(d)}{=} \sum_{\ell=1}^L \sum_{k=1}^L \frac{1}{2} \Re\Big[
\mathbb{E}[ e^{-j 2\Phi_X} e^{-j \Theta_\ell-j \Theta_k} F_\ell^* F_k^*] \mathbb{E}[N_\ell N_k]
+
\mathbb{E}[ e^{j \Theta_\ell-j \Theta_k} F_\ell F_k^*] \mathbb{E}[N_\ell^* N_k] \Big] \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(e)}{=} \frac{1}{2} \sigma^2_N \Delta \sum_{\ell=1}^L \mathbb{E}[|F_\ell|^2] \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(f)}{=} \frac{1}{2} \sigma^2_N \Delta L ~ \mathbb{E}[G]
\label{eq:EZ12}
\end{align}
}\fi
Step
$(a)$ follows from the definition (\ref{eq:Z1_def}),
$(b)$ follows by using the relation $\Re[A] \Re[B] = \frac{1}{2} \Re[A B + A B^*] = \frac{1}{2} \Re[A^* B^* + A^* B]$,
$(c)$ follows from the linearity of the expectation,
$(d)$ follows because $\{N_k\}$ is independent of $\Phi_X$, $\{\Theta_k\}$ and $\{F_k\}$,
$(e)$ follows from (\ref{eq:N_covar}) and (\ref{eq:N_pseudocovar}), and
$(f)$ follows from (\ref{eq:G_def}).
\item $\mathbb{E}[ Z_0 ] = \sigma^2_N \Delta L$
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}[ Z_0 ]
&\stackrel{(a)}{=} \mathbb{E}\left[ \sum_{\ell=1}^L |N_\ell|^2 \right] \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(b)}{=} \sigma^2_N \Delta L
\label{eq:EZ0}
\end{align}
Step
$(a)$ follows from the definition (\ref{eq:Z0_def}) and
$(b)$ follows from (\ref{eq:N_covar}).
\item $\mathbb{E}\left[ (Z_0-\mathbb{E}[Z_0])^2 \right] = \sigma^4_N \Delta^2 L$
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}\left[ (Z_0-\mathbb{E}[Z_0])^2 \right]
&= \textsf{Var}(Z_0) \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(a)}{=} L \textsf{Var}(|N_1|^2) \nonumber \\
&= L (\mathbb{E}[|N_1|^4] - \mathbb{E}^2[|N_1|^2]) \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(b)}{=} L \left( 2 \sigma^4_N \Delta^2 - \sigma^4_N \Delta^2 \right) \nonumber \\
&= \sigma^4_N \Delta^2 L
\label{eq:VarZ0}
\end{align}
where
$(a)$ holds because $\{N_k\}$ is i.i.d. and
$(b)$ follows from Remark \ref{remark:cc_gauss_4th_moment}.
\item $\mathbb{E}\left[ Z_1 Z_0 \right] = 0$
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}\left[ Z_1 Z_0 \right]
&\stackrel{(a)}{=} \mathbb{E}\left[
\left[ \sum_{\ell=1}^L \Re[ e^{j \Phi_X} e^{j \Theta_\ell} F_\ell N_\ell^* ] \right]
\left[ \sum_{k=1}^L |N_k|^2 \right]
\right] \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(b)}{=} \sum_{\ell=1}^L \sum_{k=1}^L \Re\left[ \mathbb{E}[ e^{j \Phi_X} e^{j \Theta_\ell} F_\ell ] \ \mathbb{E}[ N_\ell^* |N_k|^2 ] \right] \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(c)}{=} \sum_{\ell=1}^L \Re\left[ \mathbb{E}[ e^{j \Phi_X} e^{j \Theta_\ell} F_\ell] \ \mathbb{E}[ N_\ell^* |N_\ell|^2 ] \right] \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(d)}{=} 0
\label{eq:EZ1Z0}
\end{align}
Step
$(a)$ follows from the definitions (\ref{eq:Z1_def}) and (\ref{eq:Z0_def}),
$(b)$ follows because $\{N_k\}$ is independent of $\Phi_X$, $\{\Theta_k\}$ and $\{F_k\}$,
$(c)$ follows from the independence of $N_\ell$ and $N_k$ for $k \neq \ell$ and (\ref{eq:N_mean}),
i.e., $ \mathbb{E}[ N_\ell^* |N_k|^2 ] = \mathbb{E}[ N_\ell^*] \mathbb{E}[ |N_k|^2 ] = 0$ for $k \neq \ell$,
$(d)$ follows by using Remark \ref{remark:cc_gauss_3rd_moment}.
\item $\mathbb{E}\left[ Z_1 (Z_0-\mathbb{E}[Z_0]) \right] = 0$
Follows
by using (\ref{eq:EZ1Z0}) and (\ref{eq:EZ1}).
\item $\mathbb{E}\left[ G Z_1 \right] = 0$
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}\left[ G Z_1 \right]
&\stackrel{(a)}{=} \mathbb{E}\left[
\left[ \sum_{\ell=1}^L \Re[ e^{j \Phi_X} e^{j \Theta_\ell} F_\ell N_\ell^* ] \right]
\left[ \frac{1}{L} \sum_{k=1}^L |F_k|^2 \right]
\right] \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(b)}{=} \frac{1}{L} \sum_{\ell=1}^L \sum_{k=1}^L \Re\left[ \mathbb{E}[ e^{j \Phi_X} e^{j \Theta_\ell} F_\ell |F_k|^2 ] \ \mathbb{E}[ N_\ell^*] \right] \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(c)}{=} 0
\label{eq:EGZ1}
\end{align}
Step
$(a)$ follows from the definitions (\ref{eq:G_def}) and (\ref{eq:Z1_def}),
$(b)$ follows because $\{N_k\}$ is independent of $\Phi_X$, $\{\Theta_k\}$ and $\{F_k\}$,
$(c)$ follows from (\ref{eq:N_mean}).
\item $\mathbb{E}\left[ (G - 1) Z_1 \right] = 0$
Follows
by using (\ref{eq:EGZ1}) and (\ref{eq:EZ1}).
\end{itemize}
\subsection*{Appendix A.3}
\begin{itemize}
\item Details for computing $\mathbb{E}[ |F_1|^2 ]$
Using the definition in (\ref{eq:Fk_def}), we have
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}[ |F_1|^2 ]
&=\mathbb{E}\left[ \frac{1}{\Delta^2} \int_0^{\Delta} \int_0^{\Delta} e^{j (\Theta(t_2)-\Theta(t_1))} \ dt_2 dt_1 \right ] \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(a)}{=} \frac{1}{\Delta^2} \int_0^{\Delta} \int_0^{\Delta} \mathbb{E}\left[ e^{j (\Theta(t_2)-\Theta(t_1))} \right] \ dt_2 dt_1 \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(b)}{=} \frac{1}{\Delta^2} \int_0^{\Delta} \int_0^{\Delta} e^{-{\textsf{Var}(\Theta(t_2)-\Theta(t_1))}/2} \ dt_2 dt_1 \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(c)}{=} \frac{1}{\Delta^2} \int_0^{\Delta} \int_0^{\Delta} e^{-\pi \beta \Delta |t_2-t_1|} \ dt_2 dt_1 \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(d)}{=} \int_0^{1} \int_0^{1} a^{|u_2-u_1|} \ du_2 du_1.
\label{eq:EF2_integral}
\end{align}
Step $(a)$ follows from the linearity of expectation,
$(b)$ follows by using the characteristic function of a Gaussian random variable \cite{Papoulis2002},
$(c)$ follows from (\ref{eq:Thetat_statistics}), and
$(d)$ follows from the transformation of variables $t_1 = u_1\Delta$ and $t_2 = u_2\Delta$ .
We define
\begin{align}
a \equiv e^{-\pi \beta \Delta}.
\label{eq:a_def}
\end{align}
Finally, we have
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}[ |F_1|^2 ]
= 2\frac{a-1-\log{a}}{(\log{a})^2}
\label{eq:EF2}
\end{align}
by using (\ref{eq:EF2_integral}) and the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}
\begin{align*}
\int_0^{1} \int_0^{1} a^{|t-s|} \ ds \ dt = 2\frac{a-1-\log{a}}{(\log{a})^2}
,\text{ for } a>0.
\end{align*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Follows by direct integration.
\end{proof}
\item Details for computing $\mathbb{E}[ |F_1|^4 ]$
We remark that a formula for computing moments of filtered Wiener phase noise
(specifically, $\mathbb{E}[|F_1|^{2k}]$ where $k$ is a positive integer)
is found in \cite{ShamaiIT94}.
We proceed to compute $\mathbb{E}[ |F_1|^4 ]$.
Let $\mathcal{T} = \{\mathbf{t}: 0 \leq t_i \leq \Delta, i=1,2,3,4\}$ and
\begin{align}
\Psi(\mathbf{t}) = \Theta(t_4) - \Theta(t_3) + \Theta(t_2) - \Theta(t_1).
\end{align}
The variable $\Psi(\mathbf{t})$ is Gaussian.
Using the definition (\ref{eq:Fk_def}), we have
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}[ |F_1|^4 ]
&= \mathbb{E}\left[ \frac{1}{\Delta^4} \int_{\mathbf{t} \in \mathcal{T}} e^{j \Psi(\mathbf{t})} \ d\mathbf{t} \right ] \nonumber \\
&= \frac{1}{\Delta^4} \int_{\mathbf{t} \in \mathcal{T}} e^{-{\textsf{Var}\left( \Psi(\mathbf{t}) \right)}/{2} } \ d\mathbf{t}
\end{align}
where the last equality
follows by using the characteristic function of a Gaussian random variable.
The set $\mathcal{T}$ can be partitioned into 24 subsets based on the order of $t_1$, $t_2$, $t_3$ and $t_4$.
However, because of the symmetry, we have
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}[ |F_1|^4 ]
&= \frac{1}{\Delta^4} \left[ 16 \int_{\mathbf{t} \in \mathcal{T}_1} + 8 \int_{\mathbf{t} \in \mathcal{T}_2} \right]
e^{-{\textsf{Var}\left( \Psi(\mathbf{t}) \right)}/{2} } \ d\mathbf{t}
\label{eq:EF4_symmetry}
\end{align}
where the sets $\mathcal{T}_1$ and $\mathcal{T}_2$ are
\begin{align}
\mathcal{T}_1 &= \{\mathbf{t}:0 \leq t_1 \leq t_2 \leq t_3 \leq t_4 \leq \Delta\} \nonumber \\
\mathcal{T}_2 &= \{\mathbf{t}:0 \leq t_1 \leq t_3 \leq t_2 \leq t_4 \leq \Delta\}.
\end{align}
In other words, we need to compute the integral over two subsets only rather than 24 subsets.
For $\mathbf{t} \in \mathcal{T}_1$, we have
\begin{align}
\textsf{Var}\left( \Psi(\mathbf{t}) \right)
&\stackrel{(a)}{=} \textsf{Var}\left( \Theta(t_4) - \Theta(t_3) \right) + \textsf{Var}\left( \Theta(t_2) - \Theta(t_1) \right) \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(b)}{=} 2 \pi \beta (t_4 - t_3 + t_2 - t_1)
\end{align}
where $(a)$ follows because $\Theta(t_4) - \Theta(t_3)$ and $\Theta(t_2) - \Theta(t_1)$ are increments of a Wiener process over disjoint time intervals
and hence they are independent (see Property \ref{prop:increm_independent})
while $(b)$ follows from Property \ref{prop:increm_var}.
We compute the first integral
\begin{align}
K_1
&= \frac{1}{\Delta^4} \int_{\mathbf{t} \in \mathcal{T}_1} e^{-{\textsf{Var}\left( \Psi(\mathbf{t}) \right)}/{2} } \ d\mathbf{t} \nonumber \\
&= \int_0^1 \int_{u_1}^1 \int_{u_2}^1 \int_{u_3}^1 a^{u_4 - u_3 + u_2 - u_1} \ du_4 du_3 du_2 du_1 \nonumber \\
&= \frac{6 - 6 a + 4 \log{a} + 2 a \log{a} + (\log{a})^2}{2 (\log{a})^4}.
\label{eq:EF4_K1}
\end{align}
For $\mathbf{t} \in \mathcal{T}_2$,
we can rewrite $\Psi(\mathbf{t})$ as
\begin{align*}
\Psi(\mathbf{t}) = (\Theta(t_4) - \Theta(t_2)) + 2(\Theta(t_2) - \Theta(t_3)) + (\Theta(t_3) - \Theta(t_1))
\end{align*}
and hence, we have
\begin{align}
\textsf{Var}\left( \Psi(\mathbf{t}) \right)
&\stackrel{(a)}{=} \textsf{Var}\left( \Theta(t_4) - \Theta(t_2) \right) + \textsf{Var}\left( 2(\Theta(t_2) - \Theta(t_3)) \right) \nonumber \\&
+ \textsf{Var}\left( \Theta(t_3) - \Theta(t_1) \right) \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(b)}{=} 2 \pi \beta (t_4 - 3 t_3 + 3 t_2 - t_1) .
\end{align}
Step $(a)$ follows because $\Theta(t_4) - \Theta(t_2)$, $\Theta(t_2) - \Theta(t_3)$ and $\Theta(t_3) - \Theta(t_1)$
are increments of a Wiener process over disjoint time intervals and hence they are independent (see Property \ref{prop:increm_independent})
while $(b)$ follows from Property \ref{prop:increm_var}.
Next, we compute the second integral
\begin{align}
K_2
&= \frac{1}{\Delta^4} \int_{\mathbf{t} \in \mathcal{T}_2} e^{-{\textsf{Var}\left( \Psi(\mathbf{t}) \right)}/{2} } \ d\mathbf{t} \nonumber \\
&= \int_0^1 \int_{u_1}^1 \int_{u_3}^1 \int_{u_2}^1 a^{u_4 - 3 u_3 + 3 u_2 - u_1} \ du_4 du_2 du_3 du_1 \nonumber \\
&= \frac{-81 + 80 a + a^4 - 36 \log{a} - 48 a \log{a}}{144 (\log{a})^4}.
\label{eq:EF4_K2}
\end{align}
By combining (\ref{eq:EF4_symmetry}), (\ref{eq:EF4_K1}) and (\ref{eq:EF4_K2}), we obtain
\ifdefined\twocolumnmode{
\begin{align}
&\mathbb{E}[ |F_1|^4 ] \nonumber \\&
= \frac{783 - 784 a + a^4 + (540 + 240 a) \log{a} + 144 (\log{a})^2}{18 (\log{a})^4}.
\label{eq:EF4}
\end{align}
}\else{
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}[ |F_1|^4 ]
= \frac{783 - 784 a + a^4 + 540 \log{a} + 240 a \log{a} + 144 (\log{a})^2}{18 (\log{a})^4}.
\label{eq:EF4}
\end{align}
}\fi
\item Computing $\textsf{Var}(|F_1|^2)$
\ifdefined\twocolumnmode{
\begin{align}
&\textsf{Var}(|F_1|^2) \nonumber\\
&= \mathbb{E}[|F_1|^4] - (\mathbb{E}[|F_1|^2])^2 \nonumber\\
&= \frac{711 - 640 a - 72 a^2 + a^4 + 12 (33 + 32 a) \log{a} + 72 (\log{a})^2}{18 (\log{a})^4}
\label{eq:VarF2}
\end{align}
}\else{
\begin{align}
\textsf{Var}(|F_1|^2)
&= \mathbb{E}[|F_1|^4] - (\mathbb{E}[|F_1|^2])^2 \nonumber\\
&= \frac{711 - 640 a - 72 a^2 + a^4 + 396 \log{a} + 384 a \log{a} + 72 (\log{a})^2}{18 (\log{a})^4}.
\label{eq:VarF2}
\end{align}
}\fi
\item Limits
We have
\begin{align}
&\lim_{a \rightarrow 1} {\textsf{Var}(|F_1|^2)}
= 0, \
&\lim_{a \rightarrow 1} \frac{\textsf{Var}(|F_1|^2)}{\log{a}}
= 0, \ \nonumber\\
&\lim_{a \rightarrow 1} \frac{\textsf{Var}(|F_1|^2)}{(\log{a})^2}
= \frac{4}{45}, \
&\lim_{a \rightarrow 1} \frac{\textsf{Var}(|F_1|^2)}{(\log{a})^3}
= \infty
\label{eq:limits_VarF2}
\end{align}
and
\ifdefined\twocolumnmode{
\begin{align}
&\lim_{a \rightarrow 1} \frac{\left(\mathbb{E}[|F_1|^2] - 1\right)^2}{\log{a}}
= 0, \
\lim_{a \rightarrow 1} \frac{\left(\mathbb{E}[|F_1|^2] - 1\right)^2}{(\log{a})^2}
= \frac{1}{9}, \ \nonumber\\& \qquad\qquad\qquad
\lim_{a \rightarrow 1} \frac{\left(\mathbb{E}[|F_1|^2] - 1\right)^2}{(\log{a})^3}
= \infty.
\label{eq:limits_EF2_minus_1_squared}
\end{align}
}\else{
\begin{align}
\lim_{a \rightarrow 1} \frac{\left(\mathbb{E}[|F_1|^2] - 1\right)^2}{\log{a}}
= 0, \
\lim_{a \rightarrow 1} \frac{\left(\mathbb{E}[|F_1|^2] - 1\right)^2}{(\log{a})^2}
= \frac{1}{9}, \
\lim_{a \rightarrow 1} \frac{\left(\mathbb{E}[|F_1|^2] - 1\right)^2}{(\log{a})^3}
= \infty.
\label{eq:limits_EF2_minus_1_squared}
\end{align}
}\fi
\item Computing $\mathbb{E}[F_1]$
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}[F_1]
&= \frac{1}{\Delta} \int_{0}^{\Delta} \mathbb{E}[e^{j (\Theta(\tau)-\Theta(0))}] \ d\tau \nonumber\\
&= \frac{1}{\Delta} \int_{0}^{\Delta} e^{-\pi\beta \tau} \ d\tau \nonumber\\
&= \int_{0}^{1} a^u \ du \nonumber\\
&= \frac{a-1}{\log{a}}.
\label{eq:EF}
\end{align}
\item Computing $\textsf{Var}(F_1)$
We have
\begin{align}
\textsf{Var}(F_1)
&\equiv \mathbb{E}\left[ |F_1-\mathbb{E}[F_1]|^2 \right] \nonumber \\
&= \mathbb{E}[|F_1|^2] - |\mathbb{E}[F_1]|^2 \nonumber \\
&= -\frac{3 - 4 a + a^2 + 2 \log{a}}{(\log{a})^2}
\label{eq:VarF}
\end{align}
which follows by using (\ref{eq:EF2}) and (\ref{eq:EF}).
\item More limits
It follows from (\ref{eq:EF}) and (\ref{eq:VarF}) that
\begin{align}
\lim_{a \rightarrow 0} \mathbb{E}[ F_1 ] = 1
\text{ and }
\lim_{a \rightarrow 0} \textsf{Var}(F_1) = 0
\label{eq:limits_EF_and_VarF}
\end{align}
which further imply that
\begin{align}
\lim_{a \rightarrow 1}
\mathbb{E}[|F_1-1|^2]
&= \lim_{a \rightarrow 1} \textsf{Var}(F_1) + \left|\mathbb{E}[F_1] - 1\right|^2 \nonumber \\
&= \lim_{a \rightarrow 1} \textsf{Var}(F_1) + \left|\lim_{a \rightarrow 1} \mathbb{E}[F_1] - 1 \right|^2 \nonumber \\
&= 0.
\label{eq:limit_E(F-1)2}
\end{align}
\end{itemize}
\subsection*{Appendix A.4}
\begin{itemize}
\item Moments of $G$\\
We have
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}[G]
= \mathbb{E}\left[ \frac{1}{L} \sum_{\ell=1}^L |F_\ell|^2 \right]
= \frac{1}{L} \sum_{\ell=1}^L \mathbb{E}[|F_\ell|^2]
= \mathbb{E}[|F_1|^2]
\label{eq:EG}
\end{align}
where we used the definition of $G$ in (\ref{eq:G_def}) and that $F_1,\ldots,F_L$ are identically distributed (see Remark \ref{remark:Fk_iid}).
Moreover, we have
\begin{align}
\textsf{Var}(G)
= \textsf{Var}\left( \frac{1}{L} \sum_{\ell=1}^L |F_\ell|^2 \right)
= \frac{1}{L} \textsf{Var}(|F_1|^2)
\label{eq:VarG}
\end{align}
where we used the definition of $G$ in (\ref{eq:G_def}) and that $F_1,\ldots,F_L$ are i.i.d. (see Remark \ref{remark:Fk_iid}).
\item $G$ converges to 1 in mean square as $L \rightarrow \infty$
We have
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}[ \left(G - 1\right)^2 ]
&= \mathbb{E}[ \left(G - \mathbb{E}[G]\right)^2 ] + \left(\mathbb{E}[G] - 1\right)^2 \nonumber\\
&= \frac{1}{L} \textsf{Var}(|F_1|^2) + \left(\mathbb{E}[|F_1|^2] - 1\right)^2
\label{eq:mean_square_G-1}
\end{align}
which follows from (\ref{eq:VarG}) and (\ref{eq:EG}).
By using (\ref{eq:VarF2}) and (\ref{eq:EF2}), we have
\ifdefined\twocolumnmode{
\begin{align}
&\lim_{L \rightarrow \infty} \mathbb{E}[ \left(G - 1\right)^2 ] \nonumber\\&
= \lim_{L \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{L} \cdot \lim_{a \rightarrow 1} \textsf{Var}(|F_1|^2)
+ \left( \lim_{a \rightarrow 1} \mathbb{E}[|F_1|^2] - 1\right)^2
= 0.
\label{eq:lim_E(G-1)2}
\end{align}
}\else{
\begin{align}
\lim_{L \rightarrow \infty} \mathbb{E}[ \left(G - 1\right)^2 ]
= \lim_{L \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{L} \cdot \lim_{a \rightarrow 1} \textsf{Var}(|F_1|^2)
+ \left( \lim_{a \rightarrow 1} \mathbb{E}[|F_1|^2] - 1\right)^2
= 0.
\label{eq:lim_E(G-1)2}
\end{align}
}\fi
\item Limits\\
Recall from (\ref{eq:Delta_def}) with $\Ts=1$ and from (\ref{eq:a_def}) that $L=1/\Delta$ and $\Delta=-(\log{a})/\pi\beta$.
Therefore, (\ref{eq:VarG}) and (\ref{eq:limits_VarF2}) imply
\begin{align}
&\lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} \frac{\textsf{Var}(G)}{\Delta}
= 0, \
&\lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} \frac{\textsf{Var}(G)}{\Delta^2}
= 0, \ \nonumber\\
&\lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} \frac{\textsf{Var}(G)}{\Delta^3}
= \frac{4}{45} (\pi \beta)^2, \
&\lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} \frac{\textsf{Var}(G)}{\Delta^4}
= \infty
\label{eq:limits_VarG}
\end{align}
while (\ref{eq:EG}) and (\ref{eq:limits_EF2_minus_1_squared}) imply
\ifdefined\twocolumnmode{
\begin{align}
&\lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} \frac{\left(\mathbb{E}[G] - 1\right)^2}{\Delta}
= 0, \
\lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} \frac{\left(\mathbb{E}[G] - 1\right)^2}{\Delta^2}
= \frac{1}{9} (\pi \beta)^2, \ \nonumber\\& \qquad\qquad\qquad
\lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} \frac{\left(\mathbb{E}[G] - 1\right)^2}{\Delta^3}
= \infty.
\label{eq:limits_EG_minus_1_squared}
\end{align}
}\else{
\begin{align}
\lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} \frac{\left(\mathbb{E}[G] - 1\right)^2}{\Delta}
= 0, \
\lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} \frac{\left(\mathbb{E}[G] - 1\right)^2}{\Delta^2}
= \frac{1}{9} (\pi \beta)^2, \
\lim_{\Delta \rightarrow 0} \frac{\left(\mathbb{E}[G] - 1\right)^2}{\Delta^3}
= \infty.
\label{eq:limits_EG_minus_1_squared}
\end{align}
}\fi
\end{itemize}
\section{}
\begin{itemize}
\item
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:pdf_symmetry}
Suppose $\Phi_X$ and $\Phi_Y$ are real-valued circular\footnote{
Circular random variables are random variables defined on a circle, i.e., random angles and should not be confused with circularly-symmetric random variables.}
random variables \cite{Mardia2000}.
Suppose $p_{\Phi_Y|\Phi_X}(\cdot|\cdot)$ is a conditional probability density
such that
$p_{\Phi_Y|\Phi_X}(\phi_y|\phi_x) = p_{\Phi}(\phi_y-\phi_x)$
and
$p_{\Phi}(\cdot)$ is periodic with a period $2\pi$.
Then, for any bounded function $f(\cdot)$ that is periodic with a period $2\pi$,
we have
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}\left[ f(\Phi_Y-\Phi_X) \right]
&= \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} p_{\Phi}(\phi) \ f(\phi) \ d\phi.
\end{align}
This implies that $\mathbb{E}\left[ f(\Phi_Y-\Phi_X) \right]$ does not depend on the distribution of $\Phi_X$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, we remark that the pdf of a circular random variable
is defined on the whole real line and
is normalized over any interval of length $2\pi$
\cite[Ch.3]{Mardia2000}, e.g., we have
\begin{align}
\int_{x}^{x+2\pi} p_{\Phi_Y|\Phi_X}(\phi_y|\phi_x) ~ d\phi_y = 1, \qquad -\infty < x < \infty.
\end{align}
We proceed to the proof.
\begin{align}
&\mathbb{E}\left[ f(\Phi_Y-\Phi_X) \right] \nonumber\\
&= \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} p_{\Phi_X,\Phi_Y}(\phi_x,\phi_y) \ f(\phi_y-\phi_x) \ d\phi_y d\phi_x \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(a)}{=} \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} p_{\Phi_X}(\phi_x) \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} p_{\Phi}(\phi_y-\phi_x) \ f(\phi_y-\phi_x) \ d\phi_y d\phi_x \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(b)}{=} \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} p_{\Phi_X}(\phi_x) \int_{-\pi-\phi_x}^{\pi-\phi_x} p_{\Phi}(\phi) \ f(\phi) \ d\phi d\phi_x \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{(c)}{=} \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} p_{\Phi_X}(\phi_x) \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} p_{\Phi}(\phi) \ f(\phi) \ d\phi d\phi_x \nonumber \\
&= \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} p_{\Phi_X}(\phi_x) d\phi_x
\int_{-\pi}^{\pi} p_{\Phi_Y}(\phi) \ f(\phi) \ d\phi \nonumber \\
&= \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} p_{\Phi}(\phi) f(\phi) \ d\phi
\end{align}
where
$(a)$ follows from the chain rule of probability and
because $p_{\Phi_Y|\Phi_X}(\phi_y|\phi_x) = p_{\Phi}(\phi_y-\phi_x)$,
$(b)$ follows from the transformation of variables $\phi = \phi_y - \phi_x$ and
$(c)$ holds because $p_{\Phi}(\phi) f(\phi)$ is periodic with period $2 \pi$.
\end{proof}
\item
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:erfc_minusz_lowerbound}
For $z \geq 0$, $\text{erfc}(-z) \geq 2-e^{-z^2}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since for any real number $z$
\begin{align}
\text{erf}(-z) &= - \text{erf}(z) \\
\text{erfc}(z) &= 1-\text{erf}(z)
\end{align}
we have
\begin{align}
\text{erfc}(-z) = 1-\text{erf}(-z) = 1+\text{erf}(z) = 2-\text{erfc}(z).
\end{align}
To complete the proof, we use \cite[eq(5)]{Chiani2002}
\begin{align}
\text{erfc}(z) \leq e^{-z^2} \ \text{for} \ z \geq 0.
\end{align}
\end{proof}
\item
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:sin_upperbound}
$\sin t \leq t \ \text{for} \ t \geq 0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $1 - \cos{z} \geq 0$,
then for $t \geq 0$ we have
\begin{align}
\int_0^{t} (1 - \cos{z}) \ dz \geq 0
\end{align}
which implies that (for $t \geq 0$)
\begin{align}
t -\sin{t} \geq 0.
\end{align}
\end{proof}
\item
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:cos2_expsin2_lowerbound}
Let $a \geq 0$. Then for $ t \geq 0$, we have
\begin{align}
\cos^2{t} \ e^{-a \sin^2{t}} \geq (1-t^2) e^{-a t^2}.
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The trigonometric identity $\cos^2{t} + \sin^2{t} = 1 $
and $\sin{t} \leq t$ (Lemma \ref{lemma:sin_upperbound}) imply that
\begin{align}
\cos^2{t} \geq 1-t^2.
\end{align}
Since the exponential function is monotone,
we further have
\begin{align}
e^{-a \sin^2{t}} \geq e^{-a t^2}.
\end{align}
By combining the two inequalities, we obtain
\begin{align}
\cos^2{t} \ e^{-a \sin^2{t}}
\geq (1-t^2) e^{-a t^2}.
\end{align}
\end{proof}
\item
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:max_power_exp}
Let $a > 0 $ and $n$ be a positive integer. Then we have
\begin{align}
\max_{x} x^n e^{-a x^2} = \left( \frac{n}{2 a e} \right)^{n/2}.
\label{eq:max_power_exp}
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\end{itemize}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sc:intro}
Structures resulting from stellar explosions represent space laboratories that elucidate
the physics of enormous blasts under extreme conditions, and are of fundamental
importance to astrophysics. The representative of this kind of structure is a supernova
remnant (SNR). X-ray observations of SNRs have provided wide-ranging insights into
their plasma physics, shock phenomena, and into Cosmic-ray origins (e.g.,
\citealt{slane1999,uchiyama2007,yamaguchi2009d,katsuda2013x}). However, the time history
of an individual SNR is generally difficult to track because of the long timescales ---
comparable to the entirety of human written history --- over which typical remnants
evolve. With the notable exception of spectacular nearby remnants, such as Cas~A
\citep[e.g.,][]{Fesen.etal:06,Patnaude.Fesen:09}, our understanding of remnant expansion
and evolution has therefore largely depended on theory, numerical simulations, and
systematic snapshot observational assessments of objects sampling different evolutionary
phases.
This paper presents a different approach to studying the X-ray evolution of an explosion
remnant. We study not a supernova but a ``classical'' nova resulting from a cataclysmic
explosion in an accreting binary system comprising a white dwarf and a red dwarf or
giant companion. The released energy and material propagate through the circumstellar
environment similar to, but on much smaller scales than, those in supernovae. Classical
novae are about 10$^{5}$ times smaller in energy, and typically factors of
$10^{5}$--$10^{7}$ times smaller in ejecta mass. The analogy with supernovae renders a
nova remnant a miniature SNR with a short life: its full dynamical evolution occurs on a
timescale comparable with a human lifetime and can potentially be followed in X-rays by
multi-epoch imaging spectroscopy.
Our target is Nova Persei 1901 (hereafter GK Per), which hosts the largest known X-ray
emitting nebula centered on a white dwarf binary \citep{seaquist1989}. In the
following, we start by comparing \textit{Chandra} Cycle-1 data of GK Per obtained in
2000 with our recent observation in Cycle-15 obtained in 2013. The earlier data have
been analyzed in detail by \citet{balman2005} who characterized the shock conditions,
energetics of the remnant, and the shocked mass. Here, we use the second epoch data to
examine the remnant expansion, cooling and fading, and discuss the results in the
context of the physics of expanding explosion remnants.
\section{Target (GK Persei)}\label{sc:target}
GK~Per is a magnetic white dwarf binary at the distance of 470~pc \citep{mclaug1960s}
that underwent a classical nova outburst on 1901 February 21 \citep{williams1901o}.
Light echoes from the event photographed in 1901 and 1902 illuminated a complex of
shell-like structures around the central object \citep{Ritchey:02,Perrine:02} that
\citet{Bode.etal:87} and \citet{Bode.etal:04} interpreted as part of an old planetary
nebula. This nebula is also apparent as a vaguely bipolar-shaped structure, elongated
in the northwest-southeast direction, in the light of H$\alpha$, [\ion{O}{3}]~$\lambda$
5007, and the \textit{IRAS} 100~$\mu$m band.
\citet{Schaefer:88} noted that the lack of the sort of reflection features seen in
GK~Per around other novae indicates that the grain density around GK~Per is unusually
high --- in keeping with the planetary nebular origin suggested by \citet{Bode.etal:87}.
The extended nova remnant and its evolution has been imaged extensively in the optical
over several decades \citep[e.g.,][]{Seaquist.etal:89,Anupama.Prabhu:93,Slavin.etal:95,
Lawrence.etal:95,shara2012g,liimets2012t}. It has a pronounced asymmetric appearance,
with brighter emission to the southwest and a dearth of emission in the east. The limb
defined by the extent of optical knots exhibits a decidedly flattened appearance to the
northwest and northeast.
{\it Hubble Space Telescope} (\textit{HST}) observations in 1995 and 1997 revealed the
details of the remnants complex structure comprising a myriad of knots \citep{shara2012g}.
Its present-day angular size based on optical images from 2011 December 13 is about
1$\arcmin$ in radius, and the knots are observed to be expanding with circular symmetry
\citep{liimets2012t}. \citet{anupama2005} found a possible deceleration of the ejecta
after 1950 for the period 1901--2003, suggesting that the remnant is in a transition to
an adiabatic phase. A typical expansion rate of the outermost optical knots in
2004--2011 was 0$\farcs$3--0$\farcs$5~yr$^{-1}$, corresponding to a velocity of
600--1000~km~s$^{-1}$ \citep{liimets2012t}, which is similar to the 1995--1997 results
found by \cite{shara2012g}.
The various properties of the remnant were discussed in detail by \citet{seaquist1989}.
The long axis of the bipolar \ion{H}{1} and \textit{IRAS} 100~$\mu$m map lies in the
northwest-southeast direction, and essentially orthogonal to the northeast-southwest
axis (of symmetry of the X-ray remnant, see below). \citet{seaquist1989} concluded
that the nova ejecta are interacting with a cone of this pre-existing ambient medium
in the southwest where the remnant appears brightest. This region also corresponds
to a particularly bright structure lying at an angular separation of approximately
0$\farcs$5--1$\arcmin$ from the central star in the 1901 and 1902 images by
\citet{Ritchey:02} and \citet{Perrine:02}. \citet{seaquist1989} suggested this might
be a cone of material ejected during the planetary nebular phase suggested by
\citet{Bode.etal:87} and that the remnant is being decelerated by interaction with
this material. \citet{seaquist1989} also showed that the remnant expansion was
consistent with an adiabatic evolution in a medium with density declining with the
inverse square of the radial distance. Here the \citet{seaquist1989} analysis was
based on data obtained up until the late 1980's, and \citet{anupama2005} discussed
subsequent observations made until 2003, presenting evidence that the deceleration
of the blast expansion had decreased since 1987. They concluded that the density
into which the southwest quadrant was expanding in the later data was lower that in
1987 by a factor of about 7.
Regarding non-optical wavelengths, non-thermal radio emission indicating the presence
of accelerated electrons interacting with the remnant magnetic field was detected in
the southwest quadrant by \citet{Reynolds.Chevalier:84}, who estimated that a minimum
of 1\% of the 10$^{45}$~erg explosion energy has gone into the non-thermal electrons
and the magnetic field.
In the X-ray regime, GK~Per has the only nova remnant for which clumps were spatially
resolved. \textit{ROSAT} discovered the extended nebula for the first time in 1996
\citep{balman1999}, finding the bulk of the X-ray emission came from the southwestern
quadrant, then \textit{Chandra} revealed the presence of local X-ray structures in a
``lumpy and asymmetric nebula'' in 2000 \citep{balman2005}. The \textit{Chandra} ACIS
spectrum was dominated by a softer optically-thin thermal plasma component below
1.0--1.2~keV, but a harder non-thermal component was also found by \cite{balman2005},
who concluded that the remnant was still in the adiabatic phase in which the radiated
energy loss is still negligible in comparison with the initial explosion energy.
\section{Observations and Reduction}\label{sc:obs}
\textit{Chandra} has now visited GK~Per twice for imaging spectroscopy using the ACIS-S3
back-illuminated CCD. The first exposure was taken on 2000 February 10 (Obs.ID $=$ 650)
with a total observing time of 95.3~ks. Our additional observation was obtained on 2013
November 22 (Obs.ID $=$ 15741) with an exposure of 97.4~ks (see Table~\ref{tb:param} for
details). Both data sets were re-processed by the standard pipeline using the
\textit{Chandra} Interactive Analysis of Observations (CIAO) package \citep{frusci2006c}
with calibration database version 4.6.2.
\begin{table}[tb]
\begin{center}
\caption{Observation Logs and Spectral Properties\tablenotemark{a}}\label{tb:param}
\begin{tabular}{llll}
\tableline
& & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Obs.ID} \\
Par. & Unit & 650 & 15741 \\
\tableline
$\textit{t}$\tablenotemark{b} & (d) & 36148.0 & 41182.2 \\
$\textit{t}$\tablenotemark{b} & (yr) & 99.0 & 112.8 \\
$\textit{t}\rm{_{str}}$\tablenotemark{c} & (UT) & 2000-02-10 & 2013-11-22 \\
& & 01:15:21 & 20:51:14 \\
$\textit{t}\rm{_{end}}$\tablenotemark{c} & (UT) & 2000-02-11 & 2013-11-24 \\
& & 04:46:38 & 00:44:32 \\
$\textit{t}\rm{_{exp}}$\tablenotemark{c} & (ks) & 95.3 & 97.4 \\
$\theta\rm{_{off}}$\tablenotemark{d} & (arcmin) & 1.25 & 0.18 \\
\tableline
SC\tablenotemark{e,f} & (counts) & 3693 & 793 \\
NR\tablenotemark{e,f} & (counts s$^{-1}$) & 3.06$\times$10$^{-2}$ & 5.68$\times$10$^{-3}$ \\
ME\tablenotemark{e,f} & (keV) & 0.61 & 0.66 \\
HR\tablenotemark{g} & & $-$0.68$\pm$0.10 & $-$0.73$\pm$0.10 \\
\tableline
\ensuremath{N_{\rm{H}}} & (10$^{21}$ cm$^{-2}$) & 2.10 (fixed) & 2.10 (fixed) \\
\ensuremath{k_{\rm{B}}T} & (keV) & 0.23$_{-0.04}^{+0.03}$ & 0.22$_{-0.05}^{+0.05}$ \\
\ensuremath{Z_{\rm{O}}} & (solar) & 0.31$_{-0.06}^{+0.09}$ & 0.16$_{-0.05}^{+0.09}$ \\
\ensuremath{Z_{\rm{Ne}}} & (solar) & 2.84$_{-1.01}^{+1.55}$ & 1.71$_{-0.93}^{+1.32}$ \\
$\tau$ & (10$^{9}$ s cm$^{-3}$) & 4.82$_{-1.26}^{+5.57}$ & 3.77$_{-1.57}^{+6.89}$ \\
\ensuremath{V_{\rm{EM}}}\tablenotemark{h} & (10$^{54}$ cm$^{-3}$) & 1.18$_{-0.22}^{+0.48}$ & 1.63$_{-0.62}^{+1.50}$ \\
\tableline
\ensuremath{F_{\rm{X}}}\tablenotemark{f} & (10$^{-14}$ ergs~s$^{-1}$~cm$^{-2}$) & 8.09$_{-0.96}^{+1.00}$ & 4.84$_{-1.28}^{+1.56}$ \\
\ensuremath{L_{\rm{X}}}\tablenotemark{f,h} & (10$^{30}$ ergs~s$^{-1}$) & 9.70$_{-1.15}^{+1.20}$ & 5.76$_{-1.53}^{+1.86}$ \\
\tableline
\multicolumn{2}{l}{$\chi^{2}/\rm{d.o.f.}$} & 38.4/28 & 10.7/14 \\
\tableline
\end{tabular}
\begin{flushleft}
$^{\rm{a}}${Statistical uncertainties indicate 1$\sigma$ confidence ranges.} \\
$^{\rm{b}}${Elapsed days and years from the discovery of the nova (15436.6~d
in modified Julian date) to the middle of each observation.} \\
$^{\rm{c}}${Start dates ($\textit{t}\rm{_{str}}$), end dates
($\textit{t}\rm{_{end}}$), and exposure times ($\textit{t}\rm{_{exp}}$).} \\
$^{\rm{d}}${Off-axis angles ($\theta\rm{_{off}}$) of the white dwarf binary,
of which the nova explosion in 1901 caused the surrounding remnant.} \\
$^{\rm{e}}${Source counts (SC), net rates (NR), and median energies (ME).} \\
$^{\rm{f}}${Values are estimated in the 0.5--1.2~keV energy band.} \\
$^{\rm{g}}${Hardness ratios (HR) of the remnant spectra. The values were
defined as (H$-$S)/(H$+$S), where H and S are photon fluxes in the harder
(0.8--1.2~keV) and softer (0.5--0.8~keV) bands, respectively.} \\
$^{\rm{h}}${Values are for a distance of 470~pc \citep{mclaug1960s}.} \\
\end{flushleft}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\clearpage
\section{Analysis}\label{sc:ana}
\subsection{Diffuse Emission and Comparison}
As found by \citet{balman2005} from the 2000 February data, the latest observation
reveals the brightest X-ray emission to lie in the southwest quadrant and to be
characterized by a prominent arc with extended ``wings'' of emission running from the
northwest to the southeast. The source is notably fainter than it appeared in 2000.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\epsscale{1.00}
\plotone{fig1.eps}
\caption{\textit{Chandra} ACIS-S3 0.5--1.2~keV photon flux images of GK Per in (a) 2000
and (b) 2013. Data were smoothed by a Gaussian blur with a 2$\sigma$ radius of 5~pixels
(2$\farcs$46), and were rendered with a logarithmic intensity greyscale covering up to
2$\times$10$^{-7}$~photons~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$. The source and background extraction
regions are indicated by the solid and dashed annuli, respectively. Areas of diffuse
emission identified by the \texttt{vtpdetect} algorithm are shown as green
polygons. The 45$^{\circ}$ blue sectors show the source and background extraction
regions that were rotated in a clockwise direction to investigate the azimuthal
dependence of the X-ray flux (see text and Figure~\ref{fg:az}). The red rectangles of
size 50$\arcsec\times$20$\arcsec$ parallel to a position angle of 122$\degr$ are the
regions used for the projection profiles of Figure~\ref{fg:proj}. On the lower image,
the edge of the CCD chip is also shown by the solid black line.
}\label{fg:im}
\end{figure}
We limit detailed analysis to soft X-ray events in the 0.5--1.2~keV energy band.
At lower energies, the detector efficiency, especially around the carbon K-edge at
0.28~keV, is significantly attenuated by a layer of molecular contamination that
appears to be depositing on the instrument filter \citep{marshall2004c,chandra2013u}.
At higher energies, the source fluxes become comparable to, or lower than, the
background levels. The background-subtracted X-ray count rates were estimated to be
3.06$\pm$0.07$\times$10$^{-2}$ and 5.68$\pm$0.32$\times$10$^{-3}$~counts~s$^{-1}$
in 2000 and 2013, respectively, corresponding to a decline of 81$\pm$1\%. Based on
folding a model fit to the observed spectrum (see below) through the instrument
effective areas in the two epochs, a drop of 70\% in count rate is expected due to
the decline in the detector efficiency at low energies. We attribute the difference
between the observed and expected decline to the remnant development over the
intervening 13.8 years, indicating an X-ray flux drop of 38$\pm$5\%. No large
differences in median photon energy or hardness ratio were found between 2000 and
2013 (see also Table~\ref{tb:param} for details).
\begin{figure}[tb]
\epsscale{1.00}
\plotone{fig2.eps}
\caption{Comparison between radio, optical, and X-ray images of GK~Per rendered in
red, green, and blue, respectively, on logarithmic scales tuned to clarify features
of interest. The radio data was taken by the B-configuration \textit{VLA} in 1997
using the L-band receiver at 1.45~GHz. The optical data was by the WFPC2 instrument
of the \textit{HST} in 1995 using the H$\alpha+$[\ion{N}{2}] filter. The X-ray image
is by \textit{Chandra} in 2000; the same data as the panel (a) in Figure~\ref{fg:im}.
}\label{fg:fox}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{fg:im} shows 0.5--1.2~keV photon-flux images obtained by \textit{Chandra}
ACIS-S3 in both 2000 and 2013 epochs.
Exposure maps used for flat-field correction were computed at 0.6~keV, corresponding to
the median detected photon energy, using the \texttt{fluximage} software in CIAO. A
sliding cell search for source candidates (\texttt{celldetect}; \citealt{harnd1984s})
was performed, and astrometry was fixed by matching the observed X-ray positions of
three point sources with Two-Micron All Sky Survey (2MASS; \citealt{cutri2003a})
catalogue positions of their infrared counterparts: J03311201$+$4354154 (i.e., the
white dwarf binary of GK Per), J03312219$+$4356461, and J03310820$+$4357503.
The \texttt{celldetect} position estimates have precisions better than 0$\farcs$2,
and the resulting relative astrometric precision between the two epochs
based on the three reference sources remains at a similar level. The distribution of
diffuse sources was determined from a Voronoi Tessellation and Percolation algorithm
(\texttt{vtpdetect}; \citealt{ebeling1993}) applied to a combined exposure-corrected
image in which the two observations in 2000 and 2013 were merged.
We then compared the \textit{Chandra} X-ray data with the \textit{HST} optical image
and the \textit{Very Large Array} (\textit{VLA}) radio observations in
Figure~\ref{fg:fox}. The \textit{HST} data were obtained from the {\it Hubble} Legacy
Archive, and we retrieved the H$\alpha+$[\ion{N}{2}] image taken by the Wide Field
and Planetary Camera 2 (WFPC2) in 1995 --- see \citet{shara2012g} for further details.
The {\it VLA} observations were discussed by e.g.,
\citet{reynolds1984n,anupama2005,balman2005}, and the 1.45~GHz L-band image taken by
the B-configuration in 1997 was obtained from the National Radio Astronomy Observatory
\textit{VLA} Archive Survey (NVAS) system \citep{crossley2008}. We combined the data
from the different wavelength regimes using the SAOImage DS9 image analysis tool
\citep{joye2011s}, rendering radio, optical, and X-rays in red, green, and blue,
respectively. The conspicuous coincidence of the radio and X-ray emission, concentrated
at the bright rim to the southwest, was noted by \citet{balman2005}, who also presented
comparisons with optical image contours.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\epsscale{1.00}
\plotone{fig3.eps}
\caption{Radial projection profiles in the 0.5--1.2~keV band derived from the
rectangular regions in Figure~\ref{fg:im}, smoothed by Gaussian blurs of 5~pixel radius
at 2$\sigma$, are shown color-coded (black for 2000 and red for 2013). The vertical
dotted lines mark the positions of the peak of the rim emission and the
dashed-and-dotted lines are the half-maximum levels of each profile. Both indicate that
the observed expansion of the X-ray nebula is approximately 1$\arcsec$--2$\arcsec$ in
13.8 years. The typical 1$\sigma$ uncertainties of the data points are represented by
the vertical bars.
}\label{fg:proj}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Limits on Hard X-ray Evolution}
Unfortunately, our additional data provide no further insights into the non-thermal hard
X-ray signatures reported by \cite{balman2005} because of the background contamination
above about 1~keV. We investigated this non-thermal emission by first fitting the
extracted spectra from both epochs in the 1.2--7.0 keV range using an absorbed power-law
model and estimating the 1$\sigma$ statistical uncertainties in the power-law
normalization. Using these, we calculated count rates in the 0.5--1.2 keV range by
extrapolation. The fitted power-law slopes were approximately zero, and the resulting
upper limits to the contribution of power-law component to the count rate are 10\% and
23\% for the first and second observations, respectively. The larger limit from the
second epoch results from the larger uncertainty in the fitted slope for those data.
However, it is unlikely that the harder component has increased in intensity or
hardness while the rest of the remnant has faded significantly. To place a best
estimate on the soft X-ray power-law emission contribution, we therefore imposed
additional constraints of not allowing either the spectrum to get harder or the
normalization to increase from the first epoch to the second. We introduced a lower
limit to the power-law slope and an upper limit to the normalization corresponding to
the 1$\sigma$ limits derived from the first observation and found a 1$\sigma$ limit of
an 18\% contribution due to the harder component, although the actual contribution is
likely similar to the 10\% one of the earlier epoch. Since the power-law spectrum
would be essentially flat, it has little influence on the interpretation of the soft
X-ray data and we disregard it in the remainder of the analysis.
\subsection{Radial Profiles and Remnant Expansion}
In order to examine the expansion of the remnant between the two {\it Chandra}
observation epochs, the projected and summed profile of the bright southwest rim was
analyzed. A rectangular extraction region was placed on top of, and tangential to,
the rim (indicated by the red rectangles lying to the southwest in Figure~\ref{fg:im}),
and X-ray events were extracted and summed in the tangential direction such that the
resulting histogram shows the variation of integrated flux (IF) in an approximately
radial direction from the nebula center.
Figure~\ref{fg:proj} illustrates the projection profiles of these brightest regions in
the X-ray images of both epochs. Comparing the profiles at their peaks suggests an
observed expansion of 1$\farcs$5, while at half maxima linear interpolation indicates
1$\farcs$9 in 13.8 years. These two estimates are significantly larger than any
systematic error in the relative positional accuracy of the two observations. In the
following, we adopt the measurement based on the half maxima for discussing the remnant
expansion.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\epsscale{1.00}
\plotone{fig4.eps}
\caption{Comparison of background-subtracted SB radial profiles of GK~Per in 2000
(black) and 2013 (red) in the 0.5--1.2~keV band computed from the exposure-corrected
photon-flux images, taking into account the degradation of the quantum efficiency
of ACIS-S3. The dashed lines show 0.6~keV PSFs that were normalized to the maxima of
the observed peaks, and further to the minima of the background levels. The lower
panel indicates the ratios of 2013 to 2000 data, suggesting that the SB drop was
36$\pm$6\% in the 20$\arcsec$--40$\arcsec$ plateau area, which is indicated by the
orange region and the dashed-and-dotted lines.
}\label{fg:rpf}
\end{figure}
Radial surface brightness (SB) profiles derived by azimuthally summing the observed
signal as a function of radial distance from the central binary position, with a
0$\farcs$5 step size, are shown in Figure~\ref{fg:rpf}. Also shown is a 0.6~keV point
spread function (PSF) calculated using the \textit{Chandra} Ray Tracer tool
\citep{carter2003c}. Comparison of the central source counts as a function of radius
with the PSF prediction indicates the source is heavily piled up in the center. The
excess counts over the PSF model out to about 10$\arcsec$ are then expected to arise
as a result of the PSF being normalized to the peak counts, although it is possible
some of the excess could be extended emission from the remnant.
Plateaus in the SB 20$\arcsec$--40$\arcsec$ from the center indicate
regions where the nebula emission clearly dominates any signal from the central source.
Fitting a constant SB level to these segments of the radial profiles resulted in best
fits of 1.48$\pm$0.04$\times$10$^{-8}$ and
0.95$\pm$0.06$\times$10$^{-8}$~photons~cm$^{-2}$~s$^{-1}$~arcsec$^{-2}$ in 2000 and
2013, respectively, corresponding to a decay of 36$\pm$6\% in 13.8 years. The radial
profiles decay to the background levels at distances of 50$\arcsec$--60$\arcsec$.
Based on the radial profiles, the remnant signals for further spectral analysis were
extracted from annular regions between 20$\arcsec$--60$\arcsec$, avoiding potential
contamination from the PSF wings.
Background events were accumulated from the 70$\arcsec$--100$\arcsec$ annular region,
excluding the areas where diffuse emission was detected by the \texttt{vtpdetect}
algorithm (see Figure~\ref{fg:im} for details), and the background rate was computed
by normalizing to the ratio of net source and background extraction regions.
\subsection{Azimuthal Dependence and Evolution}
The azimuthal dependence of the nebular emission was investigated by assessing the
source and background counts in 45$\degr$ segments of their respective annular
extraction regions and rotating these segments in the clockwise direction with a
1$\degr$ step size. The resulting IFs as a function of azimuth computed using both the
rotating background sector and just the average background in the annulus (again with
diffuse emission excluded) are illustrated in Figure~\ref{fg:az}. The results reflect
the ``by-eye'' assessment that the brightest part of the remnant is in the south and the
faintest in the east. The ratios between 2000 and 2013 curves indicate that the flux
decline is inversely related to X-ray brightness --- fainter regions are getting more
faint at a faster rate than brighter regions. A simple average of the IF ratios is
about 70\%, with a maximum ratio of 90\% in the bright area to the south, and down to
20\% to the northwest.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\epsscale{1.00}
\plotone{fig5.eps}
\caption{Comparison of 0.5--1.2~keV background-subtracted azimuthal dependence in
integrated flux in 2000 (black) and 2013 (red). The solid and dash-dotted lines are
the results of using different background estimates; the former used the one-eighth
outward sectors at each azimuth angle, of which the background levels are shown by
the dashed lines, while the latter is from the entire background annulus (see
Figure~\ref{fg:im} for details). The 1$\sigma$ confidence ranges of the former
estimates are illustrated by the color-coded bands. The lower panel indicates the
ratios of 2013 to 2000 data.
}\label{fg:az}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Spectral Analysis}
\begin{figure}[tb]
\epsscale{1.00}
\plotone{fig6.eps}
\caption{Background-subtracted spectra of the GK Per remnant in 2000 (black) and 2013
(red). The best-fit models of each spectrum are shown by the dashed lines. The lower
panel shows the residuals from the best-fit models. The energies of plausible K$\alpha$
emission lines are labeled with solid and solid-and-dashed lines for H- and He-like
ions, respectively.
}\label{fg:spec}
\end{figure}
As no significant secular trends, except for background variations, were found in
the light curves constructed from the background-subtracted remnant events, spectral
analysis proceeded based on the whole of each data set. Background-subtracted X-ray
spectra from both epochs are illustrated in Figure~\ref{fg:spec}. Emission from
\ion{Ne}{9} K$\alpha$ was clearly present in both epochs, while \ion{O}{7} emission
is also possibly discernible. We applied a fitting model comprising emission from a
non-equilibrium ionization collision-dominated plasma plus photoelectric interstellar
absorption (T\"{u}ebingen-Boulder absorption; \citealt{wilms2000o}) with a
hydrogen-equivalent column density ($\ensuremath{N_{\rm{H}}}$) fixed at 2.1$\times$10$^{21}$~cm$^{-2}$.
The absorption column was not well-constrained by the {\it Chandra} data and the
latter was estimated from the \ion{H}{1} maps of \cite{kalberla2005t} for a 1$\degr$
cone radius around the GK~Per position.
Here we experimented first with allowing the plasma abundances of C, N, O, and Ne to
vary from their solar values, as might be expected in the shell of a planetary nebula
and also in the ejecta of a classical nova. As a result no significant constraint
on the C abundance has been given from the spectral fitting. Regarding the
N emission, the best-fits and 1$\sigma$ statistical errors suggest an abundance
of 0.3--2.7 times the solar value. The reason for such poor constraints is that
the energies of the K$\alpha$ emission lines from those metals are slightly below
the useful low energy cut-off of the X-ray spectra. We confirmed that varying the
C and N abundances provides no significant difference on other parameters, and thus
the elemental abundances of the emission component were fixed to be solar, except
for O and Ne from which the energies of the K$\alpha$ lines are in the range of the
extracted spectra. For the final spectral fitting, the free parameters were then:
(1) plasma temperature ($\ensuremath{k_{\rm{B}}T}$), (2) elemental abundances of O ($\ensuremath{Z_{\rm{O}}}$) and Ne
($\ensuremath{Z_{\rm{Ne}}}$), (3) the non-equilibrium plasma ionization timescale ($\tau$),
and (4) a volume emission measure ($\ensuremath{V_{\rm{EM}}}$). The observed fluxes ($\ensuremath{F_{\rm{X}}}$) and
absorption-corrected luminosities ($\ensuremath{L_{\rm{X}}}$) in the 0.5--1.2~keV energy band were
also determined. The flux decay between the 2000 and 2013 epochs determined from
these spectra amounts to 40\%.
The spectral properties and the best-fit parameters producing minima in the $\chi^{2}$
test statistic defined by \citet{gehrels1986c} are summarized in Table~\ref{tb:param}.
The results for the 2000 epoch are broadly consistent with the results of
\citet{balman2005}, and the fitted temperature for both epochs of 0.2~keV is similar to
the 2$\times$10$^{6}$~K temperature derived from the 1992 \textit{ROSAT} observation by
\citet{balman1999}. Independent spectral analysis of different regions of the nebular
was investigated but not pursued due to insufficient signal-to-noise ratio.
\section{Discussion}\label{sc:dis}
\subsection{Energetics}\label{ss:en}
We start with an overview of the energetics of the explosion that lead to the GK~Per
remnant. First, assuming the angular radius $R$ $=$ 1$\arcmin$ corresponds to 0.14~pc at
a distance of 470~pc, the upper limit to the remnant volume assuming a spherical shape
is $V$ $=$ 3.4$\times$10$^{53}$~cm$^{3}$. The geometry of the emission is instead
presumably a thin shell with thickness $R/12$, as expected for a compression ratio of
4 for a strong shock, which suggests a plasma emitting volume of $V$ $=$
7.8$\times$10$^{52}$~cm$^{3}$. Here, the observed volume emission measures, $\ensuremath{V_{\rm{EM}}}$ $=$
$n_{\rm{e}}n_{\rm{i}}V$, where $n_{\rm{e}}$ and $n_{\rm{i}}$ are electron and ion number
densities, respectively, are 1--2$\times$10$^{54}$~cm$^{-3}$ at the distance 470~pc. The
larger uncertainties on the fitted $\ensuremath{V_{\rm{EM}}}$ values result from degeneracy with the
weakly-constrained Ne and O abundances. Further assuming solar abundances, the electron
to ion ratio is $n_{\rm{e}}$ $=$ 1.18$n_{\rm{i}}$, and so $n_{i}$ $\sim$ 4~cm$^{-3}$,
which corresponds to the pre-shock total number density of $n_{0}$ $\sim$ $n_{\rm{i}}/4$
$\sim$ 1~cm$^{-3}$. The swept-up mass is $M$ $\sim$ $m_{\rm{H}}n_{\rm{i}}V$ $\sim$
2$\times$10$^{-4}$~$M_{\odot}$, where $m_{\rm{H}}$ is a hydrogen mass.
If the remnant is in an adiabatic stage \citep{seaquist1989,balman2005,anupama2005}, in
which radiating energy loss is still negligible compared with the initial explosion, the
plasma state can be compared with the Sedov-Taylor solution \citep{sedov1959s}
represented by the following three equations,
\begin{small}
\begin{eqnarray}
R &=& 4\times10^{19} (\frac{t}{10^{4}{\rm{yr}}})^{\frac{2}{5}} (\frac{E}{10^{51}{\rm{ergs}}})^{\frac{1}{5}} (\frac{n_{0}}{1{\rm{cm}^{-3}}})^{-\frac{1}{5}} [{\rm{cm}}], \\
v &=& 5\times10^{7} (\frac{t}{10^{4}{\rm{yr}}})^{-\frac{3}{5}} (\frac{E}{10^{51}{\rm{ergs}}})^{\frac{1}{5}} (\frac{n_{0}}{1{\rm{cm}^{-3}}})^{-\frac{1}{5}} [{\rm{\frac{cm}{s}}}], \\
T &=& 3\times10^{6} (\frac{t}{10^{4}{\rm{yr}}})^{-\frac{6}{5}} (\frac{E}{10^{51}{\rm{ergs}}})^{\frac{2}{5}} (\frac{n_{0}}{1{\rm{cm}^{-3}}})^{-\frac{2}{5}} [{\rm{K}}].
\end{eqnarray}
\end{small}
Here, the simultaneous equations consist of the six parameters: the radial distance to
the outer shock $R$, the blast-wave velocity $v$, the shock temperature $T$, the elapsed
time $t$, the total explosion energy $E$, and the total number density $n_{0}$. The
velocity is $v$ $=$ $(2/5)(R/t)$ $\sim$ 500~km~s$^{-1}$ with $R$ $=$ 1$\arcmin$ and $t$
$=$ 112.8 years, and similarly the temperature is $\ensuremath{k_{\rm{B}}T}$ $=$
1.8$\times$10$^{5}(R\rm{[pc]}/t\rm{[yr]})^{2}$ $\sim$ 0.28~keV. The radial distance is
then $R$ $=$ 0.31$(E\rm{[10^{51}~ergs]}/n_{0})^{1/5}$ $t\rm{[yr]}^{2/5}$~pc, which can
be converted to the explosion energy $E$ $\sim$ 2$\times$10$^{45}$~ergs using $n_{0}$
$=$ 1~cm$^{-3}$. This distance is fairly insensitive to the exact particle density
assumed, The observed electron temperature of $\ensuremath{k_{\rm{B}}T}$ $\sim$ 0.2--0.3~keV is almost
consistent with the Sedov-Taylor estimates, suggesting that the electrons and ions are
near equilibration.
All these estimates lie within typical ranges for nova explosions obtained from
both observations and theory \citep[e.g.,][]{prialnik1995e,starrfield2009e,metzger2014}.
\subsection{Proper Motion}\label{ss:pr}
The observed expansion of the X-ray brightest part of the remnant in the 13.8~years
separating the {\it Chandra} observations derived from the
radial-profile comparisons is 1$\farcs$9, corresponding to an expansion rate
of 0$\farcs$14~yr$^{-1}$. Assuming a distance of 470~pc, the velocity of the
outermost X-ray emitting region is 300~km~s$^{-1}$. This is slightly lower than
that the 600--1000~km~s$^{-1}$ of optical knots moving in a similar direction
\citep[][see also \citealt{Duerbeck:87}]{shara2012g,liimets2012t}, as well as the
Sedov-Taylor estimate of 500~km~s$^{-1}$. The velocity inconsistencies might imply
that the shock speed was faster than the estimate from the apparent X-ray advance and
that this measurement is not representative of the advance of the shock front itself.
Further, as we discuss in Sect.~\ref{ss:cl}, the expansion of the blast wave must have
been non-uniform.
\subsection{Cooling or Thinning?}\label{ss:cl}
The flux estimates based on radial profiles, the IF azimuthal dependence, and the
spectral fitting all indicate that the 0.5--1.2~keV brightness has been reduced on
average to 60--70\% of its value in 13.8 years, corresponding to a decline rate of
about 3\%~yr$^{-1}$. This is very similar to the flux decay rate of the optical knots in
the remnant of 2.6\%~yr$^{-1}$ \citep{liimets2012t}, and to the annual secular decrease
of 2.1\% in the flux density at 1.4 and 4.9 GHz between 1984 and 1997 found by
\citet{anupama2005}. There is no obvious significant X-ray spectral evolution
accompanying this decay, and all the fitted spectral model parameters for the two epochs
were statistically consistent (see Table~\ref{tb:param}).
For an emitting plasma with cosmic abundances, the observed temperature of 0.2--0.3~keV
implies a total cooling coefficient of order 10$^{-22}$--10$^{-23}$~erg~cm$^{3}$~s$^{-1}$
(e.g., \citealt{gehrels1993}). Here, the dominant cooling occurs from the line emission
of Fe \citep{boehringer1989m}. Since the shocked circumstellar environment is likely to
have a chemical composition more like that of typical planetary nebulae, the actual
cooling coefficient could differ from this value --- the tendency of the Fe depletion in
galactic planetary nebulae \citep{delgado2009i,delgado2014c} suggests that the plasma
cooling becomes less effective also in the GK~Per remnant. The cooling timescale
is therefore orders of magnitude longer than the present lifetime of the remnant. As the
temperature was almost constant during 2000--2013 as expected, the radiated energy
integrated over 13.8~years is of order 10$^{39}$--10$^{41}$~ergs or lower. This strongly
suggests that radiative cooling is negligible in comparison with the explosion energy of
order 10$^{45}$~ergs, and supports earlier conclusions that the remnant is in the
adiabatic phase \citep{seaquist1989,anupama2005,balman2005}.
We thus conclude that the most plausible cause of the 30--40\% decline in emission
between 2000--2013 is not the plasma cooling but just the thinning and expansion of the
emitting nebula. Assuming the blast velocity of 500~km~s$^{-1}$, the emitting volume
increased 20\% in 13.8~years. Were the blast wave expanding into a medium of uniform
density, the increase in swept-up mass combined with an increase in the shocked gas
volume in the expression for the emission measure, means the X-ray emission should
increase with the cube of the remnant radius. In the Sedov phase, since $R$ $\propto$
$t^{2/5}$, the emission measure should increase with time as $\ensuremath{V_{\rm{EM}}}$ $\propto$ $t^{6/5}$.
That this is definitely not the case indicates that the medium into which the GK~Per
remnant has been recently expanding must be non-uniform. Indeed, as discussed in
Sect.~\ref{sc:target}, the complex non-uniform nature of the circumbinary medium of
GK~Per has been evident for more than a century. The observed decline in X-ray
emission corresponds best to the case of negligible swept-up mass during 2000--2013
and therefore a number density at the shock front in the later epoch much lower than
at earlier times. The later volume emission measure $\ensuremath{V_{\rm{EM}}}$ $=$ $n_{\rm{e}}n_{\rm{i}}V$
would then be about 80\% of the 2000 value.
The inverse relation between the X-ray brightness and the decline rate found in the
azimuthally-dependent data indicates that the currently fainter regions are fainter
because they have dimmed more rapidly, and continue to do so. This is especially
prominent to the east, at an azimuthal angle of around 270$\degr$. These regions might
be fading faster because they are expanding more rapidly, although the X-ray data are
insufficient to test this.
Asymmetric expansion is {\em not} see in the optical knots \citep{liimets2012t} which
actually experienced a recent brightening in the east. Such divergent behaviors are
not unrealistic since optical knots are probably dominated by shocked
ejecta and we expect the X-ray emission to instead originate largely from the shocked
medium. Comparison of the X-ray and optical emission in the multi-wavelength image
in Figure~\ref{fg:fox} reveals that some optical knots precede the X-ray emitting
shock front. Similar behavior has been seen in optical knots of the Cas~A supernova
remnant \citep{hammell2008c}. The main shell of the brightest knots is quasi-spherical,
and close inspection of the X-ray emission indicates that it is co-spatial with knots.
This indicates that the knots are likely not the same material as the X-ray emitting
plasma that has condensed and cooled, and is consistent with the knots being shocked
ejecta \citep[e.g.,][]{Bode.etal:04,liimets2012t,shara2012g}.
The most obvious departure of optical and X-ray morphology is in the X-ray ``wings''
pointing to the north and east that extend well beyond the optical knots.
\citet{balman2005} noted that the expansion rate for these wing regions must be about
2600--2800~km~s$^{-1}$ --- more than twice the rate of the optical knots and the bright
emission in the southwest --- and drew comparison to the ``cone'' of earlier ejected
material proposed in the planetary nebula scenario by \citet{seaquist1989}. The
implication would be that we are still seeing largely the shocked medium, but that the
density experienced by the blast in these wing directions up until encountering the
denser material must have been much lower than in the southwest direction to permit the
more rapid expansion.
\section{Conclusions}
Comparison of {\it Chandra} X-ray imaging spectroscopy observations of the remnant of
the GK~Per classical nova event of 1901 obtained in 2000 and 2013 has revealed the
following results.
\begin{enumerate}
\item The remnant faded significantly in the interval between the two observations,
with a mean flux decline of 30--40\%. The rate of fading is spatially dependent,
with more rapid fading generally coinciding with regions of lower surface
brightness.
\item Comparison of X-ray and optical data confirms qualitatively the very different
morphology of cool knots and hot gas. The highly asymmetric X-ray remnant
contrasts with a quasi-spherical shell of complex knots. Some optical knots
appear to be slightly ahead of the X-ray emitting shock front, and also appear
X-ray dark.
\item The expansion of the remnant deduced from the difference in the bright rim of
X-ray mission to the southwest in the two different epochs is 1$\farcs$9, or
an expansion rate of 0$\farcs$14~yr$^{-1}$. This corresponds to velocity of
approximately 300~km~s$^{-1}$ for a distance to GK~Per of 470~pc.
\item Assuming the X-ray emission arises from a relatively thin shell of shocked
plasma, the swept-up mass is approximately 2$\times$10$^{-4}$~$M_{\odot}$ and
the ion density is 4~cm$^{-3}$. A Sedov-Taylor solution yields an explosion
energy of 2$\times$10$^{45}$~ergs, and electrons and ions are close to
temperature equilibration.
\item Since the radiative cooling time of the shock-heated gas is much longer than
the age of the remnant, we conclude that the X-ray fading is a result of
adiabatic expansion at a rate of about 3\% per year in the southwest rim. The
more drastic fading in regions of low surface brightness, such as in the east
of the remnant, is then expected to be caused by more rapid expansion into a
lower-density medium.
\item The general evolution of the remnant is qualitatively consistent with
expectations based on early post-explosion photographs of pre-existing
nebulosity, with a highly-structured and inhomogeneous shell-like morphology.
The fading observed between 2000 and 2013 is then caused by the recent
expansion of the remnant into regions of much lower density. This is
consistent with a planetary nebula origin for the pre-blast circumstellar
material illuminated by light echoes from the explosion itself.
\end{enumerate}
\acknowledgments
We thank \textit{Chandra} for allocating a part of the telescope time in Cycle-15,
and acknowledge \textit{HST} and \textit{VLA} for their archival images. D.\,T.
thanks T.\,Yuasa, K.\,Morihana, and J.\,Ueda for valuable discussions, and
acknowledges financial support from the RIKEN/SPDR program, Grant-in-Aid for JSPS
Fellows for Research Abroad, and \textit{Chandra} grant GO4-15025X. J.\,J.\,D.
and P.\,S. were supported by NASA contract NAS8-03060 to the \textit{Chandra} X-ray
Center, and thank the Director, B.~Wilkes, for continuing advice and support.
\clearpage
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
Molecular clouds in their vast complexity hold the key to understanding the early stages of the
star formation process. Magnetic fields and turbulence are the two main mechanisms that dictate the structural,
dynamical and evolutionary properties of these clouds, through their competition against gravity.
Their role in the onset of star formation can be studied best in quiescent non--star-forming regions, where
stellar feedback is not present. One such region is the Polaris Flare, a translucent molecular cloud at a distance
between 130 pc and 240 pc \citep{heithausen}, discovered by \cite{Heiles}.
It is believed to be in the early stages of its formation,
since it does not exhibit any signs of active star formation \citep{andre}. CO observations have provided invaluable
information on the turbulence signatures in the densest parts of the cloud \citep{falgarone1998,hily-blant}.
Recently, the Herschel space telescope mapped over 15 deg$^2$ of the cloud in dust emission \citep{andre,miville}.
The structure of the magnetic field of a cloud, as projected on the plane of the sky,
can be probed by observing polarized radiation.
The polarization of starlight transmitted through a cloud is believed to be caused by dichroic extinction
due to aspherical dust grains that are partially aligned with the magnetic field. This alignment causes the
polarization direction of the light of background stars to trace the magnetic field direction of the cloud as
projected on the plane of the sky.
The same alignment process causes the thermal emission of these dust grains to be polarized in the direction
perpendicular to the magnetic field.
Information on the plane-of-the-sky magnetic field of the Polaris Flare has been provided for the first time
through polarized dust emission \citep{planckXIX,planckXX}.
These data, however, are limited by the instrumental
resolution and confusion along the line of sight. A mapping of the region in polarized starlight, which is
complementary to the dust emission but suffers from different limitations, is necessary to resolve these issues.
We obtained optical polarization measurements of stars projected on 10 deg$^2$ of the Polaris Flare region
with RoboPol.
The RoboPol instrument is a 4-channel optical polarimeter with
no moving parts, other than a filter wheel (Ramaprakash et al., in prep).
It can measure both linear fractional Stokes parameters $q=Q/I$ and $u=U/I$ simultaneously,
thus avoiding errors caused by the imperfect alignment of rotating optical elements
and sky changes between measurements (polarization, seeing conditions).
Each star in the field of view creates four images (spots) on the CCD displaced symmetrically
in the horizontal and vertical directions.
A mask supported by four legs is positioned at the centre of the field of view. This allows targets
that are centred on the mask to be measured with four times lower sky noise than the rest of the field.
A typical image seen with RoboPol is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:typicalfield}.
The instrument has a $13'\times13'$ field of view, enabling the rapid polarimetric mapping of large areas
of the sky.
RoboPol is equipped with standard Johnson-Cousins $R$- and $I$-band filters
and is mounted on the 1.3-m, f/7.7 Ritchey--Cr\'etien telescope at Skinakas Observatory in Crete, Greece.
It has been operating since May 2013.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{Fig1.eps}
\caption{A field observed by RoboPol. Each star in the field creates a quadruplet of images (spots) on the CCD.
The central dark region is the mask used for lowering sky noise for the target at the centre of the field
of view and the cross-like figure is created by the mask-supporting legs.}
\label{fig:typicalfield}
\end{figure}
RoboPol has been monitoring the optical linear polarization of a large sample of gamma-ray
bright blazars for the past two years \citep{2014MNRAS.442.1693P}.
In addition, the instrument is being used for long-term monitoring of Be X-ray binaries
\citep{2014MNRAS.445.4235R}.
Observations of optical afterglows of gamma-ray bursts have also been conducted with RoboPol
\citep{2014MNRAS.445L.114K}. More complete descriptions of the instrument and data reduction pipeline
are given in Ramaprakash et al. (in prep.) and \cite{2014MNRAS.442.1706K}, respectively.
The data presented here are the first obtained from an analysis of the instrument's entire field of view.
We present the observational details in Section \ref{sec:observations}. In Section
\ref{sec:pipelinecuts} we describe the methods used for analysing sources in the entire field of view.
We present and discuss the results of our observations in Section \ref{sec:PF} and
summarize our findings in Section \ref{sec:summary}.
\section{Observations}
\label{sec:observations}
Observations were taken during 25 nights from August to November 2013, totaling around 60 hours of
telescope time.
The observations covered an area of 10 deg$^2$: $l =$ [122.6$^\circ$, 126.0$^\circ$], $b =$ [24.7$^\circ$, 27.9$^\circ$].
The area was initially divided into 275 non-overlapping fields spaced 13.2 arcminutes apart (slightly larger than the size of the RoboPol field of view). Of them, 227 were observed by the end of the period. The number of observations of each field ranges between 2 and 6, with 93\% of all fields having been observed at least 3 times. The exposures were either 120 or 180 seconds long, with 95\% of the exposures having lasted 180 s. All observations were taken in the R band.
\section{Analysis}
\label{sec:pipelinecuts}
Previous studies with RoboPol concentrated on sources either exclusively within the mask, or
with the addition of some selected sources in the field of view around the central target.
Although the data reduction pipeline presented by \cite{2014MNRAS.442.1706K} was designed for the
entire RoboPol field of view, its implementation in this particular project showed the need for
some adjustments and additions. Sources outside the mask present a number of challenges. Some are common in most
polarimetric studies in the optical, while others are due to the particular design of the instrument.
A measurement may be adversely affected by one of the following sources of systematic error:
\begin{itemize}
\item Large-scale optical aberrations
\item Proximity to the mask and its legs
\item Proximity to the CCD edge
\item Proximity to other sources
\item Selection of apertures for photometry
\item Dust on optical elements
\end{itemize}
An additional systematic error has already been identified and discussed by
\cite{2014MNRAS.442.1706K}. A rotation in the polarization reference frame of the telescope with respect to
that of the sky causes all angles to be larger by $2.31^\circ\pm 0.34^\circ$.
All polarization angle measurements presented in this paper have been corrected for this.
This section outlines the analysis of observations and the methodology adopted to control these systematic effects.
\subsection{Significance of measurements and debiasing}
The measurement of the fractional linear polarization ($p$) at the low polarization regime which is
relevant for interstellar polarization, being always positive, is biased towards values larger than the
true (intrinsic) polarization \citep{simons-stewart}.
Thus, $p$ measurements should be debiased to find their most probable intrinsic value.
In the analysis, we consider only sources with signal-to-noise ratios
($p/\sigma_p \geq 2.5$) so that errors are approximately normally distributed.
The maximum-likelihood estimator of the true value of $p$ found by \cite{vaillancourt}
for measurements with $p/\sigma_p \geq 3$ significance is:
\begin{equation}
\centering
p_d = \sqrt{p^2-\sigma_p^2}
\label{eqn:debiasing}
\end{equation}
We extend this formula to $p/\sigma_p \geq 2.5$ and use it to debias all measurements of $p$.
\subsection{Large-scale optical aberrations}
\label{ssec:model}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.48]{Fig2a.eps}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.48]{Fig2b.eps}
\caption{Relative Stokes parameters across the CCD. Left: measured $q$ (top) and $u$ (bottom). Right: residual
$q$ (top) and $u$ (bottom) after subtracting the fitted model.
Each square panel shows values on the CCD binned in 100 cells.
Each cell is colored according to its average value.}
\label{fig:modelu}
\end{figure}
Large-scale aberrations caused by the optical system are corrected by the instrument model,
as presented by \cite{2014MNRAS.445L.114K}. The model is created by placing an unpolarized standard star
at many positions across the field of view and finding the best-fitting parameters that cancel the global, instrumentally-induced polarization and vignetting.
The instrument model has been found to perform equally well, regardless of telescope pointing position
(which may result in different telescope stresses) and after multiple removals and re-installations of
the instrument on the telescope. The set of models that were created for these tests have been combined
into one with improved performance with respect to that presented by \cite{2014MNRAS.445L.114K}. Below we
estimate the systematic uncertainty that remains after the model correction.
\subsubsection{Systematic uncertainty from model residuals}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{Fig3.eps}
\caption{Distributions of the residuals of $q$ and $u$ across the CCD, after the subtraction of the model fit
(q: dotted, u: solid).
The vertical lines show the standard deviation of each distribution.}
\label{fig:residual-dist}
\end{figure}
Fig. \ref{fig:modelu} shows the uncorrected (left) and corrected (right) $q$ (top) and $u$ (bottom)
values across the CCD derived by using this combined model.
The data are binned in 100 cells of 39 arcsec width and the mean value is plotted in each one.
On average, 2.4 star measurements contribute to each cell. The residuals appear to be homogeneous across the CCD.
The distributions of residual $q$ and $u$ of the combined model are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:residual-dist}.
Vertical lines show the standard deviation of each distribution ($\sigma_{\it q,\rm res}$ = 0.0034,
$\sigma_{\it u,\rm res}$ = 0.0031).
Statistical errors of measurements of unpolarized standards are an order of magnitude lower
than these standard deviations, thus their contribution to this scatter can be ignored.
Therefore, we take the systematic uncertainties in $q$ and $u$ to be
$\sigma_{q,\rm sys} = \sigma_{\it q,\rm res},\, \sigma_{u,\rm sys} = \sigma_{\it u,\rm res}$.
From now on, in order to estimate total uncertainties in $q$ and $u$, we add statistical and systematic
uncertainties in quadrature,
\begin{equation}
\centering
\sigma_{q}^2 = \sigma_{q,\rm sys}^2 + \sigma_{q, \rm stat}^2
\label{eqn:quadratureq}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\centering
\sigma_{u}^2 = \sigma_{u,\rm sys}^2 + \sigma_{u, \rm stat}^2.
\label{eqn:quadratureu}
\end{equation}
The total uncertainty in $q$ and $u$ can be propagated to find the total uncertainty in
fractional linear polarization ($p$) and electric vector position angles (EVPA or $\chi$) using the equations:
\begin{equation}
\centering
p = \sqrt{q^2 + u^2}, \, \sigma_p = \sqrt{\frac{q^2\sigma_q^2 + u^2\sigma_u^2}{q^2+u^2}}
\label{eqn:P}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\chi = \frac{1}{2} \tan ^{-1}{\frac{u}{q}}, \, \sigma_{\chi} = \frac{1}{2} \sqrt{\frac{u^2\sigma_q^2 + q^2\sigma_u^2}{(q^2+u^2)^2}}
\label{eqn:EVPA}
\end{equation}
\begin{table*}
\centering
\caption{Polarization standard stars shown in Fig. \ref{fig:polstands}}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
& BD+59.389 & VICyg12 & HD151406 & HD212311\\
\hline
P (\%) & 6.430 $\pm0.022$ & 7.893 $\pm0.037$ & 0.085 $\pm0.041$ &0.034 $\pm0.021$\\
& 6.43 $\pm0.13$ & 7.18 $\pm0.04$ & & 0.02$\pm0.021$\\
& & & &0.045\\
$\chi$($^\circ$)& 98.14$^\circ$ $\pm 0.10$& 116.23$^\circ$ $\pm0.14$& -2$^\circ$ &50.99$^\circ$\\
& 96.0 $^\circ$ $\pm 0.6$& 117$^\circ$ $\pm1$ & & 36.2$^\circ$ $\pm51.3^\circ$\\
& & & & 10.4$^\circ$\\
Band & R & R & no filter & V \\
Reference & 1 ,5 & 1, 3 & 2 & 1,4,5\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\\1 - \cite{Schmidt}, 2 - \cite{berdyugin}, 3 - \cite{bailey}, 4- \cite{heiles2000}, 5 - \cite{eswaraiah2011}
\label{tab:refs}
\end{table*}
Assuming low polarization the expression for $\sigma_{\chi,\rm sys}$ can be written as:
\begin{equation}
\centering
\sigma_{\chi} \simeq \frac{1}{2} \frac{\sigma_p}{p}.
\label{eqn:chi}
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{Fig4.eps}
\caption{EVPA versus fractional linear polarization of standard stars. Left: BD+59.389, right: VI Cyg12.
Literature values are shown by stars (see references in Table \ref{tab:refs}) and circles are measurements outside the mask. Error bars include the statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.}
\label{fig:polstands}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{Fig5.eps}
\caption{Probability distribution of the intrinsic value of $p$ of unpolarized standards, given the measurement
in the literature (red) and our own (black). Left: HD151406,right: HD212311. There are two black lines
(measurements) of HD212311.}
\label{fig:rice}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Performance: Standard Stars}
\label{ssec:calibration}
To assess the accuracy of the instrument model, measurements of stars with known polarization values
were taken and were then compared to the literature. During the two observing seasons, a number of standard stars
(different from the ones used for the model calculation) were observed throughout the field of view.
Catalog measurements as well as the band in which they were taken are shown in Table \ref{tab:refs}.
Measurements of the unpolarized stars in the $R$ band could not be found, so those in other bands are quoted.
Fig. \ref{fig:polstands} presents RoboPol measurements of polarized standards
(denoted by circles) and their literature values (stars) on the EVPA - polarization fraction plane.
All $p$ measurements are consistent with the literature within the errors (which include both the statistical and systematic uncertainties discussed above). Measurements of $p$ have not been debiased.
In the case of unpolarized stars, biasing of $p$ measurements is very pronounced and the interpretation of the
measurement uncertainty is not straightforward. To facilitate comparison of our measurements with literature
values, we plot, in Fig. \ref{fig:rice}, the probability distribution (likelihood) of the intrinsic (true)
value of $p$, given the literature measurement (red) and our own (black). This likelihood function (see
\cite{vaillancourt}, equation 8) takes into account that the measured values of $p$ follow a Rice, rather than a
normal, distribution. In calculating the likelihood function we have used a total uncertainty obtained by adding
statistical and systematic uncertainties in quadrature, as in equations (\ref{eqn:quadratureq}) and (\ref{eqn:quadratureu}). In both cases, our measurements are consistent within
uncertainties with the literature
measurements. There are two measurements (black lines) of the standard HD212311.
For unpolarized standards the EVPA does not carry meaningful information, as can be seen by
substituting $\sigma_p/p > 1$ into equation (\ref{eqn:EVPA}): $\sigma_\chi \geq 30^\circ$.
\subsection{Proximity to the mask, legs and CCD edge}
The mask and its supporting legs cast shadows on specific regions of the CCD
rendering them unusable.
Therefore, sources that happen to fall in the shadow of the mask legs or within 155 pixels (radially)
of the mask centre are not considered in the analysis.
Sources falling very close to any of the CCD edges are very likely to suffer partial photon losses.
Also, light reaching these areas is subject to large optical distortions.
Since the typical separation between a pair of the four images is 100 pixels, we reject any spot within
100 pixels of the edges from the analysis.
\subsection{Proximity to other sources}
Sometimes images from different stars happen to fall within a few pixels of each other on the CCD.
Since the typical diameter of a spot is 8 pixels (3.2 arcsec), photons from both spots are blended, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:spot-on-spot}. The relative Stokes parameters are computed using the following equations:
\begin{equation}
\centering
q = \frac{N_{1} - N_{0}}{N_{1} + N_{0}},\, \sigma_q = \sqrt{\frac{4(N_1^2\sigma_0^2+N_0^2\sigma_1^2)}{(N_0+N_1)^4}}
\label{eqn:qucounts1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\centering
u = \frac{N_{3} - N_{2}}{N_{3} + N_{2}},\, \sigma_u = \sqrt{\frac{4(N_3^2\sigma_2^2+N_2^2\sigma_3^2)}{(N_2+N_3)^4}}
\label{eqn:qucounts}
\end{equation}
where $N_i$ is the number of photons in the $i^{th}$ spot and $\sigma_i$ is the uncertainty that results from
the photon noise. Therefore, overlapping of spots causes an
artificially large difference in intensity of one pair of spots belonging to each affected star. The two
point spread functions (PSFs) cannot be de-blended, since the pipeline performs aperture photometry.
Typically, this contamination results in erroneously large degrees of polarization
(but not necessarily, this can vary based on the relative brightness of the sources involved) and,
most notably, regular EVPAs (0$^{\circ}$, $\pm$45$^{\circ}$, $\pm$90$^{\circ}$).
This follows from the definition of the EVPA, equation (\ref{eqn:EVPA}).
If one of the vertical images of the star is artificially brightened,
for example $N_1 \ll N_2$, then $|u| \ll |q| \Rightarrow \chi\to\pm 45^{\circ}$.
Whereas if one of the horizontal images is affected by a nearby source,
e.g. $N_2 \ll N_3$, then $|q| \ll |u| \Rightarrow \chi\to0^{\circ},\pm 90^{\circ}$.
Fig \ref{fig:fingers} (left) shows the EVPA versus fractional linear polarization of all sources
with at least 2 measurements found in the Polaris Flare field (5172 in total).
Measurements of $p > 20\%$ are clustered around regular EVPAs - the clear signature of nearby star contamination.
We remove such sources from the analysis in the following way. If any of the four spots of a star suffers from
confusion with another spot then we flag it as nearby contaminated. This flag applies if a source exists
within 3$\times$FWHM of a star spot. In cases where the spots of two stars happen to fall exactly on each other
and are identified as a single source we check if any spot is assigned to more than one star.
The effect of removing contaminated sources from the final catalog can be seen in Fig. \ref{fig:fingers} (right).
All but two measurements with $p$ $>$ 20$\%$ were caused by proximity to other sources.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{Fig6.eps}
\caption{An example of sources that are affecting each other's measurements due to their proximity
(circled spots). The positions of the stars (centres of quadruplets) are shown with crosses.}
\label{fig:spot-on-spot}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{Fig7.eps}
\caption{Fractional linear polarization versus EVPA for stars in the Polaris Flare field. Left: Measurements at regular
angles (0$^{\circ}$, $\pm$45$^{\circ}$, $\pm$90$^{\circ}$) are caused by nearby contamination as seen in Fig.
\ref{fig:spot-on-spot}. Right: Measurements that survive after the removal of stars that suffered this contamination. Most remaining measurements of $\rm p > 5\%$ are caused by other systematics.}
\label{fig:fingers}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{Fig8.eps}
\caption{Distributions of ratios of the FWHM between vertical (black) and horizontal (red) spots for a number of fields. Vertical lines mark the area that contains acceptable ratios.}
\label{fig:fwhm}
\end{figure}
Stars that are affected by reflections, and even other close-by stars in the case that the previous check fails,
can be removed by checking the ratio of the FWHM between two pairs of spots. The distribution of these ratios for
all stars found in all observed frames is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:fwhm}.
We discard measurements lying outside the range 0.87 to 1.15 (vertical lines).
\subsection{Aperture optimization}
The RoboPol pipeline performs aperture photometry to measure the intensity (photon counts - N) of each spot.
It then uses these values to calculate the Stokes parameters as shown in equations (\ref{eqn:qucounts1}) and
(\ref{eqn:qucounts}).
Photometry measurements are greatly affected by the choice of aperture size \citep[e.g.][]{Howell1989}.
If the aperture is too large the value obtained suffers from background contamination and the signal to noise ratio
is decreased. On the other hand, if the aperture is too small only a fraction of the total flux is measured.
This is not a problem if the same fraction of photons are counted, since polarimetric measurements depend on
the relative brightness of two spots. If, however, the PSFs of two spots belonging to a
source are different, then the fraction of the total flux measured is not the same and this introduces artificial
polarization.
A number of circumstances may affect the PSF of the four spots of a source.
Bad seeing or weather conditions (wind) sometimes cause sources to appear elongated instead of round.
Also, the optical system of the instrument may distort the shape of the PSF and mainly the wings of the profile.
Typically, bright stars (whose wings are more prominent) are affected more severely than faint ones. Therefore,
it is essential that photometry be performed with an aperture optimized for each source. Also, the complexity
of the optical system introduces some asymmetries in the PSFs of the vertical and horizontal images
of a star. Consequently, photometry must also be optimized for \emph{each} of the four images of a star.
We created a simple aperture optimization algorithm as an addition to the original pipeline, presented in
\cite{2014MNRAS.442.1706K}.
Photon counts are measured within a circular aperture centred on each spot,
while the background level is estimated within an outer concentric annulus that is separated from the
inner aperture by a gap.
The diameter of the background annulus is a constant multiple of the aperture size.
The constant is different for faint and bright sources as the latter have more extended wings,
so that the annulus does not contain any light from the source while retaining the smallest possible distance
from the source for the background estimation.
By measuring the background subtracted photon flux within increasing apertures we create a growth curve for
each spot. Each of the four growth curves of the source are fitted with a fourth degree polynomial, $P(x)$
(no errors are accounted for in the fit).
The size of the aperture at which the normalized photon flux saturates is the optimum.
To locate it in practice we look for the aperture size at which the rate of photon flux increase
has reached some small value $\lambda$.
In other words, the optimal aperture is the root of the equation:
\begin{equation}
\centering
\frac{dP}{dx}=\lambda P(x).
\label{eqn:growth-rate}
\end{equation}
An example growth curve of one of the images of a star is shown
in Fig. \ref{fig:polynomials} (circles) along with its polynomial fit (solid line). The dashed vertical line
shows the optimal aperture found by solving equation (\ref{eqn:growth-rate}). This aperture is used to measure
the photon counts and noise ($N$, $\sigma$) of this spot.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{Fig9.eps}
\caption{Growth curve of one of the images of a star (circles show the number of background subtracted counts
for each aperture size). A fourth degree polynomial is fit to the
points. The optimal aperture is shown with the dashed line.}
\label{fig:polynomials}
\end{figure}
The optimization is used for all data, including those collected for the instrument model calculation.
\subsubsection*{The choice of the value for $\lambda$}
To calibrate equation (\ref{eqn:growth-rate}) and determine the best value of $\lambda$,
we created growth curves of polarization standard stars that were routinely observed in the field and
measured their fractional linear polarizations and angles using all the different aperture sizes.
Fig. \ref{fig:VCyg12_1-growth} shows the fractional linear polarization (top) and EVPA (middle) measured for
VI Cyg12 with different apertures. As the aperture increases, these quantities saturate at some value consistent
with those found in the literature (gray bands). As aperture size continues to increase, the signal-to-noise
ratio worsens and also nearby sources may affect the measurement.
The point on the horizontal axis after which saturation occurs is the optimal aperture for this star.
The parameter $\lambda$ was selected so that it reflects this transition. The bottom panel of
Fig. \ref{fig:VCyg12_1-growth} shows the four growth curves of VI Cyg12 and the corresponding polynomial fits.
The vertical line shows the aperture that was chosen as optimal.
Because the standards observed with RoboPol are bright (typically 9-11 mag) we needed to extend this sample
to stars of lower brightness.
We selected 6 stars that were already observed in the field and observed them in the mask.
We used the values found in the mask to define the optimal aperture for these sources when observed in the field.
Finally, we optimized the parameter $\lambda$ so that it yields an accurate optimal aperture for
most of the stars (both these 6 as well as the standards): $\lambda = 0.02$.
\subsection{Detection of dust specks using flat field images}
The design of RoboPol does not allow us to correct science images for irregularities in transmission and
uneven sensitivity throughout the field in conventional ways (e.g. by dividing pixel-by-pixel by a flat field
image). Because both sets of orthogonally polarized beams are projected on the same CCD,
when recording an extended image (such as a flat) each point on the CCD is exposed to four rays tracing four
different optical paths through the instrument.
In contrast, the photon counts we would like to correct (i.e. each of the four images
corresponding to a point source) arrive on the CCD through a single optical path since each beam
corresponds to a different orientation of the plane of polarization.
Light from the sky against which they are projected still arrives through four paths for each
pixel, but at different ratios, since the polarization of the sky differs between the moments of science and
flat field image acquisition. This makes ordinary flat fielding impossible.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{Fig10.eps}
\caption{Top: Fractional linear polarization of the standard star VI Cyg12 measured with different
aperture sizes (multiples of FWHM).
The horizontal gray band shows the literature value $\pm 1 \sigma$.
The position of the vertical gray band shows the mean of the four optimal apertures
while its width represents their scatter.
Middle: EVPA measured with different aperture sizes.
Bottom: Background subtracted number of counts with different aperture sizes (growth curve).
The growth curves for all four of images of the star are shown, along with a fourth degree polynomial fit.}
\label{fig:VCyg12_1-growth}
\end{figure}
The global non-uniformity of the field (caused by vignetting) is corrected by the instrument model
as described in Section \ref{ssec:calibration}. Small-scale non-uniformities cannot be corrected for, but they can
be identified on flat-field images. Stars that happen to be affected by these small scale variations must be
excluded from the analysis. An example is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:dust-spot} where the crescent pattern produced
by a dust speck is clearly visible in the exposure and coincides with one of the four spots of a star
(circled in white).
We process flat-field images obtained in the evening and/or the morning of each night in the following way: we
create a master flat by normalizing separate shots and taking the median. After that we fit a third degree
polynomial to the master flat and subtract its value from each pixel, thus removing the large scale vignetting in the flat image.
At the position of each spot in the science image, we calculate the mode value ($F_{\rm bgr}$) and standard
deviation of counts ($\sigma_{\rm bgr}$) of pixels on the flat-field image
that fall within an aperture with diameter equal to the background annulus.
In principle, by comparing these quantities on all four spots of a star we can determine whether any of them has
fallen on a dust speck, since this would cause significant variations in $F_{\rm bgr}$ and $\sigma_{\rm bgr}$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{Fig11.eps}
\caption{Crescent dust patterns on the CCD. One of the four images of a star falls on a dust pattern (in the white circle).}
\label{fig:dust-spot}
\end{figure}
To establish a set of reliable criteria that can identify most, if not all, dust-contaminated stars we analysed
data of the Be X-ray binary CepX4 \citep[e.g.][]{ulmer}, which is one of the most crowded fields observed with RoboPol \citep{2014MNRAS.445.4235R}.
We constructed a number of different quantities with the information from the flat field image.
Those that proved most useful in revealing the effect of dust contamination were the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item difference between the $\sigma_{\rm bgr}$ of a star's vertical (horizontal) spots
($\Delta \sigma_{\rm bgr,v},\Delta \sigma_{\rm bgr,h}$),
\item difference between the background value of a star's vertical (horizontal) spots
($\Delta F_{\rm bgr,v},\Delta F_{\rm bgr,h}$),
\item maximum $\sigma_{\rm bgr}$ (among four spots),
\item minimum $\sigma_{\rm bgr}$ (among four spots).
\end{itemize}
The distributions of all 6 quantities are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:dust-distros}.
These quantities are measured in units of normalized counts in the processed master flat image.
The outliers of these distributions are stars that coincide with the most prominent dust specks.
According to these distributions we selected the thresholds depicted by vertical lines in Fig.
\ref{fig:dust-distros}.
Using these criteria we manage to eliminate only stars that are affected by the most obvious dust shadows.
A more sophisticated analysis is needed to identify more subtle anomalies on the CCD.
\subsection{Statistical assessment}
\label{sec:statisticcuts}
The standard observing strategy in the RoboPol project is to obtain multiple exposures of the same field.
We are thus able to use the stability of the measurements (in a statistical sense) to further reject stars
with unreliable polarization measurements.
One reason for turning to a statistical treatment of the data is that even after the first stage of rigorous
cuts described in this section, some systematic errors are still present.
These include faint dust specks, reflections from bright stars,
and in general, sources with properties around the various thresholds that were used.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{Fig12.eps}
\caption{Distributions of the values extracted from the flat fields and used for identifying dust specks.
Values on the horizontal axis are measured in normalized counts.}
\label{fig:dust-distros}
\end{figure}
First, we choose to work with stars that have reliable measurements of the weighted mean of $p$
($\bar{p}/\bar{\sigma}_p \geq 2.5$).
The weighted mean is calculated by substituting into equation (\ref{eqn:P}) the weighted mean $q$ and $u$
values of a star.
One way to quantify the statistical significance of the differences between the $n$ measurements of a star
is by computing the reduced $\mathcal{X}^2$ ($\mathcal{X}^2_{red}$) of all of its $q$ and $u$ measurements:
\begin{equation}
\centering
\mathcal{X}^2_{red,q} = \frac{1}{n-1} \sum_{j=1}^n \frac{(q_j - \bar q)^2}{(\sigma_{q,j})^2}
\end{equation}
and similarly for $\mathcal{X}^2_{red,u}$.
By placing a threshold in the value $\mathcal{X}^2_{red}$ we can eliminate stars that deviate
from the expected normal behavior.
The threshold was selected so as to remove the tail of the distribution of all $\mathcal{X}^2_{red}$
values of stars in the Polaris Flare region.
The distributions of these values for $q$ and $u$ measurements are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:rcs} as well as the selected threshold (vertical line).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{Fig13.eps}
\caption{Distributions of $\mathcal{X}^2_{red}$ of $q$ (black) and $u$ (red) of stars with $\bar{p}/\bar{\sigma}_p \geq 2.5$. The vertical line shows the selected threshold. }
\label{fig:rcs}
\end{figure}
Stars that still remain after these cuts and show signs of some type of contamination visible by eye
on the raw science images were removed by hand. These include types of contamination already presented
in this section as well as projected double stars, for which the analysis does not account.
\section{Results and Discussion}
\label{sec:PF}
The analysis provides us with 648 stars with reliable $p$ and $\chi$ measurements.
They are presented in the online table accompanying this paper (Table \ref{tab:data}).
The distribution of debiased fractional linear polarizations of all these sources is shown in
Fig. \ref{fig:pdebiased}. The median of the distribution is at 1.3\%.
Fig. \ref{fig:pav} shows the debiased polarization percentage
against visual extinction derived by the SDSS colors as in \cite{schlafly}.
The dashed line shows the empirically determined upper limit in polarization at a given $A_V$:
$p/A_V = 0.03$ \citep{serkowski}.
We mark sources above this limit with empty circles and use this line as a threshold.
Sources above the line are considered separately as their polarizations may have an intrinsic contribution.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{Fig14.eps}
\caption{Distribution of debiased fractional linear polarizations of all 648 sources resulting from the analysis.}
\label{fig:pdebiased}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{Fig15.eps}
\caption{Debiased polarization percentage vs. visual extinction, $A_V$ for all our
reliably measured stars. The dashed line shows the maximum observable $p$ at all $A_V$ ($p$ = $0.03
A_V$). Stars above the black line are marked with empty circles.}
\label{fig:pav}
\end{figure}
In order to construct the polarization map of the region we transform all EVPAs
(measured with respect to the North-South celestial pole direction) into galactic angles according to
\cite{stephens}\footnote{see erratum published in MNRAS.}.
We plot the polarization segments of all stars below the $p_d-A_V$ line of Fig. \ref{fig:pav} at each star
position on the Herschel 250 $\mathrm{\mu m}$ image of the Polaris Flare \citep{miville}
in Fig. \ref{fig:map}. The length of each segment is proportional to the debiased $p$ of the star, calculated
using equation (\ref{eqn:debiasing}).
The most striking feature of the polarization map is the extended ordered pattern at large longitudes.
In this region the plane-of-the-sky magnetic field appears to be oriented in approximately the same direction
as that of the faint striations seen in dust emission. A very similar pattern has been observed in the much
denser Taurus Molecular Cloud \citep{chapman}.
Segments at the largest longitudes are mostly parallel to lines of constant longitude,
following the projected curvature of a vertical cloud structure that is partly cut-off by the map edges.
A border appears to exist, spanning the diagonal of region (124$^\circ$, 125$^\circ$), (26$^\circ$, 27$^\circ$).
Segments below this virtual line form a loop, or eddy-like feature centred at
(124$^\circ$, 25.5$^\circ$) that covers latitudes down to 24.5$^\circ$ and longitudes down to 123$^\circ$.
In the south, segments that are projected on the dense filamentary region, also known as the MCLD 123.5+24.9 cloud,
appear to be parallel to the axis of the filament and its surrounding less dense gas.
A detailed quantitative comparison of the magnetic field as revealed by the map with the dust column density from
Herschel will be presented in a follow-up paper.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{Fig16.eps}
\caption{Polarization segments over plotted on top of the Herschel 250 $\mathrm{ \mu m}$ image of the Polaris Flare. The length of each segment is proportional to the debiased $p$ of the star. The horizontal segment at l = 121$^\circ$ is for scale. The blue star marks the position of the North Celestial Pole.}
\label{fig:map}
\end{figure*}
The general structure of the plane-of-the-sky magnetic field in this cloud agrees qualitatively with that inferred
from the polarized emission seen by the Planck satellite \citep{planckXX}. Even though the resolution of
the presented map does not allow for a detailed comparison, the orientation of the ordered east part is in fair agreement with that seen in our map. Also, the central-southwest part in the Planck map does show a discontinuity
of the projected field orientation that could be a sign of the loop that we observe.
The proximity of the cloud suggests that the level of
contamination by dust foreground to the cloud is insignificant. Stars lying in front of the cloud will most
likely exhibit very low polarization ($\ll 1\%$) and so would not comply with the $p/\sigma_p$ threshold,
thus they would not affect the map.
The distribution of stars for which we have reliable polarization measurements is not uniform.
Segments at higher galactic latitude and longitude are denser than at the lower part of the map.
Fig. \ref{fig:stardist} shows the number of stars in the map binned across the entire observed region.
The bin size corresponds to that of the field of view.
The brighter regions (containing more stars per bin) are in the area with ordered plane-of-the-sky
magnetic field. This non-uniformity is not due to variations in the stellar density across the observed region.
It appears as a result of the $p/\sigma_p$ cut. We find no correlation between this pattern and
observing conditions (i.e. seeing, elevation, moon phase).
For all fields with a given number of surviving stars ($N_s$), we calculate the mean
extinction $\langle A_V\rangle$. There is a clear correlation between the two, as can be seen in
Fig. \ref{fig:n-av-corr}.
We find that the Pearson correlation coefficient between these two sets is 0.59.
We therefore conclude that this effect is most likely not the result of some systematic error,
but that of the cloud properties. A possibility that could give rise to this effect is a magnetic field
whose direction changes from mostly on the plane-of-the-sky in the upper left part of the map, to
having a more pronounced component along the line of sight towards the lower right.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{Fig17.eps}
\caption{Number of stars in the map per field across the sky. The size of the bins corresponds to that of the
field of view. The non-uniformity is a result of the $p/\sigma_p$ cut.}
\label{fig:stardist}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{Fig18.eps}
\caption{Number of stars ($N_s$) in Fig. \ref{fig:map} versus mean $A_V$ in all fields with $N_s$.}
\label{fig:n-av-corr}
\end{figure}
\subsection*{Potentially intrinsically polarized sources}
We plot the polarization segments of sources above the dashed line of Fig. \ref{fig:pav}
separately in Fig. \ref{fig:abovepav}
to be easily distinguished from those whose polarization is primarily affected by the magnetic field of
the cloud. The length of the polarization segment of each star is proportional to its debiased $p$.
The orientations of some segments are correlated with the general direction of the plane-of-the-sky magnetic
field map of Fig. \ref{fig:map}. This is not surprising since the $p$-$A_V$ line is empirical.
Therefore our choice of setting a threshold based on that line is conservative.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=1]{Fig19.eps}
\caption{Polarization segments of stars above the P-$A_V$ line shown in Fig. \ref{fig:pav}.
The black star shows the position of the North Celestial Pole while the horizontal segment in the bottom
right sets the scale (1\%).}
\label{fig:abovepav}
\end{figure}
We investigate the possibility that a number of the 39 sources falling above the $p_d - A_V$ line in
Fig. \ref{fig:pav} could be quasar candidates.
Multi-wavelength data in this region are sparse, so cross-correlations with our sample were not particularly
fertile. The low resolution of radio data renders direct identification of optical counterparts impractical.
For most highly polarized sources (over the $p_d - A_V$ line) we only managed to find data
from the USNOB and 2MASS catalogs. \cite{2mass} presented the color properties of quasar and AGN candidates in the
2MASS catalog. They demonstrated that candidates can be found preferentially at certain regions of
color-color diagrams. Only one of our sources seems to marginally fit into this category.
It should be noted, though, that these values have not been redshift-corrected.
\section{Summary}
\label{sec:summary}
We have presented optical linear polarization measurements of stars projected on the Polaris Flare field.
These measurements reveal the plane-of-the-sky magnetic field structure of the cloud.
The observations span about 10 $\rm deg^2$ of the region and have been conducted with the RoboPol polarimeter
in the R-band. We presented adjustments to the automated data reduction pipeline that were necessary for the
analysis of sources in the entire $13'\times13'$ field of view. We have investigated possible sources of systematic
errors and have presented our methods for correcting for each one.
We have produced a map of 648 polarization segments showing the magnetic field structure of the cloud as projected
on the plane of the sky. The median debiased $p$ is 1.3\%. The projected field shows a complicated,
ordered structure throughout the map.
To the top left part of the map, the field is aligned with the striations seen in dust emission.
The bottom right parts show the presence of an eddy-like feature spanning roughly 2 degrees in diameter.
Our results compare well with the Planck map of polarized emission of the cloud.
The distribution of stars with reliable polarization measurements across the field is not uniform, with
most stars lying in the top left of the region. This is most likely due to the intrinsic properties of the
magnetic field structure.
\begin{table*}
\centering
\caption{Reliable polarization measurements in the Polaris Flare region (full table online).}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
R.A. & Dec & $l (^\circ)$& $b (^\circ)$ & $p_d$ (\%) & $\sigma_p$ (\%) & $\chi (^\circ)$ & $\sigma_\chi (^\circ)$& $\theta_{gal} (^\circ)$\\
\hline
\hline
53.78514 & 87.71787 & 124.58667 & 25.39440 & 1.4 & 0.5 & 44 & 7 & 4 \\
67.42559 & 88.23095 & 124.53694 & 26.09361 & 0.8 & 0.3 & 36 & 8 & 162 \\
66.70140 & 88.02690 & 124.70368 & 25.95310 & 1.0 & 0.3 & -14 & 8 & 112 \\
75.26493 & 88.39611 & 124.51862 & 26.37650 & 2.3 & 0.6 & 65 & 7 & 3 \\
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:data}
\end{table*}
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We thank A. Kougentakis, G. Paterakis, and A. Steiakaki,
the technical team of the Skinakas Observatory.
The University of Crete group acknowledges support by the ``RoboPol'' project,
implemented under the ``ARISTEIA'' Action of the ``OPERATIONAL PROGRAMME EDUCATION AND
LIFELONG LEARNING'' and is co-funded by the European Social Fund (ESF) and Greek National
Resources. The Nicolaus Copernicus University group acknowledges support from the Polish
National Science Centre (PNSC), grant number 2011/01/B/ST9/04618.
This research is supported in part by NASA grants NNX11A043G and NSF grant AST-1109911.
V.P. acknowledges support by the European Commission Seventh Framework Programme (FP7)
through the Marie Curie Career Integration Grant PCIG10-GA-2011-304001 ``JetPop''.
K.T. acknowledges support by FP7 through the Marie Curie Career Integration Grant
PCIG-GA-2011-293531 ``SFOnset''. V.P., E.A., I.M., K.T.,
and J.A.Z. would like to acknowledge partial support from the EU FP7 Grant
PIRSES-GA-2012-31578 ``EuroCal''. I.M. is supported for this research through a stipend
from the International Max Planck Research School (IMPRS) for Astronomy and Astrophysics
at the Universities of Bonn and Cologne. M.B. acknowledges support from the International
Fulbright Science and Technology Award. T.H. was supported by the Academy of
Finland project number 267324. The RoboPol collaboration acknowledges observations support
from the Skinakas Observatory, operated jointly by the University of Crete and the Foundation for
Research and Technology - Hellas. Support from MPIfR, PNSC, the Caltech Optical
Observatories, and IUCAA for the design and construction of the RoboPol polarimeter is
also acknowledged.
This research has used data from 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. This research has made use of the SIMBAD database, operated at CDS, Strasbourg, France as well as the VizieR catalogue access tool, CDS, Strasbourg, France.
This work made use of APLpy, an open-source plotting package for Python hosted at http://aplpy.github.com, Astropy, a community-developed core Python package for Astronomy \citep{2013A&A...558A..33A}, matplotlib, a Python library for publication quality graphics \citep{matplotlib} and the Python library SciPy \citep{scipy}.
|
\section{Introduction}
Let $G$ be a compact, connected Lie group, and $(M, \omega)$ a compact symplectic manifold with a Hamiltonian $G$-action. By choosing a $G$-invariant $\omega$-compatible almost complex structure on $M$, we can define a $G$-equivariant $\Z_2$-graded spinor bundle $S^\pm_{M}$. If the Hamiltonian $G$-space $M$ is pre-quantizable and has a $G$-equivariant pre-quantum line bundle $L$, we define a $\Z_{2}$-graded Hilbert space by
\[
\mathcal{H}^\pm = L^{2}(M, S^\pm_{M}\otimes L)
\]
and a $G$-equivariant Spin$^{c}$-Dirac operator
\[
D^\pm : \mathcal{H}^\pm \to \mathcal{H}^\mp.
\]
Attributed to Bott, the \emph{quantization} of $(M, \omega)$ can be defined as the equivariant index
\[
Q(M, \omega) = \mathrm{Ind}(D) = [\mathrm{ker}(D^+)] - [\mathrm{ker}(D^-)] \in R(G).
\]
The goal of this paper is to generalize the quantization process to the \emph{quasi-Hamiltonian $G$-space} introduced by Alekseev-Malkin-Meinrenken \cite{AMM98}. The q-Hamiltonian $G$-space, arising from infinite-dimensional Hamiltonian loop group space, differs in many respects from Hamiltonian $G$-space. In particular, the moment map takes values in the group $G$ and the 2-form $\omega$ doesn't have to be closed or non-degenerate. Consequently, the two key ingredients in defining $Q(M, \omega)$: the spinor bundle $S_{M}$ and pre-quantum line bundle $L$ might not exist in general.
Given a q-Hamiltonian $G$-space $(M, \omega)$, we use the spin representation of loop group to construct twisted spinor bundles $S^\mathrm{spin}$ on $M$, and the Hilbert space of Wess-Zumino-Witten model to construct twisted pre-quantum bundles $S^\mathrm{pre}$. Both of them are bundles of Hilbert spaces and play the same roles as the spinor bundle and pre-quantum line bundle for Hamiltonian $G$-spaces. We analogously define a Hilbert space
\[
\mathcal{H}:= \big[L^{2}(M, S^{\mathrm{spin}}\otimes S^{\mathrm{pre}})\big]^{G}.
\]
One key in the construction of Dirac operators on $\mathcal{H}$ is the algebraically defined cubic Dirac operator. It was introduced by Kostant for finite-dimensional Lie group, and extensively studied for infinite-dimensional loop group by various people. Our strategy is to construct a Dirac operator as a combination of algebraic cubic Dirac operators and geometric Spin$^{c}$-Dirac operators. To be more precise, we choose an open cover of $M$ using the symplectic cross-section theorem for q-Hamiltonian $G$-spaces, so that every open subset $U$ has the geometric structure:
\[
U \cong G \times_{H} V,
\]
where the slice $V$ is a Hamiltonian $H$-space. Accordingly, the tangent bundle $TU$ splits equivariantly into ``vertical direction" and ``horizontal direction". We define a suitable Dirac operator on $U$ so that it acts as the Spin$^{c}$-Dirac operator on the vertical part $V$ and the cubic Dirac operator for loop group on the horizontal part $G/H$. Using partition of unity, we obtain a global Dirac operator $\mathcal{D}$ on $\mathcal{H}$ by patching together Dirac operators on the open sets $U$. The main result of this paper is that we show the Dirac operator $\mathcal{D}$ has a well-defined index given by positive energy representations of loop group.
\subsection*{Acknowledgements}
The author received many useful suggestions as well as warm help from Eckhard Meinrenken. The author also would like to thank Nigel Higson and Mathai Varghese for inspiring conversations.
\section{Loop group and positive energy representation}
We first give a brief review on loop groups and their representations. We use \cite{PS86} as our primary reference.
\subsection{Loop group and central extension}
Let $G$ be a compact, simple and simply connected Lie group, and fix a ``Sobolev level" $s > 1$. We define $LG$ the \emph{loop group} as the Banach Lie group consisting of maps $S^{1} \to G$ of Sobolev class $s +\frac{1}{2}$ with the group structure given by pointwise multiplication. The Lie algebra $L\mathfrak{g} = \Omega^{0}(S^{1}, \mathfrak{g})$ is given by the space Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}$-valued 0-forms of Sobolev class $s + \frac{1}{2}$ and $L\mathfrak{g}^{*} = \Omega^{1}(S^{1}, \mathfrak{g})$ the space of $\mathfrak{g}$-valued 1-forms of Sobolev class $s-\frac{1}{2}$. Integration over $S^{1}$ gives a natural non-degenerate pairing between $L\mathfrak{g}$ with $L\mathfrak{g}^{*}$.
Note that $L\mathfrak{g}^{*}$ can be identified with the affine space of connections on the trivial principle $G$-bundle over $S^{1}$. The loop group $LG$ acts on $L\mathfrak{g}^{*}$ by gauge transformation
\begin{equation}
\label{gauge transformation}
g \cdot \xi = \mathrm{Ad}_{g}(\xi) - dg \cdot g^{-1}, \hspace{5mm} g \in LG, \xi \in L\mathfrak{g}^{*},
\end{equation}
where $dg\cdot g^{-1}$ is the pull-back of the right-invariant Maurer-Cartan form on $G$.
Let $\widehat{LG}$ be the basic central extension of $LG$, defined infinitesimally by the cocycle
\[
(\xi_1, \xi_2) \mapsto \oint d\xi_1 \cdot \xi_2, \hspace{5mm} \xi_1,\xi_2 \in L\mathfrak{g}^*.
\]
The coadjoint action of $LG$ on
\[
\widehat{L\mathfrak{g}}^* = L\mathfrak{g}^*\oplus \mathbb{R}
\]
is given by the formula
\[
g \cdot (\xi,k) = (\mathrm{Ad}_{g}(\xi) - k \cdot g^{-1}dg, k).
\]
One can view the action (\ref{gauge transformation}) as the coadjoint action on the affine hyperplane $L\mathfrak{g}^* \times \{1\} \subset \widehat{L\mathfrak{g}}^*$.
Fixing a maximal torus $T$, the choice of a set of positive roots $\mathfrak{R}_{+}$ for $G$ determines a positive Weyl chamber $\mathfrak{t}_{+}^*$. It is well-known that the orbits of coadjoint $G$-action on $\mathfrak{g}^{*}$ are parametrized by points in $\mathfrak{t}^*_+$. The set of coadjoint $LG$-orbits can be described as follow. Denote by $\alpha_{0}$ the highest root and
\[
\rho_{G} = \frac{1}{2}\sum_{\alpha \in \mathfrak{R}_{+}}\alpha.
\]
There is a unique ad-invariant inner product $\langle \cdot, \cdot \rangle_{\mathfrak{g}}$ on $\mathfrak{g}$, rescaled so that the highest root of $\mathfrak{g}$ has norm $\sqrt{2}$. The \emph{dual Coxeter number} of $G$ is defined by
\[
h^{\vee} = 1 + \langle \rho_{G}, \alpha_{0} \rangle_\mathfrak{g},
\]
and the \emph{fundamental Weyl alcove} for $G$ is the simplex
\[
\mathfrak{A} = \{ \xi \in \mathfrak{t}_{+}\big| \langle \alpha_{0}, \xi \rangle_{\mathfrak{g}} \leq 1\} \subset \mathfrak{t} \subset \mathfrak{g}.
\]
Every coadjoint orbit of $LG$-action on $L\mathfrak{g}^*$ contains a unique point in $\mathfrak{A}$.
For any $\xi \in L\mathfrak{g}^*$, we define the \emph{holonomy map}
\[
\mathrm{Hol}: L\mathfrak{g}^* \to G
\]
the smooth map that sends $\xi$ to the holonomy of $\xi$ around $S^1$. This map satisfies the equivariance property
\[
\mathrm{Hol}(g \cdot \xi) = g(0) \cdot \mathrm{Hol}(\xi) \cdot g(0)^{-1}.
\]
It follows that the based loop group
\[
\Omega G = \{g \in LG \big| g(0) = e\}
\]
acts freely on $L\mathfrak{g}^*$.
The isotropy group $(LG)_{\xi}$ is isomorphic to $G_{\mathrm{Hol}(\xi)}$, and thus compact. It sets up a 1-1 correspondence between the set of coadjoint $LG$-orbits and conjugacy classes. Moreover $(LG)_{\xi}$ with $\xi \in \mathfrak{t}^*_+$ depends only on the open face $\sigma$ of $\mathfrak{A}$ containing $\xi$ and will be denoted by $(LG)_{\sigma}$. If we introduce a partial order on open faces by setting $\tau \preceq\sigma$ if $\tau \subseteq \overline{\sigma}$, then one has that
\[
\sigma \preceq \tau \Rightarrow (LG)_{\tau} \subseteq (LG)_{\sigma}.\]
In particular, $(LG)_{0} = G$ and $(LG)_{\mathrm{int} \mathfrak{A}} = T$.
\subsection{Positive Energy Representation}
Let $S^{1}_{\mathrm{rot}}$ be the rotation group on $S^{1}$ and $\partial$ its infinitesimal generator.
Consider a unitary representation of $S^{1}_{\mathrm{rot}}\ltimes \widehat{LG}$ on a Hilbert space $V$, on which the central circle acts by scalar multiplication.
\begin{definition}
We say that $V$ is a \emph{positive energy representation} if the operator $\partial$ is self-adjoint with spectrum bounded below. Moreover, we say that $V$ \emph{has level k} if the central circle of $\widehat{LG}$ acts with weight $k$.
\end{definition}
The positive energy representations of loop groups behave quite analogously to the representation theory of compact Lie groups. For example, every irreducible positive energy representation is uniquely determined by the highest weight. To be more precise, let $T$ be a maximal torus of $G$ and $\Lambda^{*}$ the weight lattice. We take $S^{1}_{\mathrm{rot}} \times T \times S^{1}$ as the maximal torus of $S^{1}_{\mathrm{rot}}\ltimes \widehat{LG} $, where the second $S^{1}$ factor comes from the central extension. The \emph{affine weights} of $LG$ are in the forms of $(m, \lambda, k)$, where $m \in \Z$ is the \emph{energy}, $\lambda \in \Lambda^{*}$ is the weight of $G$, and $k$ is the \emph{level}.
The \emph{affine Weyl group} $W_{\mathrm{aff}} = W \ltimes \Lambda$ acts on affine weights as follow: the Weyl group $W$ acts as usual on $\Lambda^{*}$ and the action of $z \in \Lambda$ is given by
\[
z \cdot (m,\lambda, k) = (m + \langle \lambda, z \rangle + \frac{k}{2} \cdot \|z\|^{2}, \lambda+ k \cdot z, k).
\]
The level $k$ is fixed by the affine Weyl group action and the energy is shifted so as to preserve the inner product:
\begin{equation}
\label{weight product}
(m_{1}, \lambda_{1}, k_{1}) \cdot (m_{2}, \lambda_{2}, k_{2})= \langle \lambda_{1}, \lambda_{2} \rangle - m_{1}k_{2} - m_{2}k_{1}.
\end{equation}
For a fixed level $k$, every irreducible positive energy representation $V$ of $LG$ is uniquely determined by the dominant weight $\lambda$ at the minimum energy $m$. We call $\boldsymbol{\lambda} = (m, \lambda, k)$ the \emph{highest weight} of $V$.
Let $V(n)$ be a subspace of the Hilbert space $V$, on which the energy operator acts on $V(n)$ with weight $n$. The positive energy condition asserts that there is an integer $n_{\mathrm{min}}$ so that $V(n) = 0$ for all $n < n_{\mathrm{min}}$. The algebraic direct sum
\[
V^{\mathrm{fin}}:= \bigoplus_n V(n)
\]
consists of vectors of \emph{finite energy}. It is a dense subspace of $V$. In addition, we can always normalize so that the lowest energy level $n_{\mathrm{min}}$ equals zero.
It is well-known by the Borel-Weil theorem that all the irreducible $G$-representations are parameterized by the dominant weights $P_{G,+} = \Lambda^{*} \cap \mathfrak{t}^{*}_{+}$. Similarly there is a 1-1 correspondence between irreducible positive energy representation at level $k$ and weight in
\[
P_{k,+} = k \mathfrak{A} \cap \Lambda^{*} = \{ \lambda \in \Lambda^{*} \big| \frac{\lambda}{k} \in \mathfrak{A} \}.
\]
The abelian group $R_{k}(LG)$ generated by irreducible positive energy representations at level $k$ has a finite basis and a ring structure known as \emph{fusion product}. But we won't discuss it in this paper.
\section{Dirac operators in the algebraic setting}
The \emph{cubic Dirac operator} is an algebraically defined operator introduced by Kostant \cite{kostant99} for finite-dimensional Lie algebras. It has now been generalized to infinite-dimensional case and plays an important role in the theory of loop groups: its application in representation theory was first demonstrated in the lecture notes of Wassermann \cite{Wassermann-notes}. Later Landweber and Posthuma generalize it to different homogeneous settings \cite{landweber01, Posthuma11}. A family version of the cubic Dirac operator was used by Freed-Hopkins-Teleman \cite{Freed13} to construct the isomorphism between the twisted K-theory and fusion ring of loop groups. In addition Meinrenken \cite{MR2894443} discusses its application in general Kac-Moody algebra.
\subsection{Finite dimensional case}
Let $G$ be a compact Lie group and $\mathfrak{g}$ its Lie algebra equipped with an ad-invariant inner product $\langle \ , \ \rangle_\mathfrak{g}$. Let $\mathrm{Cliff}(\mathfrak{g})$ be the $\Z_2$-graded complex Clifford algebra of $\mathfrak{g}$ and $S_{\mathfrak{g}}$ an irreducible $\Z_{2}$-graded $\mathrm{Cliff}(\mathfrak{g})$-module.
Fix an orthonormal basis
\[
X_{a}, \hspace{5mm} a = 1, \dots, \mathrm{dim}\mathfrak{g}.
\]
We define a map $\mathrm{ad}^{\mathfrak{g}}: \mathfrak{g} \to \mathrm{Cliff}(\mathfrak{g})$ by the formula
\[
\mathrm{ad}^{\mathfrak{g}}(X) := \frac{1}{4}\cdot \sum_{a=1}^{\mathrm{dim}\mathfrak{g}} [X, X_{a}] \cdot X_{a}, \hspace{5mm} X \in \mathfrak{g}.
\]
Let $U(\mathfrak{g})$ be the universal enveloping algebra of $\mathfrak{g}$. We consider the \emph{non-commutative Weil algebra}
\[
U(\mathfrak{g}) \otimes \mathrm{Cliff}(\mathfrak{g})
\]
introduced by Alekseev-Meinrenken\cite{Meinrenken00}.
\begin{definition}
\label{cubic operator}
The \emph{cubic Dirac operator} $D_\mathfrak{g}$ is an element of the
algebra $U(\mathfrak{g}) \otimes \mathrm{Cliff}(\mathfrak{g})$ defined as
\[
D_{\mathfrak{g}}= \sum_{a=1}^{\mathrm{dim}\mathfrak{g}} \big( X_{a} \otimes X_{a} + \frac{1}{3} \otimes \mathrm{ad}^{\mathfrak{g}}(X_{a}) \cdot X_{a} \big)
\]
\end{definition}
The key property of the cubic Dirac operator is that its square is simple and nice.
More generally, let $H \subset G$ be a closed subgroup of the equal rank. Using the inner product we write
\[
\mathfrak{g} = \mathfrak{h} \oplus \mathfrak{p}, \hspace{5mm} \mathfrak{p} = \mathfrak{h}^\perp.
\]
This decomposition induces isomorphisms:
\[
\mathrm{Cliff}({\mathfrak{g}}) \cong \mathrm{Cliff}({\mathfrak{h}}) \otimes \mathrm{Cliff}({\mathfrak{p}}), \hspace{5mm}
S_{\mathfrak{g}} \cong S_{\mathfrak{h}} \otimes S_{\mathfrak{p}},
\]
where $S_{\mathfrak{h}}, S_{\mathfrak{p}}$ are spinor modules of $\mathrm{Cliff}({\mathfrak{h}})$ and $\mathrm{Cliff}({\mathfrak{p}})$ respectively.
\begin{definition}
We define the \emph{relative cubic Dirac operator}
\[
D_{\mathfrak{g},\mathfrak{h}} \in U(\mathfrak{g}) \otimes \mathrm{Cliff}(\mathfrak{p})
\]
by
\begin{equation}
\label{relative cubic operator}
D_{\mathfrak{g}, \mathfrak{h}} =\sum^{(\mathfrak{p})}\big(X_{a} \otimes X_{a} + \frac{1}{3} \otimes \mathrm{ad}^{\mathfrak{p}}(X_{a}) \cdot X_{a} \big).
\end{equation}
Here $\sum^{(\mathfrak{p})}$ indicates the summation over basis of $\mathfrak{p}$.
\end{definition}
As it stands, the element $D_{\mathfrak{g}, \mathfrak{h}}$ gives us an operator on $W \otimes S_{\mathfrak{p}}$ for any $\mathfrak{g}$-representation $W$. To exhibit the structure of $D_{\mathfrak{g},\mathfrak{h}}$, we decompose $W\otimes S_{\mathfrak{p}}$ with respect to the $\mathfrak{h}$-action and denote by $M(\nu)$ the isotypic $\mathfrak{h}$-summand with highest weight $\nu$.
\begin{theorem}[\cite{kostant99}]
\label{relative cubic}
Suppose that $W_{\lambda}$ is an irreducible $\mathfrak{g}$-representation with highest weight $\lambda$. The following formula holds
\[
D_{\mathfrak{g},\mathfrak{h}}^{2}\big|_{M(\nu)} = \|\lambda +\rho_{G} \|^{2}- \|\nu + \rho_{H}\|^{2}.
\]
\end{theorem}
\subsection{Dirac operators on Homogeneous spaces}
Suppose now that $M = G/H$ is an orbit of the coadjoint $G$-action on $\mathfrak{g}^*$. It is known that $M$ has a $G$-invariant complex structure, which determines a $H$-equivariant splitting: $\mathfrak{p} = \mathfrak{p}^+ \oplus \mathfrak{p}^-$. One can check that the spinor bundle associated to the complex structure on $M$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{spinor for lg}
S_{M} = G \times_H (\wedge \mathfrak{p}^-) \cong G \times_{H} (S_{\mathfrak{p}}^{*} \otimes \C_{\rho_G - \rho_H}),
\end{equation}
and the canonical line bundle
\begin{equation}\label{canonical for lg}
K_M = G \times_H\C_{2 \cdot(\rho_G - \rho_H)}.
\end{equation}
Hence, the Hilbert space $L^{2}(M, S_{M})$ can be identified with
\begin{equation}\label{G dec}
\big[ L^{2}(G) \otimes S_{\mathfrak{p}}^{*} \otimes \C_{\rho_G - \rho_H}\big]^{H} \cong \bigoplus_{\lambda \in P_{G,+}} W_{\lambda} \otimes [W_{\lambda}^{*} \otimes S_{\mathfrak{p}}^{*} \otimes \C_{\rho_G - \rho_H}]^{H},
\end{equation}
where the isomorphism comes from the Peter-Weyl theorem.
We define Dirac operators on $M$ in two different ways. First of all, the Levi-Civita connection $\nabla^{TM}$ lifts to a Hermitian connection $\nabla^{S_{M}}$ on $S_{M}$. In particular, the connection $\nabla^{S_{M}}$ is compatible with the Clifford action in the sense that
\[
[X, \nabla^{S_{M}}_Y] = \nabla^{TM}_Y X, \hspace{5mm} X, Y \in TM.
\]
We define a geometric Spin$^{c}$-Dirac operator by
\[
D_{\mathrm{geo}} = \sum_{a=1}^{\mathrm{dim}M} X_{a} \cdot \nabla^{S_{M}}_{X_{a}},
\]
where $\{X_{a}\}_{i=1}^{\mathrm{dim}M}$ is an orthonormal basis of $TM$.
On the other hand, since the cubic Dirac operator $D_{\mathfrak{g},\mathfrak{h}}$ is $H$-equivariant, it restricts to an operator on
\[
[W_{\lambda}^{*} \otimes S_{\mathfrak{p}}^{*} \otimes \C_{\rho_G - \rho_H}]^{H}.
\]
Tensoring the identity operator on each $W_{\lambda}$, and summing over $W_{\lambda}$, one obtains an operator $D_{\mathrm{alg}}$ on (\ref{G dec}).
\begin{lemma}
\label{geo alg}
The difference between $D_{\mathrm{alg}}$ and $D_{\mathrm{geo}}$ on (\ref{G dec}) is a bounded operator.
\begin{proof}
We rewrite the geometric connection $\nabla^{S_M}$ as
\[
\nabla^{S_M}_X = X + \frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ad}^{\mathfrak{p}}(X).
\]
It follows that
\[
D_{\mathrm{geo}} =\sum_{i=1}^{\mathrm{dim}\mathfrak{p}} X_{a} \otimes \big(X_{a} + \frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ad}^{\mathfrak{p}}(X_{a})\big).
\]
We deduce the lemma by comparing the above with (\ref{relative cubic operator}). An alternative proof can be found in \cite[Chapter 9]{Meinrenken-book}.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
\subsection{Infinite dimensional case}
The definitions of spin representation and cubic Dirac operator can be extended to the infinite-dimensional loop algebra $L\mathfrak{g}$.
Let now $G$ be a compact, simple and simple connected Lie group with Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}$. The loop algebra $L\mathfrak{g}$ carries an inner product defined by
\begin{equation}
\label{inner product}
B(X, Y) = \frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{0}^{2\pi} \langle X(\theta), Y(\theta) \rangle_{\mathfrak{g}} d\theta, \hspace{5mm} X, Y \in L\mathfrak{g}.
\end{equation}
As in the finite dimensional case, we can define the Clifford algebra $\mathrm{Cliff}(L\mathfrak{g})$, and its spin representation $S_{L\mathfrak{g}}$. Here $S_{L\mathfrak{g}}$ is a $\Z_2$-graded complex Hilbert space, and also a positive energy $LG$-representation with highest weight
\[
\boldsymbol{\rho}_G= (0, \rho_G, h^{\vee}).
\]
The explicit construction of $S_{L\mathfrak{g}}$ is given in \cite{PS86}. For the general theory of Clifford algebras and representations for infinite dimensional Hilbert spaces we refer to \cite{Plymen94}.
Let us fix an orthonormal basis $\{X_{a}\}$ of $\mathfrak{g}$. For $n \in \Z$, we write $X_{a}^{n}$ for the loop
\[
s \mapsto e^{i n s}\cdot X_{a}, \hspace{5mm} s \in \mathbb{R},
\]
and $\mathfrak{g}(n)$ the vector space spanned by $\{X^{n}_{a}\}_{a=1}^{\mathrm{dim}\mathfrak{g}}$.
The algebraic direct sum
\[
L\mathfrak{g}^{\mathrm{fin}}:= \bigoplus_{n \in \Z} \mathfrak{g}(n)
\]
is dense in $L\mathfrak{g}_{\C}$. The dense subspace of the spin representation $S_{L\mathfrak{g}}$ which consists of vectors with finite energy may be realized as
\[
S_{L\mathfrak{g}}^{\mathrm{fin}}= S_{\mathfrak{g}} \otimes \bigotimes_{k>0} \Lambda^*\big(\mathfrak{g}_\C z^k\big).
\]
\begin{definition}
We define the \emph{cubic Dirac operator}
\[
D_{L\mathfrak{g}} \in U(L\mathfrak{g}) \otimes \mathrm{Cliff}(L\mathfrak{g})
\]
by
\begin{equation}\label{d_lg}
D_{L\mathfrak{g}} = \sum_{n\in \Z} \sum_{a=1}^{\mathrm{dim}\mathfrak{g}} \big( X_{a}^{n}\otimes X_{a}^{-n}+ \frac{1}{3}\otimes \mathrm{ad}^{L\mathfrak{g}}(X_{a}^{n}) \cdot X_{a}^{-n} \big),
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}
The map
\begin{equation}\label{ad_lg}
\mathrm{ad}^{L\mathfrak{g}}(X) := \frac{1}{4} \sum_{n\in \Z} \sum_{a=1}^{\mathrm{dim}\mathfrak{g}} [X, X_{a}^n] \cdot X_{a}^{-n} \in \mathrm{Cliff}(L\mathfrak{g}), \hspace{5mm} X \in L\mathfrak{g}^{\mathrm{fin}}.
\end{equation}
is defined only on vectors with finite energy. To justify the infinite summation in (\ref{d_lg}) and (\ref{ad_lg}), we refer to \cite{MR2894443, Wassermann-notes}. For any positive energy $LG$-representation $V$, $D_{L\mathfrak{g}}$ gives us an unbounded operator on $\big(V \otimes S_{L\mathfrak{g}}\big)^{\mathrm{fin}}$ which is a dense subspace of $V \otimes S_{L\mathfrak{g}}$.
\end{remark}
Let $\mathfrak{h}$ be an isotropy Lie algebra $\mathfrak{h}$ of the coadjoint $LG$-action. We decompose the Lie algebra $L\mathfrak{g} = \mathfrak{p} \oplus \mathfrak{h}$, where $\mathfrak{p} = \mathfrak{h}^{\perp}$. By the multiplicative property of spin representation
\[
S_{L\mathfrak{g}} = S_{\mathfrak{p}} \otimes S_{\mathfrak{h}},
\]
where $S_{\mathfrak{p}}$ is a $\Z_2$-graded irreducible representation of the Clifford algebra $\mathrm{Cliff}(\mathfrak{p})$.
\begin{definition}
We define $D_{L\mathfrak{g}, \mathfrak{h}}\in U(L\mathfrak{g}) \otimes \mathrm{Cliff}(\mathfrak{p})$ by the formula
\[
D_{L\mathfrak{g}, \mathfrak{h}} = \sum_{a, n}^{(\mathfrak{p})}\big( X_a^n \otimes X_a^{-n} + \frac{1}{3} \otimes \mathrm{ad}^\mathfrak{p}(X_{a}^n)\cdot X_a^{-n} \big),
\]
where the summation ranges over a basis of $\mathfrak{p}$.
\end{definition}
We denote by $\widehat{H}$ the central extension of $H$ induced by the inclusion $H \hookrightarrow LG$ and the central extension $\widehat{LG}$. We decompose $V \otimes S_{\mathfrak{p}}$ with respect to the $S^{1}_{\mathrm{rot}} \times \widehat{H}$-action and denote by $M(\boldsymbol{\nu})$ the isotypic component labeled by
\[
\boldsymbol{\nu} = (n, \nu, k+h^\vee) \in \Z \times \Lambda^{*} \times \Z.
\]
We have an analog of Theorem \ref{relative cubic} for the infinite-dimensional case.
\begin{theorem}
\label{square operator-4}
Suppose that $V_{\lambda}$ is an irreducible positive energy representation with highest weight $\boldsymbol{\lambda} = (0, \lambda, k)$. If we restrict to the isotypic component $M(\boldsymbol{\nu})$ of $V_{\lambda} \otimes S_{\mathfrak{p}}$, we have that
\[
D_{L\mathfrak{g},\mathfrak{h}}^{2}\big|_{M(\boldsymbol{\nu})}= \|\boldsymbol{\lambda} + \boldsymbol{\rho}_{G}\|^{2} - \|\boldsymbol{\nu} + \boldsymbol{\rho}_{H}\|^{2},
\]
where $\boldsymbol{\rho}_{G} = (0, \rho_{G}, h^{\vee})$ and $ \boldsymbol{\rho}_{H} = (0, \rho_{H}, 0)$.
\begin{proof}
\cite[Theorem 7.5]{MR2894443}.
\end{proof}
\end{theorem}
\section{Hamiltonian $LG$-spaces and q-Hamiltonian $G$-spaces}
The theory of q-Hamiltonian $G$-spaces was developed in \cite{AMM98}. It provides a finite-dimensional model for Hamiltonian $LG$-spaces. In this section, we begin by reviewing the basic definitions, and then discuss their cross-section theorems. We assume that $G$ is a compact, simple and simple connected Lie group.
\subsection{Basic definitions}
Recall that a \emph{Hamiltonian $G$-space} is a triple $(M, \omega, \mu)$, with $\omega$ the $G$-equivariant symplectic 2-form, and $\mu: M \to \mathfrak{g}^{*}$ the \emph{moment map} satisfying that
\[
\iota_{\xi_{M}} \omega =d \langle \mu, \xi \rangle, \hspace{5mm} \xi \in \mathfrak{g},
\]
where $\xi^M$ is the vector field on $M$ induced by the infinitesimal action of $\xi$.
The above definition can be extended to the loop group setting. Let $\mathcal{M}$ be an infinite-dimensional Banach manifold. We say that it is \emph{weakly symplectic} if it is equipped with a closed 2-form $\omega \in \Omega^{2}(\mathcal{M})$ so that the induced map
\[
\omega^{\flat}: T_{m}\mathcal{M} \to T_{m}^{*}\mathcal{M}
\]
is injective.
\begin{definition}
A \emph{Hamiltonian $LG$-space} is a weakly symplectic Banach manifold $(\mathcal{M}, \omega)$ together with a $LG$-action and
a $LG$-equivariant map $\mu: \mathcal{M} \to L\mathfrak{g}^{*}$ so that $\iota_{\xi_{\mathcal{M}}} \omega =d \langle \mu, \xi \rangle$ for all $\xi \in L\mathfrak{g}$.
\end{definition}
For example, the coadjoint $LG$-orbit is a Hamiltonian $LG$-space, with moment map the inclusion.
Let $(\mathcal{M}, \omega, \mu)$ be a Hamiltonian $LG$-space. Since the based loop group $\Omega G$ acts freely on $L\mathfrak{g}^{*}$, it acts freely on $\mathcal{M}$ as well by the equivariance of $\mu$. We thus obtain a commuting square
\begin{diagram}
\mathcal{M} & \rTo^{\mu} & L\mathfrak{g}^{*}\\
\dTo & &\dTo^{\mathrm{Hol}}\\
M & \rTo^{\phi} & G\\,
\end{diagram}
where the quotient $M = \mathcal{M}/\Omega G$ is a finite-dimensional compact smooth manifold provided that $\mu$ is proper.
Alekseev-Malkin-Meinrenken \cite{AMM98} give a set of conditions a $G$-space $M$ must satisfy in order to arise from a Hamiltonian $LG$-space by such a construction.
Choose an invariant inner product $\langle \cdot, \cdot \rangle_{\mathfrak{g}}$ on $\mathfrak{g}$ and denote by $\theta^{L}, \theta^{R} \in \Omega^{1}(G,\mathfrak{g})$ the left and right invariant Maurer-Cartan forms on $G$ and the \emph{Cartan 3-form}
\[
\chi = \frac{1}{12} \langle \theta^{L}, [\theta^{L}, \theta^{L}] \rangle_{\mathfrak{g}} = \frac{1}{12} \langle \theta^{R}, [\theta^{R}, \theta^{R}]\rangle_{\mathfrak{g}} \in \Omega^{3}(G).
\]
\begin{definition}[\cite{AMM98}]
\label{q-Hamiltonian}
A \emph{q-Hamiltonian} $G$-space is a compact $G$-manifold $M$, together with an equivariant 2-form $\omega$, and an equivariant map $\phi: M \to G$ satisfying the following properties:
\begin{enumerate}
\item
$d \omega = \phi^{*}\chi;$
\item
$\iota_{\xi_{M}} \omega = \frac{1}{2}\langle \phi^{*}(\theta^{L} + \theta^{R}), \xi \rangle_{\mathfrak{g}}$ for all $\xi \in \mathfrak{g};$
\item
$\mathrm{ker}(\omega) \cap \mathrm{ker}(d\phi) = 0. $
\end{enumerate}
We call $\phi$ the \emph{group-valued moment map}.
\end{definition}
According to \cite[Theorem 8.3]{AMM98}, there is a 1-1 correspondence between Hamiltonian $LG$-spaces with proper moment map and q-Hamiltonian $G$-spaces. One can always choose to work with infinite-dimensional Hamiltonian $LG$-spaces with more conventional definitions or to use finite dimensional q-Hamiltonian $G$-spaces. The counterparts of coadjoint orbits for q-Hamiltonian $G$-spaces are conjugacy classes $\mathcal{C}$ in $G$ with group-valued moment map the embedding $\mathcal{C} \hookrightarrow G$.
\subsection{Cross-section theorems}
The Hamiltonian $LG$-spaces and their equivalent finite-dimensional models behave in many respects like the usual Hamiltonian $G$-spaces. This is due to the existence of the cross-section theorem we shall now describe.
Let us first introduce a partial order of open faces of $\mathfrak{A}$ by setting $\tau \preceq\sigma$ if $\tau \subseteq \overline{\sigma}$. The isotropy group $(LG)_{\xi}$ of the coadjoint $LG$-action on $L\mathfrak{g}^{*}$ depends only on the open face $\sigma$ of $\mathfrak{A}$ containing $\xi$ and will be denoted by $(LG)_{\sigma}$ (note however $(LG)_{\sigma}$ will generally contain non-constant loops). One has that
\[
\sigma \preceq \tau \Rightarrow (LG)_{\tau} \subseteq (LG)_{\sigma}.
\]
In particular, $(LG)_{0} = G$ and $(LG)_{\mathrm{int} \mathfrak{A}} = T$.
We define a $(LG)_{\sigma}$-invariant open subset of $(L\mathfrak{g})_{\sigma}^{*}$ by
\[
\mathcal{A}_{\sigma} = (LG)_{\sigma} \cdot \bigcup_{\sigma \preceq\tau} \tau.
\]
Note that $\mathcal{A}_{\sigma}$ is a slice for all $\xi \in \sigma$ for the action of $LG$ in the sense that
\[
LG \times_{(LG)_{\sigma}} \mathcal{A}_{\sigma} \to LG \cdot \mathcal{A}_{\sigma}
\]
is a diffeomorphism of Banach manifolds.
\begin{theorem}
\label{cross section LG}
Let $(\mathcal{M}, \omega, \mu)$ be a Hamiltonian $LG$-space with proper moment map. For every open face $\sigma$ of $\mathfrak{A}$, the cross-section
\[
\mathcal{V}_{\sigma} = \mu^{-1}(\mathcal{A}_{\sigma})
\]
is a finite-dimensional symplectic submanifold with Hamiltonian $(LG)_{\sigma}$-action. The restriction of $\mu|_{\mathcal{V}_{\sigma}}$ is a moment map of the $\widehat{(LG)}_{\sigma}$-action (the central circle acts trivially on $\mathcal{V}_{\sigma}$).
\begin{proof}
\cite[Theorem 4.8]{MW98}.
\end{proof}
\end{theorem}
The symplectic cross-section theorem carries over to q-Hamiltonian $G$-spaces. The centralizer $G_{\mathrm{exp}(\xi)}$ with $\xi \in \mathfrak{A}$ is isomorphic to $(LG)_{\xi}$ and it depends only on the open face $\sigma$ of $\mathfrak{A}$ containing $\xi$. We denoted it by $G_{\sigma}$. The subset
\[
A_{\sigma} = \mathrm{Ad}(G_{\sigma}) \cdot \mathrm{exp}(\bigcup_{\sigma \preceq\tau}\tau) \subset G_{\sigma} \subset G
\]
is smooth and is a slice for the $\mathrm{Ad}$(G)-action at points in $\sigma$.
\begin{theorem}
Let $(M, \omega, \phi)$ be a q-Hamiltonian $G$-space. The cross-section
\begin{equation}
\label{slice}
V_{\sigma} = \phi^{-1}(A_{\sigma})
\end{equation}
is a smooth $G_{\sigma}$-invariant submanifold and
\[
G \times_{G_{\sigma}} V_{\sigma} \cong G \cdot V_{\sigma}
\]
is a $G$-invariant open subset of $M$. Moreover, $V_{\sigma}$
is a q-Hamiltonian $G_{\sigma}$-space with the restriction of $\phi$ as the group-valued moment map.
\begin{proof}
\cite[Proposition 7.1]{AMM98}.
\end{proof}
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
\label{identify}
It is important to point out that if we identify $G_{\sigma}\cong (LG)_{\sigma}$, the two cross-sections
\[
\mathcal{V}_{\sigma}\subset \mathcal{M}, \hspace{5mm} V_{\sigma} \subset M
\]
are equivariantly diffeomorphic. In particular, every $V_\sigma$ is also a Hamiltonian $G_\sigma$-space.
\end{remark}
\begin{comment}
\subsection{Equivalence theorem}
Every Hamiltonian $LG$-space with proper moment map determines a q-Hamiltonian $G$-space and vice versa. Since the based loop group $\Omega G$ acts on $L\mathfrak{g}^{*}$ freely, its action on $\mathcal{M}$ is free as well. We can thus form the quotient
\[
M = \mathrm{Hol}(\mathcal{M}) := \mathcal{M} / \Omega G.
\]
By the assumption that $\phi$ is proper, the holonomy manifold $M$ is a smooth finite-dimensional manifold. In fact, we have the following theorem:
\begin{theorem}[Equivalence theorem]
Let $(\mathcal{M}, \sigma, \mu)$ be a Hamiltonian $LG$-space with proper moment map $\mu$. Then the holonomy manifold $M = \mathrm{Hol}(\mathcal{M})$ is a q-Hamiltonian $G$-space with group-valued moment map $\phi = \mathrm{Hol}(\mu) : M \to G$.
\end{theorem}
Suppose conversely that we are given a q-Hamiltonian $G$-space $(M, \omega, \phi)$. The Hamiltonian $LG$-space can be reconstructed from
\[
\mathcal{M} = \{ (\xi, m) \in L\mathfrak{g}^{*} \times M| \phi(m) = \mathrm{Hol}(\xi)\},
\]
with moment map $\mu(\xi, m) = \xi \in L\mathfrak{g}^{*}$.
\end{comment}
\section{Twisted spinor bundle and twisted pre-quantum bundle}
In this section, we construct twisted spinor bundle and twisted pre-quantum bundles on q-Hamiltonian $G$-spaces.
\subsection{Construction of the twisted spinor bundle}
Let $G$ be a compact, simple, and simply connected Lie group. Let $(M, \omega)$ be a q-Hamiltonian $G$-space and $\mathcal{M}$ its corresponding Hamiltonian $LG$-space.
We first replace the cross-sections $V_\sigma$ in (\ref{slice}) with smaller open subsets. To be more precise, for every vertex $\sigma$ of $\mathfrak{A}$, let $Y_{\sigma}$ be a $G_{\sigma}$-invariant, open subset of $V_\sigma$ so that $\overline{Y_\sigma} \subset V_\sigma$, and
\[
M/G \subseteq \bigcup_{\sigma, \mathrm{dim}\sigma =0} Y_{\sigma}.
\]
Then we form an open cover of $M$ by
\[
\{ U_{\sigma} = G \times_{G_{\sigma}}Y_{\sigma}\}_{\sigma, \mathrm{dim}\sigma = 0}.
\]
For all open faces $\tau$ of $\mathfrak{A}$ with $\mathrm{dim}\tau > 0$, we define
\[
Y_{\tau} = \bigcap_{\sigma \preceq\tau, \mathrm{dim}\sigma = 0} Y_{\sigma}, \hspace{5mm} U_\tau = G \times_{G_\tau} Y_{\tau}.
\]
Remark at this point that each $Y_{\tau}$ is a Hamiltonian
$G_\tau$-space and admits $G_\tau$-invariant almost complex structures.
\begin{lemma}
\label{homotopy}
There exists a collection of $G_{\sigma}$-invariant almost complex structures on the collection of $Y_{\sigma}$ such that the embedding
\[
Y_{\tau} \hookrightarrow Y_{\sigma},\hspace{5mm} \sigma \prec \tau
\]
is almost complex. In addition, any two almost complex structures with the required properties are homotopic. We denote by $S_{Y_{\sigma}}$ the spinor bundle on $Y_{\sigma}$ associated to the almost complex structures.
\begin{proof}
\cite[Lemma 3.2]{Meinrenken-W-2001}.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
Let $\pi : U_\sigma \to G/G_\sigma$ be the projection. The tangent bundle decomposes $G$-equivariantly
\[
TU_\sigma \cong \pi^*T(G/G_\sigma) \oplus G \times_{G_\sigma} TY_\sigma.
\]
The base manifold $G/G_\sigma$ is a conjugacy class and might not have a $G$-equivariant Spin$^c$-structure in general. Thus the total space $U_\sigma$ doesn't have to be Spin$^c$ either.
On the other hand, the coadjoint $LG$-orbit $\mathcal{O} =LG/(LG)_\sigma$ is a complex manifold. By the discussion in \cite{Meinrenken-W-2001}, the weight
\[
2 \cdot (\rho_{G} -\rho_{\sigma}, h^{\vee})
\]
is fixed by $\widehat{(LG)}_\sigma$ and the tensor product
\[
S^{*}_{L\mathfrak{g}/(L\mathfrak{g})_{\sigma}} \otimes \C_{(\rho_{G} -\rho_{\sigma}, h^{\vee})}
\]
is a $(LG)_\sigma$-space. The associated spinor bundle and canonical line bundle on $\mathcal{O}$ are given by
\[
S_\mathcal{O} = \widehat{LG} \times_{\widehat{(LG)}_\sigma} (S^{*}_{L\mathfrak{g}/(L\mathfrak{g})_{\sigma}} \otimes \C_{(\rho_{G} -\rho_{\sigma}, h^{\vee})})
\]
and
\[
K_\mathcal{O} = \widehat{LG} \times_{\widehat{(LG)}_\sigma} \C_{2 \cdot (\rho_{G} -\rho_{\sigma}, h^{\vee})}).
\]
One can compare them with (\ref{spinor for lg}) and (\ref{canonical for lg}).
Motivated by the above, we define a bundle of Hilbert space on $U_\sigma$ by
\begin{equation}
\label{spinor-2}
S_{U_{\sigma}}^{\mathrm{spin}} = G \times_{G_{\sigma}} \big(S^{*}_{L\mathfrak{g}/(L\mathfrak{g})_{\sigma}} \otimes \C_{(\rho_{G} -\rho_{\sigma}, h^{\vee})} \otimes S_{Y_{\sigma}}\big),
\end{equation}
where $G_{\sigma}$ acts on
\[
S^{*}_{L\mathfrak{g}/(L\mathfrak{g})_{\sigma}} \otimes \C_{(\rho_{G} -\rho_{\sigma}, h^{\vee})}
\]
factoring through the identification $G_{\sigma} \cong (LG)_{\sigma}$. In addition, we equip $S_{U_{\sigma}}^{\mathrm{spin}}$ with a $\Z_{2}$-grading induced by that on $S^{*}_{L\mathfrak{g}/(L\mathfrak{g})_{\sigma}}$ and $S_{Y_\sigma}$. To sum up, we obtain a collection of $G$-equivariant bundles of $\Z_{2}$-graded Hilbert space $\{ S_{U_{\sigma}}^{\mathrm{spin}}\}$. We next show that such a collection of bundles can be glued together.
\begin{lemma}
For any $\sigma \prec \tau$, the normal bundle $\nu_{\tau}^{\sigma}$ of $Y_{\tau} \hookrightarrow Y_{\sigma}$ has a $G_{\tau}$-equivariant almost complex structure with spinor bundle isomorphic to
\begin{equation}
\label{normal} S_{(L\mathfrak{g})_{\sigma}/(L\mathfrak{g})_{\tau}}^{*} \otimes \C_{(\rho_{\sigma} - \rho_{\tau})},
\end{equation}
where $\rho_{\tau}, \rho_{\sigma}$ are the half-sums of positive roots for $G_\tau, G_\sigma$ respectively.
\begin{proof}
By the cross-section theorem, the normal bundle $\nu_{\tau}^{\sigma}$ is isomorphic to the trivial bundle
\[
\mathfrak{g}_{\sigma}/\mathfrak{g}_{\tau} \cong (L\mathfrak{g})_{\sigma}/(L\mathfrak{g})_{\tau}
\]
with equivariant almost complex structure. In fact, let $\mathfrak{R}_{\sigma}, \mathfrak{R}_{\tau}$ be compatible sets of positive roots for $G_{\sigma}$ and $G_{\tau}$. Then
\[
\mathfrak{g}_{\sigma} /\mathfrak{g}_{\tau} = \bigoplus_{\alpha \in \mathfrak{R}_{\sigma}\setminus \mathfrak{R}_{\tau}} \C_{\alpha}
\]
and
\[
\mathrm{det}_{\C}(\nu_{\tau}^{\sigma}) = \bigotimes_{\alpha \in \mathfrak{R}_{\sigma}\setminus \mathfrak{R}_{\tau}} \C_{\alpha} = \C_{2(\rho_{\sigma} - \rho_{\tau})}.
\]
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}
There are canonical isomorphisms
\[
\Psi_{\tau, \sigma}: S_{U_{\tau}}^{\mathrm{spin}} \cong S_{U_{\sigma}}^{\mathrm{spin}} |_{U_{\tau}}, \hspace{5mm} \sigma \prec \tau
\]
and they automatically satisfy the cocycle condition.
\begin{proof}
By the above lemma, we have that
\[
S_{Y_{\sigma}}|_{Y_{\tau}} \cong S_{(L\mathfrak{g})_{\sigma}/(L\mathfrak{g})_{\tau}}^{*} \otimes \C_{(\rho_{\sigma} - \rho_{\tau})} \otimes S_{Y_{\tau}}.
\]
The claim follows form the construction.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
\begin{definition}
We define the \emph{twisted spinor bundle} $S^{\mathrm{spin}}$ to be the $G$-equivariant bundle of $\Z_{2}$-graded Hilbert space over $M$ with the property that
\[
S^{\mathrm{spin}}|_{U_{\sigma}} \cong S_{U_{\sigma}}^{\mathrm{spin}},
\]
for all vertexes $\sigma$ of $\mathfrak{A}$.
\end{definition}
The twisted spinor bundle is determined by the choice of almost complex structures on subsets $\{Y_{\sigma}\}$. By Lemma \ref{homotopy}, all the choices are homotopic. Hence, the twisted spinor bundle $S^{\mathrm{spin}}$ is unique up to homotopy.
\subsection{Construction of the twisted pre-quantum bundle}
Let us recall that the pre-quantum line bundle of a symplectic manifold is traditionally defined to be a line bundle whose first Chern class is an integral lift of the symplectic 2-form.
\begin{definition}\label{pre-quantum LG}
We say that a Hamiltonian $LG$-space $\mathcal{M}$ is \emph{pre-quantizable at level $k$} $(k >0)$ if there exists a $\widehat{LG}$-equivariant line bundle
\[
\mathcal{L} \to \mathcal{M}
\]
such that the central circle acts with weight $k$ and the first Chern class $c_{1}(\mathcal{L})$ equals to the symplectic 2-form on $\mathcal{M}$.
\end{definition}
Because the pre-quantum line bundle $\mathcal{L}$ is $\widehat{LG}$-equivariant instead of $LG$-equivariant, it might not descend to an actual line bundle on its corresponding q-Hamiltonian $G$-space $M$.
\begin{remark}\label{pre-quantum q}
The 2-form $\omega$ for a q-Hamiltonian $G$-space $M$ is not closed in general. Instead the condition $d\omega = \phi^{*}\chi$ and the fact that$\chi$ is a closed 3-form imply that the pair $(\omega, \chi)$ defines a cocyle for the relative de Rham theory (see \cite[Appendix B]{MR2989614} for a reference). We denote by $[(\omega, \chi)] \in H^{3}(\phi, \mathbb{R})$ its cohomology class. We say that a q-Hamiltonian $G$-space $(M, \omega, \phi)$ is \emph{pre-quantizable at level $k$} if $k \cdot [(\omega, \chi)]$ is integral. By the 1-1 correspondence between q-Hamiltonian $G$-spaces and Hamiltonian $LG$-spaces, their pre-quantum conditions are equivalent.
\end{remark}
Let $Y_\sigma$ be the cross-section defined before. We identify it as a subset in $\mathcal{M}$. If $\mathcal{M}$ has a pre-quantum line bundle $\mathcal{L}$ at level $k$, then there exists a $\widehat{(LG)}_{\sigma}$-equivariant line bundle obtained by restriction
\[
L_{Y_{\sigma}} = \mathcal{L}|_{Y_{\sigma}} \to Y_\sigma,
\]
on which the central circle acts with weight $k$. The collection of line bundles $\{L_{Y_{\sigma}}\}$ satisfy a compatibility condition in the sense that
\begin{equation}
\label{normal-2}
(LG)_{\sigma} \times_{(LG)_{\tau}}L_{Y_{\tau}} \cong L_{Y_{\sigma}}|_{Y_{\tau}^{\sigma}}, \hspace{5mm} \sigma \prec \tau.
\end{equation}
where
\[
Y_{\tau}^{\sigma} =(LG)_{\sigma} \times_{(LG)_{\tau}} Y_{\tau}
\]
is a $(LG)_{\sigma}$-invariant open subset of $Y_{\sigma}$.
For any irreducible positive energy representation $V_{\lambda}$ at level $k$, we denote $V_{\lambda}^*$ its dual. Comparing to (\ref{spinor-2}), we define a bundle of Hilbert space on
\[
U_\sigma = G\times_{G_\sigma} Y_\sigma
\]
by
\begin{equation}
\label{pre-q-2}
S^{\mathrm{pre}}_{\lambda,U_{\sigma}} = G \times_{G_{\sigma}} (V_{\lambda}^* \otimes L_{Y_{\sigma}}).
\end{equation}
Here the central circle of $\widehat{(LG)}_\sigma$ acts trivially on the tensor product $V_{\lambda}^* \otimes L_{Y_{\sigma}}$, and $G_\sigma$ acts factoring through $G_{\sigma} \cong (LG)_\sigma$.
By the compatibility condition (\ref{normal-2}), there are canonical isomorphisms
\[
\Psi_{\tau, \sigma}: S^{\mathrm{pre}}_{\lambda,U_{\tau}} \cong S^{\mathrm{pre}}_{\lambda,U_{\sigma}} |_{U_{\tau}}, \hspace{5mm} \sigma \prec \tau,
\]
satisfying the cocycle condition. Thus, they can be glued together. We define $S^{\mathrm{pre}}_{\lambda}$ the unique $G$-equivariant bundle of Hilbert space over $M$
with the property that
\[
S^{\mathrm{pre}}_{\lambda}|_{U_{\sigma}} =S^{\mathrm{pre}}_{\lambda,U_{\sigma}}.
\]
\begin{definition}
We define the \emph{twisted pre-quantum bundle} by
\begin{equation}
\label{twisted pre-quantum}
S^{\mathrm{pre}}:= \bigoplus_{\lambda \in P_{k,+}} V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}} \otimes S^{\mathrm{pre}}_{\lambda}.
\end{equation}
It is a $\widehat{LG} \times G$-equivariant bundle of Hilbert space over the q-Hamiltonian $G$-space $M$.
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}
There is a global construction of the twisted pre-quantum bundle. Let us introduce a $\widehat{LG} \times \widehat{LG}$-space:
\[
H_{\mathrm{wzw}, k} = \bigoplus_{\lambda \in P_{k,+}} V_{\lambda} \otimes V_{\lambda}^{*}.
\]
This is the so-called Hilbert space of the Wess-Zumino-Witten model (see \cite{Gawedzki00} for a reference). The aim of this paper is not to justify this choice of the Hilbert space, but morally one can consider it as the analog of $L^2(G)$ for loop groups, in the spirit of the Peter-Weyl decomposition of $L^2(G)$. The tensor product
\[
(\mathcal{M} \times H_{\mathrm{wzw}, k}) \otimes \mathcal{L} = \bigoplus_{\lambda \in P_{k,+}} V_{\lambda} \otimes (V_{\lambda}^{*} \otimes \mathcal{L}) \to \mathcal{M}
\]
is a $\widehat{LG} \times LG$ equivariant bundle. We obtain a $\widehat{LG}\times G$-equivariant bundle of Hilbert space by taking its $\Omega G$-invariant part
\[
S^{\mathrm{pre}} = V_{\lambda} \otimes [ V^{*}_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}} \otimes \mathcal{L}]^{\Omega G} \to M = \mathcal{M}/ \Omega G.
\]
\end{remark}
\section{Dirac operators on q-Hamiltonian $G$-spaces}
With the twisted spinor bundle and twisted pre-quantum bundle defined in last section, we now proceed to construct Hilbert spaces and Dirac operators. We keep the same notations as in last section. Let $G$ be a compact, simple and simply connected Lie group, and $M$ a pre-quantizable q-Hamiltonian $G$-space at level $k$.
\subsection{Dirac operators on cross-sections}
The idea of constructing Dirac operators is that we first define Dirac operators on local cross-sections, and then patch them together using partition of unity.
Let $\{ Y_\tau \}$ be the collection of cross-sections defined in last section and open subsets $U_\tau = G \times_{G_\tau} Y_\tau$.
Fixing an irreducible positive energy $LG$-representation $V_\lambda$, we define
\[
\big[\Gamma_{c}^\infty(U_{\tau}, S^{\mathrm{spin}} \otimes S^{\mathrm{pre}}_{\lambda}) \big]^{G}
\]
the space of $G$-invariant, smooth sections of $S^{\mathrm{spin}} \otimes S^{\mathrm{pre}}_{\lambda}$ with compact support in $U_\tau$, with norm given by
\[
\|s\|^2 := \int_{U_\tau} \langle s(m), s(m) \rangle dm.
\]
\begin{lemma}
\label{cross-1}
We have that
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
&\big[\Gamma_{c}^\infty(U_{\tau}, S^{\mathrm{spin}} \otimes S^{\mathrm{pre}}_{\lambda}) \big]^{G}\\
\cong & \big[V_{\lambda}^{*} \otimes S^{*}_{L\mathfrak{g}/(L\mathfrak{g})_{\tau}} \otimes \C_{(\rho_{G} -\rho_\tau, h^\vee)} \otimes \Gamma_{c}^\infty(Y_\tau, S_{Y_\tau} \otimes L_{Y_\tau})\big]^{G_{\tau}}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\begin{proof}
The assertion follows immediately from the isomorphisms (\ref{spinor-2}) and (\ref{pre-q-2}).
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
\begin{comment}
\begin{remark}
Although the tensor products
Every factor on the right-hand side of equation (\ref{e-1}) might not be a $G_{\sigma}$-space individually but $\mathfrak{g}_{\sigma}$-space. However, the tensor product
\[
S^{*}_{L\mathfrak{g}/(L\mathfrak{g})_{\sigma}} \otimes \C_{(\rho_{G} -\rho_{\sigma}, h^{\vee})}
\]
as well as
\[
V_{\lambda}^{*} \otimes \Gamma_{L^{2}}(\mathcal{Y}_{\sigma}, S_{\mathcal{Y}_{\sigma}} \otimes L_{\mathcal{Y}_{\sigma}})
\]
are actual $G_{\sigma}$-representations.
\end{remark}
\end{comment}
Let
\[
D_{\mathrm{alg}} \in U(L\mathfrak{g}) \otimes \mathrm{Cliff}(L\mathfrak{g}/(L\mathfrak{g})_\tau)
\]
be the cubic Dirac operator acting on $V_{\lambda}^{*} \otimes S_{L\mathfrak{g}/(L\mathfrak{g})_\tau}^{*}$ and $D_{\mathrm{geo}}$ the equivariant geometric Spin$^{c}$-Dirac operator on $\Gamma_{c}^\infty(Y_\tau, S_{Y_\tau} \otimes L_{Y_\tau})$. Here we choose $D_{\mathrm{geo}}$ so that it is symmetric. Since the sum
\[
D_{\mathrm{alg}} \otimes 1 + 1\otimes D_{\mathrm{geo}}
\]
is equivariant, it descends to the $G_\tau$-invariant part. That is, we obtain a collection of operators
\[
\big[D_{ \mathrm{alg}} \otimes 1 + 1\otimes D_{\mathrm{geo}}\big]^{G_\tau}
\]
on
\[
\big[V_{\lambda}^{*} \otimes S^{*}_{\mathfrak{p}} \otimes \C_{(\rho_{G} -\rho_\tau, h^\vee)} \otimes \Gamma_{c}^\infty(Y_\tau, S_{Y_\tau} \otimes L_{Y_\tau})\big]^{G_\tau},
\]
and thus an operator on
\[
\big[\Gamma_{c}^\infty(U_{\tau}, S^{\mathrm{spin}} \otimes S^{\mathrm{pre}}_{\lambda}) \big]^{G}.
\]
We denote it by $D_{U_\tau}$. By definition, every $D_{U_\tau}$ is an unbounded operator.
Since $D_{\mathrm{alg}}$ is defined only on vectors with finite energy, the domain of $D_{U_\tau}$ is given by
\[
\big[(V_{\lambda}^{*} \otimes S^{*}_{L\mathfrak{g}/(L\mathfrak{g})_{\tau}})^{\mathrm{fin}} \otimes \C_{(\rho_{G} -\rho_\tau, h^\vee)} \otimes \Gamma_{c}^\infty(Y_\tau, S_{Y_\tau} \otimes L_{Y_\tau})\big]^{G_{\tau}},
\]
which is a dense subspace.
Suppose that $\sigma_1, \sigma_2$ are two vertexes of $\mathfrak{A}$ and $\tau$ an open face of $\mathfrak{A}$ so that $ \sigma_1 \preceq \tau$ and $ \sigma_2 \preceq \tau$. In particular, one has that
\[
U_\tau \subseteq U_{\sigma_1}, \hspace{5mm} U_\tau \subseteq U_{\sigma_2}.
\]
\begin{proposition}
\label{overlap}
If we restrict to
\[
\big[\Gamma_{c}^\infty(U_{\tau}, S^{\mathrm{spin}} \otimes S^{\mathrm{pre}}_{\lambda}) \big]^{G},
\]
the difference between $D_{U_{\sigma_1}}$ and $D_{U_{\sigma_2}}$ is a bounded operator.
\begin{proof}
Since $U_\tau = G \times_{G_\tau} Y_\tau$, the Lemma \ref{cross-1} gives us an isomorphism:
\begin{equation} \label{iso-2}
\big[\Gamma_{c}^\infty(U_{\tau}, S^{\mathrm{spin}} \otimes S^{\mathrm{pre}}_{\lambda}) \big]^{G} \cong \big[ V_\lambda^*\otimes S^{*}_{L\mathfrak{g}/(L\mathfrak{g})_{\tau}} \otimes \C_{(\rho_{G} -\rho_{\tau}, h^{\vee})} \otimes \Gamma_{c}^\infty(Y_{\tau}, S_{Y_{\tau}} \otimes L_{Y_{\tau}})\big]^{G_{\tau}}.
\end{equation}
The Dirac operator $D_{U_\tau}$ is defined as the combination of a cubic Dirac operator on
\[
V_\lambda^*\otimes S^{*}_{L\mathfrak{g}/(L\mathfrak{g})_{\tau}} \cong \cong V_\lambda^* \otimes S^{*}_{L\mathfrak{g}/(L\mathfrak{g})_{\sigma_1}} \otimes S^*_{\mathfrak{g}_{\sigma_1}/\mathfrak{g}_\tau}
\]
and a Spin$^c$-Dirac operator on
\[
\Gamma_{c}^\infty(Y_{\tau}, S_{Y_{\tau}} \otimes L_{Y_{\tau}}).
\]
On the other hand, we have that
\[
U_{\tau} \cong G \times_{G_{\sigma_1}} Y_{\tau}^{\sigma_1}, \hspace{5mm} Y_{\tau}^{\sigma_1}= G_{\sigma_1} \times_{G_{\tau}} Y_{\tau}.
\]
Applying Lemma \ref{cross-1} again,
\begin{equation}\label{iso-1}
\big[\Gamma_{c}^\infty(U_{\tau}, S^{\mathrm{spin}} \otimes S^{\mathrm{pre}}_{\lambda}) \big]^{G}
\cong \big[ V_\lambda^* \otimes S^{*}_{L\mathfrak{g}/(L\mathfrak{g})_{\sigma_1}} \otimes \C_{(\rho -\rho_{\sigma_1}, h^{\vee})} \otimes \Gamma_{c}^\infty(Y_{\tau}^{\sigma_1},S_{Y_{\sigma_1}} \otimes L_{Y_{\sigma_1}} )\big]^{G_{\sigma_1}}.
\end{equation}
Under the isomorphism (\ref{iso-1}), the operator $D_{U_{\sigma_1}}$ decomposes into the sum of a cubic Dirac operator on
\[
V_\lambda^* \otimes S^{*}_{L\mathfrak{g}/(L\mathfrak{g})_{\sigma_1}}
\]
and a Spin$^c$-Dirac operator on
\[
\Gamma_{c}^\infty(Y_{\tau}^{\sigma_1},S_{Y_{\sigma_1}} \otimes L_{Y_{\sigma_1}} ).
\]
It follows immediately that the two operators $D_{U_\tau}$ and $D_{U_{\sigma_1}}$ are identical on
\[
V_\lambda^* \otimes S^{*}_{L\mathfrak{g}/(L\mathfrak{g})_{\sigma_1}}.
\]
Note that the spinor bundle
\[
S_{Y_{\sigma_1}}|_{Y_{\tau}^{\sigma_1}} \cong G_{\sigma_1} \times_{G_{\tau}} (S_{Y_{\tau}} \otimes S^{*}_{\mathfrak{g}_{\sigma_1}/ \mathfrak{g}_{\tau}} \otimes \C_{\rho_{\sigma_1}-\rho_{\tau}}),
\]
and the pre-quantum line bundle
\[
L_{Y_{\sigma_1}}|_{Y_{\tau}^{\sigma_1}} \cong G_{\sigma_1} \times_{G_{\tau}} L_\tau.
\]
Therefore, the space
\[
\Gamma_{c}^\infty(Y_{\tau}^{\sigma_1},S_{Y_{\sigma_1}} \otimes L_{Y_{\sigma_1}} )
\]
decomposes into:
\[
\big[ \big(C^\infty(G_{\sigma_1}) \otimes S^{*}_{\mathfrak{g}_{\sigma_1}/ \mathfrak{g}_{\tau}}\big) \otimes \C_{\rho_{\sigma_1}-\rho_{\tau}} \otimes \Gamma_{c}^\infty(Y_{\tau}, S_{Y_{\tau}} \otimes L_{Y_{\tau}} )\big]^{G_{\tau}}.
\]
By definition, both $D_{U_\tau}$ and $D_{U_{\sigma_1}}$ act as Spin$^{c}$-Dirac operators on
\[
\Gamma_{c}^\infty(Y_{\tau}, S_{Y_{\tau}} \otimes L_{Y_{\tau}} );
\]
while on the factor
\[
C^\infty(G_{\sigma_1}) \otimes S^{*}_{\mathfrak{g}_{\sigma_1}/ \mathfrak{g}_{\tau}},
\]
$D_{U_\tau}$ acts as the cubic Dirac operator, and $D_{U_{\sigma_1}}$ acts as the Spin$^{c}$-Dirac operator. By Lemma \ref{geo alg}, their difference is bounded.
We just show that the difference between $D_{U_{\sigma_1}}$ and $D_{U_{\tau}}$ is a bounded operator on the overlap $U_{\tau}$. Similarly one can show that the difference between $D_{U_{\sigma_2}}$ and $D_{U_{\tau}}$ is bounded as well. This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\end{proposition}
\subsection{Construction of Dirac operator and main theorem}
For a fixed irreducible positive energy representation $V_\lambda$ at level $k$, we define
\[
\mathcal{H}_{\lambda} = \big[L^2(M, S^{\mathrm{spin}}\otimes S^{\mathrm{pre}}_\lambda)\big]^{G}.
\]
The $\Z_2$-grading on the twisted spinor bundle $S^{\mathrm{spin}}$ equips $\mathcal{H}_\lambda$ with a $\Z_2$-grading. That is
\[
\mathcal{H}_\lambda = \mathcal{H}_\lambda^+ \oplus \mathcal{H}_\lambda^-.
\]
Select a $G$-invariant, smooth partition of unity $\{f_{\sigma}^{2}\}$ which is subordinate to the cover
\[
\{U_\sigma = G \times_{G_\sigma} Y_\sigma \}_{\sigma, \mathrm{dim}\sigma = 0}.
\]
We define a Dirac operator $\mathcal{D}$ on $\mathcal{H}$ by the formula:
\[
\mathcal{D}= \sum_{\sigma, \mathrm{dim}\sigma = 0} f_{\sigma} \cdot D_{U_\sigma} \cdot f_{\sigma}.
\]
\begin{proposition} \label{same up to bounded}
The Dirac operator $\mathcal{D}$ doesn't depend on the choice of $\{f_\sigma^2\}$ up to homotopy.
\begin{proof}
Let $\{f_{\sigma}'^{2}\}$ be another partition of unity.
We define a Dirac operator $\mathcal{D}'$ on $\mathcal{H}_\lambda$ by
\[
\mathcal{D}'= \sum_{\sigma, \mathrm{dim}\sigma = 0} f'_{\sigma} \cdot D_{U_\sigma} \cdot f'_{\sigma}.
\]
It suffices to show that
\[
\mathcal{D}' - \mathcal{D} \in \mathbb{B}(\mathcal{H}_{\lambda}).
\]
We compute that
\begin{equation}\label{step-1}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{D}&= \sum_{\sigma} f_{\sigma} \cdot D_{U_\sigma} \cdot f_{\sigma} = \sum_{\sigma, \tau} f_{\sigma} \cdot D_{U_\sigma}\cdot f'^2_\tau \cdot f_{\sigma}\\
& = \sum_{\sigma, \tau} \big( f'_\tau \cdot f_{\sigma} \cdot D_{U_\sigma} \cdot f_{\sigma} \cdot f'_\tau + f_{\sigma} \cdot [D_{U_\sigma}, f'_\tau] \cdot f'_\tau \cdot f_{\sigma}\big)\\
& = \sum_{\sigma, \tau} \big( f'_\tau \cdot D_{U_\sigma} \cdot f^2_{\sigma} \cdot f'_\tau + f_{\sigma} \cdot [D_{U_\sigma}, f'_\tau] \cdot f'_\tau \cdot f_{\sigma} + f'_{\tau} \cdot [D_{U_\sigma}, f_\sigma] \cdot f'_\tau \cdot f_{\sigma}\big).\\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Since the functions $f_\sigma$ are $G$-invariant, they commute with the cubic Dirac operator $D_{\mathrm{alg}}$. Their commutators with Spin$^c$-Dirac operators:
\[
c(df_\sigma) = [f_\sigma, D_{\mathrm{geo}}]
\]
are all bounded. It shows that
\begin{equation}\label{step-2}
[D_{U_\sigma}, f'_\tau],\hspace{5mm} [D_{U_\sigma}, f_\sigma] \in \mathbb{B}(\mathcal{H}_{\lambda}).
\end{equation}
In addition, by Proposition \ref{overlap},
\[
f'_\tau \cdot ( D_{U_\sigma} - D_{U_\tau}) \cdot f^2_{\sigma} \cdot f'_\tau
\]
are bounded for all $\sigma, \tau$. Therefore,
\begin{equation}\label{step-3}
\begin{aligned}
&\sum_{\sigma, \tau} f'_\tau \cdot D_{U_\sigma} \cdot f^2_{\sigma} \cdot f'_\tau\\
&= \sum_{\tau, \sigma} f'_\tau \cdot D_{U_\tau} \cdot f^2_\sigma \cdot f'_\tau + \sum_{\tau, \sigma}f'_\tau \cdot ( D_{U_\sigma} - D_{U_\tau}) \cdot f^2_{\sigma} \cdot f'_\tau \\
& = \mathcal{D}' + \sum_{\tau, \sigma}f'_\tau \cdot ( D_{U_\sigma} - D_{U_\tau}) \cdot f^2_{\sigma} \cdot f'_\tau
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The proposition follows from (\ref{step-1}), (\ref{step-2}) and (\ref{step-3}).
\end{proof}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proposition}\label{self-adjoint}
The Dirac operator $\mathcal{D}$ is essentially self-adjoint.
\begin{proof}
It is enough to show that each $f_\sigma \cdot D_{U_\sigma} \cdot f_\sigma$ is essentially self-adjoint.
Let us write
\[
D_{U_\sigma} = \big[D_{ \mathrm{alg}} \otimes 1 + 1\otimes D_{\mathrm{geo}}\big]^{G_\sigma}
\]
The algebraic part $D_{ \mathrm{alg}}$ is certainly self-adjoint, and the geometric part, $D_{\mathrm{geo}}$ is a symmetric Spin$^c$-Dirac operator on $Y_\sigma$. Recall that every symmetric Dirac operator on a complete manifold is essentially self-adjoint. But it doesn't apply directly to our case since $Y_\sigma$ is not complete. Nevertheless, we can get around this by the following trick.
Since the function $f_\sigma$ has compact support in $Y_\sigma$, we can find a smaller subset $\widetilde{Y}_{\sigma}$ so that
\[
\mathrm{Supp} f_\sigma \subset \widetilde{Y}_{\sigma} \subset Y_\sigma
\]
and the closure of $\widetilde{Y}_{\sigma}$ is contained in $Y_\sigma$. We denote by $g$ the metric on $Y_\sigma$ and $\chi$ a positive function on $Y_\sigma$ so that $\chi|_{\widetilde{Y}_{\sigma}} \equiv 1$ and $\chi(m)$ tends to infinity as $m$ tends to the boundary of $Y_\sigma$. Under the rescaled metric
\[
g^\chi(\cdot, \cdot) = \chi^2 \cdot g(\cdot, \cdot),
\]
the manifold $Y_\sigma$ becomes complete.
Let $\widetilde D_{\mathrm{geo}}$ be an essentially self-adjoint Spin$^c$-Dirac operator on the complete manifold $Y_\sigma$. Consider a new Dirac operator
\[
\widetilde D_{U_\sigma} := [D_{\mathrm{alg}} \otimes 1 + 1\otimes \widetilde D_{\mathrm{geo}}]^{G_{\sigma}},
\]
which is essentially self-adjoint. Since the metric remains the same within $\widetilde{Y}_\sigma$, we have that
\[
\widetilde D_{U_\sigma} s = D_{U_\sigma} s
\]
for all $s$ with $\mathrm{Supp} s \subseteq \widetilde{Y}_\sigma$. Thus,
\[
f_\sigma \cdot \widetilde D_{U_\sigma} \cdot f_\sigma
\]
can be viewed as an operator on $\mathcal{H}_\lambda$, and
\[
f_\sigma \cdot D_{U_\sigma} \cdot f_\sigma = f_\sigma \cdot \widetilde D_{U_\sigma} \cdot f_\sigma
\]
is essentially self-adjoint.
\end{proof}
\end{proposition}
We define an operator by functional calculus,
\[
\mathcal{F} = \frac{\mathcal{D}}{\sqrt{1 + \mathcal{D}^2}}.
\]
Because $\mathcal{D}$ has a dense domain in $\mathcal{H}_\lambda$, $\mathcal{F}$ extends to a self-adjoint bounded operator on $\mathcal{H}_\lambda$, which anti-commutes with the $\Z_2$-grading on $\mathcal{H}_\lambda$.
\begin{theorem}\label{main theorem}
The bounded operator $\mathcal{F}$ is Fredholm on $\mathcal{H}_{\lambda}$. We define its Fredholm index by
\[
\mathrm{Ind}(\mathcal{D})_{\lambda}:= \mathrm{ker}(\mathcal{F}) \cap \mathcal{H}^{+}_{\lambda} - \mathrm{ker}(\mathcal{F}) \cap \mathcal{H}^{-}_{\lambda} \in \Z.
\]
\end{theorem}
By Proposition \ref{same up to bounded}, the index is independent of the choice of partition of unity. Let us define a Hilbert space
\[
\mathcal{H} = \big[L^2(M, S^{\mathrm{spin}} \otimes S^{\mathrm{pre}})\big]^{G} \cong \bigoplus_{\lambda \in P_{k,+}} V_{\lambda} \otimes \mathcal{H}_{\lambda},
\]
and a Dirac operator
\[
\mathcal{D}_M = \bigoplus_{\lambda \in P_{k,+}} 1 \otimes \mathcal{D}|_{\mathcal{H}_\lambda}.
\]
\begin{definition}
Let $(M, \omega)$ be a q-Hamiltonian $G$-space. If it is pre-quantizable at level $k$, we define its \emph{quantization}
\[
Q(M) =\mathrm{Ind}(\mathcal{D}_M) = \bigoplus_{\lambda \in P_{k,+}} \mathrm{Ind}(\mathcal{D})_{\lambda} \cdot V_{\lambda} \in R_{k}(LG).
\]
\end{definition}
This generalizes Bott's Spin$^c$-quantization for Hamiltonian $G$-spaces to q-Hamiltonian $G$-spaces.
\begin{remark}
In \cite{MR2989614} Meinrenken develops a quantization from pre-quantized q-Hamiltonian $G$-spaces to the equivariant twisted $K$-homology of $G$ using push-forward maps. By the work of Freed-Hopkins-Teleman \cite{Freed13} the equivariant twisted $K$-homology of $G$ at level $k$ is isomorphic to fusion ring of loop group $R_{k}(LG)$.
\end{remark}
\begin{example}
Let
\[
\mathcal{C} = G \cdot \exp(\xi) \cong G/H, \hspace{5mm} \xi \in \mathfrak{A}
\]
be a conjugacy class. We assume that it is pre-quantizable at level $k$. By Remark \ref{pre-quantum q},
\[
(\eta, k) = (k \cdot \xi, k) \in \widehat{\mathfrak{t}}^*_+
\]
is an integral weight. By definition, the twisted spinor bundle and twisted pre-quantum bundle are given by
\[
S^{\mathrm{spin}} = G \times_{H} (S_{L\mathfrak{g}, \mathfrak{h}}^* \otimes \C_{(\rho_{G} - \rho_{H}, h^{\vee})}), \hspace{5mm} S^{\mathrm{pre}} = G\times_{H}(H_{\mathrm{wzw}, k} \otimes \C_{(\eta, k)}).
\]
The Hilbert space
\[
\big[L^2(\mathcal{C}, S^{\mathrm{spin}}\otimes S^{\mathrm{pre}})\big]^G \cong
\bigoplus_{\lambda \in P_{k,+}} V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}} \otimes \big(V_{\boldsymbol{\lambda}}^{*} \otimes S_{L\mathfrak{g}/\mathfrak{h}}^{*} \otimes \C_{(\rho_{G}-\rho_{H} +\eta, k +h^{\vee})} \big)^{H}.
\]
By Theorem \ref{square operator-4}, one can calculate that
\[
Q(\mathcal{C})= \mathrm{ind}(\mathcal{D}_M) = V_{\eta} \in R_{k}(LG).
\]
This is an algebraic version of the Borel-Weil construction for loop groups \cite{PS86}.
\end{example}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{main theorem}}
We will prove the main theorem in this subsection. Let us begin with a lemma.
\begin{lemma}
\label{bounded perturb}
Let $\mathcal{D},\mathcal{D}'$ be two self-adjoint unbounded operators on a Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}$ such that $\mathcal{D} - \mathcal{D}' \in \mathbb{B}(\mathcal{H})$. For $\alpha = 0,1$, if
\[
\mathcal{D}^\alpha \cdot (1+ \mathcal{D}^2)^{-1} \in \mathbb{K}(\mathcal{H}),
\]
then
\[
\mathcal{D}'^\alpha \cdot (1+ \mathcal{D}'^2)^{-1} \in \mathbb{K}(\mathcal{H}).
\]
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $\mathcal{D}' = \mathcal{D} + B$ with $B \in \mathbb{B}(\mathcal{H})$. By straightforward calculation,
\begin{equation}\label{op-2}
\begin{aligned}
& (1+ \mathcal{D}^2)^{-1} - (1+ \mathcal{D}'^2)^{-1} \\
& =(1+ \mathcal{D}^2)^{-1} \cdot(\mathcal{D}'^2 - \mathcal{D}^2) \cdot (1+ \mathcal{D}'^2)^{-1}\\
& = (1+ \mathcal{D}^2)^{-1} \cdot(\mathcal{D} \cdot B + B \cdot \mathcal{D}') \cdot (1+ \mathcal{D}'^2)^{-1}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
By the fact that the product of bounded operator and compact operator is again a compact operator and the assumption, we deduce that
\[
(1+ \mathcal{D}'^2)^{-1}\in \mathbb{K}(\mathcal{H}).
\]
We next consider
\begin{equation}\label{op-2}
\begin{aligned}
& \mathcal{D} \cdot (1+ \mathcal{D}^2)^{-1} - \mathcal{D} \cdot (1+ \mathcal{D}'^2)^{-1} \\
& = \mathcal{D} \cdot (1+ \mathcal{D}^2)^{-1} \cdot(\mathcal{D}'^2 - \mathcal{D}^2) \cdot (1+ \mathcal{D}'^2)^{-1}\\
& = \mathcal{D} \cdot (1+ \mathcal{D}^2)^{-1} \cdot(\mathcal{D} \cdot B + B \cdot \mathcal{D}') \cdot (1+ \mathcal{D}'^2)^{-1}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
For the same reason as above, it follows that
\[
\mathcal{D} \cdot (1+ \mathcal{D}'^2)^{-1}\in \mathbb{K}(\mathcal{H}).
\]
Because $\mathcal{D}' -\mathcal{D}$ is bounded, we conclude that
\[
\mathcal{D}' \cdot (1+ \mathcal{D}'^2)^{-1}\in \mathbb{K}(\mathcal{H}).
\]
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
Fix a vertex $\sigma$ of $\mathfrak{A}$. Let us write
\[
D_{U_\sigma} = \big[D_{ \mathrm{alg}} \otimes 1 + 1\otimes D_{\mathrm{geo}}\big]^{G_\sigma},
\]
acting on
\[
\big[V_{\lambda}^{*} \otimes S^{*}_{L\mathfrak{g}/(L\mathfrak{g})_{\sigma}} \otimes \C_{(\rho_{G} -\rho_\sigma, h^\vee)} \otimes \Gamma_{c}^\infty(Y_\sigma, S_{Y_\sigma} \otimes L_{Y_\sigma})\big]^{G_{\sigma}}.
\]
By the trick used in Proposition \ref{self-adjoint}, we can assume that $Y_\sigma$ is complete and $D_{\mathrm{geo}}$ is an essentially self-adjoint Spin$^c$-Dirac operator on $Y_\sigma$.
\begin{lemma}\label{compact op}
For $\alpha = 0,1$, one has that
\[
f_\sigma \cdot D^{\alpha}_{U_\sigma} \cdot (1+ D^{2}_{U_\sigma})^{-1} \cdot f_\sigma \in \mathbb{K}(\mathcal{H}_\lambda).
\]
\begin{proof}
We decompose
\[
L^2(Y_\sigma, S_{Y_\sigma} \otimes L_{Y_\sigma})
\]
with respect to the $S^{1}_{\mathrm{rot}} \times \widehat{G}_\sigma$-action and denote by $M(\boldsymbol{\nu})$ the isotypic component labeled by
\[
\boldsymbol{\nu} = (n, \nu, k) \in \Z \times \Lambda^{*} \times \Z.
\]
Since $f_{\sigma}$ has compact support, it follows from the Rellich's lemma that
\[ f_\sigma \cdot D_{\mathrm{geo}}^{\alpha} \cdot (1 + D_{\mathrm{geo}}^{2} )^{-1} \cdot f_{\sigma}
\]
is a compact operator on
\[
L^2(Y_\sigma, S_{Y_\sigma} \otimes L_{Y_\sigma}).
\]
It implies that the norm of the restriction of
\[
f_\sigma \cdot D^{\alpha}_{U_\sigma} \cdot (1+ D^{2}_{U_\sigma})^{-1} \cdot f_\sigma
\]
to
\[
\big[ V_{\lambda}^*\otimes S^{*}_{L\mathfrak{g}/(L\mathfrak{g})_{\sigma}} \otimes \C_{(\rho_{G} -\rho_{\sigma}, h^{\vee})} \otimes M(\boldsymbol{\nu})\big]^{G_{\sigma}}.
\]
tends to 0 as $\|\boldsymbol{\nu}\|$ tends to infinity. Thus, it suffices to show that the operator
\[
f_\sigma \cdot D^{\alpha}_{U_\sigma} \cdot (1+ D^{2}_{U_\sigma})^{-1} \cdot f_\sigma
\]
is compact after restricted to a fixed component
\[
\big[ V_{\lambda}^*\otimes S^{*}_{L\mathfrak{g}/(L\mathfrak{g})_{\sigma}} \otimes \C_{(\rho_{G} -\rho_{\sigma}, h^{\vee})} \otimes M(\boldsymbol{\nu})\big]^{G_{\sigma}}.
\]
By Theorem \ref{square operator-4}, the operator $D^2_{\mathrm{alg}} = D^2_{L\mathfrak{g},(L\mathfrak{g})_\sigma}$ acts on the above space by
\[
\|\boldsymbol{\lambda} + \boldsymbol{\rho}_{G}\|^{2} - \|\boldsymbol{\nu} + \boldsymbol{\rho}_{G}\|^{2}.
\]
By the formula in (\ref{weight product}),
\[
\|\boldsymbol{\lambda} + \boldsymbol{\rho}_{G}\|^{2} - \|\boldsymbol{\nu} + \boldsymbol{\rho}_{G}\|^{2} = \|\boldsymbol{\lambda} + \boldsymbol{\rho}_{G}\|^{2} + 2 \cdot n \cdot (k+ h^\vee) - \|\nu + \rho_G\|^2.
\]
Since $ \|\boldsymbol{\lambda} + \boldsymbol{\rho}_{G}\|^{2}$ and $ \|\nu + \rho_g\|^2$ are fixed constants, the operator $D^2_{\mathrm{alg}}$ tends to infinity as the energy level $n$ goes to infinity. This proves the assertion.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}\label{key lemma}
One has that
\[
f_\sigma \cdot (1+\mathcal{D}^{2})^{-1} \cdot f_\sigma, \hspace{5mm} [f_\sigma, (1+\mathcal{D}^{2})^{-1}] \cdot f_\sigma \in \mathbb{K}(\mathcal{H}_{\lambda})
\]
\begin{proof}
As shown in Proposition \ref{same up to bounded}, there exists a bounded operator $B$ so that
\[
\mathcal{D} \cdot s = D_{U_\sigma}\cdot s + B \cdot s.
\]
for any $s \in \mathcal{H}_\lambda$ with $\mathrm{Supp} s \subset U_\sigma$. By the choice of function $f_\sigma$, the support of $f_\sigma \cdot s$ is automatically contained in $U_\sigma$ for all $s \in \mathcal{H}_\lambda$. One can verify that
\[
f_\sigma \cdot \mathcal{D}^\alpha \cdot (1+\mathcal{D}^{2})^{-1} \cdot f_\sigma = f_\sigma \cdot (D_{U_\sigma} + B)^\alpha \cdot \big(1+(D_{U_\sigma} + B)^{2} \big)^{-1} \cdot f_\sigma.
\]
By Lemma \ref{bounded perturb} and \ref{compact op}, we conclude that for $\alpha=0,1$,
\[
f_\sigma \cdot \mathcal{D}^\alpha \cdot (1+\mathcal{D}^{2})^{-1} \cdot f_\sigma \in \mathbb{K}(\mathcal{H}_\lambda).
\]
For the second half, we calculate that
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
&\big[f_\sigma, (1+\mathcal{D}^{2})^{-1}\big]\cdot f_\sigma \\
= &(1+\mathcal{D}^{2})^{-1} \cdot [f_\sigma, \mathcal{D}^2] \cdot(1+\mathcal{D}^{2})^{-1}\cdot f_\sigma\\
=& (1+\mathcal{D}^{2})^{-1} \cdot c(df_\sigma)\cdot \mathcal{D} \cdot(1+\mathcal{D}^{2})^{-1}\cdot f_\sigma\\
+& (1+\mathcal{D}^{2})^{-1} \cdot \mathcal{D} \cdot c(df_\sigma) \cdot(1+\mathcal{D}^{2})^{-1}\cdot f_\sigma.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
We point out here that $c(df_\sigma)$ is a bounded operator with support in $U_\sigma$. As in Lemma \ref{compact op}, one can similarly prove that
\[
c(df_\sigma)\cdot \mathcal{D}^\alpha \cdot(1+\mathcal{D}^{2})^{-1}\cdot f_\sigma \in \mathbb{K}(\mathcal{H}_\lambda).
\]
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
Because the operator
\[
\mathcal{F} = \frac{\mathcal{D}}{\sqrt{1 + \mathcal{D}^2}} \in \mathbb{B}(\mathcal{H}_\lambda),
\]
we have that
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
&1 - \mathcal{F}^2 = (1+\mathcal{D}^{2})^{-1}\\
= &\sum_{\mathrm{dim}\sigma = 0} (1+\mathcal{D}^{2})^{-1} \cdot f^2_\sigma\\
=& \sum_{\mathrm{dim}\sigma = 0} \big( f_\sigma \cdot (1+\mathcal{D}^{2})^{-1} \cdot f_\sigma + [ f_\sigma, (1+\mathcal{D}^{2})^{-1}] \cdot f_\sigma \big).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
By Lemma \ref{key lemma},
\[
1 - \mathcal{F}^2 \in \mathbb{K}(\mathcal{H}_{\lambda}),
\]
which implies that $\mathcal{F}$ is a Fredholm operator on $\mathcal{H}_{\lambda}$.
\bibliographystyle{alpha}
|
\section{Introduction}
Many edge-on disc galaxies can be seen to contain boxy-, peanut- or X-shaped isophotes, which are usually grouped together into the category of Boxy/Peanut (hereafter B/P) bulges. As a result of a number of theoretical studies (see \citealt{Athanassoula2008, Athanassoula2015} for general reviews of this subject), including orbital structure and stability analysis \citep{Binney1981,Pfenniger1984a,Pfenniger1985,Patsisetal2002,Skokosetal2002, Skokosetal2002b, MartinezValpuestaetal2006, HarsoulaKalapotharakos2009, ContopoulosHarsoula2013}, and numerical simulations \citep{CombesSanders1981, Combesetal1990, Rahaetal1991, Mihosetal1995, AthanassoulaMisiriotis2002, Athanassoula2003, Athanassoula2005, Bureau&Athanassoula2005, MartinezValpuestaetal2006}, these structures are now known to be due to vertical instabilities in the bar, which cause it to `puff up', giving rise to boxy or peanut-like shapes. These studies also show that once a bar forms, a B/P bulge will form soon after.
Observational studies have further confirmed the link between B/P bulges and bars (see \citealt{KormendyKennicutt2004} and \citealt{Kormendy2015} for reviews on the subject), by showing that the fraction of edge-on disc galaxies with B/P bulges is comparable to the fraction of disc galaxies containing bars \citep*{Luttickeetal2000}. Kinematic studies of edge-on barred galaxies and B/P bulges also confirm the connection between the two structures \citep[and references therein]{Athanassoula&Bureau1999, Bureau&Athanassoula1999, Chung&Bureau2004, Bureau&Athanassoula2005}.
Therefore, barred galaxies at present and past epochs will contain B/P bulges, and in fact, one is also believed to be present in our own Galaxy (\citealt{Weilandetal1994, Howardetal2009, Shenetal2010,McWilliamandZoccali2010}, Ness et al. 2012, 2013a,b; \nocite{Nessetal2012,Nessetal2013b,Nessetal2013a } \citealt{Vasquezetal2013,WeggGerhard2013,Gardneretal2014, Netafetal2013, Netafetal2014, Netafetal2015}).
Bars are found in about two thirds of disc galaxies in the local universe, with variable strengths \citep{Eskridgeetal2000,Menendezetal2007,Barazzaetal2008,Aguerrietal2009,Gadotti2009}, and are known to be the main drivers of the secular phase of galaxy evolution. The torque they induce into the disc causes outward angular momentum transfer, which in turn will cause a redistribution of matter in the disc. They are thus responsible for driving gas to the centre of their host galaxy \citep{Athanassoula1992b}, forming discy pseudo-bulges \citep{KormendyKennicutt2004,Athanassoula2005}, redistributing stars in the galactic disc \citep{Sellwood&Binney2002,Roskaretal2008,MinchevFamaey2010}, and possibly creating a fuel reservoir for AGN activity (\citealt{Shlosmanetal1990,CoelhoGadotti2011, Emsellemetal2014}, but see also \citealt{Leeetal2012}. For a review see \citealt{Combes2001}). However, even though the effect of bars on all these processes has been thoroughly examined, a study of the effects of B/P bulges on all these processes has not, until present, been carried out.
As a first step towards understanding the effect B/P bulge geometry may have on the aforementioned processes, in this paper we focus on their influence on dynamical models of their host galaxies. These models are obtained directly from images of the galaxies' surface brightness, by first assuming a vertical density distribution, or height function, and subsequently deriving the potential of the galaxy. They have been used extensively in the literature, with one of their most important implementations being in simulations that study the response of gas in a fixed potential. These response simulations are used to study the dark matter content of galaxies and to test the maximum disc hypothesis \citep{Kranz2001, Weiner2001,Slyzetal2003,Kranzetal2003, Perezetal2004}, the bar pattern speed \citep*{LLA1996,Kalapotharakosetal2010b} as well as the kinematical and morphological properties of gas in galaxies \citep{Linetal2011, Linetal2013}. Dynamical models have also been used in studies determining the bar strength \citep{ButaBlock2001,HeikiEija2002} and the orbital structure of galaxies \citep{Quillenetal1994, Patsis1997, Kalapotharakosetal2010a,Patsisetal2010}. Furthermore, they have been used to study gravitational torques in barred and spiral galaxies in order to establish the amount of gas inflow and by extension determine the importance of secular evolution \citep{Zaritsky&Lo1986,Haanetal2009,Foyleetal2010}.
In all of these aforementioned studies, the geometry of the B/P bulge is not taken into account when constructing the height function, and instead a position independent, `flat' height function is assumed.
This is partly due to the lack of an analytical model for a B/P bulge, as well as to the inherent difficulty of detecting these bulges in face-on or intermediate inclination galaxies, which are the galaxies generally used in these studies.
Various methods however have been proposed over the past few years, which allow either for the detection of B/P bulges, or at least for an educated guess at their existence. By viewing a large number of $N$-body+SPH simulations, and covering a wide range of viewing angles, \citet{Athanassoulaetal2014} have shown that B/P bulges manifest themselves in face-on projections as the so called `barlens' \citep{Laurikainenetal2011}, which renders their detection fairly easy. Strong observational arguments for this have been presented in \citet{Laurikainenetal2014}. Another method proposed by \citet{Debattistaetal2005}, uses signatures in the stellar kinematics of face-on or almost face-on galaxies and was implemented by \citet{MendezAbreuetal2008} who confirmed the existence of a B/P bulge in NGC 98. Furthermore, it is possible to detect signatures of B/P bulges by examining the morphological features of inclined galaxies \citep{AthanassoulaBeaton2006,ErwinDebattista2013}.
We therefore believe that a study of the effect of B/P bulges on models of their host galaxies, and by extension of the necessity of including the geometry of B/P bulges in the height function of these models, is called for.
To this aim, we first introduce in Section \ref{sec:section2} a straightforward and reliable method for calculating the potential, forces and derivatives of forces of a general density distribution $\rho$(r,$\phi$,z). We present some tests which demonstrate that the method can give highly accurate results, while also allowing the flexibility to choose an arbitrary height function, without being restricted to one which is constant with position.
We then used our code on an image of an $N$-body+SPH simulated galaxy, which is presented in Section \ref{sec:smoothing}, thus obtaining a realistic potential for a barred galaxy.
In order to create this model, we assign a thickness and a height function to the galaxy. These height functions are introduced in Section \ref{sec:section3} and include two `flat' height functions, a function which describes peanut bulges (from which we construct our fiducial B/P model), and another which describes boxy bulges.
The main results are presented in Section \ref{sec:B/P-noB/P}, where we examine the effect B/P bulges have on the potential and forces (\ref{sec:models_pea_nopea}), on the periodic orbits (\ref{sec:pea-nopea-orbits}) and on the bar strength (\ref{sec:simbarstrength}). We find that B/P bulges indeed have a significant effect on the results and therefore conclude that they should be included when modelling their host galaxy.
In Section \ref{sec:peanuterrors} we explore the errors which will be induced in the results by using a B/P model which is not exactly the `correct' one. This is necessary since it is not trivial to observationally obtain the exact parameters of B/P bulges, and this can introduce errors in the model. We show that for a range of uncertainties, the errors induced in the results are less than those induced by not modelling the B/P at all. We also introduce a new method for calculating the bar strength, $Q_T^{int}$, which takes into account the variation of the non-axisymmetric forcings along the whole extent of the bar.
In Section \ref{sec:Summary} we give a summary and list the main conclusions of our work.
\section{Method \& Tests}
\label{sec:section2}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{orbits_MOD1_x1_x2_more_3}
\caption{Comparison of orbits in the analytic and 3DF potentials of our model galaxy. The thin black line gives the outline of the bar. The orbits calculated in the 3DF potential are given in solid thick black lines, and the orbits calculated in the analytic potential are given in dashed red lines. We plot some x$_1$ orbits (along the bar), some x$_2$ orbits (perpendicular to the bar), and an almost circular orbit outside the bar region.
We see that the orbits in the two potentials almost completely overlap, so that the red and black lines are practically indistinguishable.}
\label{fig:orbits}
\end{figure}
To create a dynamical model of a galaxy we first need its density distribution. The two-dimensional surface density can be obtained from surface brightness images of a face-on disc galaxy by assuming a M/L ratio. It is important that these images are taken in a wavelength range which minimises the effect of dust extinction and traces the old stellar population (for example, the Spitzer 3.6$\,\mu$m band). In this work we use an image of a face-on simulated galaxy, and thus we do not need to account for dust extinction, nor assign a M/L ratio, as our two-dimensional image gives the surface density directly. Once we have the surface density we also need to assign a height function, and together these give us the three-dimensional density distribution, from which we can calculate the potential of the galaxy due to the stellar component. Our method for calculating the potential involves a straightforward three-dimensional integration over the density distribution and we refer to it throughout the paper as the 3DF method. We calculate the potential in Cartesian coordinates by
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
& \Phi (x,y,z) =\\
& -G \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \frac{\rho (x', y', z')}{\sqrt{\sum_{j=1}^{3} (x_{j}'-x_{j})^{2}+\epsilon^2}} \mathrm{d}x' \mathrm{d}y' \mathrm{d}z' ,
\end{split}
\label{eq:potdef}
\end{equation}
\noindent where \emph{G} is Newton's gravitational constant, $\rho$ is the density and $\epsilon$ is the softening length which is necessary to eliminate the noise at the expense of a small bias \citep{Merritt1996,Athanassoulaetal2000}. We can differentiate the expression in Eq. \ref{eq:potdef} analytically with respect to \emph{x}, \emph{y} and \emph{z}, to obtain expressions for the the force and its derivatives. We thus rely heavily on an adequate integration algorithm, specifically one which can deal with singularities. To tackle this we use CQUAD, a doubly adaptive integration algorithm \citep{GSL}, which requires more function evaluations than other integration routines, but is more successful in dealing with difficult integrands. It computes the integral within the desired relative error limits (or precision), which the user can set.
Since we mainly work in the $z$=0 plane, we focus in what follows on the non-zero quantities in the plane: the potential $\Phi$ and the two non-zero components of the force $F_x$ and $F_y$.
As mentioned, the above, as well as what follows, concerns the potential and forces of the stellar component of the galaxy.
\subsection{Tests on the method: Relative errors}
\label{sec:relerrorstests}
In order to test the accuracy of our method, we create a model of a barred galaxy containing a disc, a bar and a classical bulge, using density distributions which have analytic solutions for the potential and forces. We then calculate the potential and forces for this model using the 3DF method, and compare the results against the analytic solutions. The general results of these tests are very positive, which demonstrates the ability of our code to deal with difficulties such as cuspy and/or non-axisymmetic density configurations. For more details on the model of the galaxy we refer the reader to Appendix \ref{sec:appendix}.
To calculate the relative errors of the potential and the derivatives of the force, we use the relation
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{Error} = 0.5\frac{|R_1 - R_2|}{|R_1|+|R_2|},
\label{eq:relativeerrors}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $R_1$ and $R_2$ are respectively the analytic and 3DF solutions.
To calculate the relative errors for the force, we use the relation
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{Error} = \frac{|F_{i1} - F_{i2}|}{\sqrt{F_{i1}^2+F_{j1}^2}},
\label{eq:relativeerrors}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $i$ and $j$ can be either the $x$ or the $y$ component of the force, and the subscripts $1$ and $2$ stand for the analytic and 3DF solutions respectively.
We therefore normalise the error of each component of the force by the \emph{total} force at each point. This is done because our main interest in the forces is for the calculation of orbits and because on the symmetry axes of the $x$- and $y$- components of the force (in the static frame of reference), the analytic estimates of $F_x$ and $F_y$ will be equal to zero.
We stress that the precision with which the code calculates the results is an input parameter to the code. The accuracy can be as high as the user wants it to be (within the limits of machine precision), at the expense, of course, of computation time.
We require a three dimensional integration and, due to the propagation of error at each integration, the relative precision we ask of the CQUAD algorithm for each integration has to be larger than that which we wish to achieve. Practically this means that if we ask for a relative precision of 10$^{-3}$, we will obtain a relative precision of approximately 10$^{-1}$. This is sufficient for our purposes as the error is less than 1\% for all variables. The softening is set to 10$\,\mathrm{pc}$ throughout the paper. For this precision and softening, the maximum error of the potential is 0.3\%, of $F_x$ 0.6\% and of $F_y$ 0.7\%.
\subsection{Tests on the method: Orbits}
\label{sec:testorbits}
Even though from the results of the relative errors we see that the 3DF method gives highly accurate results, we would like to confirm that the noise in the force field does not prevent orbits from running smoothly, as they would in an analytic potential. To do this, we calculate a number of periodic orbits in the analytic potential and in the potential derived using the 3DF method for the galaxy in the frame co-rotating with the bar, in the model described in Appendix \ref{sec:appendix}. The grid used for the orbits and throughout the paper is $200 \times 200$, and the orbits are calculated using a Kick-Drift-Kick leapfrog algorithm \citep{Hockney&Eastwood1988,Quinnetal1997,Springel2005}.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:orbits}, we plot a few of these orbits. In this figure and all throughout the paper the bar major axis is along the $x$-axis. In the figure we show some x$_1$ orbits, which are elongated along the bar, some x$_2$ orbits which are perpendicular to the bar, as well as some nearly circular orbits outside the bar region. We see that the orbits calculated in the 3DF potential are a very good approximation of those calculated in the analytic potential, as the two practically coincide. Thus the error which is introduced in the potential from our 3DF method and the adopted value of precision is sufficient for our purposes.
\subsection{The image}
\label{sec:smoothing}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure[IC 4290]{%
\includegraphics[height=3.7cm]{ic4290_same}
\label{fig:ic4290}}
\quad
\subfigure[gtr116]{%
\includegraphics[height=3.7cm]{gtr116_same}
\label{fig:gtr116bw}}
\quad
\caption{Visual comparisson between IC 4290 and gtr116. The two galaxies have striking morphological similarities and are classified as having the same bar strength (for more details see Section \ref{sec:simbarstrength}).}
\label{fig:IC4290}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subfigure[Original Image]{%
\includegraphics[width=0.24\textwidth]{gtr116_orig}
\label{fig:gtrorig}}
\quad
\subfigure[Model]{%
\includegraphics[width=0.24\textwidth]{gtr116_recomp26}
\label{fig:gtrrecomp}}
\quad
\subfigure[Residual]{%
\includegraphics[width=0.24\textwidth]{gtr116_residual}
\label{fig:gtrresidual}}
\quad
\caption{\emph{Left}: Original image showing the surface density of the stellar component of the gtr116 simulation. \emph{Middle}: Model from the Fourier recomposition, using up to $n_F$=26 even Fourier components. \emph{Right}: Residual image after subtracting the model from the original image.}
\label{fig:gtr}
\end{figure*}
We use the 3DF method on the density distribution derived from a face-on image of a simulated isolated galaxy and different height functions (which are described in Section \ref{sec:section3}). The initial conditions of the simulation from which the image was constructed, include a live spherical dark matter halo, an exponential stellar disc and 75\% gas (for more information on the simulation the reader is referred to run gtr116 in \citet*{AthanassoulaRodionov2013}). The snapshot we use is taken well into the secular evolution phase of the galaxy, specifically at $8\,\mathrm{Gyr}$ after the start of the simulation, by which point a strong bar and B/P bulge have formed. The image we use is constructed from the `stars' component of the snapshot and has a morphology reminiscent of that of many strongly barred galaxies, such as IC 4290 (see Fig.~\ref{fig:IC4290}).
In order to decrease the noise of the image we require a snapshot with a large number of particles. We create a snapshot with 40 times the particles of the original snapshot, following the procedure described in \citet{Athanassoula2005}. To further reduce the noise in the image we apply some smoothing, by Fourier decomposing and recomposing it.
The Fourier components are calculated as follows:
\begin{equation}
a_n(r)=\frac{1}{\pi} \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} \! \Sigma(r,\theta) \mathrm{cos}(n\theta)\, \mathrm{d}\theta,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
b_n(r)=\frac{1}{\pi} \int_{-\pi}^{\pi} \! \Sigma(r,\theta) \mathrm{sin}(n\theta)\, \mathrm{d}\theta ,
\end{equation}
\noindent where $a_n$ and $b_n$ are the even and odd Fourier components, $\theta$ is the azimuthal angle, \emph{r} the radius and $\Sigma$ gives the surface density.
We then reduce the high frequency noise by recomposing the image as
\begin{equation}
\Sigma(r,\theta)=\frac{a_0}{2} + \sum\limits_{m=2}^{m=n_F} \left( a_m(r) \mathrm{cos}(m\theta) + b_m(r) \mathrm{sin}(m\theta)\right),
\end{equation}
\noindent using only a limited number of even Fourier components (in our case $n_F$=26). We show in Figs.~\ref{fig:gtrorig} and \ref{fig:gtrrecomp} the surface density of the original image and of the Fourier recomposed image, respectively, both in arbitrary units, and in Fig.~\ref{fig:gtrresidual} we show the residual image of the two. As the images of surface density are in arbitrary units, the density, as well as the potential and its derivatives will also be in arbitrary units in what follows.
\section{Height Functions Used}
\label{sec:section3}
In order to obtain the three-dimensional density of a galaxy disc from a two-dimensional image we need to assume a height function, which defines how the density drops off as a function of \emph{z} from the equatorial plane \emph{z}=0. The height function and the scaleheight ($z_0$) will of course affect the results, and we therefore need to use the height function which best approximates that of the galaxy we are trying to model.
The height function can be either constant or can change with position. In the case where it is constant with respect to position we assume, for simplicity, that the density distribution can be written as
\begin{equation}
\rho(x,y,z)=\Sigma(x,y)F(z) ,
\end{equation}
where $\rho$ is the three-dimensional density distribution, $\Sigma$ is the two-dimensional surface density, and $F$ is the height function. In the more general case where the height function depends on position in the galaxy, as would be for example the height function describing a B/P bulge, the scaleheight changes as a function of position. In this case, the density distribution would be given by,
\begin{equation}
\rho(x,y,z)=\Sigma(x,y)F(x,y,z) ,
\end{equation}
where the normalisation of the height function is
\begin{equation}
\int_{-\infty}^\infty F(x,y,z) \mathrm{d}z=1 .
\end{equation}
It is worth noting that the mass of the model is always the same; the height function simply determines the volume density of the galaxy, by setting the thickness of the disc.
\subsection{Flat height functions}
\label{sec:flatHF}
Up to now in the literature, position-independent or `flat' height functions have been used when modelling barred disc galaxies. We therefore also use two flat height functions in this paper, to check the discrepancy which will be created in the model by a) using a flat height function and a B/P height function, and b) using two different flat height functions. We adopt two commonly used functions, the isothermal-sheet model \citep{vanderkruit1981}:
\begin{equation}
F(z)=\frac{1}{2z_0}\mathrm{sech}^2\left(\frac{z}{z_0}\right) ,
\label{eq:sech2}
\end{equation}
\noindent and the sech-law model \citep{vanderkruit1988}:
\begin{equation}
F(z)=\frac{1}{\pi z_0}\mathrm{sech}\left(\frac{z}{z_0}\right) ,
\label{eq:sech}
\end{equation}
\noindent where 1/(2$z_0$) and 1/($\pi$$z_0$) are the respective normalisation factors.
\subsection{Peanut height function}
\label{sec:PHF}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subfigure[gtr116: Side-on]{%
\includegraphics[height=4.4cm]{gtr116_stars_sideon}
\label{fig:fitedge1}}
\quad
\subfigure[Edge-on: Side-on]{%
\includegraphics[height=4.4cm]{fit_edgeon}
\label{fig:fitedge}}
\quad
\subfigure[Edge-on: End-on]{%
\includegraphics[height=4.4cm]{fit_endeon}
\label{fig:fitend}}
\quad
\caption{\emph{Left}: side-on image of the surface stellar density of the simulated galaxy gtr116. \emph{Middle}: The scaleheight of the simulation (red crosses) is plotted along the $x$-axis (for $y$=0, i.e. the side-on projection). The solid black line shows the fit of $z_0(x,0)$ to the data, which gives the scaleheight of the fiducial peanut height function. \emph{Right}: Plot of the scaleheight of the simulation (red crosses) along $x$=3 which is where the maximum of the peanut occurs (end-on projection). The solid black line shows the values of $z_0(x,y)$ along $x$=3.}
\label{fig:fits}
\end{figure*}
To obtain a height function for the peanut, we examined the particle distribution along different cuts in \emph{x} and \emph{y} from the simulation introduced in the previous section. We found that the sum of two two-dimensional gaussians for the scaleheight can provide a reasonable approximation to the B/P shape. As can be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:fits} and as commented below, this choice may fail at certain points, but provides an overall fair representation of the structure.
The resulting B/P height function is a non-separable function of position and is given by:
\begin{equation}
F(x,y,z)=\frac{1}{2 z_0(x,y)}\mathrm{sech}^2\left(\frac{z}{z_0(x,y)}\right).
\label{eq:peanut1}
\end{equation}
\noindent The scaleheight \emph{z}$_0$(x,y) varies like the sum of two two-dimensional gaussians:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
z_0(x,y)= & A \exp\left(-\left(\frac{(x-x_0)^2}{2\sigma^2} + \frac{(y-y_0)^2}{2\sigma^2}\right)\right) + \\
& A \exp\left(-\left(\frac{(x-x_1)^2}{2\sigma^2} + \frac{(y-y_1)^2}{2\sigma^2}\right)\right) + z_0^{disc} ,
\end{split}
\label{eq:peanut2}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $A$ is the maximum scaleheight of the peanut above the disc scaleheight, $z_0^{disc}$. The variance of the gaussians is given by $\sigma^2$, ($x_0$, $y_0$) is the position of the maximum of the first gaussian and (x$_1$, $y_1$) the position of the maximum of the second gaussian.
We fit these two two-dimensional gaussians to values of the scaleheight obtained from the simulation along $y=0$ and $x=3$ (which is where the maximum of the scaleheight occurs). In the remainder of the paper, we refer to this as our fiducial peanut (or B/P) model.
To obtain the scaleheights, we take cuts along the \emph{x}- and \emph{y}- axes and fit the vertical particle distribution with a sech$^2$ function. We thereby determine the variation of \emph{z}$_0$ from bin to bin along the cut. The results can be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:fits}. In the side-on view (panel (b)) we see that the scaleheight along $y=0$ behaves approximately like the combination of two gaussians, except in the central region where the scaleheight drops below that of the outer disc. For a cut along $x=3$, where the peanut is maximum (end-on view, panel (c)), the behaviour of $z_0$ is still well approximated by a gaussian, although our fit slightly under predicts the value of the scaleheight.
Along some cuts at \emph{x} values intermediate between the centre and the peanut maximum, the gaussian approximation fails to represent the behaviour of the scaleheight with \emph{y}. In fact the behaviour of the scaleheight in the presence of a B/P bulge is quite complex, and cannot be grasped entirely by a simple analytic function. However, as it turns out, the fitted function shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:fits} underestimates the value of $z_0$ at these points. This directly translates into an underestimation of the effect of the peanut in those regions. In summary, our fiducial model for the peanut height function shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:fits} will result into a conservative estimate of the effect of the real peanut present in the image we adopt as our starting point. Given the scope of this paper, which is to demonstrate the generic effect of a peanut bulge on a galaxy model, we find this approximation more than satisfactory.
\subsection{Boxy height function}
\label{sec:BHF}
The B/P bulge might at times have rather boxy isophotes. This could be due to projection effects, whereby the peanut is projected at such an angle that the isophotes appear boxy \citep{AthanassoulaMisiriotis2002}. However, boxy isophotes might be present even when the bar is seen side-on, i.e. they might be the real shape of the B/P bulge (see \citet{Patsisetal2002} for a discussion based on orbits). This tends to be the case for galaxies with weak bars, where instead of a strong x-shape or peanut forming, boxy isophotes are seen \citep{Athanassoula2006ph}.
To model a boxy bulge we use a height function which drops off as sech$^2$ with height from the \emph{z}=0 plane,
\begin{equation}
F(x,y,z)=\frac{1}{2 z_0(x,y)}\mathrm{sech}^2\left(\frac{z}{z_0(x,y)}\right) ,
\label{eq:boxytophat1}
\end{equation}
\noindent where the scaleheight is a top-hat function,
\begin{equation}
z_0(x,y) =
\begin{cases}
z_0^{bulge} & |x| \leq x_{max} \,\&\, |y| \leq y_{max}\\
z_0^{disc} & \text{otherwise}.
\end{cases}
,
\label{eq:boxytophat2}
\end{equation}
\noindent and where $z_0^{disc}$ gives the scaleheight of the disc and $z_0^{bulge}$ gives the scaleheight, or strength, of the boxy bulge.
This is quite a simplified model of the boxy bulge, with only two free parameters, its strength and length (which is set by \emph{L}=2\emph{$x_{max}$}). The thickness of the box, i.e. \emph{$y_{max}$}, is set by the width of the bar.
We create the fiducial boxy height function such that it best approximates the fiducial peanut height function, so such that we can examine whether the former can be used as an approximation for the latter, as there is one less parameter to model. The fiducial boxy height function therefore has a height equal to the height of the fiducial peanut model and its length is such that the boxy bulge finishes approximately where the peanut scaleheight is in between its maximum and minimum (see top right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:resultsgtr116potforce}).
\section{Boxy/Peanut or no Boxy/Peanut?}
\label{sec:B/P-noB/P}
We wish to investigate whether accounting for the geometry of the B/P in the height function will significantly change the model of its host galaxy, and therefore whether we should include it in the modelling when it is present. Thus, in the next three subsections we investigate the effect B/Ps will have on the potential and forces (Section \ref{sec:models_pea_nopea}), on the periodic orbits (Section \ref{sec:pea-nopea-orbits}) and on the bar strength (Section \ref{sec:simbarstrength}) of the model.
\subsection{B/P effect on potential and forces}
\label{sec:models_pea_nopea}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{errors_pot_forces_pea_nopea}
\caption{\textbf{Errors from not taking into account the proper B/P geometry:}
The top row gives the scaleheight (in red and black lines) along the bar major axis for the setups we are comparing in the plots. The second, third and fourth rows give the relative difference between the two setups being compared for the potential, $F_x$ and $F_y$, respectively (see the colourbar for values of the relative difference). The dark green line represents the ellipse fitted to the outer isophote of the bar.
\textit{First Column}: Difference between the sech and sech$^2$ setup.
\textit{Second Column}: Difference between the fiducial peanut height function and a sech$^2$ height function.
\textit{Third Column}: Difference between a boxy height function and a sech$^2$ height function.
\textit{Fourth Column}: Difference between a boxy height function and our fiducial peanut height function.
We see that not including a peanut or a boxy bulge where there is one will induce large errors in the potential and forces and also that a boxy height function is not a good approximation for a peanut height function. For details see the text (Section \ref{sec:models_pea_nopea}).}
\label{fig:resultsgtr116potforce}
\end{figure*}
We calculate the potential and the forces for the density distribution given by the image described in Section \ref{sec:smoothing}, and the different height functions described in Section \ref{sec:section3}.
The results of this subsection are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:resultsgtr116potforce}. In the top row we plot the scaleheight along the bar major axis for the two setups we are comparing in the plots. We show two-dimensional plots of the relative difference for the potential in the second row, of the $x$ component of the force in the third row, and of the $y$ component of the force in the fourth row. The green line represents an ellipse fitted to the outer isophote of the bar. Each column gives one of the following comparisons (from left to right):
\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{Two flat height functions: sech and sech$^2$}
We compare the models obtained by implementing two flat height functions, sech and sech$^2$, with equivalent scaleheights, in order to demonstrate that different flat height functions do not significantly affect the results. In the very centre, the difference for the potential is only around 1\% and for the forces it is 5\%, while for the rest of the grid the difference between the two setups is well below 1\% in all cases. If we decrease the value of the scaleheight the two height functions produce even more similar results. This happens because as the disc tends to become infinitesimally thin, the shape of the height function becomes less important. Equivalently, if we increase the value of the scaleheight, and hence the thickness of the disc, then the difference in the results obtained with the two height functions increases.
We see therefore that the scaleheight, and not the vertical profile of the height function, is primarily responsible for creating differences in the models. \newline
\item \emph{Flat and peanut height functions}
We compare a flat height function and the height function of our fiducial peanut bulge, i.e. a peanut with parameters fitted to our simulated galaxy. The differences that arise from using these two setups are significant for the potential and forces, as can be seen in the second column of Fig. \ref{fig:resultsgtr116potforce}. This is especially true near and around the region of the maximum height of the peanut, and in general in and around the bar. The force can be different in the two cases by up to 40\%, which is not surprising since around the maximum of the peanut the scaleheight is more than three times the value of the scaleheight of the disc. This can be seen in the top row of the figure, which demonstrates how the scaleheight varies along $x$ for the two height functions. The larger scaleheight reduces the forces in the plane of the disc, due to a reduction of the density in the plane.
Therefore, we see that by not taking into account the geometry of the B/P bulge, we induce significant errors in the model, i.e. in the potential and its derivatives.\newline
\item \emph{Flat and boxy height functions}
In the third column of Fig. \ref{fig:resultsgtr116potforce} we compare a flat height function and the height function of the fiducial boxy bulge. We see that a boxy height function will also induce large differences compared to the flat height function, and in fact in the central regions our fiducial boxy height function has an even larger effect than the peanut. Boxy bulges are usually associated to weaker bars in simulations and are therefore typically less strong than peanut bulges (although at early times boxy bulges can be as strong as peanut bulges - see Figs. 2 and 3 in \citet{AthanassoulaMisiriotis2002}). In observations, boxy bulges can appear as strong as peanut bulges (see for example \citet{Chung&Bureau2004}) although it is hard to distinguish whether these are truly boxy bulges, or simply peanut bulges seen at an angle. It is therefore reasonable to assume that a substantial amount of boxy bulges will be somewhat less strong than our fiducial boxy height function. However, for the sake of simplicity and to be able to compare our fiducial boxy height function with our fiducial peanut height function, we give the former the same strength as the latter. Therefore our fiducial boxy height function can be thought of as an upper limit for the effect of a boxy bulge on the model of its galaxy. \newline
\item \emph{Peanut and boxy height functions}
We compare our fiducial peanut height function to our fiducial boxy height function in order to see to what extent the boxy height function approximates the peanut height function as it has one less free parameter than the peanut height function. These results can be seen in the fourth column of Fig. \ref{fig:resultsgtr116potforce}. For the potential and forces the match between the boxy height function and the peanut height function is quite poor, especially in the central region where the scaleheights of the two height functions are very different. Therefore the boxy height function is not a good approximation to a peanut bulge.\newline
\end{enumerate}
\subsection{B/P effect on periodic orbits}
\label{sec:pea-nopea-orbits}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subfigure[Typical orbits in bar region]{%
\includegraphics[height=6.9cm]{gtr116_orbits}
\label{fig:gtr116orbits}}
\quad
\subfigure[Characteristic Diagram]{%
\includegraphics[height=6.9cm]{characteristic}
\label{fig:orbgtr116Ej}}
\quad
\caption{\emph{Left}: Some typical orbits in the bar region for the model with a sech$^2$ height function, over-plotted on the image of the simulated galaxy gtr116: In red the x$_1$ bar supporting orbits, in cyan an x$_2$ orbit perpendicular to the bar and in green the 3/1 orbits (asymmetric with respect to the $y$-axis).
\emph{Right}: Characteristic diagram (intersection of each orbit with the $y$-axis as a function of the Jacobi energy) for the models created from the image of the simulated galaxy gtr116 and the two height functions. The solid black line gives the characteristic diagram for the model with the fiducial peanut bulge and the dashed red line the characteristic diagram for a model with a flat sech$^2$ height function. The dotted blue line shows the zero velocity curve (ZVC) for the sech$^2$ model (the ZVC of the two models are very similar).}
\label{fig:orbsgtr116peanopea}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subfigure[Comparing x$_1$ orbits]{%
\includegraphics[height=7.5cm]{orbits_x1_compare_Ej_09}
\label{fig:difx1orb}}
\quad
\subfigure[Comparing 3/1 orbits]{%
\includegraphics[height=7.5cm]{orbits_x31_compare_y12}
\label{fig:dif31orb}}
\quad
\caption{\emph{Left}: Two x$_1$ orbits with the same Jacobian energy ($E_J$=-0.9) calculated in the two potentials: with (solid black line) and without (dashed red line) a B/P bulge. We see that in the B/P model the x$_1$ orbit's length and height are reduced (its extent along the $x$-axis is reduced by $\sim$12\% and along the $y$-axis by $\sim$46\% -measured respectively at $y$=0 and $x$=0). \emph{Right}: Two 3/1 periodic orbits for $y_0$=1.2 in the two potentials (colours as before). Again the orbits differ significantly.}
\label{fig:orbsgtr116peanopea}
\end{figure*}
In this section we examine how some of the most important families of periodic orbits will be influenced by taking into account the geometry of a B/P. To do this we study two models: the model with the fiducial peanut bulge height function, and the model with the sech$^2$ height function {\it{without}} a B/P bulge. We set the pattern speed of both models to be such that corotation occurs just outside the bar radius, within the range $1.4 \textgreater R_{CR}/R_{bar} \textgreater 1$, where $R_{CR}$ and $R_{bar}$ are the corotation and bar radius respectively (e.g. \citealt{Athanassoula1992b}). The orbits are calculated in a frame of reference co-rotating with the pattern speed of the bar.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:gtr116orbits} we show a few typical orbits in the bar region for the potentials we are examining, overplotted on the image of our simulated galaxy, gtr116, shown face-on. The three most important families of orbits in the bar region are shown, i.e. the x$_1$ (red lines, extended along the bar major axis), x$_2$ (cyan lines, perpendicular to the bar major axis) and $3/1$ (green lines, asymmetric with respect to the $y$-axis) families, which are stable along most of their extent.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:orbgtr116Ej} we plot the characteristic diagram of periodic orbits, for the two cases with and without a peanut.
The characteristic diagram gives the value at which the orbit intersects the $y$-axis ($y_0$) as a function of its Jacobian energy ($E_J$, i.e. energy in the rotating frame of reference; \cite{BT2008}). The Jacobian energy is in arbitrary units, since, as already mentioned, the mass is also in arbitrary units.
We see that the characteristic diagram of the two models differs significantly. The most noticeable effect due to the presence of a B/P is the change in the bifurcation loci of the upper and lower branch of the 3/1 family. This indicates that taking into account the geometry of a B/P in the model changes the location of the 3:1 resonance, and therefore the 3/1 family of periodic orbits appears at higher energies. Thus orbits of the 3/1 family will differ in the two cases, as can be seen in Fig. \ref{fig:dif31orb}, where we plot two 3/1 orbits in the two models for the same cut along the $y$-axis.
The extent of the 3/1 family of orbits is also significantly increased for the case with a B/P bulge, surpassing the extent of the x$_1$ family of periodic orbits, which is in fact shorter compared to the x$_1$ family in the model without a B/P bulge.
The x$_1$ family also suffers changes, in the $E_J$ region between -1.1 and -0.8. In this area of the diagram, the maximum extent of the orbits along the $x$-axis reaches the region where the effect of the B/P is maximum; therefore, for these energies the orbits of the two models differ. In Fig. \ref{fig:difx1orb} we show an $x_1$ orbit of the same energy ($E_J$=-0.9) plotted in the two models. When a B/P is present, the maximum extent of the orbit along the $x$-axis is reduced by 12\%, while its maximum extent along the $y$-axis is reduced by 46\% (measured at $x$=0).
For the x$_2$ family, the highest (lowest) value of $y_0$ increases (decreases) for the model with a B/P bulge (see Fig.~\ref{fig:orbgtr116Ej}), i.e. the entire extent of the x$_2$ family is increased by about 43\% . As the extent of the x$_2$ family is related to the distance between the two Inner Lindblad Resonances (ILRs; \citealt{Athanassoula1992a}), the distance between these two resonances will therefore also increase. This increase is due to a weakening of the non-axisymmetric perturbation: when the geometry of B/Ps is taken into account in the model, the scaleheight of the galaxy is increased, where the B/P is maximum, and therefore -- since the amount of mass is the same-- the volume density in the plane of the galaxy is decreased. This leads to a decrease in the radial and tangential forces in such a way that the non-axisymmetric perturbation is diminished, thus changing the distance between the two ILRs. This is in accordance with results from both \cite{ContopoulosGrosbol1989} and \cite{Athanassoula1992a}, the latter of which showed that there are a number of model parameters which can affect this distance. In particular, in Figures 6 \& 7 of \cite{Athanassoula1992a}, we see that the distance between the ILRs can increase due to a decrease in the bar mass or the pattern speed, or due to an increase in the central mass concentration of the galaxy or the axial ratio of the bar.
The differences between the orbital families of the two models will have effects on their stellar, as well as their gaseous dynamics.
The extent of the x$_2$ orbits plays a crucial role on the shape of the shock loci in the gas \citep{Athanassoula1992a,Athanassoula1992b}, and therefore the shape of the gas shocks in the two models should differ significantly; conversely, the shape and strength of the shocks influence the amount of gas inflow towards the centre of the galaxy, and it is therefore likely that there will be a measurable difference in the amount of gas inflow in models with and without a B/P bulge.
This is further supported by the results in Section \ref{sec:simbarstrength}, where we show that B/P bulges reduce the strength of the bar; we plan to address in upcoming work the extent to which the gas flows will be affected.
\subsection{B/P effect on bar strength}
\label{sec:simbarstrength}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{Qt_pea_nopea}
\caption{Strength of non-axisymmetric forcings ($Q_T$) as a function of radius, for models with different height functions: sech (solid red line), sech$^2$ (dashed green line), the fiducial peanut setup (thick black solid line) and the fiducial boxy setup (dash-dotted blue line). The vertical solid black line indicates the radius at which the scaleheight of the fiducial peanut is maximum and the vertical dashed black line indicates the end of the bar.}
\label{fig:Qt_pea_nopea}
\end{figure*}
We study the effect of the B/P bulge on one of the measures of bar strength, which involves calculating the non-axisymmetric forcings on the disc due to the bar, i.e. the bar-induced torque \citep{CombesSanders1981, ButaBlock2001}. The magnitude of this non-axisymmetric perturbation is given by
\begin{equation}
Q_T(r)=\frac{F^{max}_{\mathrm{T}}(r)}{\langle F_{\mathrm{R}}(r) \rangle} ,
\label{eq:qt}
\end{equation}
\noindent where F$_T$ is the tangential force $F_T(r)$=(1/r) ($\partial \Phi$/$\partial \phi$), and $\langle F_R(r) \rangle$ is the average over azimuth of the radial force $F_R(r)$=$\partial \Phi$/$\partial r$. The forces are calculated directly from the image, as described in Section \ref{sec:section2}.
In order to obtain a single measure of the bar strength for a galaxy, the quantity $Q_b$, which is the maximum of $Q_T$ in the bar region, is commonly defined as the bar strength.
In what follows we investigate the effect that a B/P height function will have on both $Q_b$ and $Q_T$.
The results of this study are discussed in paragraphs (\emph{i}), (\emph{ii}) and (\emph{iii}), where we examine models with the flat, the fiducial peanut and the fiducial boxy height function respectively. In Table~\ref{table:bp-nobp_strength} we show the maximum and average relative errors of $Q_T$, denoted MAX(Error $Q_T$) and $\langle$Error $Q_T$$\rangle$ respectively, as well as the relative error of $Q_b$, when comparing two models with different height functions. The average relative error of $Q_T$ over radius is calculated according to:
\begin{equation}
\langle\mathrm{Error} \;Q_{T}\rangle=\frac{1}{n} \times \sum_{i=1}^n (\mathrm{abs}(\frac{Q_{T_{1}}(r_i)-Q_{T_{2}}(r_i)}{Q_{T_{1}}(r_i)}) \times 100) .
\end{equation}
Plots of these results can also be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:Qt_pea_nopea}, where it is worth noting that for the flat and peanut height functions, the strength of the bar is $Q_b$$\approx$0.55-0.6. According to \citet{ButaBlock2001}, this represents a strong bar case (between bar class 5 and 6), which corresponds to approximately 20\% of their sample of SB galaxies. We have already shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:IC4290} the striking morphological similarity between IC 4290 and our galaxy, and we note here that IC 4290 is also classified by \citet{ButaBlock2001} as a class 6 barred galaxy, with $Q_b$=0.56. Therefore the results presented in this section, as well as in previous and subsequent sections, correspond straightforwardly and quantitatively to strongly barred galaxies. However, even weakly barred galaxies will have B/P bulges, albeit weaker ones, and therefore the results will also apply to these galaxies although to a lesser extent. We intend to carry out a full statistical study of the effects of different strength B/P bulges on the models of their host galaxy, together with a full comparison to observations, elsewhere.
\begin {table}
\caption {Errors in bar strength}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ r | r | r | r }
\hline
Comparison & $\langle$Error $Q_T$$\rangle$ & MAX(Error $Q_T$) & $Q_b$ \\ \hline
sech - sech$^2$ & 1\% & 1.6\% & 1.5\% \\
peanut - no peanut & 27\% & 74\% & 4\% \\
peanut - boxy & 14\% & 42\% & 16\% \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
We show the average and maximum of the relative errors of $Q_T$, as well as the relative error of $Q_b$, for three different comparisons of the setups.
\label{table:bp-nobp_strength}
\end{table}
\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{A model with a sech and sech$^2$ height function}
In previous work by \citet{HeikiEija2002} the effect of position-independent height functions and height functions which only vary as a function of radius was examined, and these were found not to change $Q_b$ in a significant way. For realistic height functions such as the exponential, sech, or sech$^2$ models, they found that $Q_b$ was affected by less than 5\%, which is consistent with our own results. This is confirmed in Fig. \ref{fig:Qt_pea_nopea} and Table \ref{table:bp-nobp_strength}, where we see that for an equivalent scaleheight, the height functions of sech and sech$^2$ will produce very similar bar strengths, which will tend to become even more similar the thinner the disc.\newline
\item \emph{A model with the fiducial peanut height function}
We plot $Q_T$ for our fiducial B/P height function. In the region around the scaleheight maxima (at r=3), $Q_T$ is significantly flatter than the model without a peanut, due to the reduction of the strength of the tangential and radial forces. The value of $Q_b$ will not be significantly different from the case with the flat height function, due to the fact that the maxima of the peanut and the maximum of $Q_T$ are at a relatively large distance from each other. The torque induced by the bar in the two cases however is significantly different, as can be seen both in the plot and in the second row of Table \ref{table:bp-nobp_strength}. By using the $Q_b$ method of measuring bar strength, the bars will be judged as having the same strength (class 6), and hence the same effect on the disc, even though the forces in the plane of the galaxy are significantly reduced in the presence of a peanut. Therefore, in Section \ref{sec:Qt_pea-pea} we introduce another measure of bar strength, which can capture the reduction in bar strength when a B/P bulge is present.\newline
\item \emph{A model with the fiducial boxy height function}
We also plot $Q_T$ for our fiducial boxy height function. We see again that where the boxy bulge is maximum, $Q_T$ is flattened due to the decrease in the strength of the bar forces in the plane. We also see that where the top-hat boxy function ends, $Q_T$ exceeds the values of the sech and sech$^2$ curves. This is due to the effect of the boxy bulge on the tangential and radial forces, with the former increasing just outside the boxy bulge while the latter is decreased in the whole disc due to the overall decrease in mass-density in the plane of the galaxy. The combination of these two effects results in the torque becoming large in the region just outside the boxy bulge. As a consequence, $Q_b$ is overestimated by 16\% compared to the fiducial peanut case (third row of Table \ref{table:bp-nobp_strength}). We investigate the boxy height function as an alternative to using the peanut height function - since there is one parameter less to model - and conclude that even if one is merely interested in $Q_T$, a simple boxy height function is not a good approximation to a peanut function.
\end{enumerate}
\section{Errors due to Boxy/Peanut Modelling}
\label{sec:peanuterrors}
In this section we investigate how much error will be induced if we include a B/P bulge in the model, but with the main peanut parameters differing from that of our fiducial model. This type of error is induced due to observational uncertainties, as it is not trivial to observationally obtain the correct parameters for the B/P bulge we want to model. This is due to the physics of the problem, not the numerical part of the calculation (as is the error referred to in Section \ref{sec:relerrorstests} which can be made arbitrarily small) and is therefore practically an unavoidable source of uncertainty. Nevertheless, as we will discuss below, there do exist empirical and theoretical arguments which can constrain the parameter space of a B/P bulge.
The height function we have chosen for our fiducial B/P bulge, the sum of two two-dimensional gaussians, has three degrees of freedom. Thus inaccuracies in the modelling of the B/P bulge can also be introduced in three ways: by estimating wrongly the height of the gaussians (which corresponds to a change in peanut strength), or the distance between the maxima of the gaussians (which corresponds to a change in the peanut length), or the widths of the gaussians (which corresponds to a change in peanut `width', i.e. how peaked or thin the peanut is at its maximum).
\subsection{Potential and forces}
\label{sec:peanuterrors_potfor}
In this subsection we investigate how much error is introduced in the potential and forces by incorrectly modelling the B/P bulge.
\subsubsection{Peanut strength uncertainties}
The maximum value of the scaleheight of the peanut, also called the peanut strength, is a value which is not trivial to find observationally. Numerical studies have shown that the strength of the peanut correlates with the bar strength (Athanassoula 2006). However this relation has a considerable scatter, and can merely give an approximate estimate. \citet{Debattistaetal2005} showed that for face-on, or nearly face-on $N$-body simulated galaxies, an indicator of the presence and strength of a B/P bulge is the fourth order Gauss-Hermite moment of the line-of-sight velocity dispersion, $h_4$. However this relation has not been quantified in such a way which would allow a direct measurement of peanut strength from $h_4$.
Studies of orbital structure \citep{Patsisetal2002,Skokosetal2002} have also suggested specific families of periodic orbits which are responsible for giving the B/P bulge its height, but no direct measurement of the strength of the B/P bulge is available from orbital structure either.
In order to measure the error due to peanut strength uncertainties, we use a grid of models with varying peanut strength and compare them to our fiducial peanut setup. These results can be seen in Table \ref{table:error_pea_strength} below. In this and in all subsequent tables, the term `Average Error', indicates the average error within the outer isophote of the bar and `Maximum Error' corresponds to the maximum error found in the grid, excluding the central-most point.
We see that an over- or under-estimation of the error by the same amount will produce similar errors in the model. In all the cases studied, the error induced by an incorrect peanut strength is always less than that induced by not modelling a B/P bulge at all.
\begin {table}
\caption {Percentage Error due to Peanut Strength Uncertainty}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ r | r r r | r r r }
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Peanut Strength} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Average Error} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Maximum Error} \\
\cline{2-7}
& $\Phi$ & $F_x$ & $F_y$ & $\Phi$ & $F_x$ & $F_y$ \\ \hline
+50\% & 1.3\% & 2\% & 3\% & 3\% & 10\% & 6\%\\
+25\% & 0.7\% & 1\% & 2\% & 1.5\% & 5\% & 3\% \\
-25\% & 0.7\% & 1\% & 2\% & 1.5\% & 6\% & 4\% \\
-50\% & 1.4\% & 3\% & 4\% & 3\% & 14\% & 10\% \\
no peanut & 3\% & 8\% & 10\% & 7\% & 37\% & 28\%\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
Average and maximum errors of the potential and forces for setups with different peanut strength error, within the area enclosed by the outer isophote of the bar. The last row gives the error induced by not including a B/P bulge in the model at all.
\label{table:error_pea_strength}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Peanut width uncertainties}
In Table \ref{table:error_pea_width} we show the errors for a grid of models with different peanut width errors.
For all cases considered, the error induced due to a miscalculation of the peanut width is less than that induced by not modelling a peanut at all, apart from the maximum error induced in the potential when the peanut width is 50\% larger than in the fiducial scenario. This is due to a sharp increase in scaleheight in the central region for large peanut widths (see solid red line in Fig.~\ref{fig:z0_peawidth}), which is where the potential is most affected. This error however is confined only to the potential and to the central most grid points, and should not have significant effects on orbital calculations in most of the galaxy.
\begin {table}
\caption {Percentage Error due to Peanut Width Uncertainty}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ r | r r r | r r r }
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Peanut Width} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Average Error} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Maximum Error} \\
\cline{2-7}
& $\Phi$ & $F_x$ & $F_y$ & $\Phi$ & $F_x$ & $F_y$ \\ \hline
+50\% & 3\% & 5\% & 6\% & 15\% & 26\% & 27\% \\
+25\% & 1\% & 2\% & 3\% & 4\% & 10\% & 12\% \\
-25\% & 1\% & 2\% & 3\% & 3\% & 11\% & 6\% \\
-50\% & 2\% & 5\% & 6\% & 5\% & 11\% & 15\% \\
no peanut & 3\% & 8\% & 10\% & 7\% & 37\% & 28\%\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
Average and maximum errors of the potential and forces for setups with different peanut width errors within the area enclosed by the outer isophote of the bar. The last row gives the error that would be present if we do not model a B/P bulge at all.
\label{table:error_pea_width}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Peanut length uncertainties}
Of the three parameters - length, strength and width - length has the least uncertainty, due to a method proposed by \citet{Athanassoulaetal2014}. The method determines the length of B/Ps for face-on and moderately inclined galaxies, which uses the shape of the projected isophotes in the bar region.
They demonstrated that the barlens and the peanut are the same component and therefore that the size of the former can be used to estimate the length of the latter. For galaxies with larger inclinations the length can be estimated from other morphological features in the isophotes created by the B/P bulge \citep{AthanassoulaBeaton2006, ErwinDebattista2013}, while orbital structure studies confirm the aforementioned results and also give clues as to the length of the peanut \citep{Patsisetal2002,Patsisetal2003}. Due to all this, the uncertainties of the length estimates are rather small, certainly smaller than the corresponding ones for strength and width, which is why we use a smaller range of uncertainties for the peanut length.
We carry out comparisons for a grid of models with different peanut length errors and give the results in Table \ref{table:error_pea_length}. As expected, the more we change the length of the peanut away from the fiducial value, the larger the errors will be, although there is an asymmetry in the error induced with respect to over- and under-estimating the length; by underestimating the peanut length by a certain amount, we induce more error than by overestimating it by the same amount. By decreasing the length of the peanut we induce more error in the central regions of the galaxy, which is where the potential is most affected, due to the two gaussians overlapping in the centre and thus increasing the scaleheight (see dotted magenta line, Fig.~\ref{fig:z0_pealength}). This can be seen in Table \ref{table:error_pea_length}, for the case of -30\% peanut length where, for the potential, the maximum and average errors are larger than that of the +30\% peanut length case.
For all the cases considered, the average error induced is smaller or equal to that of not modelling the B/P bulge. Given that the length is a fairly well constrained quantity, large errors are not expected to be present due to the peanut length in the modelling of the B/P bulge.
\begin {table}
\caption {Percentage Error due to Peanut Length Uncertainty}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ r | r r r | r r r }
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Peanut Length} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Average Error} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Maximum Error} \\
\cline{2-7}
& $\Phi$ & $F_x$ & $F_y$ & $\Phi$ & $F_x$ & $F_y$ \\ \hline
+30\% & 1\% & 6\% & 5\% & 4\% & 24\% & 13\% \\
+16\% & 0.9\% & 3\% & 3\% & 3\% & 12\% & 7\% \\
-16\% & 1\% & 4\% & 4\% & 5\% & 11\% & 10\% \\
-30\% & 3\% & 8\% & 9\% & 13\% & 25\% & 28\% \\
no peanut & 3\% & 8\% & 10\% & 7\% & 37\% & 28\%\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
Average and maximum errors of the potential and forces for setups with different peanut length errors within the area enclosed by the outer isophote of the bar. The last row gives the error induced by not modelling a B/P bulge at all.
\label{table:error_pea_length}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Combinations of uncertainties}
\label{sec:comb_potfor}
It is likely that a combination of different kinds of error will contribute to the total error budget of a model of the B/P. It is not in the scope of this paper to explore the full parameter space of the possible error combinations, instead we choose a few cases in order to get a feel of the amount of error that can be induced. By `combination of error' we refer to a combination of all the different sources of error. By `+50\%' (`-50\%') we refer to a setup with peanut strength and width which are 50\% larger (smaller) than the fiducial value, and a peanut length which is 30\% larger (smaller) than the fiducial. We do not find it necessary to further increase the error in peanut length, since it is the best constrained quantity out of the three parameters. The `+25\%' (`-25\%') setup corresponds to one with peanut strength, width and length which is 25\% larger (smaller) than the fiducial value. In Table \ref{table:error_pea_allerrors} we see that all the combinations of uncertainties will introduce less error in the model than not including a B/P bulge at all.
\begin {table}
\caption {Percentage Error due to Combination of Uncertainties}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ r | r r r | r r r }
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Combination} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Average Error} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Maximum Error} \\
\cline{2-7}
& $\Phi$ & $F_x$ & $F_y$ & $\Phi$ & $F_x$ & $F_y$ \\ \hline
+50\% & 2\% & 3\% & 5\% & 6\% & 23\% & 22\% \\
+25\% & 1\% & 4\% & 4\% & 6\% & 19\% & 18\% \\
-25\% & 1\% & 6\% & 6\% & 5\% & 29\% & 22\% \\
-50\% & 2\% & 7\% & 8\% & 6\% & 35\% & 26\% \\
no peanut & 3\% & 8\% & 10\% & 7\% & 37\% & 28\%\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
Average and maximum errors of the the potential and forces for setups with different combinations of errors within the area enclosed by the outer isophote of the bar. The last row gives the error induced by not modelling a B/P bulge at all.
\label{table:error_pea_allerrors}
\end{table}
\subsection{Periodic orbits}
\label{sec:pea-pea-orbits}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subfigure[]{%
\includegraphics[height=6.5cm]{characteristic_compare}
\label{fig:Ej_orb_peaerrors1}}
\quad
\subfigure[]{%
\includegraphics[height=6.5cm]{orbits_compare_sech2_BP_BP50_copy}
\label{fig:orbs_peaerrors}}
\quad
\caption{\emph{(a)} Characteristic diagram for models with different B/P setups. See Fig.~\ref{fig:orbsgtr116peanopea} and the text in Section \ref{sec:pea-nopea-orbits} for more details on the interpretation of the characteristic diagram. The dotted blue line gives the zero velocity curve; the characteristic diagram for the model with 0\%, 50\% and 100\% the fiducial peanut strength is given by the dashed red line, the magenta dashed-dotted line and the solid black line respectively.
\emph{(b)} The same $3/1$ orbit, which cuts the $y$-axis at $y$=1, in three models: without a B/P bulge (dashed red line), with 50\% peanut strength (magenta dashed-dotted line) and with 100\% peanut strength (black solid line).}
\label{fig:Ej_orb_peaerrors}
\end{figure*}
As shown in Section \ref{sec:pea-nopea-orbits}, the presence of a B/P bulge will affect the extent and shape of the different families of periodic orbits which make up the bar. In this section we qualitatively explore the errors introduced in the calculation of periodic orbits due to incorrect modelling of a B/P bulge. To do this we examine the characteristic diagram of the most relevant families of periodic orbits for three models with different peanut strengths (100\%, 50\% and 0\% of the fiducial strength), shown in Fig. \ref{fig:Ej_orb_peaerrors1}.
For the model with 50\% the fiducial strength the extent of the x$_2$ orbits is reduced by $\sim$19\%, while if we do not add a B/P at all, the extent of the x$_2$ family is reduced by $\sim$43\% (more than double the error for the 50\% peanut strength case).
The bifurcation locus of the 3/1 family for the model with 50\% the peanut strength occurs about halfway between the locus of the models with and without a B/P bulge. Additionally, the extent of the 3/1 family in the characteristic diagram for this model is almost the same as for the model with the fiducial peanut, while the extent of the 3/1 family without a B/P is significantly shortened. In Fig. \ref{fig:orbs_peaerrors} we can see how the 3/1 orbits are affected by the incorrect modelling of the B/P bulge: for the same cut along the $y$-axis the 3/1 orbits are more elongated in the case with the fiducial peanut model, while they become less elongated and more concave with respect to the bar as the peanut strength is reduced. However, as expected, the orbits in the model with 50\% the peanut bulge better match the orbit of the fiducial B/P setup than the model without the B/P bulge.
As already noted in Section \ref{sec:pea-nopea-orbits}, the x$_1$ family of orbits is also affected by the presence of the B/P bulge, when the maximum extent of the orbits reach the region where the effect of the B/P is maximum, i.e. around ($x$, $y$)=($\pm3\,\mathrm{kpc}$, $0\,\mathrm{kpc}$). On the characteristic diagram this occurs in the region around ($E_J$, $y_0$)=(0.9, $0.5\,\mathrm{kpc}$). However even by underestimating the strength of the B/P by 50\%, the x$_1$ family is quite similar to the x$_1$ family of the fiducial B/P case.
We see that in general, the characteristic diagram of the model with 50\% the fiducial strength has features which are more towards the fiducial peanut model and therefore even with such a large error in peanut strength, the characteristic diagram of this model reproduces relatively well the characteristic diagram of the fiducial B/P model and certainly better than the model without a B/P bulge.
Similar results are found when considering errors in peanut width and length, and we therefore conclude that it is preferable to include a B/P in the model; the orbital structure of the model is significantly affected when a B/P bulge is present, and by adding a B/P, even with large errors in its parameters, the periodic orbits reproduce the correct structure more closely than when not including a B/P at all.
\subsection{Bar strength}
\label{sec:Qt_pea-pea}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subfigure[]{%
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{z0_pea_strength}
\label{fig:z0_peastrength}}
\quad
\subfigure[]{%
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Qt_pea_strength}
\label{fig:Qt_peastrength}}
\quad
\subfigure[]{%
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{z0_peanutwidth_2}
\label{fig:z0_peawidth}}
\quad
\subfigure[]{%
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Qt_pea_width}
\label{fig:Qt_peawidth}}
\quad
\subfigure[]{%
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{z0_pea_length}
\label{fig:z0_pealength}}
\quad
\subfigure[]{%
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Qt_pea_length}
\label{fig:Qt_pealength}}
\quad
\caption{\emph{Top Row: Left:} Values of z$_0$ for the fiducial peanut strength (solid thick black line), for 50\% larger (solid thin red line), 25\% larger (dashed green line), 25\% less (dotted magenta line), 50\% less (dot-dashed cyan line) and 0\% peanut strength, i.e. an isothermal sheet (thin solid black line). \emph{Right:} Bar-induced torque $Q_T$ as a function of radius for models with the aforementioned height functions (respective colours).
\emph{Middle Row: Left:} The values of z$_0$ for the fiducial peanut width (solid thick black line), 50\% larger (solid thin red line), 25\% larger (dashed green line), 25\% less (dotted magenta line) and 50\% less peanut width (dot-dashed cyan line). \emph{Right}: Bar-induced torque $Q_T$, for aforementioned models (respective colours).
\emph{Bottom Row: Left:} The values of z$_0$ for models with the fiducial peanut length (thick solid black line), 30\% longer peanut (dashed red line), 30\% shorter peanut (dashed-dotted green line) and a model without a peanut (i.e. 0\% peanut strength-thin solid black line. \emph{Right:} Bar-induced torque $Q_T$ for the aforementioned models (respective colours).
In all plots, the vertical lines correspond to the positions of the peanut maxima for each respective height function.}
\label{fig:Qt_pean_comps}
\end{figure*}
In this section we examine how both the relative errors of $Q_T$ and those of its maximum value $Q_b$ will be affected by uncertainties in the different parameters of the peanut model. We also introduce a new measure of bar strength, $Q_T^{int}$, which takes into consideration the integrated bar-induced torque, along the entire range of the bar. We do so because even though $Q_b$ remains relatively unchanged when adding a B/P bulge to the model, $Q_T$ over its whole range is significantly affected (see for example Fig.~\ref{fig:Qt_pealength} and Table \ref{table:bp-nobp_strength}), and we wish to have a measure of this change with a singlr number. The bar strength as defined by $Q_T^{int}$ is given by
\begin{equation}
Q_{T}^{int}=\frac{1}{r_{disc}}\int\limits_0\limits^{\mathrm{r_{bar}}} Q_T \, \mathrm{d}r ,
\label{eq:Qbint}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $r_{disc}$ is the disc scalelength.
To get a good estimate of the difference of $Q_T$ between two models over the entire radial range, it is best to carry out a point by point comparison, and then consider the radially averaged relative $Q_T$ error.
The relative error of $Q_T^{int}$ is a better proxy for this error than $Q_b$, although there are cases where the relative error of $Q_T^{int}$ is small, while the average relative error of $Q_T$ is much more significant (such as the first row of Table \ref{table:error_qt_length}) or vice-versa (first row of Table \ref{table:error_qt_comb}) . Therefore it is possible to have two cases with identical $Q_T^{int}$, but locally different $Q_T$.
\subsubsection{Peanut strength uncertainties}
We see in Figs.~\ref{fig:z0_peastrength} and \ref{fig:Qt_peastrength} that $Q_T$ increases as we reduce the strength of the peanut, and it reaches its maximum value when the peanut strength is zero, which corresponds to the height function of a flat isothermal sheet.
The values of the average and maximum relative errors of $Q_T$ ($\langle$Error $Q_T$$\rangle$ and MAX(Error $Q_T$) respectively), as well as the relative error of $Q_b$ and Q$_T^{int}$ can be seen in Table \ref{table:error_qt_strength} (and in all subsequent tables in the following subsections). We see that when we compare an isothermal sheet to the fiducial peanut model the error in $Q_b$ is of the order of 4\%. This is not representative of the large change that the average relative error of $Q_T$ undergoes (27\%). This is due to the fact that the maximum of $Q_T$ does not change much, even though $Q_T$ itself is affected by a significant amount over its entire range (see Fig.~\ref{fig:Qt_peastrength}). On the other hand, the change in Q$_T^{int}$, which takes into account the whole bar region, is more representative of the change in the average relative error of $Q_T$ (20\%).
In all the cases and for all the measurements of bar strength, the error introduced in the model due to uncertainty in peanut strength is not as large as the error introduced when not including a B/P bulge in the model.
\begin {table}
\caption {Percentage Error of Bar Strength due to Peanut Strength Uncertainty}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{r | r | r | r | r }
\hline
Peanut & \multirow{2}{*}{$\langle$Error $Q_T$$\rangle$} & \multirow{2}{*}{MAX(Error $Q_T$)} & \multirow{2}{*}{$Q_b$} & \multirow{2}{*}{Q$_T^{int}$} \\
Strength & & & & \\ \hline
+50\% & 8\% & 17\% & 1.4\% & 6\% \\
+25\% & 4\% & 9\% & 0.7\% & 3\% \\
-25\% & 5\% & 11\% & 0.5\% & 4\% \\
-50\% & 11\% & 26\% & 1.6\% & 7\% \\
no peanut & 27\% & 74\% & 4\% & 20\% \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
The error induced in the bar strength due to different amount of error in the peanut strength. We see the effect of these uncertainties on the average and maximum relative error in $Q_T$ ($\langle$Error $Q_T$$\rangle$ and MAX(Error $Q_T$) respectively), as well as on the relative errors of $Q_b$ and $Q_T^{int}$.
\label{table:error_qt_strength}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Peanut width uncertainties}
We compare setups with varying peanut widths to our fiducial model. Comparisons for $Q_T$ can be seen in Figs.~\ref{fig:z0_peawidth} and \ref{fig:Qt_peawidth} and as previously mentioned, the mismatch between the different models is found when the scaleheights of the models are different. The extent of the region of $Q_T$ which is flattened is reduced when the width of the B/P is reduced, as expected. Conversely, when we increase the width of the B/P bulge, the area of $Q_T$ which is flattened is increased.
Values for the errors in the bar region are given in Table \ref{table:error_qt_width}. We see that errors in peanut width do not induce very large errors in the average relative error of $Q_T$, compared to the errors induced when not including a B/P bulge. The errors induced in $Q_T^{int}$ are not very large either, although $Q_b$, in the case of +50\% peanut width, has a relative error larger than that of not including a B/P bulge. This again shows the importance of carrying out a point by point comparison, and a comparison of $Q_T^{int}$, in order to determine the errors induced in bar strength due to uncertainties.
\begin {table}
\caption {Percentage Error of Bar Strength due to Peanut Width Uncertainty}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{r | r | r | r | r }
\hline
Peanut & \multirow{2}{*}{$\langle$Error $Q_T$$\rangle$} & \multirow{2}{*}{MAX(Error $Q_T$)} & \multirow{2}{*}{$Q_b$} & \multirow{2}{*}{Q$_T^{int}$} \\
Width & & & & \\ \hline
+50\% & 6\% & 12\% & 9\% & 6\% \\
+25\% & 4\% & 11\% & 5\% & 4\% \\
-25\% & 7\% & 20\% & 3\% & 6\% \\
-50\% & 16\% & 39\% & 5\% & 13\% \\
no peanut & 27\% & 74\% & 4\% & 20\% \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
As in Table \ref{table:error_qt_strength} but for errors in peanut width.
\label{table:error_qt_width}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Peanut length uncertainties}
\label{sec:qt_comp_pea_length}
The results of this study are shown in Figs.~\ref{fig:z0_pealength} and \ref{fig:Qt_pealength} and in Table~\ref{table:error_qt_length}. Something worth noting in the Fig.~\ref{fig:Qt_pealength} is that the flattening of $Q_T$ occurs at the positions where the maxima of the peanut are found (which are indicated by the corresponding vertical lines).
In Table \ref{table:error_qt_length} we see the errors induced in the different measurements of bar strength due to uncertainties in peanut length. For the case where the peanut length is 30\% larger than the fiducial value, $Q_b$ has a relative error of 17\% compared to the error of 4\% in $Q_b$ when we do not add a peanut. This seems to suggest that it can be counter-productive to include a B/P in the model when there exist uncertainties in peanut length. However, if we examine the average relative error in $Q_T$, we see that the error induced in $Q_T$ is in fact larger when we do not model a B/P than when we miscalculate its length by +30\%. This points once again to the need for examining the average errors of $Q_T$ and not just $Q_b$, as the errors induced in $Q_b$ are not representative of the error induced in $Q_T$.
We also see in Fig.~\ref{fig:Qt_pealength}, that even though $Q_T$ of the two cases (of fiducial peanut and +30\% peanut length) differs significantly point by point, the area under the curve for the two cases is quite similar. This is reflected in the value of the relative error of $Q_T^{int}$, which only suffers a change of around 5\% while the average error of $Q_T$ suffers a change of 16\%. We see therefore that $Q_T^{int}$ is not always a good approximation for the average relative error of $Q_T$.
The important thing to note is that all the cases considered induce less error in the average error of $Q_T$ than not modelling the B/P at all.
\begin {table}
\caption {Percentage Error of Bar Strength due to Peanut Length Uncertainty}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ r | r | r | r | r }
\hline
Peanut & \multirow{2}{*}{$\langle$Error $Q_T$$\rangle$} & \multirow{2}{*}{MAX(Error $Q_T$)} & \multirow{2}{*}{$Q_b$} & \multirow{2}{*}{Q$_T^{int}$} \\
Length & & & & \\ \hline
+30\% & 16\% & 35\% & 17\% & 5\% \\
+16\% & 9\% & 19\% & 7\% & 3\% \\
+8\% & 5\% & 10\% & 3\% & 1\% \\
-8\% & 4\% & 10\% & 2\% & 1\% \\
-16\% & 9\% & 19\% & 4\% & 3\% \\
-30\% & 16\% & 39\% & 8\% & 8\% \\
no peanut & 27\% & 74\% & 4\% & 20\% \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
As in Table \ref{table:error_qt_strength} but for errors in peanut length.
\label{table:error_qt_length}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Combinations of uncertainties}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subfigure{%
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{z0_comb}
\label{fig:z0_peacomb}}
\quad
\subfigure{%
\includegraphics[width=0.42\textwidth]{Qt_comb}
\label{fig:Qt_peacomb}}
\quad
\caption{\emph{Left:} Values of z$_0$ for different combinations of uncertainties.
\emph{Right:} Strength of non-axisymmetric forcings $Q_T$ as a function of radius, for the different combinations of uncertainties. In order to not over-clutter the plot, the positions of the peanut maxima are given by the vertical arrows, from left to right, for the -50\%, -25\%, fiducial, +25\% and +50\% cases.}
\label{fig:Qt_pean_combs}
\end{figure*}
As has already been discussed, the most likely scenario is that of a combination of different sources of error affecting our model. The combinations of errors shown in Table \ref{table:error_qt_comb} are as in Section \ref{sec:comb_potfor}. We see that the average and maximum relative error in $Q_T$ for all the combinations is less than that of not modelling the B/P at all. The scaleheights and bar strength for these models can be seen in Figs. \ref{fig:z0_peacomb} and \ref{fig:Qt_peacomb} respectively.
\begin {table}
\caption {Percentage Error of Bar Strength due to a Combination of Uncertainties}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ r | r | r | r | r}
\hline
All Errors & $\langle$Error $Q_T$$\rangle$ & MAX(Error $Q_T$) & $Q_b$ & Q$_T^{int}$ \\ \hline
+50\% & 19\% & 42\% & 47\% & 25\% \\
+25\% & 16\% & 35\% & 28\% & 14\% \\
-25\% & 16\% & 50\% & 7\% & 11\% \\
-50\% & 20\% & 63\% & 7\% & 17\% \\
no peanut & 27\% & 74\% & 4\% & 20\% \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
As in Table \ref{table:error_qt_strength} but for different combinations of uncertainties.
\label{table:error_qt_comb}
\end{table}
\section{\bf{Summary \& Conclusions}}
\label{sec:Summary}
In this paper we present the effects of a Boxy/Peanut height function on the potential, forces, periodic orbits and bar strength of a barred galaxy. We show that such height functions significantly affect the results, which consequently hints to the effects that a Boxy/Peanut bulge will have on its host galaxy.
We present a method for calculating the potential and forces due to the stellar component of a disc galaxy, based on a three-dimensional integration of the stellar density distribution, which can be obtained from images of not too inclined galaxies combined with a given height function. The method gives robust results for different test cases, as well as allowing for any general height function to be used, thus allowing for complex density distributions to be modelled.
We used our code on an image extracted from a $N$-body+SPH simulation of an isolated galaxy, together with two flat, position-independent height functions, and two position-dependent height functions. Of the two position-dependent height functions, one models a peanut bulge and one models a boxy bulge. To create an accurate and physically motivated fiducial height function for the peanut, we shaped and fitted our peanut height function to the Boxy/Peanut bulge of the simulated galaxy.
We found, in accordance with previous results in the literature \citep{HeikiEija2002}, that for the two flat height functions the potential and forces do not vary much, provided the setups have equivalent scaleheights. This also holds true for the bar strength $Q_T$, which does not change much for different flat height functions.
However, we found that for boxy or peanut height functions the potential and forces vary significantly with respect to the case in which a flat height function is used (see Figure \ref{fig:resultsgtr116potforce}). For the potential, the difference can be up to 7\% for an extended region within the bar. For $F_x$ the difference can be as large as 37\%, while for $F_y$ this difference can be as large as 28\%. We therefore concluded that if a Boxy/Peanut bulge is present, one should include it when creating a dynamical model of the galaxy.
To further confirm this result, we examined the effect of the Boxy/Peanut bulge on the morphology of the most important families of periodic orbits found in barred galaxies. We see that by taking into account the B/P geometry (i.e. by using our fiducial peanut height function) for a given energy, the elongation of the x$_1$ orbits -- the bar-supporting orbits elongated parallel to the bar -- is decreased; this effect is most noticeable for orbits in the region where the Boxy/Peanut is maximum (around $\pm3\,\mathrm{kpc}$, see Figure \ref{fig:difx1orb}) as expected. By adding a Boxy/Peanut to the model the extent of the x$_2$ family -- the family of orbits perpendicular to the bar -- is increased by $\sim$43\% (see Figure \ref{fig:orbgtr116Ej}), as is the distance between the two Inner Lindblad Resonances (ILRs). Additionally, the position of the 3:1 resonance is changed; the 3/1 family -- elongated along the bar and asymmetric with respect to the $y$-axis -- appears at larger energies and is much more extended in the characteristic diagram (see Figure \ref{fig:orbgtr116Ej}). All the aforementioned effects will have an impact on the stellar as well as the gaseous kinematics of the galaxy. The shape and strength of the shocks in the gas will be affected, which in turn affects the amount of gas inflow to the central parts of the galaxy. This could have an impact on the formation of discy bulges and possibly on the fuel reservoir for AGN activity. We plan to investigate in future work the extent of the effects of B/P bulges on gas flows in galaxies.
We also studied the effect of the Boxy/Peanut bulge on the bar strength, as given by the non-axisymmetric forcings due to the bar, $Q_T$. The shape as well as the maximum of $Q_T$ are significantly affected by taking into account the geometry of a Boxy/Peanut bulge. We found it useful to define a new quantity for measuring bar strength, $Q_T^{int}$, which allows us to extract information about the strength of the bar by using its whole extent. The presence of a Boxy/Peanut bulge, especially at the points where its scaleheight is maximum, reduces the bar strength (see Figure \ref{fig:Qt_pea_nopea}) which confirms that the presence of a Boxy/Peanut bulge reduces the bar induced torques.
Even though taking into account the geometry of Boxy/Peanut bulges will affect the model, it is not trivial to obtain their parameters observationally. We therefore examined how much error would be introduced in the results by introducing uncertainties in the Boxy/Peanut parameters.
Each source of error individually (peanut strength, peanut length and peanut width), as well as combinations of the different sources of error, induce errors in the results which in general are considerably less than those induced by not modelling the peanut at all. So, for realistic values of uncertainties in the peanut parameters, the error in including a peanut will be less than the error induced by not including a peanut in the model.
The simulated galaxy we chose for this study contains a strong bar, corresponding to bar classes 5 and 6 from the \citet{ButaBlock2001} classification. Therefore the results of this study can be straightforwardly and quantitatively applied to real galaxies with similar bar and peanut strength, which account for approximately 20\% of SB galaxies in the local universe. Our results are also qualitatively relevant to all barred galaxies in the secular evolution phase, although for reduced bar and peanut strength the effect of the Boxy/Peanut bulge on the model is also reduced. In this work we have presented an in depth study of the effects of a Boxy/Peanut bulge on its galaxy model, focusing on a particular test case; we plan to present a quantitative statistical study of the effects of these bulges on their host galaxies elsewhere.\newline
\section*{Acknowledgements}
All authors acknowledge financial support to the DAGAL network from the People Programme (Marie Curie Actions) of the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme FP7/2007-2013/ under REA grant agreement number PITN-GA-2011-289313. EA and AB also acknowledge financial support from the CNES (Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales - France). The simulation analysed here was made using HPC resources from GENCI- TGCC/CINES (Grants 2013 - x2013047098 and 2014 - x2014047098). We would also like to thank Dimitri Gadotti for useful discussions on the properties of barred galaxies and for helpful suggestions on the manuscript and Sergey Rodionov for software assistance.
\bibliographystyle{mn2e}
|
\section{Introduction}
In this short note, we start to develop
a general theory of connections, torsions and curvatures for local Leibniz algebroids. Interesting Leibniz algebroids are, for instance, those related to exceptional generalized geometries \cite{Hull}. We believe that our constructions can be applied to a wide class of closed form Leibniz algebroids, classified in \cite{Baraglia}.
In all these Leibniz algebroids we have, in addition to the anchor controlling the Leibniz property in the second argument of the Dorfman bracket, also the so called locality operator controlling the behavior of the bracket under the multiplication of its first argument by a function. This locality operator can then be used to define the appropriate notions of torsion and curvature.
Though the general theory is simple and transparent, explicit computations are quite tedious even in the simplest examples. Hence, in this short note we present as an example only results for the simplest Leibniz algebroid on $TM\oplus \cTM{p}$ equipped with the higher Dorfman bracket and with the corresponding generalized metric (defined by an ordinary Riemannian metric $g$ and by an $(p+1)$-form $C$). In this example, we generalize the (generalized) Bismut connection from the case $p=1$, whose significance in the context of generalized geometry was first
understood and investigated in \cite{Ellwood}. Its properties were highlighted in \cite{GualtieriBranes}, where its torsion was defined too. The calculations relating such metric connections with skew torsion to the Courant bracket go back to cite \cite{Hitchin,Gualtieri}.
Of course, what we aim for are general definitions that in our example lead to the scalar curvature of the form $R + (dC)^2$.
There is a vast and important literature on supergravity actions from the point of view of (exceptional) generalized geometry and/or double field theory. It is far beyond the scope of this short note to comment on all of these, even to cite them. Among these, it seems to us that \cite{Waldram1, Waldram2} are, at least in some aspects, closest to our point of view and include an excellent overview of the literature.
\section{Local Leibniz algebroids}
Let us recall the notion of a Leibniz (Loday) algebroid.
A Leibniz algebroid is a triple $(E,\rho,\circ)$, where $E \stackrel{\pi}{\rightarrow} M$ is a (smooth) vector bundle, $\rho: E \rightarrow TM$ is a vector bundle morphism, called the anchor, and $\circ$ is an $\mathbb{R}$-bilinear bracket on sections $\Gamma(E)$ of $E$, satisfying the Leibniz rule
\begin{equation}
e \circ (fe') = f (e \circ e') + (\rho(e).f)e'
\end{equation}
and the Leibniz identity
\begin{equation}
e \circ (e' \circ e'') = (e \circ e') \circ e'' + e' \circ (e \circ e'')
\end{equation}
for all $e,e',e'' \in \Gamma(E)$ and $f\in C^{\infty}(M)$.
From the consistency of the Leibniz rule and the Leibniz identity under the replacement $e'' \mapsto fe''$, it follows that $\rho(e \circ e') = [\rho(e),\rho(e')]$. Further, we have a natural "differential" $\mathsf{d}$\footnote{not to be confused with ordinary de Rham differential on $M$} defined as a $\mathbb{R}$-linear map $\mathsf{d}: C^{\infty}(M) \rightarrow \Gamma(E^{\ast})$
\begin{equation} \< \mathsf{d} f, e \> = \rho(e).f \end{equation}
for all $e \in \Gamma(E)$ and $f \in C^{\infty}(M)$. Obviously $\mathsf{d}$ satisfies the usual Leibniz rule $\mathsf{d}(fg) = \mathsf{d}(f)g + f\mathsf{d}(g)$, for $f,g \in C^{\infty}(M)$.
Next, one can define a Lie derivative $\Li{}^{E}$, corresponding to $\circ$. It will define a first order differential operator on the tensor bundle $\mathcal{T}(E)$. It is defined in the lowest orders and extended as a differential to all tensors.
On functions, it just the derivative in the direction of $\rho(e)$
\begin{equation} \Li{e}^{E}f = \rho(e).f \end{equation}
for all $e \in \Gamma(E)$ and $f \in C^{\infty}(M) = \Gamma(\mathcal{T}_{0}^{0}(E))$.
On sections of $E$, it is the Leibniz bracket $\circ$ itself
\begin{equation} \Li{e}^{E}e' = e \circ e' \end{equation}
for all $e \in \Gamma(E)$ and $e' \in \Gamma(E) = \Gamma(\mathcal{T}^{1}_{0}(E))$.
On sections of $\Gamma(E^{\ast})$
\begin{equation} \label{eq_Lieon1forms} \< \Li{e}^{E}\alpha, e'\> = \Li{e}^{E}\<\alpha,e'\> - \<\alpha, \Li{e}^{E}e'\> \end{equation}
for all $f \in C^{\infty}(M)$, $e,e' \in \Gamma(E)$ and $\alpha \in \Gamma(E^{\ast}) = \Gamma(\mathcal{T}_{1}^{0}(E))$.
Note that one has to use the Leibniz rule in order to guarantee the proper tensorial behavior on the right-hand side of the defining equations. For example, the right-hand side of (\ref{eq_Lieon1forms}) has to be $C^{\infty}(M)$-linear in $e'$, which is guaranteed by Leibniz rule.
On the other hand, Leibniz identity shows that $e \mapsto \Li{e}^{E}$ defines a bracket homomorphism
\begin{equation} \Li{e \circ e'}^{E} = \Li{e}^{E} \Li{e'}^{E} - \Li{e'}^{E} \Li{e}^{E} \end{equation}
for all $e,e' \in \Gamma(E)$.
In general, one has no relation between $(fe) \circ e'$ and $e \circ e'$. As a consequence, $e \circ e'$ can depend on the values of the section $e$ at every point of the manifold $M$. If this happens, we can't restrict the bracket to local sections, which is necessary in order to write it in some local frame components. Hence, in the following we will restrict ourselves only to the so called local Lie algebroids, in particular the bracket $\circ$ will be a bidifferential operator of degree one.
We say that the Leibniz algebroid $(E,\rho,\circ)$ is a {\it local} one,\footnote{cf. Definition 4.7 and Theorem 4.8 in \cite{Grabowski}} if there exists $L \in \Gamma(\mathcal{T}_{2}^{2}(E))$, such that
\begin{equation}
(fe) \circ e' = f (e \circ e') - (\rho(e').f)e + L(\mathsf{d}{f},e,e')
\end{equation}
where $L$ is viewed as $C^{\infty}(M)$-trilinear map $L: \Gamma(E^{\ast}) \times \Gamma(E) \times \Gamma(E) \rightarrow \Gamma(E)$.
Obviously, $L$ in its first argument is defined uniquely only on the subbundle $\Ann(\ker{\rho})\subset E^*$, the annulator of the kernel of the anchor, which is locally generated by sections of the form $\mathsf{d}{f}$. Nevertheless, using the partition of unity we can define a scalar product on $E^\ast$ and extend $L$ trivially on the orthogonal complement to $\Ann(\ker{\rho})$. Also, the $C^{\infty}(M)$-trilinearity of $L$ is
essential for the definition to be a consistent one.
As a direct consequence of the definition of a local Leibniz algebroid, we see that
\begin{equation} \label{eq_rhoonL}
\rho( L(\mathsf{d}{f},e,e') ) = 0
\end{equation}
i.e., $L(\mathsf{d}{f},e,e')$ takes values in the subbundle $\ker{\rho}$. Moreover, we can always choose an $L$ satisfying $\rho( L(\beta,e,e') )=0$ for all $\beta \in \Gamma(E^*)$, $e,e'\in \Gamma(E)$, by extending it - as mentioned above - trivially to $((\Ann(\ker{\rho}))^\perp $.
\begin{example}
Lie algebroid is simply a Leibniz algebroid with skew-symmetric bracket. Obviously we can put $L = 0$ in this case.
\end{example}
\begin{example}\label{example1.2}
Courant algebroid is a Leibniz algebroid equipped with fiberwise metric $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_{E}$ satisfying
\begin{equation} \label{def_courant1} \<e', e \circ e \>_{E} = \frac{1}{2} \rho(e').\<e,e\>_{E} \end{equation}
for all $e,e' \in \Gamma(E)$ and being invariant with respect to the Lie derivative induced by $\circ$, that is
\begin{equation} \label{def_courant2} \rho(e).\<e',e''\>_{E} = \<e \circ e', e''\>_{E} + \<e' , e \circ e''\>_{E}
\end{equation}
for all $e,e',e'' \in \Gamma(E)$. Note that $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_{E}$ defines an isomorphism $\psi_{E}: E \rightarrow E^{\ast}$. Using this isomorphism, we can define yet another differential $\mathcal{D}: C^{\infty}(M) \rightarrow E$ as $\mathcal{D} = \psi_{E}^{-1} \circ \mathsf{d}$. The first axiom of a Courant algebroid can then be rewritten as
\begin{equation} e \circ e = \frac{1}{2} \mathcal{D}\<e,e\>_{E} \end{equation}
This can be polarized to
\begin{equation} e \circ e' = - e' \circ e + \mathcal{D}\<e,e'\>_{E} \end{equation}
Hence,
\begin{equation} (fe) \circ e' = f (e \circ e') - (\rho(e').f)e + \<e,e'\>_{E} \mathcal{D}{f} \end{equation}
We thus get the condition on $L$ to be
\begin{equation} L(\mathsf{d}{f},e,e') = \<e,e'\>_{E} \psi_{E}^{-1}(\mathsf{d}{f}) \end{equation}
Therefore, in addition to the generic choice of $L$ satisfying $\rho( L(\beta,e,e') )=0$ we also have an another one $L(\beta,e,e') := \<e,e'\>_{E} \psi_{E}^{-1}(\beta)$, which seems to be more natural in case of a Courant algebroid.
\end{example}
\begin{example}\label{example1.3}
Consider $E = TM \oplus \cTM{p}$, with anchor $\rho = {\mbox pr}_{TM}$, the projection to the tangent bundle $TM$, and bracket $\circ$ defined as
\begin{equation} \label{def_hdorfman} (x,a_{p}) \circ (y,b_{p}) = ([x,y], \Li{x}b_{p} - \mathit{i}_{y}da_{p}) \end{equation}
for vector fields $x,y \in \vf{}$ and $p$-forms $a_{p},b_{p} \in \df{p}$. One can easily show that this is indeed a Leibniz algebroid. It is neither a Lie nor a Courant algebroid. One finds that
\begin{equation} (f(x,a_{p})) \circ (y,b_{p}) = f ((x,a_{p}) \circ (y,b_{p})) - (y.f)(x,a_{p}) + (0, df \^ \<(x,a_{p}),(y,b_{p})\>^{+}) \end{equation}
where $\<\cdot,\cdot\>^{+}$ is an $\df{p-1}$-valued pairing on $E$, defined as
\begin{equation} \<(x,a_{p}),(y,b_{p})\>^{+} = \mathit{i}_{x}b_{p} + \mathit{i}_{y}a_{p} \end{equation}
The dual bundle is $E^{\ast} = T^{\ast}M \oplus \TM{p}$, and the map $\mathsf{d}$ is then $\mathsf{d}{f} = (df, 0)$. Let $p_{1}: E^{\ast} \rightarrow T^{\ast}M$ be the projection onto the first factor. We find
\begin{equation} L(\mathsf{d}{f},e,e') = (0, p_{1}(\mathsf{d}{f}) \^ \<e,e'\>^{+}) \end{equation}
There is an obvious example of $L$ satisfying $\rho L(\beta,e,e')=0$. Namely,
\begin{equation} L(\beta,e,e') := (0, p_{1}(\beta) \^ \<e,e'\>^{+}) \end{equation}
for all $e,e' \in \Gamma(E)$ and $\beta \in \Gamma(E^{\ast})$.
\end{example}
We have defined local Leibniz algebroids with the intention to be able write them in local coordinates/bases. Assume therefore that we have a neighbourhood $U$ with some local frame $(e_{1}, \dots, e_{k})$ for $E$, and a set of local coordinates $(y^{1}, \dots, y^{n})$ on $M$. We can define the structure functions of $\circ$ as
\begin{equation} e_{\alpha} \circ e_{\beta} = {c^{\lambda}}_{\alpha \beta} e_{\lambda} \end{equation}
The structure functions of $\rho$ are defined by
\begin{equation} \rho(e_{\alpha}) = \rho_{\alpha}^{k} \partial_{k} \end{equation}
and finally those of $L$ as
\begin{equation} L(e^{\sigma},e_{\alpha},e_{\beta}) = {L^{\lambda \sigma}}_{\alpha \beta} e_{\lambda}
\end{equation}
If $e = v^{\alpha} e_{\alpha}$ and $e' = w^{\beta} e_{\beta}$, we can write the bracket of $e$ and $e'$ as
\begin{equation} e \circ e' = \big( v^{\alpha} w^{\beta} {c^{\lambda}}_{\alpha \beta} + v^{\alpha} \rho_{\alpha}^{k} {w^{\lambda}}_{,k} - w^{\alpha} \rho_{\alpha}^{k} {v^{\lambda}}_{,k} + {v^{\alpha}}_{,k} w^{\beta}\rho^{k}_{\mu} {L^{\lambda \mu}}_{\alpha \beta} \big) e_{\lambda} \end{equation}
To simplify the notation, we introduce the partial derivative along $E$ directions, that is
\begin{equation} f_{,\alpha}:=\partial_{\alpha}f := \rho_{\alpha}^{k} \partial_{k}f =:\rho_{\alpha}^{k} f_{,k} = (\mathsf{d}{f})_{\alpha} \end{equation}
The above coordinate expression is then rewritten as
\begin{equation} e \circ e' = \big( v^{\alpha} w^{\beta} {c^{\lambda}}_{\alpha \beta} + v^{\alpha} {w^{\lambda}}_{,\alpha} - w^{\alpha} ( {v^{\lambda}}_{,\alpha} - {v^{\beta}}_{,\mu} {L^{\lambda \mu}}_{\beta \alpha}) \big) e_{\lambda} \end{equation}
\section{Linear connections on local Leibniz algebroids}
\subsection{Connection}
A local Leibniz algebroid $(E,\rho,\circ)$ is in particular a vector bundle with an anchor, a vector bundle morphism $\rho:E\to TM$. Hence, we can define a connection on it just mimicking the definition for the case of a Lie algebroid \cite{Fernandes}\footnote{For a thorough discussion of connections on Courant algebroids see \cite{Alekseev}}.
Let $(E,\rho)$ be an anchored vector bundle and $V$ a vector bundle. We say that an $\mathbb{R}$-bilinear map $\nabla: \Gamma(E) \times \Gamma(V) \rightarrow \Gamma(V)$ is a $E$-connection on $V$, if
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\nabla(fe,v) = f \nabla(e,v)$
\item $\nabla(e,fv) = f \nabla(e,v) + (\rho(e).f)v$
\end{enumerate}
for all $e \in \Gamma(E), v \in \Gamma(V)$ and $f \in C^{\infty}(M)$. We invoke the usual notation $\nabla_{e} = \nabla(e,\cdot)$, and call $\nabla_{e}$ a covariant derivative along $e$.
If $E=V$ we say that $\nabla$ is a (linear) connection on $(E,\rho)$.
We say that an $E$-connection $\nabla$ on $V$ is induced by a $TM$-connection $\nabla'$ on $V$ if $\nabla_e = \nabla'_{\rho(e)}$.
Locally, in some frame $(e_{1}, \dots, e_{k})$, one can define Christoffel symbols by equation
\begin{equation}
\nabla_{e_{\alpha}} e_{\beta} = {\Gamma^{\lambda}}_{\alpha \beta} e_{\lambda}
\end{equation}
These are of course not tensors, and for $e = v^{\alpha}e_{\alpha}$ and $e' = w^{\beta}e_{\beta}$, we get
\begin{equation} \nabla_{e}e' = v^{\alpha}( {w^{\lambda}}_{,\alpha} + {\Gamma^{\lambda}}_{\alpha \beta} w^{\beta} ) e_{\lambda} \end{equation}
We also can denote the covariant derivative using the usual semicolon formalism
\begin{equation} {w^{\lambda}}_{;\alpha} = {w^{\lambda}}_{\alpha} + {\Gamma^{\lambda}}_{\alpha \beta} w^{\beta} \end{equation}
Linear connections (covariant derivatives) can be extended to all tensors using standard formulas. In lowest orders
\begin{equation} \nabla_{e}f := \rho(e).f, \ \<\nabla_{e}\beta,e'\> := \nabla_{e}\<e',\beta\> - \<\beta, \nabla_{e}e'\> \end{equation}
for $e,e' \in \Gamma(E)$, $\beta \in \Gamma(E^{\ast})$ and $f \in C^{\infty}(M)$. On higher tensors on $E$, $\nabla$ is extended as usual.
If we have at our disposal a fibre-wise metric $g_E$ on $E$, we say that the connection is metric compatible if
\begin{equation} \label{def_metriccomp}
\rho(e) g_E(e',e'') = g_E(\nabla_e e',e'')+ g_E( e',\nabla_e e'')
\end{equation}
\subsection{Torsion operator}
For a local Leibniz algebroid $(E,\rho,\circ,L)$, one would like to define a torsion. Obviously, the naive guess
\begin{equation} T(e,e') = \nabla_{e}e' - \nabla_{e'}e - e \circ e' \end{equation}
does not work in general, it is not $C^{\infty}(M)$-linear in $e$. Moreover, it is not antisymmetric in $(e,e')$. This is a minor drawback when compared to non-tensoriality. Once the non-tensoriality is fixed, the antisymmetrisation, if needed at all, is trivial.
Here is our proposal.
Let $\nabla$ be a linear connection on a local Leibniz algebroid $(E,\rho,\circ,L)$ and let $e_{\lambda}$ be some (local) frame of $E$ and $e^{\lambda}$ the dual one. Then there is a well defined (not necessarily antisymmetric) torsion operator $T$ of the form
\begin{equation} \label{def_gentorsion} T(e,e') = \nabla_{e}e' - \nabla_{e'}e + L(e^{\lambda},\nabla_{e_{\lambda}}e, e') - e \circ e' \end{equation}
A direct computation reveals that it is $C^{\infty}(M)$-linear in $e$ and $e'$, and thus defines an element $T \in \Gamma(\mathcal{T}_{2}^{1}(E))$.
Concerning the local expression for $T$, we define the components of $T$ as
\begin{equation} T(e_{\alpha},e_{\beta}) = {T^{\lambda}}_{\alpha \beta} e_{\lambda} \end{equation}
One finds that
\begin{equation}
{T^{\lambda}}_{\alpha \beta} = {\Gamma^{\lambda}}_{\alpha \beta} - {\Gamma^{\lambda}}_{\beta \alpha} + {\Gamma^{\sigma}}_{\mu \alpha} {L^{\lambda \mu}}_{\sigma \beta} - {c^{\lambda}}_{\alpha \beta}
\end{equation}
Note that this definition in particular includes the case of Courant algebroids. For Courant algebroids, there already exists definitions of torsion operator \cite{GualtieriBranes}, \cite{Alekseev}. The torsion introduced in \cite{GualtieriBranes} is the following one
\begin{equation} T'(e,e',e'') = \< \nabla_{e}e' - \nabla_{e'}e - \{e,e'\}, e''\>_{E} + \frac{1}{2}( \<\nabla_{e''}e,e'\>_{E} - \< \nabla_{e''}e', e\>_{E}) \end{equation}
where $ \{e,e'\}$ is the antisymmetrized Dorfman bracket (the Courant bracket).
A direct check shows the relation
$T'(e,e',e'') = \frac{1}{2}( \<T(e,e'),e''\>_{E} - \<T(e',e),e''\>_{E})$, if one chooses $L$ given by
\begin{equation} \label{eq_torsionCourantLchoice} L(\beta,e,e') = \<e,e'\>_{E} \psi_{E}^{-1}(\beta) \end{equation}
Hence the torsion operator of \cite{GualtieriBranes} is a skew-symmetrized version of our torsion operator, with one index lowered by $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_{E}$. Note that the particular choice (\ref{eq_torsionCourantLchoice}) of $L$ was important in establishing the relation. In \cite{Alekseev}, a Courant algebroid torsion is defined to be a $3$-form $C$ given by
\begin{equation}
C(e,e',e'') = \frac{1}{3}\< \{e,e'\}, e'' \>_{E} - \frac{1}{2}\< \nabla_{e}e' - \nabla_{e'}e, e''\>_{E} + cyclic(e,e',e'').
\end{equation}
For $\nabla$ compatible with $\<\cdot,\cdot\>_{E}$ in the sense of (\ref{def_metriccomp}), one can prove that in fact $C = -T'$.
Another notion of the generalized torsion, which can be applied to Leibniz algebroids, was introduced in \cite{Waldram1, Waldram2}. They defined it as difference of "covariantized" Dorfman derivative and ordinary Dorfman derivative. By Dorfman derivative they mean the Lie derivative $\Li{}^{E}$ with respect to the first section. By "covariantized" derivative they mean Lie derivative with partial derivatives in coordinate expression replaced by covariant derivatives. We can relate this to our torsion in a holonomic frame,
\[ e_{\alpha} \circ e_{\beta} = 0 \]
in which case
\begin{equation} (\Li{e}^{E}e')^{\lambda} = v^{\alpha} {w^{\lambda}}_{,\alpha} - w^{\alpha} ( {v^{\lambda}}_{,\alpha} - {v^{\beta}}_{,\mu} {L^{\lambda \mu}}_{\beta \alpha})
\end{equation}
for $e=v^\alpha e_\alpha$ and $e'=w^\alpha e_\alpha$.
The covariantized Lie derivative is thus
\begin{equation} (\Li{e}^{\nabla}e')^{\lambda} = v^{\alpha} {w^{\lambda}}_{;\alpha} - w^{\alpha} ( {v^{\lambda}}_{;\alpha} - {v^{\beta}}_{;\mu} {L^{\lambda \mu}}_{\beta \alpha})
\end{equation}
Hence, according to the definition of \cite{Waldram1, Waldram2}
\begin{equation} \label{eq_torsionasdifference}
T(e,e') = (\Li{e}^{\nabla} - \Li{e}^{E})e' \end{equation}
Note that $\Li{e}^{\nabla}e'$ can be rewritten as
\begin{equation} \Li{e}^{\nabla}e' = \nabla_{e}e' - \nabla_{e'}e + L(e^{\mu}, \nabla_{e_{\mu}}e,e') \end{equation}
Now it is obvious that (\ref{eq_torsionasdifference}) gives exactly the formula (\ref{def_gentorsion}). Had we not assumed the holonomicity of the frame, $T(e,e')$ in (\ref{eq_torsionasdifference}) would contain, compared with our definition, an additional $v^{\alpha} w^{\beta}{c^{\lambda}}_{\alpha \beta}$ term, and would not be a well-defined section of $\Gamma(E)$ anymore.
Obviously, for induced connections, their torsion (\ref{def_gentorsion}) doesn't depend on choice of $L$.
\subsection{Curvature operator}
Here, we would like to define a curvature operator for connections on local Leibniz algebroids. As for the torsion operator, the first naive guess would be
\begin{equation}
R(e,e')e'' = \nabla_{e}\nabla_{e'}e'' - \nabla_{e'}\nabla_{e}e'' - \nabla_{e \circ e'}e''
\end{equation}
for all $e,e',e'' \in \Gamma(E)$. Due to the property of the anchor $\rho(e\circ e')=[\rho(e),\rho(e')]$, such an $R(e,e')$ is $C^{\infty}(M)$-linear in $e''$, i.e. a vector bundle morphism. As easily identified, the problem lies in the $C^{\infty}(M)$-linearity in $e$ (the $C^{\infty}(M)$-linearity in $e'$ is more or less obvious from the definitions). Here is our proposal how to fix this:
Let $(E,\rho,\circ,L)$ be a local Leibniz algebroid, such that $\rho \circ L = 0$. Let $\nabla: E \rightarrow \mathcal{D}(E)$ be a linear connection on $E$. The formula
\begin{equation} \label{eq_Rdef} R(e,e')e'' = \nabla_{e}\nabla_{e'}e'' - \nabla_{e'}\nabla_{e}e'' + \nabla_{L(e^{\alpha},\nabla_{e_{\alpha}}e,e')}e'' - \nabla_{e \circ e'}e''
\end{equation}
is $C^{\infty}(M)$-linear in $e,e',e''$ and thus defines an element $R \in \Gamma(\mathcal{T}_{3}^{1}(E))$. We call $R$ the curvature operator, or when viewed as a tensor, we call it $R$ the Riemann tensor of the linear connection $\nabla$. Note that the condition $\rho \circ L = 0$ is essential in order not to destroy the tensoriality in $e''$. It is a straightforward check to see that the additional term $\nabla_{L(e^{\alpha},\nabla_{e_{\alpha}}e,e')}e''$ indeed cancels the nontensoriality in $e$. It preserves the tensoriality in $e'$ though.
In coordinates, one defines components of $R$ as
\begin{equation} R(e_{\alpha},e_{\beta})e_{\mu} = ({R^{\lambda}}_{\mu \alpha \beta} ) e_{\lambda}
\end{equation}
and one finds the explicit expression for those
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
{R^{\lambda}}_{\mu \alpha \beta} & = {\Gamma^{\lambda}}_{\beta \mu,\alpha} - {\Gamma^{\lambda}}_{\alpha \mu,\beta} + {\Gamma^{\lambda}}_{\alpha \kappa} {\Gamma^{\kappa}}_{\beta \mu} - {\Gamma^{\lambda}}_{\beta \kappa} {\Gamma^{\kappa}}_{\alpha \mu} + {\Gamma^{\delta}}_{\sigma \alpha} {L^{\kappa \sigma}}_{\delta \beta} {\Gamma^{\lambda}}_{\kappa \mu} - {c^{\kappa}}_{\alpha \beta} {\Gamma^{\lambda}}_{\kappa \mu}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Note that $R(e,e')$ is not necessarily skew-symmetric in $(e,e')$. Of course, we can always skew-symmetrize it in $(e,e')$
\begin{equation}R_{a}(e,e')e'' = \{ \nabla_{e}\nabla_{e'} - \nabla_{e'}\nabla_{e} + \frac{1}{2}\nabla_{L(e^{\alpha},\nabla_{e_{\alpha}}e,e')} - \frac{1}{2} \nabla_{L(e^{\alpha},\nabla_{e_{\alpha}}e',e)} - \nabla_{\{e,e'\}} \}e'' \end{equation}
Ricci tensor is defined as usual
$$\Ric (e,e') = \langle e^\alpha, R(e,e_\alpha)e'\rangle$$
For a metric compatible connection we define the Ricci scalar in a standard way as
$$\mathcal{R} = \Ric (g^{-1}e^\alpha,e_\alpha)$$
Let us note that for an induced connection, the term containing the operator $L$ doesn't contribute to $R$ at all and we have a more traditionally looking expression of the form
$$R(e,e')e''= (\nabla_{\rho(e)} \nabla_{\rho(e')}-\nabla_{\rho(e')} \nabla_{\rho(e)} - \nabla_{[\rho(e),\rho(e')]})e''$$
\section{Generalized Bismut connection}
\subsection{Connection}
In \cite{Ellwood} a generalized Bismut connection on the Courant algebroid of Example \ref{example1.2} was introduced. Here, we generalize it to the case of Example \ref{example1.3}. Hence, we consider the local Leibniz algebroid $E = TM \oplus \cTM{p}$ with its higher Dorfman bracket and the map $L$ chosen as\footnote{Obviously, for the connection, the existence of the Dorfman bracket and locality are not necessary.}
\begin{equation} \label{LforBismut}
L(\beta,e,e') = (0, p_{1}(\beta) \^ \<e,e'\>^{+})
\end{equation}
Such an $L$ satisfies $\rho \circ L = 0$.
We define a generalized metric $\mathbf{G}$ and a connection $\nabla$ compatible with this metric. Let $g$ be a metric on $M$ and $\~g$ is a skew-symmetrized $p$-fold tensor product of $g$, defining a fiberwise metric on $\TM{p}$. Also, let $C \in \df{p+1}$ be a $(p+1)$-form on $M$. With an abuse of notation, we introduce the corresponding maps $g:\vf{} \rightarrow \df{1} $, ${\~g}^{-1}: \df{p}\rightarrow \vf{p}$, $C: \vf{p} \rightarrow \df{1}$. For instance,
\[ C(q) = C_{iJ} q^{J} dy^{j} \]
with the transpose map $C^{T}: \vf{} \rightarrow \df{p}$ being an insertion of vector field into $(p+1)$-form $C$: $C^{T}(x) = \mathit{i}_{x}C$ for all $x \in \vf{}$. Then $\mathbf{G}$ is defined as
\begin{equation} \mathbf{G} = \begin{pmatrix} 1 & C \\ 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix} g & 0 \\ 0 & \~g^{-1} \end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0 \\ C^{T} & 1 \end{pmatrix}
\end{equation}
It maps $\vf{}\oplus \df{p}$ to $\df{}\oplus \vf{p}$.
If $\nabla_{x}^{LC}$ is the Levi-Civita connection on $M$ and $H:= dC$, then the generalized Bismut connection $\nabla$ will be defined so that the covariant derivative
$\nabla_{(x,a_p)}$ will not depend on the $p$-form $a_p$, which will be indicated as
$\nabla_{(x,0)}$. Hence, the generalized Bismut connection will be an induced one. Before giving the definition, we introduce another, a bit simpler, connection $\widehat\nabla$ related to $\nabla$ as
\begin{equation}
\nabla_{(x,0)} = e^{C} \widehat\nabla_{(x,0)} e^{-C},
\end{equation}
where the map $e^{C}$ is defined as
\begin{equation}
e^{C}(y,b_{p}) := (y, b_{p} - \mathit{i}_{y}C) = \begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0 \\ -C^{T} & 1 \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix} y \\ b_{p} \end{pmatrix}
\end{equation}
The expression for the connection $\widehat\nabla$ is
\begin{equation}
\widehat\nabla_{(x,0)}=
\begin{pmatrix}
\nabla_{x}^{LC} & - \frac{1}{2}g^{-1}H(x, \~g^{-1}(\star),\cdot) \\
-\frac{1}{2}H(x,\star,\cdot) & \nabla_{x}^{LC}
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation}
where $\star$ indicates places where components of the pair $(y,b_p)\in \vf{}\oplus \df{p}$ acted upon by the covariant derivative are inserted.
Explicitly, when acting on $(y,0)$ we have
\[\widehat\nabla_{(x,0)}(y,0)=(\nabla_{x}^{LC}y, -\frac{1}{2}H(x,y,\cdot))\]
and when acting on $(0,b_p)$ we obtain
\[\widehat\nabla_{(x,0)}(0,b_p)=(- \frac{1}{2}g^{-1}H(x, \~g^{-1}(b_p),\cdot),\nabla_{x}^{LC} b_p)\]
It is a rather straightforward check that the connection $\widehat\nabla$ is compatible with the generalized metric $\widehat{\mathbf{G}} := {\mbox {diag}}(g, \tilde{g}^{-1})$.
Hence, as a consequence, the generalized Bismut connection $\nabla$ is compatible with the generalized metric $\mathbf{G}$.
\subsection{Torsion operator} \label{subsec_torsionhbismut}
Here, we write down the result of a rather lengthy and tedious computation of the torsion operator of the generalized Bismut connection $\nabla$. We split the result into the vector field and $p$-form components $T_{1}$ and $T_{2}$, respectively.
However, let us start with formulas for the respective torsion components $\widehat T_{1}$ and $\widehat T_{2}$ of the simpler connection $\widehat\nabla$. We have
\begin{equation}
\widehat T_{1}((x,a_{p}),(y,b_{p})) = \frac{1}{2}g^{-1} \big( H(y,\~g^{-1}(a_{p}),\cdot) - H(x,\~g^{-1}(b_{p}),\cdot) \big)
\end{equation}
for the fist one and
\begin{equation}
\widehat T_{2}((x,a_{p}),(y,b_{p})) = - \frac{3}{2}H(x,y,\cdot) - \frac{1}{2}e^{k} \^ \mathit{i}_{g^{-1}H(e_{k},\~g^{-1}(a_{p}),\cdot)}b_{p}
\end{equation}
for the second one. Here $e_k$ and $e^k$ are elements of some mutually dual frames of $TM$ and $T^\ast M$, respectively.
To get a better understanding how the second form in this formula works, contract it against a $p$-tuple of vector fields $(z_{1},\dots,z_{p})$. The result will be
\begin{equation} - \frac{1}{2}( e^{k} \^ \mathit{i}_{g^{-1}H(e_{k},\~g^{-1}(a_{p}),\cdot)}b_{p})(z_{1},\dots,z_{p}) = - \sum_{i=1}^{p} \frac{1}{2} b_{p}(z_{1}, \dots, g^{-1}H(z_{i},\~g^{-1}(a_{p}),\cdot), \dots, z_{p}). \end{equation}
Note, for $p > 1$, the torsion is not necessarily skew-symmetric in $(e,e')$.
The relation between the the hatted and unhatted torsions is\footnote{For the relation it is important that $\widehat\nabla_e = \widehat\nabla_{e^{-C}e}$, since $\widehat\nabla_e$ depends only on the vector field part of $e$, and the well known property of the Dorfman bracket $e^{-C}(e^C e \circ e^C e') = e\circ e' + (0,H(\rho(e),\rho(e'),.))$.}
\begin{equation}
T(e,e') = e^{C}( \widehat T(e^{-C}e,e^{-C}e') + (0, H(\rho(e),H(\rho(e'))).
\end{equation}
and we get
\begin{equation}
T_{1}((x,a_{p}),(y,b_{p}))
= \frac{1}{2}g^{-1}(H(y,\~g^{-1}(a_{p} + \mathit{i}_{x}C),\cdot) - H(x,\~g^{-1}(b_{p}+\mathit{i}_{y}C), \cdot))
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
T_{2}((x,a_{p}),(y,b_{p})) & = -\frac{1}{2}H(x,y,\cdot) - \frac{1}{2} e^{k} \^ \mathit{i}_{g^{-1}H(e_{k}, \~g^{-1}(a_{p} + \mathit{i}_{x}C),\cdot)} (b_{p} + \mathit{i}_{x}C) \\
& - \frac{1}{2} \mathit{i}_{g^{-1}(H(y,\~g^{-1}(a_{p} + \mathit{i}_{x}C),\cdot) - H(x,\~g^{-1}(b_{p} + \mathit{i}_{y}C),\cdot))}C
\end{split}
\end{equation}
We finish this subsection with the comment on $p=1$ case. The generalized Bismut connection in this case is same as the one in \cite{Ellwood}. Also, our torsion is for $p=1$ the same as the one of \cite{GualtieriBranes}. Since the connection is an induced one, both natural choices for $L$ have to give the same torsion.
Our choice (\ref{LforBismut}) of $L$ not only works for $p>1$, as we have seen, its property $\rho \circ L = 0$, also is essential for our definition of curvature to work.
\subsection{Curvature operator}
Here, we give the result of calculation of the Ricci scalars of the connections $\widehat\nabla$ and $\nabla$, they will turn out to be the same. We start with the simpler primed connection $\widehat\nabla$. Again, we split the result into the vector field and the $p$-form parts $\widehat R_1$ and $\widehat R_2$, respectively.
\begin{align}
\widehat R_1((x,a_{p}),(y,b_{p}))(z,c_{p}) & = R^{LC}(x,y)z - \frac{1}{2}g^{-1}((\nabla_{x}^{LC}H)(y,\~g^{-1}(c_{p}),\cdot) - (\nabla_{y}^{LC}H)(x,\~g^{-1}(c_{p}),\cdot)) \nonumber \\
& + \frac{1}{4} g^{-1}(H(x,\~g^{-1}H(y,z,\cdot),\cdot) - H(y,\~g^{-1}H(x,z,\cdot),\cdot))
\end{align}
and
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\widehat R_2((x,a_{p}),(y,b_{p})(z,c_{p}) & = R^{LC}(x,y)c_{p} - \frac{1}{2} (\nabla_{x}^{LC}H)(y,z,\cdot) + \frac{1}{2} (\nabla_{y}^{LC}H)(x,z,\cdot).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
For the Ricci tensor, the only component contributing nontrivially to the Ricci scalar is
\begin{equation}
{\widehat\Ric}((x,0),(z,0)) = \Ric^{LC}(x,z) + \frac{1}{4}H(x, \~g^{-1}H(e_{k},z,\cdot), g^{-1}(e^{k}))
\end{equation}
The scalar curvature is defined using the fiberwise metric $\widehat{\mathbf{G}}$. We get
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\widehat{\mathcal{R}} & = \mathcal{R}^{LC} + \frac{1}{4}H(g^{-1}(e^{l}), \~g^{-1}H(e_{k},e_{l},\cdot), g^{-1}(e^{k})) = \mathcal{R}^{LC} + \frac{1}{4} g^{im} g^{kn} \~g^{IJ} H_{mIn} H_{kiJ} \\
& = \mathcal{R}^{LC} + \frac{(-1)^{p+1}}{4} H_{nmJ} H^{nmJ}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Again due to the fact that $\widehat{\nabla}_e$ depends only on the vector field part of $e$ it is easy to find the following relations between primed and unprimed curvatures
\begin{equation}
R(e,e')e'' = e^C\{\widehat R(e^{-C}e,e^{-C}e')e^{-C}e''\}
\end{equation}
Now we can compute the Ricci scalar $\mathcal R$ using the generalized metric $\mathbf G$. From the above relation in follows that
\begin{equation}
{\mathcal R}=\widehat{\mathcal R}=\mathcal{R}^{LC} + \frac{(-1)^{p+1}}{4} H_{nmJ} H^{nmJ}
\end{equation}
leading to the generalized Einstein-Hilbert action
$$ S =\int \sqrt{g}(\mathcal{R}^{LC} + \frac{(-1)^{p+1}}{4} H_{nmJ} H^{nmJ}) $$
\section*{Acknowledgement}
It is a pleasure to thank Peter Schupp for discussions.
The research of B.J. was supported by grant GA\v CR P201/12/G028.
The research of J.V. was supported by Grant Agency of the Czech
Technical University in Prague, grant No. SGS13/217/OHK4/3T/14. J.V. also
gratefully acknowledges support from the DFG within the Research Training Group 1620 ``Models of Gravity''.
|
\section{Introduction}
Statistics of neuronal activity is often described as a renewal point process, or even a Poisson process,
see \cite{Averbeck2009} and references therein. On the other hand, in some sets of experimental data
correlations are observed between consecutive interspike intervals (ISI), \cite{Lowen1992,Ratnam2000,Nawrot2007,Maimon2009}, which does not conform with the renewal hypothesis.
What could be the reason of such correlations? In principle, any sort of memory in the neuronal firing
mechanism could bring about memory into the sequence of ISIs, thus disrupting a possibility for it to be renewal. Memory in the firing mechanism can appear due to partial reset of the membrane potential
after firing, \cite{Rospars1993a,Lnsk1999}, or due to threshold fatigue \cite{Chacron2003},
or for other reasons, see \cite{Avila-Akerberg2011} for a review.
Biologically, non-renewal statistics of neuronal activity can improve discrimination of weak signals
\cite{Ratnam2000,Avila-Akerberg2011} and therefore is essential feature of functioning of a nervous system.
In this context, it was checked in \cite{Ratnam2000} if it is possible to represent activity of
electrosensory neuron as a Markov chain of some finite order. Conclusion made in \cite{Ratnam2000} is
that the corresponding order, if any, cannot be lower than 7.
Normally, any neuron is embedded into a network. Inter-neuronal communication in the network is delayed
due to finite speed of nervous impulses. In a reverberating network, this brings about one more reason
for non-renewal firing statistics --- the delayed feedback. We study here the simplest possible case of
a network --- a single neuron with delayed feedback. In the previous paper \cite{Vidybida2012}, it was proven
for a concrete neuronal model --- the binding neuron with threshold 2 --- stimulated with Poisson stream
of input impulses, that statistics of its ISIs is essentially non-Markov. In this paper, we refine
and extend methods
of \cite{Vidybida2012} making those applicable to any neuron, which satisfies a number of very simple and
natural conditions (see Cond0-Cond4 in n. \ref{neuron}). Under those conditions, we prove rigorously that
ISI statistics of a neuron with delayed feedback cannot be represented as a Markov chain of any finite
order.
\section{Definitions and assumptions}
\subsection{Neuron without feedback}\label{neuron}
We do not specify any concrete neuronal model, only expect that a neuron
satisfies the following conditions:
\begin{itemize}
\item Cond0: Neuron is deterministic: Identical stimuli elicit identical spike trains from the same neuron.
\item Cond1: Neuron is stimulated with input Poisson stream of excitatory impulses.
The input stream has intensity $\lambda$.
\item Cond2: Neuron may fire a spike only at a moment when it receives an input impulse.
\item Cond3: Just after firing, neuron appears in its standard state, which is always the same.
\item Cond4: The output interspike interval (ISI) distribution is characterized with a
probability density function (pdf) $p^0(t)$, which is positive: $t>0\Rightarrow p^0(t)>0$, and
bounded: $\sup\limits_{t>0} p^0(t)< \infty$.
\end{itemize}
The Cond0, above, is imposed in accordance with experimental observations,
see e.g. \cite{Bryant1976,Mainen1995}.
As regards the Cond1, Poisson stream is a standard stimulation when neuronal random activity is studied.
The Cond2, above, is satisfied for most threshold-type neuronal models, starting from
standard leaky integrate and fire (LIF) neuron \cite{Stein1967} and its modifications, see \cite{Burkitt}.
In order the Cond2 to be valid, it is enough that the following three
conditions are satisfied: (i) neuronal excitation%
\footnote{We use here term ``excitation'' instead of ``depolarization voltage'' because we do not specify
any triggering mechanism. Our consideration as regards feedback shaping of firing statistics could be
valid also for essentially artificial neurons, where excitation not necessarily has a voltaic nature.}
gets abrupt increase at the moment of receiving input impulse%
\footnote{If considering an input impulse as a current impulse, then it has a $\delta$-function form.},
(ii) after that moment, the degree of excitation does not increase
(it decreases for most neuronal models) until the next input impulse.
(iii) the neuron fires when its degree of excitation exceeds a threshold level. The threshold can be either
static, as in the basic LIF model, or dynamic \cite{Segundo1968}. These conditions seem to be
standard for many threshold neuronal models used, see \cite{Chacron2003,Jolivet2004,Jolivet2006} and citations therein. Cond3 means that any kind of memory about previous input/output activity,
which can be present in a neuron, is cleared
after each triggering. Due to Cond3, output stream of neuron without feedback will be a renewal
stochastic process.
Cond4 seems to be natural for any neuronal model stimulated with Poisson stream. At least,
all the five conditions are satisfied for the binding neuron model and for the basic LIF model, see \cite{Vidybida2007,Vidybida2014b}, where $p^0(t)$ is calculated exactly for each model, respectively.
\subsection{Feedback line action}\label{line}
We expect that each output impulse fired by neuron is fed back to the neuron's input
through a feedback line. The feedback line has the following properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item Prop1: The time delay in the line is $\Delta>0$.
\item Prop2: The line is able to convey no more than one impulse.
\item Prop3: The impulse conveyed to the neuronal input is identical to that from the input
Poisson stream.
\end{itemize}
It is known that a neuron can form synapses (autapses) on its own body, or dendritic tree, e.g.
\cite{Nicoll1982,Bekkers1998}.
This substantiates consideration of a single neuron with feedback not only as the simplest reverberating
"network" possible, bat also as an independent biologically relevant case.
The delay $\Delta$ comprises the time required by the output spike to
pass the distance from axonal hillock, where it is generated, to the autapse and the synaptic delay.
The Prop2 is somehow related to the refractoriness even if we do not introduce here the refractoriness
to its full extent.
The Prop3 means that we consider here an excitatory neuron.
The important for us consequence of Prop2 is that at any moment of time the feedback
line is either empty, or conveys a single impulse. If it does convey an impulse, then its state
can be described with a stochastic variable $s$, which we call further ``time to live''.
The variable $s$ denotes the exact time required by the impulse to reach the output end of the line,
which is the neuron's input, and to leave the line. It is clear that $0<s\le\Delta$. In what follows,
we use the time to live $s$ only at moments when an ISI starts (just after triggering).
Now it is worth to notice that each triggering starts a new ISI.
And at the beginning of any ISI the line is never empty, but
holds an impulse. This happens for the following reasons:
\begin{itemize}
\item[a)] If neuron is triggered by an impulse from the Poisson input stream, and the line was
empty just before that moment, then the emitted impulse enters the line.
At that moment the line is characterized with $s=\Delta$.
\item[b)] If neuron is triggered by an impulse from the Poisson input stream, and the line already
conveys an impulse at that moment with time to live $s$, then that same impulse with that same
time to live is retained at the beginning of the ISI that starts after that triggering, and the line is
characterized with that same $s$.
\item[c)] If neuron is triggered by an impulse from the line, then the line is empty at the firing moment
and the emitted impulse enters the line. After that moment the line is characterized
with $s=\Delta$.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Proof outline}
We expect that defined in nn. \ref{neuron}, \ref{line} system of neuron with delayed
feedback line fed with Poisson stream is in its stationary regime. This can be achieved
if the system functions long enough that its initial state is forgotten.
In the stationary regime, let $p(t_n,\dots,t_1)$ denotes the
joint probability density function of neuron with delayed feedback.
The probability to get, in the output, starting from the beginning, $n$
consecutive ISIs $t'_1,\dots,t'_n$ such that $t'_i\in[t_i;t_i+dt_i[$, $i=1,\dots,n$
with infinitesimal $dt_i$ is given by $p(t_n,\dots,t_1)dt_1\dots dt_n$.
Let $p(t_{n+1}\mid t_n,\dots,t_0)dt_{n+1}$ denotes the conditional probability
to get the duration of $(n+2)$-th ISI in $[t_{n+1};t_{n+1}+dt_{n+1}[$ provided
that previous $n+1$ ISIs had duration $t_n,\dots,t_0$, respectively.
Now we reformulate in terms of probability density functions
the definition from \cite[Ch.2 \S 6]{Doob1953}:
\begin{definition}
The sequence of random variables $\{t_{j}\}$, taking values in $\Omega$, is called the Markov chain of the order $n\ge0$, if
\begin{displaymath}
\forall_{m > n} \forall_{t_0\in\Omega}\ldots \forall_{t_m\in\Omega}\
p(t_{m}\mid t_{m-1},\ldots,t_{0})
= p(t_{m}\mid t_{m-1},\ldots,t_{m-n}),
\end{displaymath}
and this equation does not hold for any $n'<n$.
\end{definition}
In particular, taking $m=n+1$, we have the necessary condition
\begin{multline}
\label{def}
p(t_{n+1}\mid t_{n},\ldots,t_{1},t_{0})
= p(t_{n+1}\mid t_{n},\ldots,t_{1}),~~
t_i\in\Omega,~ i=0,\ldots,n+1,
\end{multline}
required for the stochastic process $\{t_{j}\}$ to be $n$-order Markov chain.
In the case of ISIs one reads $\Omega=\mathbb{R^+}$.
We intend to prove that the relation (\ref{def}) does not hold for any $n$. For this purpose
we calculate exact expression for $p(t_{n+1}\mid t_n,\dots,t_0)$ as
\begin{equation}\label{defcond}
p(t_{n+1}\mid t_n,\dots,t_0)=
\frac{p(t_{n+1}, t_n,\dots,t_0)}{p(t_n,\dots,t_0)}
\end{equation}
from which it will be clearly seen that the $t_0$-dependence in $p(t_{n+1}\mid t_n,\dots,t_0)$
cannot be eliminated whatever large the $n$ is.
As it is seen from (\ref{defcond}), we need initially to calculate exact expressions
for $p(t_n,\dots,t_0)$ with arbitrary $n$. In \cite{Vidybida2012}, for the binding
neuron model with threshold 2
this is done by introducing an auxiliary stochastic process with events $(t_i,s_i)$,
where $s_i$ is the time to live at the beginning of ISI $t_i$. It was proven that
the sequence of events
$(t_i,s_i)$, $i=0,1,\dots$, is Markov chain, which helps to calculate the joint probability density
$p((t_n,s_n),\dots,(t_0,s_0))$ and then $p(t_n,\dots,t_0)$ as marginal probability
by integrating it over $]0;\Delta]$ with respect to each $s_i$. To simplify this
approach, it is worth to notice that in the sequence of consecutive random events
$(t_n,s_n),\dots,(t_0,s_0)$ only the values of variables
$t_n,\dots,t_1,t_0,s_0$ are fairly random. Indeed,
with $t_0,s_0$ given, one can figure out exact value for the $s_1$: if $t_0<s_0$ then
$s_1=s_0-t_0$, and $s_1=\Delta$ otherwise. Now, with $t_1,s_1$ known, the same way it is
possible to find the exact value of $s_2$ and so on. This allows one to reconstruct unambiguously
all the values $s_1,\dots,s_n$ from the given sequence of values of $t_n,\dots,t_1,t_0,s_0$.
Having this in mind, we introduce the conditional joint probability density
$p(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0\mid s)$, which we use to calculate required joint pdfs as follows
\begin{equation}\label{pdfs}
p(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0)=\int\limits_0^\Delta p(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0\mid s)f(s)\,ds,
\end{equation}
where $s$ (dented previously as $s_0$) is the time to live at the beginning of ISI $t_0$,
$f(s)$ is the stationary pdf which describes distribution of times to live
at the beginning of any ISI
in the stationary regime. In what follows we analyze the structure of functions
$f(s)$ and $p(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0\mid s)$. It appears that $f(s)$ has a singular
component $a\delta(s-\Delta)$ with $a>0$, and $p(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0\mid s)$
has a $\delta$-function-type singularities at definite hyper-planes in the $(n+2)$-dimensional
space of its variables $(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0)$.
After integration in (\ref{pdfs}), some of those $\delta$-functions
will survive, and one of those survived has its argument depending on $t_0$.
The latter statement depends on exact value of ISIs in the sequence $t_{n+1},\dots,t_0$.
Here, we limit our consideration to the domain in the $(n+2)$-dimensional
space of variables $(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0)$, which is defined as follows
\begin{equation}\label{Domain}
\sum\limits_{i=0}^n t_i<\Delta.
\end{equation}
Notice that $t_{n+1}$ is not involved in (\ref{Domain}).
The $t_0$-dependent $\delta$-function
will as well survive in the $p(t_{n+1}\mid t_n,\dots,t_0)$ for any $n$, which will complete
the proof that the condition (\ref{def}) cannot be satisfied for any $n$.
A question remains of whether the domain (\ref{Domain}) has a strictly positive probability.
This indeed takes place due to positiveness of pdfs $p(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0)$ for any positive values of
$(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0)$. The latter follows from the exact expressions for $p(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0)$
given in n. \ref{Form}, Eq. (\ref{pn}).
\section{The proof}
\subsection{Structure of functions $p(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0 \mid s)$}
Expect that the inequality (\ref{Domain}) holds.
In order to perform integration in (\ref{pdfs}), we split the integration domain
into the following $n+2$ disjoint sub-domains:
$$
D_k=\left]\sum\limits_{i=0}^{k-1}t_i\,;~\sum\limits_{i=0}^{k}t_i\right],~
k=0,\dots,n,~~
D_{n+1}=\left]\sum\limits_{i=0}^{n}t_i\,;~\Delta\right]\,.
$$
It is clear that
$$
\bigcup\limits_{k=0}^{n+1}D_k = ]0;\Delta].
$$
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.66\textwidth,angle=0]{ts-cases-1.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{relk}Mutual disposition in time of $s$ and $t_0,\dots,t_n$ if $s\in D_k$.}
\end{figure}
The conditional pdf $p(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0 \mid s)$ has different structure at different domains.
If $s\in D_k$, then a relation between $s$ and $t_i$ is as shown in Fig. \ref{relk}.
As it could be suggested by Fig. \ref{relk}, the first $k-1$ ISIs are produced with the delay
line not involved. The $k$-th ISI is generated with the line involved. The corresponding
time to live is $s_k=s-\sum_{i=0}^{k-1} t_i\le t_k$, the next time to live is $s_{k+1}=\Delta$.
Therefore, the structure of $p(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0 \mid s)$ at $D_k$ is as follows
\begin{equation}\label{struk}
p(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0 \mid s)=p(t_{n+1},\dots,t_{k+1} \mid \Delta)\,
p\left(t_k \mid s-\sum\limits_{i=0}^{k-1} t_i\right)
\prod\limits_{i=0}^{k-1}p^0(t_i),
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.66\textwidth,angle=0]{tsn-cases-1.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{reln}Mutual disposition in time of $s$ and $t_0,\dots,t_n$ if $s\in D_{n+1}$.}
\end{figure}
where $k=0,1,\dots,n$. And if $s\in D_{n+1}$, then relation between $s$ and $t_i$
is as shown in Fig. \ref{reln}. This suggests the following structure for
$p(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0 \mid s)$
\begin{equation}\label{strun+1}
p(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0 \mid s)=
p\left(t_{n+1} \mid s-\sum\limits_{i=0}^{n} t_i\right)
\prod\limits_{i=0}^{n}p^0(t_i),~ s\in D_{n+1}.
\end{equation}
Here $p(t\mid s)$ denotes the conditional pdf to get ISI of duration $t$ if
at its beginning, time to live of impulse in the feedback line is $s$.
By utilizing the same reasoning with (\ref{Domain}) taken into account,
one can represent the first factor in (\ref{struk})
as follows
\begin{equation}\label{strukf}
p(t_{n+1},\dots,t_{k+1} \mid \Delta)=
p\left(t_{n+1} \mid \Delta-\sum\limits_{i=k+1}^{n} t_i\right)
\prod\limits_{i=k+1}^{n}p^0(t_i).
\end{equation}
Representation of $p(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0 \mid s)$ by means of $p^0(t)$ and $p(t\mid s)$,
similar to that displayed in (\ref{struk}), (\ref{strun+1}), (\ref{strukf}),
can be as well constructed if (\ref{Domain}) does not hold.
For our purpose it is enough to have (\ref{struk}), (\ref{strun+1}) and (\ref{strukf}).
\subsection{Structure of function $p(t \mid s)$}
Expect that at the beginning of an ISI, there is an impulse in the
feedback line with time to live $s$. Then the probability that this ISI
will have its duration $t<s$ does not depend on the feedback
line presence. Therefore,
\begin{equation}\label{pinit}\nonumber
t<s\, \Rightarrow\, p(t\mid s) = p^0(t).
\end{equation}
The probability to get exactly $t=s$ is not zero, because in this case
the impulse, which triggers the neuron and finishes the ISI
under consideration comes from the delay line. In order
this to happen, it is necessary and sufficient that the following two
events take place: (i) the neuron does not fire at the interval $]0;s[$;
(ii) at the moment $s$, the neuron, due to previous stimulation from the Poisson stream, achieves
such a state that adding one more input impulse will trigger it.
The probability of (i) and (ii) is $\frac{p^0(s)}{\lambda}$, which can be easily concluded
from the definition of $p^0(t)$. Thus,
\begin{equation}\label{pd}\nonumber
t\in\,\,]s-\epsilon;s+\epsilon[\,\, \Rightarrow\, p(t\mid s) = \frac{p^0(t)}{\lambda}\delta(s-t)
\end{equation}
with infinitesimal $\epsilon>0$. If the neuron still not triggered at moment $s$,
then it is triggered by an input impulse from the Poisson stream at $t>s$. The probability to
get such an impulse in $[t;t+dt[$ is $\lambda dt$. Therefore, one can expect
that for $t>s$, $p(t\mid s)\le\lambda$.
Based on the above reasoning we represent $p(t\mid s)$ in the following form
\begin{equation}\label{pstruc}
p(t\mid s) = p^b(t\mid s) + \frac{p^0(t)}{\lambda}\delta(s-t),
\end{equation}
where $p^b(t\mid s)$ is a bounded function\footnote{Compare this with \cite[Eq. (7)]{Vidybida2008a}, where $p(t\mid s)$ is calculated exactly for the binding neuron model.}.
\subsection{Structure of probability density function $f(s)$}
In the stationary regime, the pdf $f(s)$ must satisfy the following equation
\begin{equation}\label{trans}
f(s) = \int\limits_0^\Delta \mathbf{P}(s\mid s') f(s') ds',
\end{equation}
where the transition function $\mathbf{P}(s\mid s')$ gives the probability density
to find at the beginning of an ISI an impulse in the line with time to live $s$
provided at the beginning of the previous ISI, there was an impulse with time to live $s'$.
To determine exact expression for $\mathbf{P}(s\mid s')$ we take into account that
after single firing, time to live can either decrease, or become equal $\Delta$.
Therefore,
\begin{equation}\label{trans1}
s'\le s <\Delta\,\,\Rightarrow \, \mathbf{P}(s\mid s')=0.
\end{equation}
If $s<s'$, then the firing, which causes transition from $s'$ to $s$, happens
without the line involved. Therefore,
\begin{equation}\label{trans2}
0 < s < s'\,\,\Rightarrow \, \mathbf{P}(s\mid s')ds = p^0(s'-s)ds.
\end{equation}
Finally, it is possible that starting from $s'$ one obtains $s=\Delta$ after
the next firing. In order this to happen, it is necessary and sufficient that
no firing happens during $s'$ units of time. And this happens with probability
$$
\mathbf{P}^0(s') = 1 - \int\limits_0^{s'} p^0(t)dt.
$$
Having this in mind, one could conclude that in the plane $(s,s')$, at the straight line $s=\Delta$,
$s'$ --- any,
the $\mathbf{P}(s\mid s')$ has singularity of the following form:
\begin{equation}\label{trans3}
\mathbf{P}^0(s')\delta(s-\Delta).
\end{equation}
Now, with (\ref{trans1})-(\ref{trans3}) taken into account, Eq. (\ref{trans})
can be rewritten as follows
\begin{equation}\label{feq}\nonumber
f(s)=\int\limits_s^\Delta p^0(s'-s)f(s')ds' +
\delta(s-\Delta)\int\limits_0^\Delta \mathbf{P}^0(s') f(s')ds'.
\end{equation}
It is clear from this equation that $f(s)$ has the following form\footnote{Compare this with \cite[Eqs. (14)-(16)]{Vidybida2008a}, where $f(s)$ is calculated exactly for the binding neuron model.}
\begin{equation}\label{ff}
f(s)=g(s) + a\delta(s-\Delta),
\end{equation}
where $a>0$ and $g(s)$ is bounded and vanishes out of interval $]0;\Delta]$.
\subsection{Form of $p(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0)$ and $p(t_{n},\dots,t_0)$ after integration in (\ref{pdfs})}
Let $D=\bigcup\limits_{k=0}^n D_k$.
At $D$, representations (\ref{struk}) and (\ref{strukf}) are valid. Also at $D$,
$f(s)$ reduces to $g(s)$.
Therefore,
\begin{multline}\label{intD}
\int\limits_D p(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0\mid s) f(s) =
\\=
\sum\limits_{k=0}^np\left(t_{n+1}\mid \Delta -\sum\limits_{i=k+1}^n t_i\right)
\prod\limits_{\vbox{\footnotesize\hbox{$i=0$}\hbox{$i\ne k$}}}^np^0(t_i)
\int\limits_{D_k}p\left(t_k\mid s-\sum\limits_{i=0}^{k-1} t_i\right) g(s)ds.
\end{multline}
Taking into account (\ref{pstruc}) it can be concluded that expression (\ref{intD}),
after performing integration, does not have any term with $\delta$-function
depending on $t_0$.
Consider now the remaining part of integral in (\ref{pdfs}). With (\ref{strun+1})
taken into account one has:
$
\int\limits_{D_{n+1}} p(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0\mid s) f(s)
=
\prod\limits_{i=0}^n p^0(t_i)
\int\limits_{D_{n+1}}p\left(t_{n+1}\mid s-\sum\limits_{i=0}^{n}t_i\right) f(s)ds.
$
After substituting here expressions (\ref{pstruc}), (\ref{ff}) one obtains four terms:
\begin{multline}\label{intDn+1}
\int\limits_{D_{n+1}} p(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0\mid s) f(s) =
\\=
\prod\limits_{i=0}^n p^0(t_i)
\int\limits_{D_{n+1}}p\left(t_{n+1}\mid s-\sum\limits_{i=0}^{n}t_i\right) f(s)ds
\\=
\prod\limits_{i=0}^n p^0(t_i)
\int\limits_{D_{n+1}}p^b\left(t_{n+1}\mid s-\sum\limits_{i=0}^{n}t_i\right) g(s)ds
\\+
a \prod\limits_{i=0}^n p^0(t_i)
p^b\left(t_{n+1}\mid \Delta-\sum\limits_{i=0}^{n}t_i\right)
\\+
\frac{1}{\lambda}\prod\limits_{i=0}^{n+1} p^0(t_i) g\left(\sum\limits_{i=0}^{n+1}t_i\right)
+
\frac{a}{\lambda}\prod\limits_{i=0}^{n+1} p^0(t_i)
\delta\left(\Delta-\sum\limits_{i=0}^{n+1}t_i\right).
\end{multline}
After performing integration, only the fourth term here includes a $\delta$-function.
And argument of this $\delta$-function does depend on $t_0$.
After taking (\ref{intD}) and (\ref{intDn+1}) together we conclude that the required joint
probability density has the following form
\begin{equation}\label{pn+1}
p(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0)=p^w(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0)+
\frac{a}{\lambda}\prod\limits_{i=0}^{n+1} p^0(t_i)
\delta\left(\Delta-\sum\limits_{i=0}^{n+1}t_i\right),
\end{equation}
where function $p^w(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0)$ does not have singularities depending on $t_0$.
\subsubsection{Form of $p(t_{n},\dots,t_0)$ after integration}\label{Form}
If (\ref{Domain}) is satisfied, then we have similarly to (\ref{struk}), (\ref{strun+1})
\begin{multline}\nonumber
p(t_{n},\dots,t_0 \mid s)=p(t_{n},\dots,t_{k+1} \mid \Delta)\,
p\left(t_k \mid s-\sum\limits_{i=0}^{k-1} t_i\right)
\prod\limits_{i=0}^{k-1}p^0(t_i),
\\
s\in D_k,\quad k=0,\dots,n-1,
\end{multline}
$$
p(t_{n},\dots,t_0 \mid s)=
p\left(t_n \mid s-\sum\limits_{i=0}^{n-1} t_i\right)
\prod\limits_{i=0}^{n-1}p^0(t_i),\quad s\in D_n.
$$
Again due to (\ref{Domain}), and in analogy with (\ref{strukf}) we have instead
of the last two equations the following one:
\begin{multline}\label{strn}
p(t_{n},\dots,t_0 \mid s)=
p\left(t_k \mid s-\sum\limits_{i=0}^{k-1} t_i\right)
\prod\limits_{\vbox{\footnotesize\hbox{$i=0$}\hbox{$i\ne k$}}}^{n}p^0(t_i),
\\
s\in D_k,\quad k=0,\dots,n.
\end{multline}
It is clear that expression similar to (\ref{strun+1}) turns here into the following
\begin{equation}\label{strn+1}
p(t_{n},\dots,t_0 \mid s)=
\prod\limits_{i=0}^{n}p^0(t_i),\quad s\in D_{n+1}.
\end{equation}
Now, due to (\ref{strn}), (\ref{strn+1}) we have
\begin{multline}\label{pn}
p(t_{n},\dots,t_0)=\int\limits_0^\Delta p(t_{n},\dots,t_0 \mid s)f(s)ds=
\\=
\sum\limits_{k=0}^n
\prod\limits_{\vbox{\footnotesize\hbox{$i=0$}\hbox{$i\ne k$}}}^{n}p^0(t_i)
\int\limits_{D_k}
p\left(t_k \mid s-\sum\limits_{i=0}^{k-1} t_i\right)
g(s) ds+
\\+
\prod\limits_{i=0}^{n}p^0(t_i)\int\limits_{D_{n+1}}f(s) ds.
\end{multline}
\subsection{$t_0$-dependence cannot be eliminated in $p(t_{n+1} \mid t_n,\dots,t_0)$}
Now, with representations (\ref{pn+1}) for $p(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0)$ and
(\ref{pn}) for $p(t_{n},\dots,t_0)$ we can pose a question about the form
of $p(t_{n+1}\mid t_n,\dots, t_0)$. The latter can be found as defined in (\ref{defcond}).
First of all notice that due to (\ref{pn}) and Cond4,
$p(t_{n},\dots,t_0)$ is strictly positive for positive ISIs.
This allows us to use it as denominator in the definition (\ref{defcond}).
Second, it can be further concluded from (\ref{pn}) and Cond4, that $p(t_{n},\dots,t_0)$ is
bounded, and therefore does not include any singularity of $\delta$-function type.
The latter means that any singularity contained in the $p(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0)$
appears as well in the $p(t_{n+1}\mid t_n,\dots, t_0)$. It follows from the above
that the conditional pdf $p(t_{n+1}\mid t_n,\dots, t_0)$ can be represented in the
following form:
\begin{equation}\label{firepr}
p(t_{n+1}\mid t_n,\dots, t_0) = p^w(t_{n+1}\mid t_n,\dots, t_0)+
Q(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0)\delta\left(\Delta-\sum\limits_{i=0}^{n+1}t_i\right),
\end{equation}
where $p^w(t_{n+1}\mid t_n,\dots, t_0)$ does not contain any $\delta$-function
depending on $t_0$, and $Q(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0)$ is strictly positive bounded function:
$$
Q(t_{n+1},\dots,t_0)=
\frac{a\prod\limits_{i=0}^{n+1}p^0(t_i)}{\lambda p(t_{n},\dots,t_0)}.
$$
The representation (\ref{firepr}) thus proves unequivocally that for any $n$,
conditional pdf $p(t_{n+1}\mid t_n,\dots, t_0)$ does depend on $t_0$
(the second term in (\ref{firepr}))
and this dependence cannot be eliminated.
\section{Conclusions and Discussion}
We have proven here that any neuronal model, which satisfies Cond0-Cond4, above,
and is equipped with a delayed feedback, will display essentially non-Markov activity
expressed in terms of output ISIs, when stimulated with Poisson stream.
This has a consequence for admissible approaches
while modeling activity of neuronal networks with stochastic behavior. Indeed, in
a reverberating network, a delayed feedback mediated by other neurons is always present.
Our result suggests that in this case, activity of individual neurons in the network
should be essentially non-Markov. Another situation in networks with instantaneous
interneuronal communication. In the case of no delay communications, the neuronal
activity can well be Markov, or even Poisson, see example in \cite{Izhikevich2003}.
We used here a single neuron with delayed feedback as the simplest case of reverberating
"network". At the same time, neurons which send to themselves their output impulses
are known in real nervous systems, \cite{Nicoll1982,Bekkers1998}. Therefore, our conclusions
about essentially non-Markov behavior should be valid for those neurons even without taking
into account their involvement in a wider network activity.
The set of conditions Cond0-Cond4 while being rather natural and wide enough, leaves out
of our consideration many neuronal models known in neuroscience. E.g., Cond2 excludes
models with spike latency. Cond3 excludes models with internal memory extending beyond
a single ISI duration.
Thus, we do not consider here
partial afterspike resetting \cite{Rospars1993a,Lnsk1999}, threshold fatigue \cite{Chacron2003},
another types of adaptation, like multi-timescale adaptive threshold \cite{Kobayashi}.
Any kind of adaptation in individual neuron is by itself able to bring about a kind
of memory in the neuronal output stream. Therefore, considering neurons without adaptation
we demonstrate here, that delayed feedback without additional memory-like mechanisms
known for neurons makes neuronal output essentially non-Markov.
Another limitation is Cond1 --- we use a Poisson process as a stimulus. It seems that
the proof given here can be extended to a wide class of renewal processes taken as stimuli.
This will be checked in further work.
|
\section{Additional results of off-$Z$ search}
\label{app:edge}
This section provides additional results of the off-$Z$ search.
The expected backgrounds and observed yields in the below-$Z$ and above-$Z$ regions for VR, SR-2j-btag, and SR-4j-btag,
are presented in Tables~\ref{tab:VR}, \ref{tab:SR2jbtag}, and \ref{tab:SR4jbtag}, respectively.
\input{results-VR}
\input{results-SR2jbtag2.tex}
\input{results-SR4jbtag2.tex}
\subsubsection{Flavour-symmetric background in the on-$Z$ search}
The flavour-symmetry method uses a control region, CR$e\mu$ in the case of the on-$Z$ search,
which is defined to be identical to the signal region, but in the different-flavour $e\mu$ channel.
In CR$e\mu$, the expected contamination due to GGM signal processes of interest is $<3$~\%.
The number of data events observed ($N^{\text{data}}_{e\mu}$) in this control region is corrected by subtracting the expected contribution from backgrounds that are not flavour symmetric.
The background with the largest impact on this correction is that due to fake leptons, with the estimate provided by the matrix method, described in Sect.~\ref{sec:fakes}, being used in the subtraction.
All other contributions, which include $WZ$, $ZZ$, $tZ$ and \ttbar$+W(W)/Z$ processes, are taken directly from MC simulation.
This corrected number, $N^{\text{data,corr}}_{e\mu}$, is related to the expected number in the same-flavour channels, $N^{\text{est}}_{ee/\mu\mu}$, by the following relations:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:NestData}
\nonumber N_{ee}^{\mathrm{est}} &=& \frac{1}{2} N_{e\mu}^{\mathrm{data,corr}} k_{ee} \alpha, \\
N_{\mu\mu}^{\mathrm{est}} &=& \frac{1}{2} N_{e\mu}^{\mathrm{data,corr}} k_{\mu\mu} \alpha,
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent where $k_{ee}$ and $k_{\mu\mu}$ are electron and muon selection efficiency factors and $\alpha$ accounts for the different trigger efficiencies for same-flavour and different-flavour dilepton combinations.
The selection efficiency factors are calculated using the ratio of dielectron and dimuon events in
VRZ according to:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:alpha}
\nonumber k_{ee} = \sqrt{\frac{N_{ee}^{\mathrm{data}}{\rm (VRZ)}}{N_{\mu\mu}^{\mathrm{data}}{\rm (VRZ)}}}, \\
\nonumber k_{\mu\mu} = \sqrt{\frac{N_{\mu\mu}^{\mathrm{data}}{\rm (VRZ)}}{N_{ee}^{\mathrm{data}}{\rm (VRZ)}}}, \\
\alpha=\frac{\sqrt{\epsilon_{\mathrm{trig}}^{ee} \epsilon_{\mathrm{trig}}^{\mu\mu}}}{\epsilon_{\mathrm{trig}}^{e\mu}},
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent where $\epsilon_{\mathrm{trig}}^{ee}$, $\epsilon_{\mathrm{trig}}^{\mu\mu}$ and $\epsilon_{\mathrm{trig}}^{e\mu}$ are the efficiencies of the dielectron, dimuon and electron--muon trigger configurations,
respectively, and $N_{ee(\mu\mu)}^{\mathrm{data}}{\rm (VRZ)}$ is the number of $ee$ ($\mu\mu$) data events in VRZ.
These selection efficiency factors are calculated separately for the cases where both leptons fall within the barrel, both fall within the endcap regions, and for barrel--endcap combinations.
This is motivated by the fact that the trigger
efficiencies differ in the central and more forward regions of the detector.
This estimate is found to be consistent with that resulting from the use of single global $k$ factors,
which provides a simpler but less precise estimate.
In each case the $k$ factors are close to $1.0$,
and the $N_{ee}^{\mathrm{est}}$ or $N_{\mu\mu}^{\mathrm{est}}$ estimates obtained using $k$ factors from each configuration are consistent with one another to within $0.2\sigma$.
The flavour-symmetric background estimate was chosen as the nominal method prior to examining the data yields in the signal region,
since it relies less heavily on simulation and provides the most precise estimate.
This data-driven method is cross-checked using the $Z$ boson mass sidebands ($m_{\ell\ell} \notin [81, 101]$~GeV)
to fit the \ttbar\ MC events to data in a top control region, CRT.
The results are then extrapolated to the signal region in the $Z$ boson mass window, as illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:Z-regions}.
All other backgrounds estimated using the flavour-symmetry method are taken directly from MC simulation for this cross-check.
Here, \ensuremath{Z/\gamma^{*}+\text{jets}}\ MC events are used to model the small residual \ensuremath{Z/\gamma^{*}+\text{jets}}\ background in the control region, while the jet smearing method provides the estimate in the signal region.
The normalisation of the \ttbar\ sample obtained from the fit is $0.52 \pm 0.12$ times the nominal MC normalisation, where the uncertainty includes all experimental and theoretical sources of uncertainty as discussed in Sect.~\ref{sec:syst}.
This result is compatible with observations from other ATLAS analyses, which indicate that MC simulation tends to overestimate data
in regions dominated by $\ttbar$ events accompanied by much jet activity~\cite{Aad:2014kra,Aad:2014wea}.
MC simulation has also been seen to overestimate contributions from \ttbar\ processes in regions with high \met~\cite{Aad:2015mia}.
In selections with high \met\, but including lower $H_{\text{T}}$, such as those used in the off-$Z$ analysis, this downwards scaling is less dramatic.
The results of the cross-check using the $Z$ boson mass sidebands are shown in Table~\ref{tab:results-flsym}, with the sideband fit yielding a prediction slightly higher than, but consistent with, the flavour-symmetry estimate.
This test is repeated varying the MC simulation sample used to model the \ttbar\ background.
The nominal {\sc Powheg+Pythia} \ttbar\ MC sample is replaced with a sample using {\sc Alpgen}, and the fit is performed again.
The same test is performed using a {\sc Powheg} \ttbar\ MC sample that uses {\sc Herwig}, rather than {\sc Pythia}, for the parton shower.
In all cases the estimates are found to be consistent within $1 \sigma$.
This cross-check using \ttbar\ MC events is further validated in identical regions with intermediate \met\ (150 $<$ \met\ $<$ 225 GeV) and slightly looser \HT\ requirements (\HT$>500$ GeV), as illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:Z-regions}.
Here the extrapolation in $m_{\ell\ell}$ between the sideband region (VRT) and the on-$Z$ region (VRTZ) shows consistent results within approximately $1\sigma$ between
data and the fitted prediction.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{RegionsSketch_METvsMll-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\caption{Diagram indicating the position in the \met\ versus dilepton invariant mass plane of SR-Z, the control region CRT, and the two validation regions (VRT and VRTZ) used to validate the sideband fit for the on-$Z$ search. VRT and VRTZ have lower \HT\ thresholds than CRT and SR-Z.}
\label{fig:Z-regions}
\end{figure*}
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
Signal & Flavour-symmetry & Sideband fit \\
region & & \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
SR-Z $ee$ & $2.8 \pm 1.4$ & $ 4.9 \pm 1.5 $ \\ [+0.05cm]
SR-Z $\mu\mu$ & $3.3 \pm 1.6$ & $ 5.3 \pm 1.9 $ \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{{\small The number of events for the flavour-symmetric background estimate in the on-$Z$ signal region (SR-Z) using the data-driven method based on data in CR$e\mu$.
This is compared with the prediction for the sum of the flavour-symmetric backgrounds ($WW$, $tW$, \ttbar\ and $Z \rightarrow \tau\tau$) from a sideband fit to data in CRT.
In each case the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are indicated. }}
\label{tab:results-flsym}
\end{table}
The flavour-symmetry method is also tested in these VRs.
An overview of the nominal background predictions, using the flavour-symmetry method, in CRT and these VRs is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:onZVRs}.
This summary includes CRT, VRT, VRTZ and two variations of VRT and VRTZ.
The first variation, denoted VRT/VRTZ (high $H_{\text{T}}$), shows VRT/ VRTZ with an increased $H_{\text{T}}$ threshold ($H_{\text{T}}>600$~GeV),
which provides a sample of events very close to the SR.
The second variation, denoted VRT/VRTZ (high \met), shows VRT/ VRTZ with the same \met\ cut as SR-Z, but the requirement $400<H_{\text{T}}<600$~GeV is added to provide a sample of events very close to the SR.
In all cases the data are consistent with the prediction.
GGM signal processes near the boundary of the expected excluded region are expected to contribute little to the normalisation regions,
with contamination at the level of up to 4~\% in CRT and 3~\% in VRT.
The corresponding contamination in VRTZ is expected to be $\sim 10$~\% across most of the relevant parameter space,
increasing to a maximum value of $\sim$50~\% in the region near $m(\tilde{g})=700$~\GeV, $\mu=200$~\GeV.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{SummaryPlot_onZAnalysis_NOcutsDefs_withoutSR-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\caption{The observed and expected yields in CRT and the VRs in the $Z$ boson mass sidebands (left) and the $Z$ boson mass window (right) regions.
The bottom plot shows the difference in standard deviations between the observed and expected yields.
The backgrounds due to $WZ$, $ZZ$ or rare top processes, as well as from lepton fakes, are included under ``Other Backgrounds''.
}
\label{fig:onZVRs}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Flavour-symmetric background in the off-$Z$ search}
The background estimation method of Eq.~(\ref{eq:NestData}) is extended to allow a prediction
of the background dilepton mass shape, which is used explicitly to discriminate signal from background in the off-$Z$ search.
In addition to the $k$ and $\alpha$ correction factors, a third correction
factor $S(i)$ is introduced (where $i$ indicates the dilepton mass bin):
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:NestData2}
\nonumber N_{ee}^{\mathrm{est}}(i) &=& \frac{1}{2} N_{e\mu}^{\mathrm{data,corr}}(i) k_{ee} \alpha S_{ee}(i), \\
N_{\mu\mu}^{\mathrm{est}}(i) &=& \frac{1}{2} N_{e\mu}^{\mathrm{data,corr}}(i) k_{\mu\mu} \alpha S_{\mu\mu}(i).
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent These shape correction factors account for different reconstructed dilepton mass shapes in the $ee$, $\mu\mu$, and $e\mu$
channels, which result from two effects. First, the offline selection efficiencies for electrons and muons depend differently
on the lepton \pt\ and $\eta$.
For electrons, the offline selection efficiency increases slowly with \pt, while it has very little dependence on \pt\ for muons.
Second, the combinations of single-lepton and dilepton triggers used for the $ee$, $\mu\mu$, and $e\mu$ channels
have different efficiencies with respect to the offline selection.
In particular, for $e\mu$ events the trigger efficiency with respect to the offline selection at low \ensuremath{m_{\ell\ell}}\ is 80\%, which is 10--15\% lower
than the trigger efficiencies in the $ee$ and $\mu\mu$ channels.
To correct for these two effects, \ttbar\ MC simulation is used.
The dilepton mass shape in the $ee$ or $\mu\mu$ channel is compared to that in the $e\mu$ channel,
after scaling the latter by the $\alpha$- and $k$-factor trigger and lepton selection efficiency corrections.
The ratio of the dilepton mass distributions, $N_{ee}(\ensuremath{m_{\ell\ell}})/N_{e\mu}(\ensuremath{m_{\ell\ell}})$ or $N_{\mu\mu}(\ensuremath{m_{\ell\ell}})/N_{e\mu}(\ensuremath{m_{\ell\ell}})$, is fitted with a second-order polynomial,
which is then applied as a correction factor, along with $\alpha$ and $k$, to the $e\mu$ distribution in data.
These correction factors have an impact on the predicted background yields
of approximately a few percent in the $ee$ channel and up to $\sim$10--15~\% in the $\mu\mu$ channel, depending on the signal region.
The background estimation methodology is validated in a region with exactly two jets and $100<\MET<150$~\GeV (VR-offZ).
The flavour-symmetric category contributes more than 95~\% of the total background in this region.
The dominant systematic uncertainty on the background prediction is the 6~\% uncertainty on the trigger
efficiency $\alpha$-factor.
The observed dilepton mass shapes are compared to the SM expectations in Fig.~\ref{fig:edge-VR},
indicating consistency between the data and the expected background yields.
The observed yields and expected backgrounds in the below-$Z$ and above-$Z$ regions are presented in~\ref{app:edge}.
For signal models near the edge of the sensitivity of this analysis, the contamination from signal events in VR-offZ is less than 3~\%.
\begin{figure*}[!tbh]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig_05a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fig_05b.pdf}
\caption{ The observed and expected dilepton mass distributions in the electron (left) and muon (right) channel of the
validation region (VR-offZ) of the off-$Z$ search.
Data (black points) are compared to the sum of expected backgrounds (solid histograms).
The vertical dashed lines indicate the $80<\ensuremath{m_{\ell\ell}}<110$~\GeV\ region, which is used to normalise the \ensuremath{Z+\text{jets}}\ background.
Example signal models (dashed lines) are overlaid, with $m(\tilde{q})$, $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2})/m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1})$, $m(\tilde{\ell})/m(\tilde{\nu})$, and $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ of each benchmark point being indicated in the figure legend.
The bottom plots show the ratio of the data to expected background. The error bars indicate the statistical uncertainty in data,
while the shaded band indicates the total background uncertainty. The last bin contains the overflow.
\label{fig:edge-VR}}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Experimental uncertainties}
The experimental uncertainties arise from the modelling of both the signal processes and backgrounds estimated using MC simulation.
Uncertainties associated with the jet energy scale (JES) are assessed using both simulation and in-situ measurements~\cite{JES,JES2}.
The JES uncertainty is influenced by the event topology, flavour composition, jet \pt\ and $\eta$,
as well as by the pile-up.
The jet energy resolution (JER) is also affected by pile-up, and is estimated using in-situ measurements~\cite{atlas-jer}.
An uncertainty associated with the JVF requirement for selected jets is also applied by varying the JVF threshold up (0.28) and down (0.21) with respect to the nominal value of 0.25.
This range of variation is chosen based on a comparison of the
efficiency of a JVF requirement in dijet events in data and MC simulation.
To distinguish between heavy-flavour-enriched and light-flavour-enriched event samples, $b$-jet tagging is used.
The uncertainties associated with the $b$-tag\-ging efficiency and the light/charm quark mis-tag
rates are measured in \ttbar-enriched samples~\cite{ATLAS-CONF-2014-004,ATLAS-CONF-2012-043} and
dijet samples~\cite{ATLAS-CONF-2012-040}, respectively.
Small uncertainties on the lepton energy scales and momentum resolutions are measured in
$Z \rightarrow \ell^+\ell^-$, $J/\psi \rightarrow \ell^+\ell^-$ and $W \rightarrow \ell^{\pm}\nu$
event samples~\cite{electronref}.
These are propagated to the \met\ uncertainty, along with the uncertainties due to the JES and JER.
An additional uncertainty on the energy scale of topological clusters in the calorimeters not associated with
reconstructed objects (the \met\ soft term) is also applied to the \met calculation.
The trigger efficiency is assigned a 5~\% uncertainty following studies comparing the efficiency in simulation to that measured in $Z \rightarrow \ell^+ \ell^-$ events in data.
The data-driven background estimates are subject to uncertainties associated with the methods employed and the limited
number of events used in their estimation.
The \ensuremath{Z/\gamma^{*}+\text{jets}}\ background estimate has an uncertainty to account for
differences between pseudo-data and MC events, the choice of seed region definition,
the statistical precision of the seed region, and the jet response functions used to create the pseudo-data.
Uncertainties in the flavour-symmetric background estimate include those related to the electron and muon selection efficiency factors $k_{ee}$ and $k_{\mu\mu}$,
the trigger efficiency factor $\alpha$, and, for the off-$Z$ search only, the dilepton mass shape $S(i)$ reweighting factors.
Uncertainties attributed to the subtraction of the non-flavour-symmetric back\-grounds, and those due to limited statistical precision in the $e\mu$ control
regions, are also included.
Finally, an uncertainty derived from the difference in real-lepton efficiency observed in \ttbar\ and $Z \rightarrow \ell^+ \ell^-$ events is assigned to the fake-background prediction.
An additional uncertainty due to the number of events in the control samples used to derive the real efficiencies and fake rates is assigned to this background,
as well as a 20~\% uncertainty on the MC background subtraction in the control samples.
\subsection{Theoretical uncertainties on background processes}
For all backgrounds estimated from MC simulation, the following theoretical uncertainties are considered.
The uncertainties due to the choice of factorisation and renormalisation scales are calculated by varying the nominal values by a factor of two.
Uncertainties on the PDFs are evaluated following the prescription recommended by {\sc PDF4LHC}~\cite{Botje01}.
Total cross-section uncertainties of 22~\%~\cite{Campbell:2012} and 50~\% are applied to \ttbar~$+W$/$Z$ and \ttbar~$+WW$ sub-processes, respectively.
For the \ttbar~$+W$ and \ttbar~$+Z$ sub-processes, an additional uncertainty is evaluated by comparing samples generated with different numbers of partons,
to account for the impact of the finite number of partons generated in the nominal samples.
For the $WZ$ and $ZZ$ diboson samples, a parton shower uncertainty is estimated by comparing samples showered with {\sc Pythia} and
{\sc Herwig+Jimmy}~\cite{Corcella:2000bw,Butterworth:1996zw} and cross-section uncertainties of 5~\% and 7~\% are applied, respectively.
These cross-section uncertainties are estimated from variations of the value of the strong coupling constant, the PDF and the generator scales.
For the small contribution from $t+Z$, a 50~\% uncertainty is assigned.
Finally, a statistical uncertainty derived from the finite size of the MC samples used in the background estimation process is included.
\subsection{Dominant uncertainties on the background estimates}
The dominant uncertainties in each signal region, along with their values relative to the total background expectation, are summarised in Table~\ref{tab:syst}.
In all signal regions the largest uncertainty is that associated with the flavour-symmetric background.
The statistical uncertainty on the flavour-symmetric background due to the finite data yields in the $e\mu$ CRs is 24~\% in the on-$Z$ SR.
This statistical uncertainty is also the dominant uncertainty for all SRs of the off-$Z$ analysis except for SR-loose, for which
the systematic uncertainty on the flavour-symmetric background prediction dominates.
In SR-Z the combined MC generator and parton shower modelling uncertainty on the $WZ$ background (7~\%), as well as the uncertainty due to the
fake-lepton background (14~\%), are also important.
\begin{table*}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\scriptsize
\begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}lcccccc}
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
Source & \multicolumn{6}{c}{Relative systematic uncertainty [\%]} \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
& SR-Z & SR-loose & SR-2j-bveto & SR-2j-btag & SR-4j-bveto & SR-4j-btag \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
Total systematic uncertainty & 29 & 7.1 & 13 & 9.3 & 30 & 15 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
Flavour-symmetry statistical & 24 & 1.7 & 9.3 & 6.2 & 23 & 12 \\
Flavour-symmetry systematic & 4 & 5.7 & 6.7 & 5.9 & 11 & 6.6 \\
\ensuremath{Z/\gamma^{*}+\text{jets}}\ & - & 2.1 & 6.3 & 3.5 & 14 & 7.0 \\
Fake lepton & 14 & 3.2 & 1.4 & 1.2 & 1.8 & 2.2 \\
$WZ$ MC $+$ parton shower & 7 & - & - & - & - & - \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
\end{tabular*}
\caption{Overview of the dominant sources of systematic uncertainty on the background estimate in the signal regions.
Their relative values with respect to the total background expectation are shown (in~\%). For the off-$Z$ region,
the full dilepton mass range is used, and in all cases the $ee+\mu\mu$ contributions are considered together.}
\label{tab:syst}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Theoretical uncertainties on signal processes}
Signal cross sections are calculated to next-to-lead\-ing order in the strong coupling constant,
adding the resummation of soft gluon emission at NLO+NLL accuracy ~\cite{Beenakker:1996ch,Kulesza:2008jb,Kulesza:2009kq,Beenakker:2009ha,Beenakker:2011fu}.
The nominal cross section and the uncertainty are taken from an envelope of cross-section predictions using different PDF sets and factorisation and renormalisation scales, as described in Ref.~\cite{Kramer:2012bx}.
For the simplified models the uncertainty on the initial-state radiation modelling is important in the case of small mass differences during the cascade decays.
{\sc MadGraph+Pythia} samples are used to assess this uncertainty, with the factorisation and normalisation scale,
the {\sc MadGraph} parameter used for jet matching,
the {\sc MadGraph} parameter used to set the QCD radiation scale and the {\sc Pythia} parameter responsible for the value of the QCD scale for final-state radiation, each being varied up and down by a factor of two.
The resulting uncertainty on the signal acceptance is up to $\sim 25$~\% in regions with small mass differences within the decay chains.
\subsubsection{\ensuremath{Z/\gamma^{*}+\text{jets}}\ background in the off-$Z$ search}
In the off-$Z$ signal regions, the background from \ensuremath{Z/\gamma^{*}+\text{jets}}\ is due to off-shell $Z$ bosons and photons, or to on-shell $Z$ bosons
with lepton momenta that are mismeasured.
The region with dilepton mass in the range $80<m_{\ell\ell}<110$ GeV is not considered as a search region.
To estimate the contribution from \ensuremath{Z/\gamma^{*}+\text{jets}}\ outside of this range, dilepton mass shape templates are derived from \ensuremath{Z/\gamma^{*}+\text{jets}}\ MC events.
These shape templates are normalised to data in control regions with the same selection as the corresponding signal regions,
but with the requirement on $m_{\ell\ell}$ inverted to $80<m_{\ell\ell}<110$~GeV, to select a sample enriched
in \ensuremath{Z/\gamma^{*}+\text{jets}}\ events.
These CRs are defined in Table~\ref{tab:regions-offz}.
\subsubsection{\ensuremath{Z/\gamma^{*}+\text{jets}}\ background in the on-$Z$ search}
The assessment of the peaking background due to \ensuremath{Z/\gamma^{*}+\text{jets}}\ in the on-$Z$ signal regions requires careful consideration.
The events that populate the signal regions result from mismeasurements of physics objects where,
for example, one of the final-state jets has its energy underestimated, resulting in an overestimate of the total \met\ in the event.
Due to the difficulties of modelling instrumental \met\ in simulation, MC events are not relied upon alone for the estimation of the \ensuremath{Z/\gamma^{*}+\text{jets}}\ background.
A data-driven technique is used as the nominal method for estimating this background.
This technique confirms the expectation from MC simulation that the $Z+\mathrm{jets}$ background is negligible in the SR.
The primary method used to model the \ensuremath{Z/\gamma^{*}+\text{jets}}\ background in SR-Z is the so-called ``jet smearing'' method, which is described in detail in Ref.~\cite{Aad:2012fqa}.
This involves defining a region with \ensuremath{Z/\gamma^{*}+\text{jets}}\ events containing well-measured jets (at low \met), known as the ``seed'' region.
The jets in these events are then smeared using functions that describe the detector's jet \pt\ response and $\phi$ resolution as a function of jet \pt,
creating a set of pseudo-data events.
The jet-smearing method provides an estimate for the contribution from events containing both fake \met, from object mismeasurements, and real \met,
from neutrinos in heavy-flavour quark decays, by using different response functions for light-flavour and $b$-tagged jets.
The response function is measured by comparing gen\-er\-a\-tor-level jet \pt\ to reconstructed jet \pt\ in {\sc Py\-thia8} dijet MC events, generated using the CT10 NLO PDF set.
This function is then tuned to data, based on a dijet balance analysis in which the \pt\ asymmetry is used to constrain the width of the Gaussian core.
The non-Gaussian tails of the response function are corrected based on $\geq 3$-jet events in data,
selected such that the \met\ in each event points either towards, or in the opposite direction to one of the jets.
This ensures that one of the jets is clearly associated with the \met, and the jet response can then be described in terms of the \met\ and reconstructed jet \pt.
This procedure results in a good estimate of the overall jet response.
In order to calculate the \met\ distribution of the pseudo-data, the \met\ is recalculated using the new (smeared) jet \pt\ and $\phi$.
The distribution of pseudo-data events is then normalised to data in the low-\met\ region (10 $<$ \met\ $<$ 50 GeV) of a validation region,
denoted VRZ, after the requirement of $\Delta\phi(\text{jet}_{1,2},\met)>0.4$.
This is defined in Table~\ref{tab:regions-z} and is designed to be representative of the signal region but at lower \met, where the contamination for relevant GGM signal models is expected to be less than 1~\%.
The seed region must contain events with to\-pol\-o\-gies similar to those expected in the signal region.
To ensure that this is the case, the \HT\ and jet multiplicity requirements applied to the seed region remain the same as in the signal region,
while the \met\ threshold of $225$ GeV is removed, as shown in Table~\ref{tab:regions-z}. Although the seed events should have little to no \met,
enforcing a direct upper limit on \met\ can introduce a bias in the jet \pt\ distribution in the seed region compared with the signal region.
To avoid this, a requirement on the \met\ significance, defined as:
\begin{equation}
\met\ \text{sig.} = \frac{\met}{\sqrt{\sum E_{\text{T}}^{\text{jet}} + \sum E_{\text{T}}^{\text{soft}}}} ,
\end{equation}
\noindent is used in the seed region.
Here $\sum E_{\text{T}}^{\text{jet}}$ and $\sum E_{\text{T}}^{\text{soft}}$ are the summed $E_{\text{T}}$ from the baseline jets and the low-energy calorimeter deposits not associated with final-state physics objects, respectively.
Placing a requirement on this variable does not produce a shape difference between jet \pt\ distributions in the seed and signal regions,
while effectively selecting well-balanced \ensuremath{Z/\gamma^{*}+\text{jets}}\ events in the seed region.
This requirement is also found to result in no event overlap between the seed region and SR-Z.
In the seed region an additional requirement is placed on the soft-term fraction, $f_\text{ST}$,
defined as the fraction of the total \met\ in an event originating from calorimeter energy deposits not associated with a calibrated lepton or jet ($f_\text{ST} = \sum E_{\text{T}}^{\text{miss, Soft}} / \met$),
to select events with small $f_\text{ST}$.
This is useful because events with large values of fake \met\ tend to have low soft-term fractions ($f_\text{ST}<0.6$).
The requirements on the \met\ significance and $f_\text{ST}$ are initially optimised by applying the jet smearing method to \ensuremath{Z/\gamma^{*}+\text{jets}}\ MC events and testing the agreement in the \met\ spectrum between direct and smeared MC events in the VRZ.
This closure test is performed using the response function derived from MC simulation.
The \ensuremath{Z/\gamma^{*}+\text{jets}}\ background predominantly comes from events where a single jet is grossly mismeas\-ured, since the mismeasurement of additional jets is unlikely,
and can lead to smearing that reduces the total \met.
The requirement on the opening angle in $\phi$ between either of the leading two jets and the \met, $\Delta\phi(\text{jet}_{1,2},\met)>0.4$, strongly suppresses this background.
The estimate of the \ensuremath{Z/\gamma^{*}+\text{jets}}\ background is performed both with and without this requirement, in order to aid in the interpretation of the results in the SR, as described in Sect.~\ref{sec:results}.
The optimisation of the \met\ significance and $f_\text{ST}$ requirements are performed separately with and without the requirement,
although the optimal values are not found to differ significantly.
The jet smearing method using the data-cor\-rec\-ted jet response function is validated in VRZ,
comparing smeared pseudo-data to data.
The resulting \met\ distributions show agreement within uncertainties assessed based on varying the response function and the \met\
significance requirement in the seed region.
The \met\ distribution in VRZ, with the additional requirement $\Delta\phi(\text{jet}_{1,2},$ $\met)>0.4$, is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:VRZ}.
Here the \met\ range extends only up to 100~\GeV, since \ttbar\ events begin to dominate at higher \met\ values.
The pseudo-data to data agreement in VRZ motivates the final determination of the \met\ significance requirement used for the seed region ($\met\ \text{sig.}<0.9$).
Backgrounds containing real \met, including \ttbar\ and diboson production, are taken from MC simulation for this check.
The chosen values are detailed in Table~\ref{tab:regions-z} with a summary of the kinematic requirements imposed on the seed and $Z$ validation region.
Extrapolating the jet smearing estimate to the signal regions yields the results detailed in Table~\ref{tab:results-z}.
The data-driven estimate is compatible with the MC expectation that the $Z+\mathrm{jets}$ background contributes significantly less than one event in SR-Z.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{smearedMet_VRZ1_EE.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{smearedMet_VRZ1_MM.pdf}
\caption{Distribution of \met\ in the electron (left) and muon (right) channel in VRZ of the on-$Z$ analysis following the requirement of $\Delta\phi(\text{jet}_{1,2},\met)>0.4$.
Here the \ensuremath{Z/\gamma^{*}+\text{jets}}\ background (solid blue) is modelled using \pt- and $\phi$-smeared pseudo-data events.
The hatched uncertainty band includes the statistical uncertainty on the simulated event samples and the systematic uncertainty on the jet-smearing estimate due to the jet response function and the seed selection.
The backgrounds due to $WZ$, $ZZ$ or rare top processes, as well as from lepton fakes, are included under ``Other Backgrounds''.
}
\label{fig:VRZ}
\end{figure*}
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
Signal region & Jet-smearing & $Z$+jets MC \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
SR-Z $ee$ & $0.05 \pm 0.04$ & $ 0.05 \pm 0.03 $ \\ [+0.05cm]
SR-Z $\mu\mu$ & $0.02^{+0.03}_{-0.02}$ & $ 0.09 \pm 0.05 $ \\
\noalign{\smallskip}\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{{\small Number of \ensuremath{Z/\gamma^{*}+\text{jets}}~background events estimated in the on-$Z$ signal region (SR-Z) using the jet smearing method. This is compared with the prediction from the {\sc Sherpa} MC simulation.
The quoted uncertainties include those due to statistical and systematic effects (see Sect.~\ref{sec:syst}). }}
\label{tab:results-z}
\end{table}
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
\input{sec-intro.tex}
\section{The ATLAS detector}
\label{sec:atlas}
\input{sec-atlas.tex}
\section{Data and Monte Carlo samples}
\label{sec:data-selection}
\input{sec-data.tex}
\input{sec-mc.tex}
\section{Physics object identification and selection}
\label{sec:objects}
\input{sec-objects.tex}
\section{Event selection}
\label{sec-selection}
\input{sec-selection.tex}
\section{Background estimation}
\label{sec:bgEst}
\input{sec-bgintro.tex}
\subsection{Estimation of the $Z/\gamma^{*}+$~jets background}
\label{sec:zjets}
\input{sec-zjets.tex}
\subsection{Estimation of the flavour-symmetric backgrounds}
\label{sec:fl-sym}
\input{sec-flsym.tex}
\subsection{Fake-lepton contribution}
\label{sec:fakes}
\input{sec-fakes.tex}
\subsection{Estimation of other backgrounds}
\label{sec:bg}
\input{sec-bg.tex}
\section{Systematic uncertainties}
\label{sec:syst}
\input{sec-syst.tex}
\section{Results}
\label{sec:results}
\input{sec-results.tex}
\section{Interpretation of results}
\label{sec:interpretation}
\input{sec-interpretation.tex}
\clearpage
\section{Summary}
\label{sec:summary}
\input{sec-summary.tex}
\section*{Acknowledgements}
\input{Acknowledgements}
\clearpage
\bibliographystyle{spphys}
|
\section{Introduction}
{\it Introduction--} The exploration of topological phases such as quantum Hall states, topological insulators, and spin liquid phases
has been carried out intensively for three decades.
Topological phases are characterized not by any local order parameters
but by nonlocal order parameters or their emergent edge excitations.
\cite{Nijs-1989,Hatsugai-1991,Kennedy-1992,Hida-1992,Kohmoto-1992,Oshikawa-1992,Yamamoto-1993,Totsuka-1995}
Recently, it was found that entanglement can characterize topological phases.\cite{Kitaev-2006,Levin-2006,Furukawa-2007,Jiang-2012}
Li and Haldane proposed the concept of entanglement spectrum (ES),
which is obtained from the eigenvalues of the reduced density matrix of a subsystem.\cite{Li-2008}
They found that the ES of fractional quantum Hall states is similar to the energy spectrum of
the low-lying excitations appearing at the edge of the system.
Since then, the ES has been widely used as a tool to study topological phases.
\cite{Pollmann-2010,Hasebe-2011,Cirac-2011,Lou-2011,Fagotti-2011,Tanaka-2012,Qi-2012,Nonne-2013,Cincio-2013,Shinjo-2015}
One of the simplest models which show a variety of topological phases would be the cluster model.\cite{Suzuki-1971,Skrovseth-2009,Smacchia-2011}
The ground state of the model is called the cluster state,\cite{Raussendorf-2001}
which is characterized by the non-local string order parameter.\cite{Smacchia-2011}
In the case of open boundary condition, two zero-energy modes localized at each end of the system exist and four-fold-degenerate ground states result.
The model is interesting also from the quantum-information perspective.
In fact, one-way quantum computation and measurement-based quantum computation using the cluster state
were proposed.\cite{Raussendorf-2001,Raussendorf-2003,Fujii-2013}
In addition, the one-dimensional cluster model is expected to be realized in experiments of cold atoms on a zigzag ladder
by introducing three-spin exchange interaction.\cite{Pachos-2004}
Dynamical properties of systems associated with phase transitions
have been extensively studied for a long time.\cite{Suzuki-1968,Kibble-1976,Zurek-1985}
Dynamics during a parameter sweep across the critical point
especially has been investigated.\cite{Zurek-2005,Mukherjee-2007,Dziarmaga-2010,Polkovnikov-2011,Suzuki-2013,Canovi-2014}
In phases characterized by conventional local order parameters, a universal relation called the Kibble--Zurek scaling\cite{Kibble-1976,Zurek-1985}
is known to hold for the dynamics of defect density.
However, dynamics in topological systems depends on their topological properties and differs from the Kibble--Zurek physics,
as pointed out in Refs.~\citen{Bermudez-2010,Kells-2014,Hegde-2014}.
In this letter, we focus on topological quantum phase transitions and
dynamical properties under an interaction sweep through a critical point associated with a topological phase transition.
Specifically, we generalize the cluster model in one dimension by adding interaction terms with topological nature,
which give rise to a quantum phase transition between two different cluster states.
Our model would be interesting in the light both of quantum-information science and of competing topological phases.
We map out the ground-state phase diagram of our model by calculating energy gap and
characterize the phases by order parameters and the ES.
In addition, the dynamics during an interaction sweep across the critical point
by calculating energy gap is investigated.
For slow sweep speeds, we observe, after passing the critical point,
periodic structures in the length dependence of string correlation functions and the entanglement entropy (EE).
This breakdown of adiabaticity is due to the topological degeneracy of the initial cluster state.
We conclude that the periodicity is attributed to the Bogoliubov quasiparticles (bogolons).
{\it Model--} The one-dimensional cluster model is defined by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:clustermodel}
H_{\rm C}=-\sum_{i=1}^{N} J^{XZX}\sigma_i^x\sigma_{i+1}^z\sigma_{i+2}^x,
\end{equation}
where $N$ is the system size and $\sigma_i^{\alpha}$ $(\alpha=x,y,z)$ are the Pauli matrices at site $i$.\cite{Suzuki-1971,Skrovseth-2009,Smacchia-2011}
With open boundary condition, we suppose $\sigma_{N+1}^\alpha=\sigma_{N+2}^\alpha=0$ ($\alpha = x,y,z$).
The three-site interaction in Eq.~(\ref{eq:clustermodel}) is called the cluster interaction or the cluster stabilizer in quantum-information science.
In the ground state of the model dubbed the cluster state, the string order parameter $O_{XZX}=\lim_{L \to \infty} O_{XZX}(L)$ is finite,
where
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:stringcorrelation}
O_{XZX}(L)=(-1)^L \left\langle\sigma_1^x\sigma_2^y\left(\prod_{i=3}^{L-2}\sigma_i^z\right)\sigma_{L-1}^y\sigma_L^x\right\rangle
\end{equation}
is called the string correlation function of length $L$.\cite{Nijs-1989,Kennedy-1992,Smacchia-2011}
A phase characterized by the non-vanishing string order parameter is generally called the cluster (C) phase.
Throughout this letter, we consider a generalization of the cluster model in one dimension to clarify the topological properties.
The {\it generalized cluster model} is defined by adding the Ising interaction $\sigma_{i}^y\sigma_{i+1}^y$ and
another cluster interaction $\sigma_{i}^y\sigma_{i+1}^z\sigma_{i+2}^y$ to the original cluster model:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:HGC}
H_{\rm GC}=\sum_{i=1}^{N}(-J^{XZX}\sigma_i^x\sigma_{i+1}^z\sigma_{i+2}^x+J^{YY}\sigma_i^y\sigma_{i+1}^y+J^{YZY}\sigma_i^y\sigma_{i+1}^z\sigma_{i+2}^y).
\end{equation}
Note that our model at $J^{YZY}=0$ is the same as the cluster Ising model studied in Ref.~\citen{Smacchia-2011}.
When $J^{YZY}$ is dominant, there appears another topological phase, which we call the dual cluster (C*) phase.
The phase is characterized by the dual string order parameter $O_{YZY}=\lim_{L \to \infty} O_{YZY}(L)$,
where
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:dualstringcorrelation}
O_{YZY}(L)=\left\langle\sigma_1^y\sigma_2^x\left(\prod_{i=3}^{L-2}\sigma_i^z\right)\sigma_{L-1}^x\sigma_L^y\right\rangle
\end{equation}
is called the dual string correlation function of length $L$.
The model (\ref{eq:HGC}) can be solved by using spinless fermion representation.\cite{Lieb-1961}
The original spin model (\ref{eq:HGC}) is transformed into a quadratic Hamiltonian:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Hquad}
H=\sum_{i, j=1}^N\left[c_i^{\dagger}A_{ij}c_j+\frac{1}{2}\left(c_i^{\dagger}B_{ij}c_j^{\dagger} +c_iB_{ji}c_j \right) \right]
\end{equation}
by the Jordan--Wigner transformation:
\begin{equation}
c_i=\prod_{j=1}^{i-1}(-\sigma_j^z)\,\sigma_i^-,\quad c_i^{\dagger}=\prod_{j=1}^{i-1}(-\sigma_j^z)\,\sigma_i^+,
\end{equation}
where $A$ is a real symmetric matrix and $B$ is a real antisymmetric matrix with
$A_{i,i+1}=J^{YY}$, $A_{i,i+2}=J^{XZX}-J^{YZY}$, $B_{i,i+1}=-J^{YY}$, $B_{i,i+2}=J^{XZX}+J^{YZY}$.
In general, quadratic Hamiltonians (\ref{eq:Hquad}) can be diagonalized by the Bogoliubov transformation as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:HGCBogoliubov}
H=\sum_{\mu=1}^{N} E_{\mu}\left(\eta_{\mu}^{\dagger}\eta_{\mu}-\frac{1}{2}\right),\quad E_{\mu}\geq0.
\end{equation}
The ground state is given by the Bogoliubov vacuum $\left| {\rm vac} \right\rangle$ satisfying $\eta_{\mu} \left| {\rm vac} \right\rangle = 0$ for all $\mu$.
The topological nature of the model (\ref{eq:HGC}) is clearly seen in the Majorana representation.\cite{Kitaev-2001}
The Majorana fermions \{$\bar{c}_i$\} are defined by real and imaginary parts of the two fermion operators \{$c_i$\} and \{$c_i^{\dagger}$\}:
\begin{equation}
\bar{c}_{2i-1}=c_{i}^{\dagger}+c_i,\quad \bar{c}_{2i}=\mathrm{i}\,(c_i-c_{i}^{\dagger}),\quad i=1, 2, \dots, N.
\end{equation}
The standard anticommutation relations of \{$c_i$\} and \{$c_i^{\dagger}$\} translate into
\begin{equation}
\bar{c}_{i}=\bar{c}_{i}^{\dagger},\quad \{\bar{c}_{i},\ \bar{c}_{j}\}=2\delta_{ij}.
\end{equation}
Using the Majorana fermions, the model (\ref{eq:HGC}) is rewritten as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:HGCmajorana}
H_{\rm GC}=\frac{\mathrm{i}}{2}\bar{c}^{\mathrm{T}}M\bar{c},
\end{equation}
where $\bar{c}=(\bar{c}_{1},\bar{c}_{2},\dots,\bar{c}_{2N})^{\mathrm{T}}$ and $M$ is a real antisymmetric matrix with
$M_{2i-1,2i+2}=-J^{YY}, M_{2i-1,2i+4}=-J^{YZY}, M_{2i,2i+3}=J^{XZX}$.
We can easily read off the number of ground states and that of zero modes from the above Hamiltonian.
Suppose the model with open boundary condition.
When either $J^{XZX}$ or $J^{YZY}$ is dominant,
two zero-energy modes localized at each end of the system exist and result in the four-fold degeneracy in the ground state, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:phase} (a), (c).
In contrast, when $J^{YY}$ is dominant, only one zero-energy mode exists and the ground state is two-fold degenerate, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:phase} (b).
Thus, the number of zero-modes appearing at the edges of the system characterizes each phase.\cite{Fidkovski-2011}
{\it Phase diagram--} In Fig.~\ref{fig:phase} (d), we show the ground-state phase diagram of the model (\ref{eq:HGC}) and
characterize each phase by order parameters and the ES
by using the method given in Ref.~\citen{Latorre-2004}.
Here we impose the periodic boundary condition.
By performing the Bogoliubov transformation, the model is expressed in the momentum space as
\begin{equation}
H=\sum_{0 \leq k \leq \pi}\Delta_k\,(\eta_k^{\dagger}\eta_k+\eta_{-k}^{\dagger}\eta_{-k}),\quad
\Delta_k=2\sqrt{\epsilon_k^2+\delta_k^2},
\end{equation}
where $\Delta_k\geq0$ is the excitation energy at the wave number $k$ and
\begin{align}
\epsilon_k&=(J^{XZX}-J^{YZY})\cos 2k+J^{YY}\cos k, \\
\delta_k&=(J^{XZX}+J^{YZY})\sin 2k-J^{YY}\sin k.
\end{align}
In the following, we use $J^{XZX}$ as the energy unit and assume that $J^{XZX}$ is positive.
The phase boundaries depicted by the thick solid curves in Fig.~\ref{fig:phase} (d) are determined by the condition $\Delta_k=0$ at a certain $k$.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=1]{GCI-phasediagram-illustrator.eps} \\
\end{center}
\caption{
(Color Online)
(a)-(c) Schematic representation of the interactions in Eq.~(\ref{eq:HGC}) by the Majorana language.
(a), (b), and (c) depict the first, second, and third terms of the Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:HGC}).
Non-interacting Majorana fermions enclosed in dotted line appear at the ends of the system.
(d) Phase diagram of the generalized cluster model (\ref{eq:HGC}) for $J^{XZX}>0$.
On the thick solid curves, the excitation gap $\Delta_k$ vanishes at a certain $k$.
C, C*, F, and AF represent cluster, dual cluster, ferromagnetic, and antiferromagnetic phases, respectively.
The P phase cannot be characterized by string and (anti) ferromagnetic order parameters.
The superscript represents the direction of the order.
Each phase is determined by order parameters calculated with the iTEBD.
Along the thin dotted line and the dashed line, we calculated the ES in Fig.~\ref{fig:GCIES} (b), (c).
(e) String order parameter $O_{XZX}$ and ferromagnetic order parameters $O_{XX}, O_{YY}$ in the $x$, $y$-directions
along the thick dotted line in Fig.~\ref{fig:phase} (d) ($J^{YZY}/J^{XZX}=0.5$)
by using the iTEBD with bond dimension $\chi=60$.
}
\label{fig:phase}
\end{figure}
In order to characterize each phase separated by the curves,
we calculated the order parameters with the time-evolving block decimation method for infinite systems (iTEBD).\cite{Vidal-2007,Orus-2008}
This method is advantageous over the exact diagonalization for the computation of the order parameters with no boundary effect.
Figure~\ref{fig:phase} (e) displays the string order parameter (\ref{eq:stringcorrelation})
and ferromagnetic order parameters $O_{\alpha\alpha}=\lim_{L \to \infty}\left\langle \sigma_1^{\alpha} \sigma_L^{\alpha} \right\rangle$ $(\alpha=x,y)$
along the thick dotted line in Fig.~\ref{fig:phase} (d).
Note that we practically take $L=200$,
at which the order parameters safely converge to their thermodynamic values.
We first consider $J^{YZY}=0$.
When $|J^{YY}/J^{XZX}|$ becomes large, conventional ferromagnetic (F$^{(y)}$) and antiferromagnetic (AF$^{(y)}$) orders in the $y$-direction appear,
which are respectively characterized by the ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic order parameters
defined by $O_{yy}$ and $\lim_{L \to \infty} (-1)^L \langle \sigma_1^y \sigma_L^y \rangle$.
When $|J^{YY}/J^{XZX}|$ becomes relatively small, on the other hand,
the C phase characterized by the string order parameter (\ref{eq:stringcorrelation}) appears.
Next, various phases appears due to non-zero $J^{YZY}$ are found.
For positive $J^{YZY}$, the AF and F phases ordered in the $x$-direction (labeled respectively by AF$^{(x)}$ and F$^{(x)}$) appears.
For negative $J^{YZY}$, on the other hand, we find the paramagnetic (P) phase
which cannot be characterized by the string and the (anti) ferromagnetic order parameters.
Similar behavior was reported in the cluster-$XY$ model\cite{Montes-2012} and in the transverse Ising model in frustrated lattices\cite{Tanaka-2010}.
Let us interpret the phase diagram obtained above in terms of entanglement.
Here we suppose open boundary condition and use the exact diagonalization.
We divide the entire system into two subsystems A and B symmetrically around the center
with the length of A being $L_{\rm sub}$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:GCIES} (a)).
We calculate the eigenvalues \{$\lambda_{\nu}$\} of the reduced density matrix $\rho_{\rm A}$ of A defined by tracing out the subsystem B:
$\rho_{\rm A}={\rm Tr}_{\rm B} \rho$,
where $\rho$ is the density matrix of the ground state of the entire system.
The ES is defined as $\xi_{\nu} = -\ln \lambda_{\nu}$.\cite{Li-2008}
First, we focus on the thin dotted line depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:phase} (d).
As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:GCIES} (b),
the degree of degeneracy in the lowest value of the ES stays constant in each phase.
We see that its number is four, one, and two for C, P, and AF phases, respectively.
Similarly, focusing on the dashed line depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:phase} (d)
the degree of degeneracy is four in both C and dual C* phases, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:GCIES} (c).
At the critical points, the degeneracy structure disappears.
We also calculate the topological invariant, called the winding number\cite{Anderson-1958}, by using the method explained in Ref.~\citen{Niu-2012}.
We confirm that the winding numbers of C, C*, AF, F, and P phases are two, two, one, one, and zero, respectively,
which correspond to the number of Majorana fermions appearing at the edge of the system (not shown).
From all of these results, the degree of degeneracy is equal to the number of the Majorana zero-modes existing at the ends of the system.
We thus corroborate that for the generalized cluster model (\ref{eq:HGC})
the ES reflects the fictitious edge modes appearing at the position where we cut the system
as in the case of other topological phases studied in previous works.
\cite{Li-2008,Pollmann-2010,Hasebe-2011,Cirac-2011,Lou-2011,Fagotti-2011,Tanaka-2012,Qi-2012,Nonne-2013,Cincio-2013,Shinjo-2015}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=1]{GCI-ES-illustrator.eps} \\
\end{center}
\caption{
(Color Online)
(a) Schematic of subsystems A and B.
(b) ES with $N=503$ and $L_{\rm sub}=249$ for $J^{YZY}/J^{XZX}=-0.5$ indicated by the thin dotted line in Fig.~\ref{fig:phase} (d).
The degeneracy in the lowest levels is four, one (no degeneracy) and two in C, N, and AF phases, respectively.
(c) ES with $N=503$ and $L_{\rm sub}=249$ for $J^{YY}/J^{XZX}=0$ indicated by the dashed line in Fig.~\ref{fig:phase} (d).
The degeneracy in the lowest levels is four in both C and C* phases.
}
\label{fig:GCIES}
\end{figure}
{\it Critical sweep--} Now we turn to the dynamics during an interaction sweep across the critical point between C and C* phases with open boundary condition.
Let us consider the following time-dependent Hamiltonian:
\begin{equation}
H(t)=-J^{XZX}\sum_{i=1}^{N} \sigma_i^x\sigma_{i+1}^z\sigma_{i+2}^x+J(t)\sum_{i=1}^{N} \sigma_i^y\sigma_{i+1}^z\sigma_{i+2}^y,
\end{equation}
where the interaction parameter changes linearly during the sweep time $\tau$ as
\begin{equation}
J(t)/J^{XZX}=2t/\tau,\quad 0\le t \le \tau.
\end{equation}
Here, the eigenenergies in Eq.~(\ref{eq:HGCBogoliubov}) are labelled in ascending order; $E_1 \le E_2 \le \cdots E_N$.
Since $E_1=E_2=0$ except $J^{XZX}=J^{YZY}$,
$\eta_1^\dagger \left| {\rm vac} \right\rangle$, $\eta_2^\dagger \left| {\rm vac} \right\rangle$,
and $\eta_2^\dagger \eta_1^\dagger \left| {\rm vac} \right\rangle$ are the ground states as well as the vacuum state $\left| {\rm vac} \right\rangle$.
The initial state is prepared in the Bogoliubov vacuum corresponding the ground state of the Hamiltonian with $J(t)=0$.
We calculated the length dependence of the dual string correlation function $O_{YZY}(\ell)$ and the EE $S(\ell)$
by using the time-dependent Bogoliubov transformation,\cite{Barouch-1970,Caneva-2007}
where $\ell$ is defined as Fig.~\ref{fig:Sweep} (a).
We define the EE as the von Neumann entropy of $\rho(\ell)$ which is the reduced density matrix of the subsystem
with the length $\ell$, that is, $S(\ell)=-\Tr \rho(\ell)\ln \rho(\ell)$.
Figure~\ref{fig:Sweep} (b) shows the length dependence of the dual string correlation function and the EE
in the final state ($t=\tau$) with $\tau=$ 25, 50, 100, and 200.
For large $\tau$, a quadruple-periodic structure in the length dependence is observed in both quantities.
We calculated the expectation values of the number of bogolons in the final state.
Figure~\ref{fig:Sweep} (c) indicates that only third bogolon is dominant for larger $\tau$.
At $t=\tau/2$, the instantaneous Hamiltonian represents the critical system.
Since the energy levels of low-lying excited states approach the ground states near the critical point as in Fig.~\ref{fig:Sweep} (d),
transitions from the ground state to the excited states would occur for finite $\tau$.
From this fact, one may speculate that the similar periodic structures in the dual string order parameter and the EE
come from the bogolons generated near the critical point.
To substantiate this, we calculated the dual string correlation function for {\it excited} states.
A similar periodic structure is actually observed in the length dependence of the string correlation function
in the excited state with a single bogolon, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Sweep} (e).
This period corresponds to the wave length of the third bogolon.
As mentioned before, the bogolon with zero energy corresponds to the ground-state degeneracy.
Actually, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Sweep} (e), the dual string correlation function in the bogolons with zero energy is
the same as that in the Bogoliubov vacuum.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=1]{GCI-dynamics.eps} \\
\end{center}
\caption{
(Color Online)
(a) We calculate the dual string correlation function of length $\ell$
and take $\ell$ adjacent sites as the subsystem to calculate the EE.
(b) The length dependence of the dual string correlation function and the EE of final state ($t=\tau$) with $N=101$ and $\tau=$ 25, 50, 100, and 200.
As $\tau$ increases, a quadruple-periodic structure is clearly observed.
(c) The expectation value of the number of bogolons in the final state.
This indicates that only third bogolon is dominant for larger $\tau$.
(d) Energy spectrum of low-lying excited states.
There is a level crossing at the critical point at $J^{YZY}/J^{XZX}=1$.
(e) The dual string correlation function in the states with the bogolon at $J^{YZY}/J^{XZX}=2$.
We can see a quadruple-periodic structure in the length dependence for third bogolon excited state.
The dual string correlation function in the state with the bogolon having zero energy is
the same as that in the Bogoliubov vacuum.
}
\label{fig:Sweep}
\end{figure}
{\it Conclusion--} We have studied the one-dimensional cluster model with several interactions
to understand the dynamics in the topological phase.
First, we have determined the ground-state topological phase diagram (Fig.~\ref{fig:phase})
and characterized each phase by the order parameters.
In particular, we have found a direct quantum phase transition between two different cluster phases.
We have confirmed that the degeneracy in the lowest levels of the ES in each phase
corresponds to the number of the Majorana fermions existing at the edges of the system (Fig.~\ref{fig:GCIES}).
Second, we have investigated the dynamics during the interaction sweep with finite speeds
across the critical point separating the two cluster states.
The periodicity in the length dependence of the dual string correlation function and the EE has been observed (Fig.~\ref{fig:Sweep}).
We have reproduced similar periodic structure by using the excited states and verified that
the periodicity stems from the bogolons excited when the system is close to the critical point.
It would be interesting to see the results from the viewpoint of topological blocking\cite{Kells-2014,Hegde-2014}.
\begin{acknowledgment}
We thank Koudai Sugimoto and Ryosuke Yoshii for helpful discussions.
This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers 25420698 (S.T.), 25800228 (I.D.), 25220711 (I.D.), 24540402 (K.T.).
S.T. is also financially supported by Leave a Nect Co., Ltd. and Discover 21, Inc.
S.T. is the Yukawa Fellow and his work is supported in part by Yukawa Memorial Foundation.
The computations in the present work were performed on super computers at Yukawa Institute for Theoretical Physics, Kyoto University,
and Institute for Solid State Physics, The University of Tokyo.
\end{acknowledgment}
|
\section{Introduction}
The effort towards science of security was born from the need for a more systematic approach to security \cite{jason2010SoS,MeushawR:TNW12,LandwehrC:TNW12,SchneiderF:TNW12,PavlovicD:TNW12}. It resulted in new empiric and experimental approaches to cyber security \cite{Benzel:ACSAC11,hard-problems,HotSoS14}. The fact that science of security still means many things to many people should perhaps be seen as a feature and not a bug, since already security on its own means many things to many people, and it is natural that they study it from many directions \cite{PavlovicD:TNW12}. On the other hand, it seems that each step of scientific progress requires a unifying idea, each of them showing that a certain group of trees is actually a forest \cite{KuhnT:structure}. What is then the unifying idea of science of security?
\subsection{Science is something else}\label{Sec:Science}
\subsubsection{What science is not}
Every known civilization seems to have developed technology, art, and religion. But only the Western Civilization has developed science. Science emerged in Europe during the Renaissance, and caused the Industrial Revolution. This unique stream of events is analyzed in some detail in \cite{KuhnT:structure}.\footnote{It has been objected that this view can be construed as eurocentric. While the word \emph{"science"} can, of course, be used to denote many things, as explained in the next paragraph, theory of science \emph{defines}\/ science as the movement that led to the Industrial Revolution. Since the fact that the Industrial Revolution emerged in Europe is historically uncontestable, the fact that science emerged in Europe follows from this definition. Moreover, as incisive critics of the Industrial Revolution even before its current destructive consequences became clear, the theorists of science can hardly be accused of \emph{praising}\/ Europe for being the cradle of science \cite{Feyerabend}.}
There are, of course, many definitions of science. Some of them are shaped to include the teachings of Ron L.~Hubbard; some to include marxism, or even the daily thoughts of the current leader of North Korea. Most definitions, however, point to some of the features of the methodological movement that led to understanding the natural processes like heat, electricity, magnetism, radiation, or networking. Although the notion of science can be extended to include astrology, scientology, theology, mathematics, or engineering, it does not seem useful to stretch it too much. Assigning the status of science, say, to the engineering principles and processes (whether those that enabled the public works of Ancient Egypt, or those that emerged in medieval alchemy, or in Renaissance architecture, or in modern software engineering) might conceal something essential about science. Can science be reduced to its technological thrust \cite{LandwehrC:TNW12}? Or does it boil down to the view that the world is governed by a system of laws \cite{SchneiderF:TNW12}? Or is there more to it?
Many ancient civilizations developed the \emph{quantitative methods}\/ that enabled them to plan and execute extensive engineering projects, and change the landscapes of their environment. Many of them also explained the world around them through sophisticated \emph{theoretical edifices}\/ and that included the \emph{'Laws of Nature'}, formalized as mythologies, or gathered in sacred texts, often equipped with extensive symbolic systems. But no one until the Age of Science came anywhere near to understanding and reproducing, e.g., the thermo-nuclear processes of Sun; or the space-time curvature, without which our GPS systems could not surf on the geodesics, and would keep sending us wrong coordinates. No one before science came anywhere near to understanding genomics and to engineering the basic processes of life; and nowhere near to connecting our world into a network of networks, and spanning a distance-free space, where every two nodes are neighbors, and where our joint problem solving, and problem creating capabilities seem to be reaching a completely new level. This network of networks is what we call cyber space. Inhabited by the processes that we programmed, but whose interactions we cannot control, cyber space hosts a new nature in need of a new science. Is this new level of our civilization just another new level of yet another civilization, or is it something else? Is the science that brought it all about just another way that we found to generate new technologies, or just another religion that tells us the laws of the world, or is it something essentially new?
There is a qualitative difference between the science-ge\-ne\-ra\-ted technologies, and the spontaneously evolved technologies. There is also a qualitative difference between the symbolic systems of theologies and mythologies that emerge from religions, and the symbolic systems of mathematics and computation that underlie science. There is a qualitative difference between the religious rituals on one hand and the scientific protocols on the other. The essence of these differences is not in the levels of complexity or effectiveness. There are complex religious systems, and there are simple scientific theories. Many religions and even superstitions postulate their \emph{'Laws of Nature'} that are structurally indistinguishable from those postulated by science. Astrology and phrenology have in their time been tested as scientific theories, by scientific methods, and rejected not for structural reasons, not as unscientific, but as wrong. And there are also effective religious systems, and there are ineffective sciences. E.g., although the processes of photosynthesis are everywhere around us, at the bottom of all of our food chains, science has remained unable to understand what do the plants really do when they bind photons into sugars. There is a quantum effect, but science has been ineffective in explaining it. It has also been less effective than most religions in addressing people's emotional and social needs.
So what really distinguishes scientific theories, if it is not complexity, and not effectiveness?
\subsubsection{What science is}
I propose to consider the logical pattern of inductive inference as the essence of science: \emph{While religion claims to provide the truth, science only seeks to disprove false hypotheses.}\footnote{There are, of course, many other ways to characterize science. The claim here is that this one is useful for the purposes of science of security.}
In a formal sense, science is the quest for \emph{disproving}\/ theories.
This formal sense was fully implemented for the first time in Ronald Fisher's practical methods of scientific inference \cite{FisherR:1925,FisherR:1959}, and then analyzed theoretically in Karl Popper's extensive and influential work \cite{PopperK:logic}. The historic support for this view of science was provided by Thomas Kuhn \cite{KuhnT:structure}, while the scientists themselves provided some of the most compelling examples from their current practices \cite{FeynmanR:character}. Other leading templates of scientific inference (e.g. the Neyman-Pearson testing \cite{Neyman:Pearson:1933}, or Bayesian inference \cite{Bayes,Bernardo-Smith:bayesian}) may appear to offer ways beyond this negative logic of science, as the quest for merely \emph{improving}\/ scientific theories through \emph{disproving}\/ false hypotheses. But a closer look shows that they only formalize the task of hypothesis selection, and thus support formation of new theories, not proving. They do not provide a method to definitely prove anything. Richard Feynman announced this with compelling simplicity in his lectures on \emph{'The Character of Physical Law'} \cite{FeynmanR:character}:
\begin{quote}
If we have a definite theory, from which we can compute the consequences which can be compared with experiment, then in principle we can prove that theory wrong. But notice that we can never prove it right. Suppose that you invent a theory, calculate the consequences, and discover every time that the consequences agree with the experiment. The theory is then right? No, it is simply not proved wrong! In the future you could compute a wider range of consequences, there could be a wider range of experiments, and you might then discover that the thing is wrong. [\ldots] ---
\emph{We never are definitely right; we can only be sure when we are wrong.}
\end{quote}
This is perhaps the best kept secret of science: \emph{Science does not provide persistent theories; it only provides methods to disprove and improve our hypotheses.}
\subsection{Security is like science}
The fact that the process of security is of the same type like the process of science can be illustrated by translating Feynman's statement from the language of science to the language of security:
\begin{quote}
If we have a precisely defined security claim about a system, from which we can derive the consequences which can be tested, then in principle we can prove that the system is insecure. But we can never prove that it is secure. Suppose that you design a system, calculate some security claims, and discover every time that the system remains secure under all tests. The system is then secure? No, it is simply not proved insecure! In the future you could refine the security model, there could be a wider range of tests and attacks, and you might then discover that the thing is insecure. --- \emph{We never are definitely secure;
we can only be sure when we are insecure.}
\end{quote}
A scientific approach to security must therefore begin with the realization that there is no persistent security. Cryptographers have known for a long time that every key has a lifetime. It is time that we recognize that every security claim has a lifetime. The designers of protocols and systems have, of course, accumulated a lot of empiric evidence about this phenomenon \cite{PavlovicD:SEFM10}. The point is to understand it as a \emph{logical}\/ phenomenon.
Upon the admission that theories cannot be definitely proved, but only disproved and improved, science has gained its current unparalleled power to harness nature. Upon the realization that security guarantees cannot be definitely assured, but only broken and strengthened, science of security will gain the ability to tap its power to protect from the same methodological source.
\subsection{Zoom on trust}
In this paper we focus on the scientific approaches to a special family of security claims: the statements of \emph{trust}. While a general security claim says that a key $K$ is uncompromised, or that a protocol $P$ guarantees an authentic channel, a statement of trust says that Alice trusts the key $K$ for use in a particular cipher, or that Bob trusts the protocol $P$ to establish an authentic channel with Alice. A statement of trust is thus a security statement \emph{bound}\/ to two subjects and an object: \emph{who trusts what to whom}.
The parallel between the security processes of trust building and the scientific methods of hypothesis testing seems like a particularly good illustration of the general logical link of security and science, so we pursue it in the rest of this paper.
\subsection*{Outline of the paper}
In Sec.~\ref{Sec:Trust} we briefly explain the concept of trust used in the paper, and why is it interesting to model the process of trust as hypothesis testing. In Sec.~\ref{Sec:Testing} we show on toy examples how to apply the three standard methods of statistical inference in trust testing. In Sec.~\ref{Sec:Formulating} we show how to formulate the best trust hypotheses \emph{a priori}, since it is notoriously difficult to extract the normal behavioral profiles from empiric data. In Sec.~\ref{Sec:Final} we comment about the relations of the presented ideas with the other views of trust, and with the application of statistics in intrusion detection.
\section{Trust as hypothesis testing}\label{Sec:Trust}
\subsection{What is trust?}\label{sec-what-trust}
Security analyses often begin with the assumptions that some of the subjects are \emph{honest}, i.e. that they behave according to some prescribed protocol rules, whereas the others are dishonest, and launch attacks. Trust internalizes the honesty assumptions into beliefs of subjects about each other. E.g., we say that Alice trusts Bob if she believes that he will behave honestly, according to some protocol agreed implicitly or explicitly. In such a trust statement, Alice is the \emph{trustor}, and Bob is the \emph{trustee}. In social and electronic networks, and on the web, trust is implemented in a variety of ways: as feedback services in web commerce, as the web of trust or certificate authorities in the various versions of Public Key Infrastructure, etc. The underlying trust models often include \emph{trust ratings}, which quantify trust, and the \emph{entrusted concepts}, which qualify trust. A survey of the models of trust used in computer security research can be found in \cite{BoydC:trust-survey}. Dynamics of the trust processes in network computation were analyzed in \cite{NicolD:IEEE10,PavlovicD:FAST08,PavlovicD:FAST10}, and the problem of trust was introduced in the framework of science of security in \cite{NicolD:HotSoS14}.
\subsection{Inductive inference of trust}
Just like science can never settle but has to keep testing its theories and refining its hypotheses, trust can also never settle and needs to keep testing its hypotheses. Just like a scientific theory can always turn out to be wrong, trust can always be broken. The reasoning about such ongoing processes goes under the name of inductive logics, which is quite different, and much less familiar than deductive logics. The central problem of the inductive inference of trust is expressed by the central principle of the modern court of law, i.e. the principle of \emph{due process}: that the accused must be \emph{presumed innocent until proven guilty} \cite{PenningtonK:innocent}. But this is just the legal form of a more general social principle of trust: that people should be \emph{trusted until proven untrustworthy}.The burden of proof is here on the prosecution, or on the accusers. The dual principle of \emph{ordeal}, typical of medieval trials, places the burden of proof on the defense, and requires that the accused be \emph{presumed guilty until proven innocent}. The corresponding social maxim is the principle of distrust (or suspicion), namely that people should be \emph{trusted only if they are proven trustworthy}. These two views of trust, the optimistic and the pessimistic one, correspond to the two social functions of trust:
\begin{itemize}
\item to support stable social links based on \emph{cumulative trust}: "I trust you because I know you"
\item to enable new social links through a \emph{leap of trust}: "I trust you although I don't know you"
\end{itemize}
Note that both the trust principle and the suspicion principle are asserted in a logical process akin to science: they are hypotheses that need to be tested. The logical parallel described in the Introduction emerges again: just like a scientific theory can always be disproved by a new experiment, but can never be definitely proven, trust can always be broken, and can never be settled. We just follow this parallel.
\subsection{How to trust methodically?}
The scientific method is the method for hypothesis testing through empiric validation. This means that a scientific theory can only be validated on a finite number of samples or instances, since the empiric data are always finite. Hence the asymmetry of inductive inference: while a counterexample can definitely disprove a theory, no amount of experience can definitely prove it. This is where the \emph{problem of induction} emerges \cite{induction-lakatos}.
Statistical methods have been developed as tools for deciding when to reject a hypothesis \cite{FisherR:1925,FisherR:1959}, and also which alternative hypothesis to endorse \cite{Neyman:Pearson:1928,Neyman:Pearson:1933}. In the experimental setting, statistical methods moreover allow testing multiple hypotheses and quantifying their likelihood \cite{CoxDR:theoretical}.
\subsection{How many trust values?}
Up to the point where the trust \emph{decisions}\/ need to be made, trust can be quantified in many ways, reflected to some extent by the trust ratings, as mentioned in Sec.~\ref{sec-what-trust}. There may be many colors, shades, and nuances of trust, in-between trusting and not trusting. At the end of the day, though, a trust decision must be extracted: \emph{Will the trustor trust the trustee enough to enter into the entrusted transaction?}\/ At the moment of decision, all previous considerations are reduced to one of the two answers: \emph{yes}\/ or \emph{no}. This simple outcome is not only the \emph{process requirement}\/ of trust, akin to the process requirement of justice, where the verdict of \emph{guilty}\/ or \emph{not guilty}\/ must be extracted from whatever mixture of subtle and dubious concerns may precede it. More importantly, the final trust decision is in principle also the \emph{only}\/ observable manifestation of trust. The rich models of trust are our theories, attempting to explain the unobservable causes of the trust decisions. With such theories, science always does the same thing: it tests them as hypotheses, and decides whether they should be rejected or not yet. The good news is that the trust process seems similar. The bad news is that the \emph{yes-no}\/ decisions are not simple.
In Sec.~\ref{Sec:Testing}, we sketch how the basic statistical methodologies apply to trust decisions, i.e. how the trust hypotheses can be tested scientifically. In the subsequent Sec.~\ref{Sec:Formulating}, we discuss a harder problem of trust science, that does not yield to the standard methodologies: \emph{how to formulate the trust hypotheses for testing}.
\section{Testing trust hypotheses}\label{Sec:Testing}
Suppose that you are interacting with a system ${\cal S}$ presented by a set of observable behaviors ${\cal B}$. Depending on the ongoing observations of the system behaviors, you must make decisions whether to entrust the system with some critical or security sensitive operations. For instance, if ${\cal S}$ is a computational device, then ${\cal B}$ can consist of the various computational behaviors: it may run fast or slowly, it may crash or spontaneously restart, it may show high or low CPU load, frequent or intermittent network accesses, various power usage behaviors, etc. If ${\cal S}$ is a closed network or a large organization, then the observable behaviors ${\cal B}$ may consist of the various network phenomena, such as local load imbalances, clustering and community formations, network chatter or its absence, and so on. If ${\cal S}$ is a market segment or a network of contractors, then ${\cal B}$ consists of the various market behaviors: clear or unclear market positions and strategies, pricing drift, shifts in supply or demand, overt or covert information propagation. In all cases, it is interesting to assume that the observable behaviors conceal some ultimately unobservable causes: the computational device may have a firmware virus or a hidden hardware component; the organization may be penetrated by undetectable moles, or bubbling with defectors; the market may be manipulated by a colluding cluster, or swayed by hidden incentives. --- \emph{Science offers methods to detect the unobservable causes of some observable phenomena.}
The observations of the observable behaviors ${\cal B}$ are modeled by a real function $f:{\cal B}\rightarrow {\Bbb R}$, which is often called a \emph{statistic}. A statistic may list the raw measurements of a sample, but it more often displays some property, e.g. the mean, the deviation, a higher-order moment, or some other combination of data.
One thing that a statistic does not display is a \emph{distribution}\/ of the behaviors in ${\cal B}$. The distribution of the behaviors, i.e. how often does a behavior $b\in {\cal B}$ come about in a system ${\cal S}$, is what a scientific analysis attempts to induce from the observations. More precisely, a scientific analysis proceeds by
\begin{itemize}
\item[(1)] setting a hypothesis $\theta$, presented by a probability distribution $\Pr_\theta :{\cal B} \rightarrow [0,1]$, and then
\item[(2)] testing whether the statistic $f:{\cal B}\rightarrow {\Bbb R}$ supports or disproves the hypothesis $\theta$.
\end{itemize}
In the context of trust, the probability distribution $\Pr_\theta :{\cal B} \rightarrow [0,1]$ is intended to capture the trust profile of the system ${\cal S}$: e.g., how often does it manifest the undesirable behaviors, how reliable is its track record, etc. Testing the trust hypothesis $\theta$ should tell us whether to stick with it, or replace it with another trust statement.
In this section, we assume that the trust hypothesis $\Pr_\theta$ is given: e.g. from the records of past behaviors. The statistic $f$ presents a new record, capturing recent behaviors. The task is to align the two. The problem of formulating $\Pr_\theta$ will be discussed in the next section.
\subsection{Significance testing of trust}\label{Sec:Significance}
For simplicity, assume that the system ${\cal S}$ has just 4 observable behaviors, collected in the set ${\cal B} = \{a,b,c,d\}$. To be trustworthy, the system should manifest the acceptable behavior $a$ at least $98\%$ of time. It may block $b$, or crash $c$ for $.5\%$ of the time, and it may delay $d$ its functioning for $1\%$ of the time. So we postulate the \emph{null hypothesis}\/ that the system ${\cal S}$ behaves according to the probability distribution $\Pr_0: \{a,b,c,d\}\rightarrow [0,1]$ displayed on Table~\ref{Tab:null}.
\begin{table}[htdp]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|r||c|c|c|c|}
\hline
${\cal B}$ & $a$ & $b$ & $c$ & $d$ \\
\hline
\hline
${\rm Pr}_0$ & .98 & .005 & .005 & .01\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Trustworthy behavior}
\end{center}
\label{Tab:null}
\end{table}%
For even more simplicity, assume that we observe just one of the events from the set $\{a,b,c,d\}$. This means that the statistic $f:\{a,b,c,d\}\rightarrow {\Bbb R}$ will have the value 1 for one event, and 0 for the rest. Should we continue to trust the system ${\cal S}$?
In statistics, the answer to this question is reduced to determining whether the sample represented by the statistic $f$ is \emph{significant}\/ enough to reject the null hypothesis (which was in our case that the system ${\cal S}$ was trustworthy). The idea of statistical \emph{significance testing}\/ is that the observation $f$ is significant enough to reject the null hypothesis just when the observation $f$ is extremely unlikely according to the null hypothesis. So we could fix a very small number $\alpha \gt 0$ and say that the null hypothesis should be rejected if $x$ is observed such that
\begin{eqnarray}
{\rm Pr}_0\big(f(x) = 1\big) &\lt & \alpha
\end{eqnarray}
Since the times before computers, the scientists got in the habit of tabulating and using $\alpha = 5\%$ and $\alpha = 1\%$. So if we use $\alpha = 1\%$ and observe $b$ or $c$, we would have to reject the null hypothesis, and stop trusting the system ${\cal S}$; and if we observe $a$ or $d$ we could continue to trust it.
But to not oversimplify things, we should mention that already the founder of statistics, Ronald Fisher, argued in \cite{FisherR:1925,FisherR:1959} that a test should be considered significant and the null hypothesis rejected only when
\begin{eqnarray}\label{pval}
\sum_{{\rm Pr}_0(y) \leq P}{\rm Pr}_0(y
& \lt & \alpha
\end{eqnarray}
where $P = {\rm Pr}_0\big(f(x)=1\big)$ for the observed event $x$. In words, the total probability of all events $y$ that are at least as unlikely as the observed event $x$ should be less than $\alpha$. The left-hand side of \eqref{pval} is the \emph{$p$-value} of the observation $f$ under the hypothesis ${\rm Pr}_0$. The $p$-value of both $b$ and $c$ is now $.1$, and the null hypothesis is never rejected. The $p$-values for $a$ and $d$ are $1$ and $.2$ respectively.
\paragraph{Remark} It should be noted here that significance testing is a typical embodiment of the \emph{negative}\/ logics of scientific induction: a test is only significant if it \emph{disproves}\/ the null hypothesis. This aspect of inductive logic is similar to the proof by contradiction in deductive logic; but it is different from deductive logic in that this is the \emph{only}\/ inductive proof schema, while deductive logic also has the positive schemas. This logical constraint is \emph{just}\/ what makes inductive logic and the scientific methodologies built upon it, suitable for the reasoning about security and trust, as it echoes the fact that they can always be broken, and cannot be assured by logics.
\subsection{Powerful testing of trust}\label{Sec:Pow}
While the significance testing allows rejecting the null hypothesis when significant tests are found, it does not allow drawing any conclusions about the null hypothesis when it is not rejected, and no conclusions about the other hypotheses when the null hypothesis is rejected. The testing method devised by Neyman and Pearson \cite{Neyman:Pearson:1928,Neyman:Pearson:1933} considers two competing hypotheses ${\rm Pr}_\theta:{\cal B}\rightarrow [0,1]$, for $\theta\in \{0,1\}$, and maximizes the probability that the null hypothesis $\theta = 0$ is rejected when the alternate hypothesis $\theta = 1$ happens to be true. This probability is called the \emph{power}\/ of a test.
It is assumed that the null hypothesis $\theta = 0$, claiming that the observed sample will be distributed according to ${\rm Pr}_0:{\cal B} \rightarrow [0,1]$, is the one that is currently accepted, whereas the alternate hypothesis $\theta = 1$, claiming that the observations will be distributed according to ${\rm Pr}_1:{\cal B} \rightarrow [0,1]$, will gain validity if the test turns out to be significant and rejects the null hypothesis. For instance, when a scientist hypothesizes that a phenomenon $A$ is the cause of the phenomenon $B$, then the null hypothesis is usually taken to be the claim that the phenomenon $B$ is not correlated to $A$, whereas the alternate hypothesis is the claim $A$ and $B$ are correlated. When a judge needs to decide whether the accused $A$ has committed a crime $B$, then the null hypothesis is that $A$ is innocent with respect to $B$, whereas the alternate hypothesis is that $A$ is guilty of $B$.
To continue with the example from Sec.~\ref{Sec:Significance}, now consider the two hypothetic distributions of the behaviors in the system ${\cal S}$ displayed in Table~\ref{Tab:alt}. In the last line of the table is the \emph{likelihood ratio}\/ $\frac{{\rm Pr}_1(x)}{{\rm Pr}_0(x)}$. Neyman and Pearson \cite{Neyman:Pearson:1928} use the likelihood ratio to decide when to reject the null hypothesis $\theta = 0$ in favor of the alternative hypothesis $\theta = 1$.
\begin{table}[htdp]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|r||c|c|c|c|}
\hline
${\cal B}$ & $a$ & $b$ & $c$ & $d$ \\
\hline
\hline
${\rm Pr}_0$ & .98 & .005 & .005 & .01\\
\hline
${\rm Pr}_1$ & .098 & .001 & .001 & .9\\
\hline\hline
$\frac{{\rm Pr}_1(x)}{{\rm Pr}_0(x)}$ & .1 & .2 & .2 & 90 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Trustworthy vs untrustworthy behavior}
\end{center}
\label{Tab:alphabeta}
\end{table}%
For this purpose, they introduce the decision thresholds $\alpha$ and $\beta$, displayed in Table~\ref{Tab:alphabeta}, which define the error probabilities as follows
\begin{itemize}
\item $\alpha$ is the probability that the null hypothesis is rejected when it is true, whereas
\item $\beta$ is the probability that the null hypothesis is not rejected when it is false.
\end{itemize}
\begin{table}[htdp]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{cr||c|c|}
\cline{3-4}
&& \multicolumn{2}{c|}{reality} \\
\cline{3-4}
& & $\theta = 1$ & $\theta = 0$ \\
\hline\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\multirow{2}{*}{decision}} & $\theta = 1$ & \begin{minipage}[c]{2.5cm}
true \\
$1-\alpha$ confidence
\end{minipage} &\begin{minipage}[c]{2.5cm}
false negative \\
$\beta = \Pr(0|1)$
\end{minipage} \\
\cline{2-4}
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{} & $\theta = 0$ & \begin{minipage}[c]{2.5cm}
false positive \\
$\alpha = \Pr(1|0)$
\end{minipage} & \begin{minipage}[c]{2.5cm}
true \\
$1-\beta$ strength
\end{minipage}
\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Decision thresholds $\alpha$ and $\beta$}
\end{center}
\label{Tab:alt}
\end{table}%
Since the rejection of the null hypothesis is conventionally viewed as the positive outcome a statistical test, the first type of error is called a \emph{false positive}\/ decision, whereas the second type of error is called a \emph{false negative}. E.g. in the court of law, sentencing an innocent person is a false positive, and letting a guilty person free is a false negative, since the null hypothesis is that the accused is innocent, and the burden of proof towards rejecting this hypothesis is on the prosecution. In a fire alarm system, the null hypothesis is that there is no fire, and the false positive is when the alarm rings without fire, whereas a false negative is when the alarm does not ring when there is fire. It is generally accepted as worse to have false positives, since they lead to switching off the fire alarms, rejecting the entire testing frameworks, and thus impelling the negatives as the only outcomes. Neyman and Pearson therefore design the testing frameworks where the upper bound $\alpha$ of the false positive decisions is chosen by the tester, and then the upper bound for the false negative decisions is minimized. The \emph{power}\/ of a test is defined to be the probability $1-\beta$ that the null hypothesis is rejected when it is really false. The Neyman-Pearson Lemma \cite{Neyman:Pearson:1928} says that the maximally powerful test is given by the decision rule that the null hypothesis of innocence should be rejected whenever the likelihood of guilt is
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq-NP}
L(x) \ =\ \frac{\Pr_1(x)}{\Pr_0(x)} & \gt & \eta
\end{eqnarray}
where the threshold $\eta$ is such that the chance of false positives is
\begin{eqnarray}
\Pr\left(L(x) \gt \eta\ |\ \theta = 0\right) & = &\alpha
\end{eqnarray}
The claim that \eqref{eq-NP} gives the most powerful test means that if the chance $\alpha$ in \eqref{eq-alpha} is fixed, then $\beta$ in
\begin{eqnarray}
\Pr\left(L(x) \leq \eta\ |\ \theta = 1\right) & = & \beta
\end{eqnarray}
is minimal for the fixed when $L(x) = \frac{\Pr_1(x)}{\Pr_0(x)}$. Recall that $\alpha$ is the chance that an innocent subject is found guilty, whereas $\beta$ is the chance that a guilty subject is found innocent. Going back to the trust test from Sec.~\ref{Sec:Significance}, where $f:\{a,b,c,d\} \rightarrow {\Bbb R}$ captured the observation of a single system event, the Neyman-Pearson powerful testing would reject the null hypothesis $\theta = 0$ in favor of the alternative hypothesis $\theta = 1$ at the level $\alpha = 1\%$ only if the event $d$ is observed, and otherwise fails to obtain a significant result. This means that we should only reject the trust hypothesis $\theta = 0$ and endorse the hypothesis $\theta = 1$ that the system ${\cal S}$ is not trustworthy if the observed delays $d$ amount to more than $1\%$ of the sampled performance time. Crashing or blocking $.5\%$ of the time should not trigger our distrust.
Note that the threshold $\alpha = 1\%$, imposed in the powerful testing as the upper bound of the false positives, has eliminated the significance of the observations $b$ and $c$, which were significant enough to cause the rejection of the null hypothesis at the same threshold level $\alpha = 1\%$ in Sec.~\ref{Sec:Significance}. On the other hand, the minimization of the false negatives in the powerful testing has now introduced the observation $d$ as significant, which it was not the significance testing. The two testing approaches thus implement two incomparable views of trust. It seems worth while to further explore which one might be more suitable for which application domains.
Although the powerful testing allows comparing pairs of hypotheses (albeit in essentially asymmetric roles of the null hypothesis and its alternative!), it actually provides little help in selecting between \emph{multiple}\/ alternative hypotheses. The best we can do with powerful testing in such situations is to test the null hypothesis against each of the candidate alternatives. However, such approaches lead to pathological situations, where the hypothesis $0$ is rejected against $1$, $1$ against $2$, and $2$ against $1$. Similar phenomena arise when the same significance test is applied to several hypotheses, in the hope that some will be rejected and some not. Overcoming such difficulties requires randomized sampling, Bayesian reasoning, and controlled experiments.
\subsection{Experimental testing of trust}\label{Sec:Exp}
If I know an overall probability $\Pr(0)$ that a system similar to ${\cal S}$ might be trustworthy, and $\Pr(1) =1-\Pr(0)$ that it might not be trustworthy, then I could derive the probability $\Pr(0|x)$ that the system ${\cal S}$ is trustworthy after the observed behavior $x\in {\cal B}$ using the Bayes' law:
\begin{eqnarray}
\Pr(0|x) & = & \frac{{\rm Pr}_0(x)\Pr(0)}{{\rm Pr}_0(x)\Pr(0) + {\rm Pr}_1(x)\Pr(1)}
\end{eqnarray}
If there are several hypotheses $\theta \in \Theta = \{0, 1, 2,\ldots, n\}$ about the behavioral profiles of the systems, then I can calculate the probability of each of them after the observation $x\in {\cal B}$ by the general formula
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Bayes}
\Pr(\theta |x) & = & \frac{{\rm Pr}_\theta(x)\Pr(\theta)}{\sum_{\psi \in \Theta} {\rm Pr}_\psi(x)\Pr(\psi)}
\end{eqnarray}
However, the only way to control the distribution $\Pr: \Theta \rightarrow [0,1]$ of the trust profiles of a population of systems to which ${\cal S}$ belongs is to model this population in the experimental environment of a laboratory, where I could control that the sample is distributed according to $\Pr: \Theta \rightarrow [0,1]$. Sampling the behaviors of the system ${\cal S}$ in this controlled environment would then allow me to calculate $\Pr(\theta | x)$ according to \eqref{Bayes} for all profiles $\theta \in \Theta$, and to select the most likely profile $\theta = 0\in \Theta$ as my current trust hypothesis about ${\cal S}$.
But even this experimental environment, where I can impose the prior probability $\Pr:\Theta \rightarrow [0,1]$ by controlling the sample, does not give me the prior probabilities $\Pr_\theta :{\cal B}\rightarrow [0,1]$, which express the trust hypotheses to be tested. Where do they come from?
\section{Formulating trust hypotheses}\label{Sec:Formulating}
How exactly should I find the trust hypotheses suitable for testing? How should I select the most important ones?
\subsection{The scientific presumption of innocence}\label{Sec:NullTrust}
Both the scientific methodology and the sound legal practices suggest that the null hypothesis should be that the system is trustworthy, i.e. "innocent until proven guilty" \cite{PenningtonK:innocent}. The alternate hypotheses should describe the various forms of undesired behavior, which the tested sample might uncover if the null hypothesis is rejected.
If I know the statistical profile of the desired normal behavior of a system, then I should take that profile as the null hypothesis ${\rm Pr}_0:{\cal B}\rightarrow [0,1]$. But it is usually difficult to specify the desired normal behavior as a single profile. It is much easier to characterize each of the abnormal behaviors, which we learn from the anomalies experienced in the past. That is why the statistical intrusion detection systems \cite{DenningD:IDM,LuntT:IDS,IDS-Bayes} and forensics mostly work with the statistical profiles of intruders and criminals, and test these profiles as the null hypotheses.
The problem with this "guilty until proven innocent" approach is not just that it is unfair in court. A greater problem arises from the logical limitation of inductive inference: that \emph{the null hypothesis can never be proved by a finite number of tests, but can only be disproved}. By testing the profiles of guilt on the given samples of behaviors, we can never demonstrate anyone's guilt; we can only fail to disprove it. The consequence in the realm of security is that the trust based on testing and rejecting every known form of undesirable behavior is not only impractical, but also the weakest possible form of trust. All that you know is that no guilt has been proven yet. The complexity and the ineffectiveness of this method is illustrated time and again by the complexity and the ineffectiveness of the vetting procedures, which often admit untrustworthy subjects, while regularly rejecting trustworthy subjects. Scientifically based trust, based on testing the null hypothesis that the subject is trustworthy, would obviously be simpler and more effective, both because it allows sound statistical controls of the false positives and the false negatives, and also because it eliminates not only the known anomalies, but all anomalies that are inconsistent with the normal behavior profile described by the null hypothesis.
But where can I find the statistical profile ${\rm Pr}_0: {\cal B}\rightarrow[0,1]$ characterizing the trustworthy behavior of the system ${\cal S}$? I could log the normal functioning of the system for a long time; but which observable system events ${\cal B}$ yield the relevant observations?
The \emph{first limitation}\/ of scientific induction, discussed so far, is that it never proves, but only disproves its hypotheses. Here we confront its \emph{second limitation}: the null hypotheses cannot be extracted from the empiric data, but always have to be formulated \emph{a priori}.
\subsection{Compressing trust}\label{Sec:Apriori}
The problem of formulating \emph{a priori}\/ hypotheses was discussed in philosophy of science several centuries ago, but remained unsolved.
The path towards the modern solutions was opened by Ray Solomonoff \cite{SolomonoffR:64}, and cleared by Andrei Kolmogorov \cite{KolmogorovA:statistic} and his school. The versions suitable for practical applications in machine learning and in statistics were developed by Jorma Rissanen \cite{RissanenJ:book}, Chris Wallace \cite{wallace2005statistical}, and many others. Very roughly, the idea is as follows.
Continuing with the notation from Sec.~\ref{Sec:Exp}, we still denote the set of hypotheses by $\Theta$. The problem is that we do not know the probabilities ${\rm Pr}_\theta :{\cal B}\rightarrow [0,1]$. We are, however, given a sufficiently large data sample, from which we extract the frequency distribution ${\rm Pr} : {\cal B}\rightarrow [0,1]$ of each observation.
The task is now to find a hypothesis $\theta = \theta_0\in \Theta$ such that ${\rm Pr}_0 : {\cal B}\rightarrow [0,1]$ maximizes the conditional probability $\Pr(\theta_0|x)$ in \eqref{Bayes} when the behavior $x\in {\cal B}$ is observed. Since
\begin{eqnarray}
{\rm Pr} (x) & = & \sum_{\psi\in \Theta} {\rm Pr}_\psi(x)\Pr(\psi)
\end{eqnarray}
the Bayes' formula \eqref{Bayes} now becomes
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Bayes-min}
\Pr(\theta | x) & = & \frac{{\rm Pr}_\theta(x)\Pr(\theta)}{{\rm Pr}(x)}
\end{eqnarray}
The null hypothesis $\theta_0$ gives the probability distribution ${\rm Pr}_0:{\cal B} \rightarrow [0,1]$ such that for the observed $x$ holds ${\rm Pr}(\theta_0|x)\geq {\rm Pr}(\theta|x)$ for all $\theta \in \Theta$. Since the probability $\Pr(x)$ is given by the observed data, the task only depends on the unknown hypotheses $\theta \in \Theta$.
The idea used by Solomonoff, Kolmogorov and others is to apply Occam's razor here, and to postulate that \emph{the simplest hypotheses have the highest \emph{a priori} probability}. The idea is implemented by taking into account the \emph{lengths of the descriptions}\/ of the probabilities in \eqref{Bayes-min}. Using the optimal Shannon-Fano encodings \cite{Cover-Thomas}, we can write a number $p\in [0,1]$ using $-\log p$ bits. The task of maximizing \eqref{Bayes-min} now becomes the task of minimizing
\begin{eqnarray*}
-\log \Pr(\theta | x) & = & -\log {\rm Pr}_\theta(x) - \log \Pr(\theta) + \log {\rm Pr}(x)
\end{eqnarray*}
Since ${\rm Pr}(x)$ is fixed, this means that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{MDL}
\theta_0 & = & \underset{{\theta\in \Theta}}{{\rm argmin}
\left\{ -\log {\rm Pr}_\theta(x) - \log \Pr(\theta)\right\}
\end{eqnarray}
This is equivalent to ${\rm Pr}_0(x) \cdot\Pr(\theta_0) \geq {\rm Pr}_\theta(x) \cdot\Pr(\theta)$ for all $\theta \in \Theta$, which picks $\theta_0$ to maximize the chance that $x$ is observed. This is what makes $\theta_0$ the best \emph{a priori}\/ null hypothesis. The minimality of the description length $-\log \Pr(\theta_0)$ means that $\theta_0$ is the simplest. The minimality of $-\log \Pr_0(x)$, or equivalently the maximality $\Pr_0(x)$, means that $x$ is the most likely prediction of $\theta_0$. The minimality of $-\log {\rm Pr}_0(x) - \log \Pr(\theta_0)$ means that $\theta_0$ is the simplest hypothesis among those that predict $x$.
Instantiated to the realm of trust, \eqref{MDL} thus says that the best trust hypothesis is the one that provides the shortest description of my notion of trust, which fits the observations that I have made.
The rapidly expanding research area of algorithmic learning and statistical inference is concerned not only with the effective computations of the \emph{a priori}\/ hypotheses, but also with the situations where the succinct descriptions of the data and the hypotheses need to be combined with empiric data. The right-hand side of \eqref{MDL} is roughly Rissanen's Minimum Description Length (MDL) \cite{RissanenJ:book} of the distribution of the observed data $x$. Wallace's Minimum Message Length (MML) \cite{RissanenJ:book} differs in the compression methods used. Kolmogorov's minimal sufficient statistic \cite{KolmogorovA:statistic} uses the optimal computable encodings as the compression method. The standard compression algorithms, e.g. based on the very efficient Lempel-Ziv algorithms \cite{Lempel-Ziv-1,Lempel-Ziv-2} are also often used, and give reasonable results. In any case, the best null hypothesis is the one which best compresses the observed data $x$, within some given family of compression algorithms. The underlying idea is that the better we understand the data, the better we compress them.
Although these methods give somewhat degenerate results when applied to our toy examples from Sec.~\ref{Sec:Testing}, just slightly larger trust hypotheses show the intuitive meaning of \eqref{MDL} in the realm of trust. My trust hypothesis should be the simplest description of the desired behaviors which best approximates the observed behaviors of the tested system.
\section{Background and future work}\label{Sec:Final}
The main claim of this paper is that the methods of statistical inference, on which modern science has been built, can be used to analyze and secure trust. We close the paper relating this idea with the general context of trust research, and in particular with the existing application of statistical methods to trust testing in the framework of intrusion detection.
The literature about trust is very extensive, as it is studied in psychology, social sciences, economics, game theory \cite{BergJ:reciprocity,buskens2002social,luhmann1979trust}. Even within the closely related security research communities, the word 'trust' is used in several different meanings \cite{BoydC:trust-survey}. The notion of trust used in this paper is based on \cite{PavlovicD:FAST10}.
A quantitative analysis of the process of trust building was initiated in \cite{PavlovicD:FAST08}. The question of trust decisions was, however, avoided by reducing them to the preferences extracted from the trust ratings. The question of trust measurements was avoided by reducing them to user ratings and feedback, which are usually available in web commerce, but not in general. In system security, the task of quantifying security in general and trust in particular becomes a problem \cite{BellovinS:brittle,WilliamsL:philosophies}. In the present paper, we did not consider the problem of quantifying trust \emph{a posteriori}, i.e. using the measurements of the past performance, but focused on the harder problem of formulating the trust hypotheses \emph{a priori}, i.e. before any empiric data are available. This problem arises even if the satisfactory methods for quantifying trust and security \emph{a posteriori}\/ are available, because the data are not always available. On the other hand, understanding how to express the \emph{a priori}\/ trust beliefs may also help in devising and validating the methods to quantify them \emph{a posteriori}.
The idea of \emph{statistical intrusion detection}, going back to Dorothy Denning \cite{DenningD:IDM} and her work with Peter Neumann at SRI in the 80s, can be viewed as an application of statistics to detect the subjects or the components that are not trustworthy. An early survey is \cite{LuntT:IDS}. The practices of intrusion detection have evolved a lot since those early days, and the rule based methods seem to have found broader applications than the statistical methods. One of the reasons often mentioned is the difficulty to control the false positives that arise when statistical tests are used to detect the intruders. We explained in Sec.~\ref{Sec:NullTrust} why the statistical methodologies suggest that trust testing should be based on taking a trustworthy behavior as the null hypothesis, and why testing for anomalies and the untrustworthy behaviors leads to the false positives that are harder to control, and to less reliable results overall. In statistics, proving that someone is not trustworthy is not equivalent to disproving that they are trustworthy. The general method for controlling the false positives when disproving trust is outlined in Sec.~\ref{Sec:Pow}. The false positives thus emerge as a hard problem in statistical intrusion detection because it tests for the intrusions, and not for trust. The reason is, of course, that the intruder profiles are much easier to come by than the trustworthy profiles. In the Sec.~\ref{Sec:Formulating}, we discussed the way to solve this problem using the methods of algorithmic learning. Whether that brief discussion explained or obscured the idea, there is very little doubt that at least a theoretical solution lies in this direction. But the practical work towards implementing such computation-based scientific methodologies on the concrete problems of trust lies ahead.
\subsection*{Acknowledgements.}
The comments and suggestions provided by Cormac Herley, Volodya Vovk and the anonymous referees helped me to improve the text. Some of their most interesting questions had to be left for future work.
|
\section{\@startsection{section}{1}{\z@}{3.5ex plus 1ex minus
.2ex}{2.3ex plus .2ex}{\large\bf}}
\makeatletter
\renewcommand{\@seccntformat}[1]{\csname the#1\endcsname.\quad}
\makeatother
\renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\fnsymbol{footnote}}
\long\def\@makefntext#1{\parindent 0cm\noindent
\hbox to 1em{\hss$^{\@thefnmark}$}#1}
\newcommand{\small}{\small}
\makeatletter
\long\def\@makecaption#1#2{%
\vskip\abovecaptionskip
\sbox\@tempboxa{{\small #1: #2}}%
\ifdim \wd\@tempboxa >\hsize
{\small #1: #2\par}
\else
\hbox to\hsize{\hfil\box\@tempboxa\hfil}%
\fi
\vskip\belowcaptionskip}
\makeatother
\begin{document}
\begin{titlepage}
\vspace{.5in}
\begin{flushright}
March 2015\\
revised July 2015
\end{flushright}
\vspace{.5in}
\begin{center}
{\Large\bf
Four-Dimensional Entropy from Three-Dimensional Gravity}\\
\vspace{.4in}
{S.~C{\sc arlip}\footnote{\it email: <EMAIL>}\\
{\small\it Department of Physics}\\
{\small\it University of California}\\
{\small\it Davis, CA 95616}\\{\small\it USA}}
\end{center}
\vspace{.5in}
\begin{center}
{\large\bf Abstract}
\end{center}
\begin{center}
\begin{minipage}{4.95in}
{\small
At the horizon of a black hole, the action of (3+1)-dimensional loop
quantum gravity acquires a boundary term that is formally identical
to an action for three-dimensional gravity. I show how to use this
correspondence to obtain the entropy of the (3+1)-dimensional black
hole from well-understood conformal field theory computations of
the entropy in (2+1)-dimensional de Sitter space.
}
\end{minipage}
\end{center}
\end{titlepage}
\addtocounter{footnote}{-1}
The ability to explain black hole thermodynamics is a key test of any
quantum theory of gravity. In this regard, loop quantum gravity has
a mixed record. The correct area dependence of black hole entropy
appears quite naturally \cite{ABCK,ABK}. But to obtain quantitative
agreement with the semiclassical results of Bekenstein
and Hawking, it seems necessary to tune a rather mysterious
parameter, the Barbero-Immirzi parameter $\gamma$, to a peculiar
value determined by a complex combinatorial computation
\cite{Domagala,Meissner}.
In the past few years, there have been intriguing hints that the
entropy can also be obtained by setting $\gamma=i$
\cite{Geiller,Achour,GhoshPran,Carlipz}. This is the natural value:
it makes the theory self-dual \cite{Ashtekar}, and is the
only choice for which the Ashtekar-Barbero-Sen connection (\ref{a1})
is a fully diffeomorphism-invariant spacetime connection
\cite{Samuel,Alexa}. Unfortunately, with this choice one must
impose a reality conditions, a procedure that remains poorly
defined. As a consequence, the theory with $\gamma=i$ is not
nearly as mathematically sophisticated as the version with real
$\gamma$, and far fewer results have been established.
In this paper, I will describe a simple new method for computing
black hole entropy in loop quantum gravity with $\gamma=i$.
The key observation is that loop quantum gravity requires a
boundary term at a black hole horizon that is formally identical
to an action for three-dimensional gravity with a positive
cosmological constant. The identification is not an obvious
geometric one, but the four-dimensional horizon maps to a
well understood three-dimensional spacetime, and
one can exploit this association to use standard techniques
of conformal field theory to count the states.
\section{Two $\hbox{SL}(2,\mathbb{C})$ actions}
We start with (3+1)-dimensional gravity in first-order form,
treating the tetrad one-form $e^I = e_\mu{}^Idx^\mu$ and
the spin connection one-form $\omega^{IJ} =\omega_\mu{}^{IJ}dx^\mu$
as independent variables. The Ashtekar-Sen self-dual connection
\cite{Ashtekar,Sen} is $A^{IJ} = \frac{1}{2}%
\left(\omega^{IJ} + \frac{i}{2}\epsilon^{IJ}{}_{KL}\omega^{KL} \right)$,
but to avoid double-counting components, it is sufficient to consider
the complexified $\hbox{SU}(2)$---or equivalently,
$\hbox{SL}(2,\mathbb{C})$---connection
\begin{align}
A^i = i\omega^{0i} + \frac{1}{2}\epsilon^{ijk}\omega_{jk} ,
\label{a1}
\end{align}
where lower case Roman indices run from $1$ to $3$ (see, for instance,
section 4.3 of \cite{Rovelli}). The gravitational action can then be written
in the form \cite{JacobsonSmolin,Samuelb}
\begin{align}
I_4 = -\frac{i}{16\pi G_4}\int\! d^4x\, \Sigma_i\wedge F^i ,
\label{a2}
\end{align}
where $F^i = dA^i + \epsilon^{ijk}A_j\wedge A_k$ is the curvature
of the connection and
$\Sigma^i = ie^0\wedge e^i + \frac{1}{2}\epsilon^{ijk}e_j\wedge e_k$
is the self-dual projection of $e^I\wedge e^J$.
The real part of (\ref{a2}) is equal to the standard
Einstein-Hilbert action, while the imaginary part is essentially
irrelevant: it is extremal whenever the real part is, so it does not
change the equations of motion, and it vanishes on shell.
In loop quantum gravity, the factor of $i$ in (\ref{a1}) is often replaced
by an arbitrary parameter $\gamma$, the Barbero-Immirzi parameter.
The quantization becomes much simpler when $\gamma$ is chosen to
be real, but as noted above, hints are now appearing that the self-dual
choice $\gamma=\pm i$ simplifies and clarifies the description of
black hole entropy.
Now suppose that a black hole is present, with a horizon $\Delta$
of area $A_\Delta$. For the surface $\Delta$ to be an isolated horizon
\cite{ISO}, it must obey a geometric restriction, which translates to
the condition \cite{ABCK,Krasnova}
\begin{align}
F^i = -\frac{2\pi}{A_\Delta}\Sigma^i \quad\hbox{on $\Delta$.}
\label{a5}
\end{align} Although the horizon is not a physical boundary, the
imposition of (\ref{a5}) forces us to add a ``boundary'' term to the
action. As first noted by Smolin in a slightly different context
\cite{Smolin}, the required term is a Chern-Simons action. The
specific form depends on the Barbero-Immirzi parameter; for
our choice $\gamma = i$, it is a chiral $\hbox{SL}(2,\mathbb{C})$
Chern-Simons action
\begin{align}
I_\Delta = \frac{k}{4\pi} \int_\Delta \mathrm{Tr}
\left\{A\wedge dA + \frac{2}{3} A\wedge A\wedge A \right\} ,
\label{a6}
\end{align}
where $A = A^iT_i$ is the $\hbox{sl}(2,\mathbb{C})$-valued connection
with generators normalized so $\mathrm{Tr}(T_iT_j) = \frac{1}{2}\eta_{ij}$,
and the coupling constant $k$ is expressed in terms of (3+1)-dimensional
gravitational quantities as
\begin{align}
k_{4D} = \frac{iA_\Delta}{8\pi G_4} .
\label{a7}
\end{align}
Moreover, the symplectic form---that is, the set of Poisson brackets%
---also acquires a boundary term for the connection at the horizon,
which is identical to the symplectic form of Chern-Simons theory (see, e.g.,
\cite{Pranzetti}). Thus components of the connection, which commute
in the bulk, become canonically conjugate at $\Delta$, and by the usual
rules of quantization we expect a Hilbert space
$\mathcal{H}_{\mathrm\scriptstyle bulk}\otimes \mathcal{H}_\Delta$,
with the bulk and horizon states related by the operator version of the
boundary conditions (\ref{a5}) \cite{ABK}.
So far, I have not used loop quantum gravity. I now exploit
one general feature of that quantization. Classically, the boundary
conditions (\ref{a5}) imply that the boundary $\hbox{SL}(2,\mathbb{C})$
connection is not flat, and is thus not an extremum of the Chern-Simons
action. In loop quantum gravity, though, quantum states are described
by spin networks, and the area element on the right-hand side of
(\ref{a5}) is distributional, differing from zero only at the ``punctures''
where spin network edges intersect the horizon. The boundary conditions
\emph{are} then equivalent to the equations of motion for a Chern-Simons
theory, but now on a sphere with punctures (or, technically, a manifold
$\mathbb{R}\times S^2$ with Wilson lines) \cite{WittenCS}. Hence the
boundary Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}_\Delta$ is that of a Chern-Simons
theory on a sphere with punctures. In standard loop quantum gravity,
one can say much more---holonomies around punctures give calculable
elements of area---but we shall not need any of those details; it is
enough that the boundary theory acts as an independent Chern-Simons
theory coupled to the bulk through a set of punctures.
The action (\ref{a6}) also appears in a very different context, though:
it is the first-order action for (2+1)-dimensional gravity with
a positive cosmological constant $\Lambda=1/\ell^2$ \cite{Wittenx}.
The connection is now
\begin{align}
{\tilde A}^a = \frac{1}{2}\epsilon^{abc}{\tilde\omega}_{bc}
+ \frac{i}{\ell}{\tilde e}^a ,
\label{a8}
\end{align}
where ${\tilde e}^a$ and ${\tilde\omega}^{bc}$ are the three-dimensional
triad and spin connection, and the coupling constant $k$ is
\begin{align}
k_{3D} = \frac{i\ell}{2G_3} ,
\label{a9}
\end{align}
now expressed in terms of (2+1)-dimensional quantities.
Much as in the four-dimensional case, the real part of (\ref{a6}) gives
the usual Einstein-Hilbert action, while the imaginary part is an
``exotic'' term that is extremal when the real part is extremal and
vanishes on shell.\footnote{The (2+1)-dimensional
action is usually written as a
sum of (\ref{a8}) and its complex conjugate, in which case the
coupling constant for each term is half of (\ref{a9}). Here, though,
we wish to match the (3+1)-dimensional action, which is chiral.}
The $\hbox{SL}(2,\mathbb{C})$ Chern-Simons action is also related
to ``Euclidean anti-de Sitter space''; I will return to this point in the
conclusion.
Although the two appearances of the Chern-Simons action both
involve gravity, their mathematical equivalence is, as far as I know,
purely accidental. One can try to construct a geometrical relationship,
but if one exists, it is subtle. Indeed, comparing (\ref{a1}) and
(\ref{a8}), we see that while the connections can be made to match,
the triad ${\tilde e}^a$ in three dimensions corresponds to the
extrinsic curvature in four dimensions. Hence we might not expect
the three-dimensional theory to give a simple geometrical picture
of the states (although see \cite{Carlipz,CarlipGF}). Still, the formal
equivalence of the actions will be enough to determine the
(3+1)-dimensional Bekenstein-Hawking entropy.
\section{Entropy}
Let us focus for now on (\ref{a6}) as an action for (2+1)-dimensional
gravity. For the case of a \emph{negative} cosmological constant,
the counting of states in such a theory is well understood
\cite{Strominger,BSS}, although the exact nature of those states
is not \cite{Carlipbh}. As Brown and Henneaux showed, the
asymptotic symmetry in such a theory is a two-dimensional
conformal symmetry \cite{BrownHenneaux}, which is powerful
enough that the Cardy formula determines the asymptotic density
of states without requiring any further details \cite{Cardy,Cardy2,Carlipc}.
For the case of a positive cosmological constant, there is no
asymptotic spatial boundary, and the picture is not as
clean. One can, however, look at the asymptotic symmetries
at timelike infinity \cite{Bala,Maloney,Umetsu}; or impose boundary
conditions on a tube, which can be viewed as the world line of an
observer \cite{Park}; or continue to negative $\Lambda$
\cite{BBO}; or perhaps obtain a central charge directly from the
symmetries of the phase space \cite{Kelly}.
One obtains a consistent answer: a ``puncture'' with
$\hbox{SL}(2,\mathbb{C})$ holonomy conjugate to
\begin{align}
H = \left(\begin{array}{cc} e^{\pi i r_+/\ell}&a\\0&e^{-\pi i r_+/\ell}
\end{array}\right)
\label{b1}
\end{align}
gives a local geometry of a cone, and contributes an entropy
\begin{align}
S = \frac{2\pi r_+}{4G_3} = -ik_{3D}\frac{\pi r_+}{\ell} .
\label{b2}
\end{align}
(For subtleties coming from the fact that we are considering a
purely chiral action, see \cite{Parkx}.)
While (\ref{b2}) was derived in $2+1$ dimensions, it is ultimately
a statement about the quantum mechanics of the action (\ref{a6}),
which is also the boundary action in $3+1$ dimensions.
We now use a single fact from the four-dimensional picture: a
cross-section of the horizon $\Delta$ at a fixed time is a two-sphere
$S^2$. Consider a loop on this two-sphere surrounding all of
the punctures. On the one hand, the $\hbox{SL}(2,\mathbb{C})$
holonomy of this loop is the product of the holonomies around
each puncture. On the other hand, the loop also surrounds a
region with no punctures, for which the holonomy must be the
identity. Assuming that all of the holonomies are in the same
conjugacy class (\ref{b1})---I will return to this below---it is easy
to see that this requires that
\begin{align}
\sum_{\hbox{\tiny\it punctures}} \frac{\pi r_+}{\ell} = 2\pi .
\label{b3}
\end{align}
Thus from (\ref{b2}) and (\ref{a7}),
\begin{align}
S = -2\pi ik_{3D} = -2\pi ik_{4D} = \frac{A_\Delta}{4G_4} ,
\label{b4}
\end{align}
reproducing the correct Bekenstein-Hawking entropy for the
\emph{four}-dimensional black hole.
\section{The Schwarzschild black hole}
To make the discussion more concrete, let us specialize to the
Schwarzschild black hole. Following Kaul and Majumdar \cite{Kaul},
we write the metric in Kruskal-Szekeres form as
\begin{align}
ds^2 = -2B(r)dvdw + r^2(v,w)(d\theta^2 + \sin^2\theta d\varphi^2)
\quad\ \hbox{with $B = \frac{4r_+{}^3}{r\ }e^{-r/r_+}$,
$-2vw = \left(\frac{r\ }{r_+}-1\right)e^{r/r_+}$}
\label{c1}
\end{align}
and choose a tetrad
\begin{align}
e^0 = \sqrt{\frac{B}{2}}\left(\frac{w}{\alpha}dv + \frac{\alpha}{w}dw\right) ,\qquad
e^1 = \sqrt{\frac{B}{2}}\left(\frac{w}{\alpha}dv - \frac{\alpha}{w}dw\right) ,\qquad
e^2 = rd\theta ,\qquad
e^3 = r\sin\theta d\varphi ,
\label{c2}
\end{align}
where $\alpha$ is an arbitrary function labeling a gauge choice for
local Lorentz transformations. It is then straightforward to compute the
connection (\ref{a1}); at the horizon $r=r_+$, $B=B_+$, $w=0$, one
finds \cite{Kaul}
\begin{align}
A^1 = \cos\theta d\varphi + i\frac{d\alpha}{\alpha} ,\ \
A^2 = -\sqrt{\frac{B_+}{2}}\frac{1}{2r_+}\alpha%
\left(id\theta - \sin\theta d\varphi\right),\ \
A^3 = -\sqrt{\frac{B_+}{2}}\frac{1}{2r_+}\alpha%
\left(i\sin\theta d\varphi + d\theta\right) .
\label{c3}
\end{align}
Now, by (\ref{a8}), the imaginary part of the connection (\ref{c3}) should give
the triad in the (2+1)-dimensional picture. Defining
\begin{align}
\frac{1}{\beta} = \sqrt{\frac{B_+}{2}}\frac{1}{2r_+}\alpha
\label{c4}
\end{align}
we see that the classical (2+1)-dimensional metric is
\begin{align}
ds^2 = \frac{\ell^2}{\beta^2}\left( -d\beta^2 + d\theta^2
+ \sin^2\theta d\varphi^2\right) .
\label{c5}
\end{align}
This is \emph{almost} the de Sitter metric on an expanding patch. It
is not quite; the curvature is not constant, but satisfies an equivalent of
(\ref{a5}). But as noted above, in loop quantum gravity we should
replace the continuous curvature by a collection of punctures, of the
type first introduced by Deser and Jackiw \cite{Deser}. That is, as
in Regge calculus, we should replace (\ref{c5}) by a locally de Sitter metric
\begin{align}
ds^2 = \frac{\ell^2}{\beta^2}\left( -d\beta^2 + dzd{\bar z}\right)
\quad\hbox{with $z=x+iy$}
\label{c6}
\end{align}
with a set of conical singularities that reproduce the curvature of (\ref{c5})
in the large.
Now, the isometry group of the de Sitter metric (\ref{c6}) is
$\hbox{SL}(2,\mathbb{C})$, with an action \cite{sl}
\begin{align}
\left(\begin{array}{cc} a&b\\c&d\end{array} \right): (z, \beta) \rightarrow
\left(\frac{(az+b)({\bar c}{\bar z} + {\bar d}) + a{\bar c}\beta^2}%
{|cz+d|^2 + |c|^2\beta^2}, \frac{\beta}{|cz+d|^2 + |c|^2\beta^2}\right) .
\label{c7}
\end{align}
To obtain the metric (\ref{c5}) from (\ref{c6}), we must add a set of conical
points on surfaces of constant $\beta$. The condition for an isometry
(\ref{c7}) to preserve such surfaces is that $c=0$, $|d|=1$, and
the resulting isometries are precisely the ones given by (\ref{b1}).
In slightly more detail, an elliptic element
\begin{align}
R = \left(\begin{array}{cc} e^{i\theta}&0\\0&e^{-i\theta}\end{array} \right)
\label{c8}
\end{align}
of $\hbox{SL}(2,\mathbb{C})$ rotates $z$ by an angle $2\theta$ around
the origin, while a parabolic element
\begin{align}
T = \left(\begin{array}{cc} 1&a\\0&1\end{array} \right)
\label{c9}
\end{align}
translates $z$ by $a$. An individual puncture at position $a$ thus
corresponds to a holonomy $TRT^{-1}$, equivalent to (\ref{b1}), and
the total holonomy is
\begin{align}
H = T_1R_1T_1{}^{-1}T_2R_2T_2{}^{-1}T_3R_3T_3{}^{-1}\dots
\label{c10}
\end{align}
in agreement with the analysis of the preceding section.
We can now go further. The parabolic element $T$ can be written as
\begin{align}
\left(\begin{array}{cc} 1&a\\0&1\end{array} \right) = \exp\left\{ a(J_1 + K_2)\right\} ,
\label{c12}
\end{align}
where the generators of complexified $\hbox{SU}(2)$ are $J_i=\frac{1}{2}\sigma_i$,
$K_i =\frac{i}{2}\sigma_i$. From a (3+1)-dimensional viewpoint, this is a
null rotation, a Lorentz transformation that leaves a null vector fixed.
Similarly, $RTR^{-1}$ is a null rotation fixing a different, rotated null vector.
The holonomy (\ref{c10}) can be rewritten as
\begin{align}
H = \bigl(T_1\bigr)\bigl(R_1(T_1{}^{-1}T_2)R_1{}^{-1}\bigr)
\bigl((R_1R_2)(T_2{}^{-1}T_3)(R_1R_2)^{-1}\bigr)\dots
\label{c11}
\end{align}
that is, as a product of null rotations.
This is just what one would expect in the self-dual formulation of general
relativity, where the connection (\ref{a1}) involves a sum of a rotation
and a boost. But we can now even identify the null vector being
held fixed. The coordinate $\beta$ in the (2+1)-dimensional
metric (\ref{c5}) originated as a gauge-dependent parameter in the
(3+1)-dimensional tetrad (\ref{c2}). But for (\ref{c5}) to be truly
(2+1)-dimensional, $\beta$ cannot depend on $\theta$ and $\varphi$
alone, but must be a function of the null coordinate $v$ along the horizon.
Indeed, to preserve spherical symmetry, $\beta$ should be a function of
$v$ alone. Hence the isometries (\ref{b1}), chosen in 2+1 dimensions to
leave $\beta$ invariant, fix $v$ in 3+1 dimensions. The null vector that
defines our null rotations is just the null normal to the horizon.
This choice is physically natural, and may offer insights into the underlying
degrees of freedom \cite{Carlipz}. But it is awkward to implement in a
formulation with a real Barbero-Immirzi parameter, perhaps explaining
why the derivation of black hole entropy is simpler with a self-dual
connection.
\section{Implications and open questions}
I have focused on the Schwarzschild black hole, but the general
arguments about the structure of holonomies hold for any black
hole satisfying the isolated horizon boundary conditions (\ref{a5}).
Still, it would be interesting to see an explicit extension to an arbitrary
black hole. For the Kerr black hole, much of the preliminary work
appears in \cite{Roken}, although a more general Lorentz gauge is
needed.
The present derivation of black hole entropy differs from the standard
loop quantum gravity approach of \cite{ABCK,ABK} in an interesting way.
The usual starting point is an ensemble of horizon configurations with
arbitrarily many punctures and arbitrary holonomies, restricted
only by the specified area $A_\Delta$. Counting
states is then a combinatorial problem; an entropy proportional to
area appears naturally, but the Barbero-Immirzi parameter must be
tuned to give the right prefactor. Here, in contrast, the entropy is
derived for a \emph{single} configuration of punctures and holonomies,
now restricted only by the closure condition (\ref{b3}). This is
reminiscent of the proposal that the number of punctures should
be treated as a sort of ``quantum hair'' \cite{GhoshPerez} that
physically distinguishes different black holes. In essence, the
question is in how fine a coarse-graining is needed to define the
entropy.
The method of counting states here also differs from the standard
approach. In contrast to the usual procedure, our central result
(\ref{b2}) depends on no details of the Hilbert space, but only on
the fact that an $\hbox{SL}(2,\mathbb{C})$ Chern-Simons theory
implies a two-dimensional conformal symmetry, which is powerful
enough to severely constrain the density of states. Similar symmetry
arguments have been used in other attempts to count black hole
states---see \cite{CEntropy} for a review---and it is intriguing that
the central charge $c=6k$ here is nearly identical to the value obtained
in those approaches, differing by a factor of two. Any relationship
between these analyses must be a bit subtle, since the conformal
methods of \cite{CEntropy} involve symmetries in the ``$r$--$t$
plane'' rather than symmetries of spatial sections of the horizon. But as
Pranzetti has pointed out \cite{Pranzettib}, the self-dual connection
(\ref{a1}) automatically links transformations in these different spaces,
so a relationship might exist.
There is another direction in which this work might be extended.
An $\hbox{SL}(2,\mathbb{C})$ Chern-Simons theory is a theory of
(2+1)-dimensional de Sitter gravity, but also of ``Euclidean anti-de
Sitter gravity,'' that is, (2+1)-dimensional gravity with $\Lambda<0$
analytically continued to Riemannian signature. Punctures then
correspond to point particles in AdS, and the quantization is almost
certainly related to Liouville theory \cite{Krasnov}. An interesting
new possibility now arises if we allow the elliptic holonomies (\ref{b1})
to lie in different conjugacy classes. The product of a large number
of random elliptic elements of $\hbox{SL}(2,\mathbb{C})$ is exponentially
likely to be hyperbolic \cite{Furstenberg,Quint}, and a hyperbolic
isometry in AdS signals the appearance of a three-dimensional black
hole horizon. It is not entirely clear how to count the resulting degrees
of freedom---I do not know the analog of the closure condition (\ref{b3})%
---but this would be interesting to pursue. One possibility is to use
the canonical version of the Cardy formula; as discussed in section 5
of \cite{Carlipz}, this may again yield the correct entropy.
Finally, it is interesting to ask whether this sort of calculation
can be applied in more general contexts. Boundary conditions of
the form (\ref{a5}) have been suggested in broader settings \cite{Smolin};
it would be good to know whether the results of this paper can be
extended to, for instance, general spatial boundaries, or perhaps
causal horizons \cite{Jacobson}. Note also that the derivation here
made very limited use of the dynamics of general relativity \cite{Husain};
while the results almost certainly depend on the use of a noncompact
connection \cite{Carlipz}, they might generalize to BF theory or its
deformations \cite{KrasnovBF}.
\vspace{1ex}
\begin{flushleft}
\large\bf Acknowledgments
\end{flushleft}
I would like to thank Abhay Ashtekar, Marc Geiller, Kirill Krasnov,
Daniele Pranzetti, and Jean-Fran{\c{c}}ois Quint for very helpful comments
and conversations.
This work was supported in part by Department of Energy grant
DE-FG02-91ER40674.
|
\section{Introduction}
\IEEEPARstart{I}{n} \cite{kiermaierzwanzger2013} Kiermaier and Zwanzger construct the \emph{extended dualized Kerdock codes} $\hat{\mathcal{K}}^*_{k+1}$ ($k \geq 3$ odd), which are a series of ${\mathbb Z}_4$-linear codes with high minimum Lee distance.
The first code $\hat{\mathcal{K}}^*_4$ in this series is a linear $(57,4^4,56)$ code over ${\mathbb Z}_4$. Its Gray image is a binary non-linear $(114,2^8,56)$ code.
A table lookup at \cite{Grassl-codetables.de} reveals that the best possible linear code over ${\mathbb F}_2$ with length $114$ and dimension $8$ has only minimum distance $55$.
That means the minimum distance of the Gray image of this code is higher than the minimum distance of any comparable binary linear code.
For that reason we call the Gray image \textsl{\sl better-than-linear} (\textsl{BTL}).
The second code $\hat{\mathcal{K}}^*_6$ in this series is a linear $(994,4^6,992)$ code over ${\mathbb Z}_4$. Its Gray image is a binary non-linear $(1988,2^{12},992)$ code with the Hamming weight enumerator $1 + 4000X^{992} + 31X^{1024} + 64X^{1120}$.
In this note, we prove that this code is BTL, too.
In fact, we show the following result:
\begin{theorem}
If $C$ is a binary linear $[1988, 12, d]$ code, then $d < 992$.
\end{theorem}
As a byproduct we show
\begin{theorem}
There are no binary linear codes with parameters
$[324, 10, 160]$, $[356, 10, 176]$, $[772,11,384]$, and $[836,11,416]$.
\end{theorem}
For the computer-assisted proof we use a well-known approach using residual codes, table lookups and the MacWilliams equations.
But instead of the usual method to relax the MacWilliams equations and use linear programming to show the non-existence of a code,
we solve the exact MacWilliams equations by using integer linear programming. In order to be able to do this as much weights as possible have
to be excluded beforehand. The use of linear programming has been propagated in~\cite{jaffe1997}, there the split weight enumerator
has been used. Here, we use the standard weight enumerator of a code.
\section{${\mathbb Z}_4$-linear codes}
A ${\mathbb Z}_4$-linear code $C$ of length $n$ is a submodule of ${\mathbb Z}_4^n$.
The Lee weights of $0$, $1$, $2$, $3\in{\mathbb Z}_4$ are $0$, $1$, $2$, $1$, respectively,
and the Lee weight $w_{\rm Lee}(c)$ of $c\in{\mathbb Z}_4^n$ is the sum of the Lee weights of its components.
The Lee distance $d_{\rm Lee}$ of two codewords is defined as the Lee weight of their difference.
The minimum Lee distance $d_{\rm Lee}(C)$ of a ${\mathbb Z}_4$-linear code $C$ is defined as
$d_{\rm Lee}(C) = \min\{w_{\rm Lee}(c)\mid c\in C, c\neq 0\}$ and
$C$ is called a $(n,\# C, d_{\rm Lee})$ code, where $\# C$ is the number of codewords of $C$.
The Gray map $\psi$ maps $0$, $1$, $2$, $3\in {\mathbb Z}_4$ to $(0,0)$, $(1,0)$, $(1,1)$, $(0,1)$, respectively.
It can be extended in the obvious way to a map from ${\mathbb Z}_4^n$ to ${\mathbb F}_2^{2n}$.
The Gray map is an isometry from (${\mathbb Z}_4^n$, $d_{\rm Lee}$) to (${\mathbb F}_2^{2n}$, $d_{\rm Ham}$).
Thus, it maps a ${\mathbb Z}_4$-linear $(n, \# C, d)$ code $C$ to an -- in general -- non-linear binary
$(2n,\#C,d)$ code.
In
\cite{Hammons-Kumar-Calderbank-Sloane-Sole-IEEETIT40[2]:301-319},
some known BTL codes were found to be Gray images of ${\mathbb Z}_4$-linear codes.
Despite many efforts to find more ${\mathbb Z}_4$-linear codes with this property,
up to now only a few such examples are known, see Table~\ref{tbl:BTL}.
The column ``lin. bound'' gives the current knowledge on the best possible minimum distance of a comparable binary linear code.
More details can be found in \cite{Kiermaier-2012,kiermaierzwanzger2013}.
In this paper, we add a new example to this list.
\begin{table*}[!t]
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.3}
\caption{${\mathbb Z}_4$-linear codes having a BTL Gray image}
\label{tbl:BTL}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c|r|c|l}
\hline
& \bfseries Gray image & \bfseries lin. bound & \bfseries ${\mathbb Z}_4$-code \\
\hline\hline
& $(14, 2^6, 6)$ & 5& Heptacode (shortened Octacode) \cite{Conway-Sloane-1993}; code $\mathrm{C}(\mathfrak{T}_3)$ for $\mathbb{G} = {\mathbb Z}_4$ in \cite{Honold-Landjev-2005}. \\
& $(16, 2^8, 6)$ & 5& Octacode \cite{Conway-Sloane-1993}. Its Gray image is the Nordstrom-Robinson code \cite{Nordstrom-Robinson-1967}. \\
& $(58, 2^7, 28)$ & 27& code $\hat{\mathcal{C}}$ in \cite{Kiermaier-Zwanzger-2011}; lengthened Simplex code $\hat{\mathcal{S}}_{2,3}$ in \cite{Kiermaier-2013}. \\
& $(60, 2^8, 28)$ & 27& doubly shortened ${\mathbb Z}_4$-Kerdock code. \\
& $(62, 2^{10}, 28)$ & 26--27& shortened ${\mathbb Z}_4$-Kerdock code; code $\mathrm{C}(\mathfrak{T}_5)$ for $\mathbb{G} = {\mathbb Z}_4$ in \cite{Honold-Landjev-2005}. \\
& $(62, 2^{12}, 26)$ & 24--25& punctured ${\mathbb Z}_4$-Kerdock code. \\
& $(64, 2^{11}, 28)$ & 26--27& expurgated ${\mathbb Z}_4$-Kerdock code. \\
& $(64, 2^{12}, 28)$ & 25--26& ${\mathbb Z}_4$-Kerdock code \cite{Kerdock-1972,Hammons-Kumar-Calderbank-Sloane-Sole-IEEETIT40[2]:301-319}. \\
& $(114, 2^8, 56)$ & 55& extended dualized Kerdock code $\hat{\mathcal{K}}^*_{4}$ \cite{kiermaierzwanzger2013}. \\
& $(372, 2^{10}, 184)$ & $\leq 183$ & dualized Teichm\"{u}ller code $\mathcal{T}^*_{2,5}$ \cite{kiermaierzwanzger2013}, see also \cite{Kiermaier-2012,Kiermaier-2013}. \\
\textbf{new} & $(1988,2^{12},992)$ & $\mathbf{\leq 991}$ & extended dualized Kerdock code $\hat{\mathcal{K}}^*_{6}$ \cite{kiermaierzwanzger2013}. \\
& $(2^{k+1}, 2^{2^{k+1} - 2(k+1)}, 6)$ & $\leq 5$ & ${\mathbb Z}_4$-Preparata code for all $k\geq 3$ odd \cite{Preparata-1968,Hammons-Kumar-Calderbank-Sloane-Sole-IEEETIT40[2]:301-319,Brouwer:1993}. \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
In \cite[Th.~5]{kiermaierzwanzger2013} a new series of ${\mathbb Z}_4$-linear codes of high minimum Lee distance is given:
\begin{theorem}\label{kiermaierzwangerseries}
For odd $k \geq 3$, the extended dualized Kerdock code $\hat{\mathcal{K}}^*_{k+1}$ is a ${\mathbb Z}_4$-linear code with the parameters
$$
(2^{2k}-2^k+2^{(k-3)/2},\; 4^{k+1},\; 2^{2k}-2^k)\, .
$$
\end{theorem}
\begin{example}
The first two codes in the series of Theorem~\ref{kiermaierzwangerseries} have the following parameters:
\begin{itemize}
\item $k=3$: $(57,2^8,56)$ with Gray image $(114,2^8,56)$,
\item $k=5$: $(994,2^{12},992)$ with Gray image $(1988,2^{12}, 992)$.
\end{itemize}
\end{example}
The code with parameters $(114,2^8,56)$ is known to be BTL.
In the following, we will show that the $(1988,2^{12}, 992)$ code is BTL, too.
\section{Preliminaries}
\subsection{The MacWilliams equations}
Let $C$ be a binary linear code and
$A_i$ the number of codewords of weight $i$, $1\leq i \leq n$.
Its weight enumerator is the polynomial
$$
W(C) = \sum_{i=0}^n A_i X^i\; .
$$
\begin{theorem}[MacWilliams equations \cite{bok:MW}]\label{macwilliams}
For $0\leq j\leq n$:
$$
\card{C} \cdot A_j^\perp = \sum_{i=0}^n K_j^{n,q}(i)\cdot A_i\;,
$$
where
$$
K_k^{n,q}(x) = \sum_{j=0}^k (-1)^j(q-1)^{k-j}\binom{x}{j}\binom{n-x}{k-j}
$$
are the Krawtchouk polynomials.
\end{theorem}
From the MacWilliams equations the Pless power moments can be derived, see e.g. \cite[Ch. 7.3]{Huffman-Pless-2003}.
The first three power moments in the binary case are
\setlength{\arraycolsep}{0.0em}
\begin{eqnarray}
\sum_{j=0}^n A_j &{}={}& 2^k \label{P0}\\
\sum_{j=0}^n jA_j &{}={}& 2^{k-1}(n - A_1^\perp) \label{P1}\\
\sum_{j=0}^n j^2A_j &{}={}& 2^{k-2}\bigl(n(n+1) - 2nA_1^\perp + 2A_2^\perp\bigr)\,. \label{P2}
\end{eqnarray}
\setlength{\arraycolsep}{5pt}
P. Delsarte~\cite{delsarte1972} uses Theorem \ref{macwilliams} to find new upper bounds
for code parameters by linear programming.
By setting $x_i:= A_i/\card{C}$ and using the fact the coefficients of weight enumerators are non-negative numbers, the MacWilliams equations
imply the inequalities
$$0 \leq \sum_{i=0}^n K_j^{n,q}(i)\cdot x_i\;,\quad 0\leq j\leq n$$
with the additional restrictions on $x_i$:
\begin{itemize}
\item $0\leq x_i\leq 1$,
\item $x_0=1/\card{C}$,
\item $x_i=0$, $i=1,\ldots,d-1$,
\item $\sum_{i=0}^n x_i = 1$.
\end{itemize}
Finding the exact solution of the MacWilliams equations is an integer linear feasibility problem which is a variant of
the integer linear programming (ILP) problem, see e.g. \cite{Nemhauser:1988}:
Determine
$$A_i, A_j^\perp \in{\mathbb Z} \quad (0\leq i,j\leq n)$$
such that
$$
0 = \card{C}\cdot A_j^\perp - \sum_{i=0}^n K_j^{n,q}(i)\cdot A_i\;
\quad \mbox{ for } 0\leq j\leq n
$$
and
\begin{itemize}
\item $0\leq A_i < \card{C}$, $0\leq A_j^\perp < \card{C^\perp}$,
\item $A_0= A_0^\perp=1$,
\item $\sum_{i=0}^n A_i = \card{C}$, $\sum_{i=0}^n A^\perp_i = \card{C^\perp}$.
\end{itemize}
For solving ILPs we will use the algorithm \cite{wassermann:02} which is based on lattice point enumeration.
\subsection{Residuals and the Griesmer bound}
\begin{definition}
For a linear $[n,k]$ code $C$ and a codeword $c\in C$
the \textsl{residual code} $\mbox{Res}(C,c)$ of $C$ with respect to $c$ is the code
$C$ punctured on all nonzero coordinates of the codeword $c$.
\end{definition}
In \cite{HenkCA1981197}, a lower bound on the minimum distance of $\mbox{Res}(C,c)$ of a binary code $C$ is given.
This has been generalized to arbitrary prime powers $q$ by \cite{Hill:1992:OTL:142976.142992}.
\begin{theorem}[\cite{Hill:1992:OTL:142976.142992}]\label{griesmerstep}
For a linear $[n,k,d]$ code $C$ over ${\mathbb F}_q$ and a
codeword $c\in C$ having weight $w<dq/(q-1)$
the residual code $\mbox{Res}(C,c)$ is an $[n-w,k-1,d']$ code with
$$d'\geq d -w+\lceil w/q\rceil.$$
\end{theorem}
The repeated application of Theorem~\ref{griesmerstep} to codewords $c$ of minimum weight leads to the Griesmer bound, which has been formulated for binary linear codes in \cite{Griesmer-1960} and was generalized to arbitrary $q$ in \cite{Solomon-Stiffler-1965}.
\begin{theorem}[Griesmer bound \cite{Solomon-Stiffler-1965}]\label{griesmer}
For a binary linear $[n,k,d]$ code, we have
\[
n \geq \sum_{i=0}^{k-1} \left\lceil\frac{d}{2^i}\right\rceil\text{.}
\]
\end{theorem}
\section{Non-existence of a binary linear $[1988,12,992]$ code}
We assume that there exists a binary linear $[1988,12,992]$ code.
\begin{theorem}[\cite{simonis}]\label{simonis}
Any linear code $C\subset {\mathbb F}_q^n$ of dimension $k$ and minimum weight $d$ can be transformed into a code $C'\subset {\mathbb F}_q^n$
with the same parameters such that $C'$ possesses a basis of weight $d$ vectors.
\end{theorem}
From Theorem \ref{simonis}
we get the existence of a binary linear $[1988,12,992]$ code $C$
which has a basis consisting of codewords of minimum weight $992$.
As the sum of two binary words of even weight is again of even weight, all the weights of $C$ are even.
\subsection{Table lookup}
Many weights of $C$ can be excluded by applying Theorem~\ref{griesmerstep} iteratively and by table lookup at \cite{Grassl-codetables.de,jaffe-tables}.
\begin{example}
Suppose there exists a codeword of weight $1000$ in $C$.
Applying Theorem~\ref{griesmerstep}
for a codeword of weight $1000$ leads to a $[988,11,\geq 492]$ code. Now we iteratively
apply Theorem~\ref{griesmerstep} to codewords of minimum weight and arrive at
a $[496,10,246]$ code and finally at a $[250,9,\geq 123]$ code.
A table lookup at \cite{Grassl-codetables.de} shows that the upper bound for a binary linear $[250,9]$ code is $122$.
It follows, there is no binary linear $[1988,12,992]$ code having a codeword with weight $1000$.
\end{example}
In the same way all nonzero weights can be excluded except the twelve weights
$992$, $1008$, $1024$, $1056$, $1088$, $1152$, $1216$, $1280$, $1344$, $1984$, $1986$, and $1988$.
\subsection{The weights $\geq 2d$}\label{geq2d}
By using appropriate linear combinations of codewords the weights $1986$ and $1988$ can be excluded,
e.g. addition of the codeword of weight $1988$ and a codeword of minimum weight $992$ would
give a codeword of weight $996$.
Excluding the weight $2d=1984$ requires a little bit more work.
Adding a codeword $c_1$ of weight $1984$ and an arbitrary codeword $c_2$ of weight $992$ might be again a codeword of weight $992$.
More precisely, $w_{\rm Ham}(c_1 + c_2) \geq 992$ with equality if and only if the support of $c_2$ is contained in the support of $c_1$.
Hence the existence of a codeword $c_1$ of weight $1984$ implies that the supports of all the codewords of minimum weight $992$ are contained in the support of $c_1$.
Since $C$ has a basis of minimum weight words, the four coordinates not in the support of $c_1$ are zero coordinates of $C$, and shortening $C$ in these four coordinates yields a binary linear $[1984,12,992]$ code.
This is a contradiction to the Griesmer bound: The length of a binary linear code of dimension $12$ and minimum distance $992$ is at least
\[
\sum_{i=0}^{11} \left\lceil \frac{992}{2^i}\right\rceil
= 1985\text{.}
\]
\subsection{The weight $1344$}\label{subsect:1344}
If $C$ has a codeword of weight $1344$, then the twofold application of Theorem~\ref{griesmerstep} gives a binary linear $[324,10,\geq 160]$ code.
In fact, the parameters are $[324,10,160]$, since a minimum distance $\geq 161$ is impossible by the Griesmer bound.
Again, using \cite[Th.~2.7.8]{Huffman-Pless-2003} we get the existence of an even binary linear $[324,10,160]$.
The application of Theorem \ref{griesmerstep} and table lookups to this parameter set show
that the only possible nonzero weights of a binary linear $[324,10,160]$ code are
$160$, $320$, $322$, and $324$.
The weights $\geq 2d = 320$ can be excluded as in Section \ref{geq2d}, using that the length of a binary linear code of dimension $10$ and minimum distance $160$ is at least $322$ by the Griesmer bound.
This leaves $160$ as only possible nonzero weight.
The power moment (\ref{P1}) gives the equation
$$2^{9}\cdot324 - (2^{10}-1)\cdot160 = 2208 = 2^{9}\cdot A_1^\perp$$
in contradiction to $A_1^\perp\in\mathbb Z$.
This shows
\begin{lemma}\label{code324}
A binary linear $[324, 10, 160]$ code does not exist.
\end{lemma}
In particular, the code $C$ does not have codewords of weight $1344$.
\subsection{The weight $1280$}
If $C$ has a codeword of weight $1280$, the strategy of Section~\ref{subsect:1344} leads to the existence of an even binary linear $[356,10,176]$ code.
Table lookup shows that the only possible nonzero weights are
$176$, $192$, $352$, $354$, and $356$.
The weights $\geq 2d = 352$ can be excluded as in Section \ref{geq2d} since the Griesmer bound is equal to $354$.
From (\ref{P0}) it follows that $A_{176} + A_{192} = 2^{10} - 1$. Then, equation (\ref{P1}) gives
$A_{192} = 139 - 32 A_1^\perp$ and $A_{176} = 884 + 32 A_1^\perp$. Using this in equation (\ref{P2}) gives
$$
12A_1^\perp + A_2^\perp = -56\text{,}
$$
which has no solution for nonnegative values of $A_1^\perp$ and $A_2^\perp$.
Therefore, we have
\begin{lemma}\label{code356}
A binary linear $[356, 10, 176]$ code does not exist.
\end{lemma}
\subsection{The weight $1216$}
If $C$ has a codeword of weight $1216$, we descend to an even $[772,11,384]$ code like in Section~\ref{subsect:1344} .
Application of Theorem \ref{griesmerstep} and table lookups show that the only possible nonzero
weights of a binary linear $[772,11,384]$ code are $384$, $416$, $448$, $768$, $770$, and $772$.
The weights $\geq 2d = 768$ can be excluded as in Section \ref{geq2d} since the Griesmer bound is equal to $769$.
Application of Theorem \ref{griesmerstep} to $w=416$ and $w=448$ would lead to $[356,10,176]$ and $[324,10,160]$ codes, which do not exist by Lemma~\ref{code324} and~\ref{code356}.
Thus, the only possible remaining weight is $384$.
Using the power moment (\ref{P1}) immediately tells us that such a code does not exist.
So we have:
\begin{lemma}\label{code772}
A binary linear $[772,11,384]$ code does not exist.
\end{lemma}
\subsection{The weight $1152$}
If $C$ has a codeword of weight $416$, we descend to an even $[836,11,416]$ code like in Section~\ref{subsect:1344}.
Application of Theorem \ref{griesmerstep} and table lookups show that the only possible nonzero weights of a binary linear $[836,11,416]$ code are $416$, $448$, $480$, $512$, $832$, $834$, and $836$.
The weights $\geq 2d = 832$ can be excluded as in Section \ref{geq2d} since the Griesmer bound is equal to $834$.
Again, Theorem \ref{griesmerstep} for $w=480$ and $w=512$ would lead to the non-existing
$[356,10,176]$ and $[324,10,160]$ codes.
From (\ref{P0}) it follows that $A_{416} + A_{448} = 2^{11} - 1$. Then, equation (\ref{P1}) gives
$A_{448} = 141 - 32 A_1^\perp$ and $A_{416} = 1906 + 32 A_1^\perp$. Using this in equation (\ref{P2}) gives
$$
28 A_1^\perp + A_2^\perp = -116\text{,}
$$
which has no solution for nonnegative values of $A_1^\perp$ and $A_2^\perp$.
It follows
\begin{lemma}\label{code836}
A binary linear $[836,11,416]$ code does not exist.
\end{lemma}
\subsection{The remaining weights}\label{remainingweight}
At this point the remaining possible nonzero weights of the $[1988,12,992]$ code are
$992$, $1008$, $1024$, $1056$, and $1088$.
Furthermore, we have $A^\perp_1 = 0$:
Otherwise, $C$ has a zero coordinate.
Puncturing in this coordinate yields a binary linear $[1987,12,992]$ code.
After three applications of Theorem~\ref{griesmerstep}, we get the existence of a binary linear $[251,9,\geq 124]$ code in contradiction to the online table \cite{Grassl-codetables.de}.
Therefore, in the ILP there remain the $5$ variables $A_i$ with $i\in \{992, 1008, 1024, 1056, 1088\}$ bounded by $0\leq A_i\leq 4096$ and the $1987$ variables $A_j^\perp$ with $j\in\{2,\ldots,1988\}$ bounded by $0\leq A_j^\perp\leq 2^{1976}$.
Due to the large number of variables and the huge absolute values of the coefficients and bounds, the resulting ILP is still very difficult to solve.
At the time being, standard Integer Program solvers are not able to handle this problem.
However, it turned out to be small enough to be attacked by the specialized method of \cite{wassermann:02}.
Using the LLL algorithm from the NTL library by V. Shoup~\cite{shoupntl} and our own NTL-implementation of lattice point enumeration we find that the ILP has no solution in about three hours on a standard PC.
\bigskip
It follows that a binary linear $[1988,12,992]$ code does not exist.
Consequently, the $(1988,2^{12},992)$ Gray image of the ${\mathbb Z}_4$-linear extended dualized Kerdock code $\hat{\mathcal{K}}^*_{6}$ is BTL.
\bigskip
We would like to conclude this note with the following open question:
Are there any further codes in the series $\hat{\mathcal{K}}^*_{k+1}$ whose Gray image is BTL?
\section*{Acknowledgement}
We thank the anonymous referee for helpful comments.
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{\label{sec:Introduction}Introduction}
\noindent
So far there are no signs for new physics beyond the Standard Model (SM) at the LHC and this
raises the question if mechanisms of electro-weak symmetry breaking are at work which are different
from what was expected over the last decades. The SM has besides the vacuum expectation value
no explicit scale and this, as well as the fact that the quartic Higgs coupling runs very close to zero at
the Planck-scale, may point to a role of conformal symmetry and its breaking by quantum effects.
No explicit mass scales would therefore be allowed in the Lagrangian and symmetry breaking would
be the consequence of a Coleman Weinberg type mass generation \cite{Coleman:1973jx}. This is from
a technical point of view more restrictive since the number of allowed terms in the Lagrangian is reduced.
The minimal phenomenological scenarios require therefore some extra fields and various specific models
have been worked out \cite{Coleman:1973jx,Fatelo:1994qf,Hempfling:1996ht,Hambye:1995fr,Meissner:2006zh,Foot:2007as,Foot:2007ay,Chang:2007ki, Hambye:2007vf, Meissner:2007xv, Meissner:2009gs,Iso:2009ss,Holthausen:2009uc, Iso:2009nw,Foot:2010et, Khoze:2013uia,Kawamura:2013kua,Gretsch:2013ooa, Heikinheimo:2013fta,Gabrielli:2013hma,Carone:2013wla,Khoze:2013oga,Englert:2013gz,Farzinnia:2013pga,Abel:2013mya, Foot:2013hna,
Hill:2014mqa,Guo:2014bha,AlexanderNunneley:2010nw,Radovcic:2014rea,Khoze:2014xha,Smirnov:2014zga,Salvio:2014soa, Kannike:2014mia,Kannike:2015apa,Chankowski:2014fva,Okada:2014nea,Guo:2015lxa,Baek:2015mna,
Hatanaka:2014tba,Kang:2014cia,Cai:2014kra,Benic:2014aga,Gorsky:2014una,Okada:2014qsa,Okada:2014oda,Khoze:2014woa,Lattanzi:2014mia}.
In this paper we study consequences for the neutrino sector arising from the fact that explicit fermion
mass terms (both Dirac and especially also Majorana) are no longer allowed when the SM is extended
to incorporate neutrino masses and mixings. All Dirac and Majorana mass terms must then stem from
Yukawa couplings times vacuum expectation values of suitable scalars. Specifically we present a simple
extension of the SM which can account for non-zero neutrino masses and which leads to spontaneous
conformal symmetry breaking. At the same time the extension of the scalar sector is such that no low-scale
Landau pole appears. We will show that our set-up leads naturally to the inverse seesaw (ISS) scenario,
with active-sterile mixing at a phenomenologically interesting level, where over-all electro-weak fits are
improved \cite{Akhmedov:2013hec,Akhmedov:2016xna,Dev:2014xea,Abada:2014nwa}.
Furthermore, we will find that the UV completion of the theory, in particular the requirement of anomaly cancellation, forces us to introduce additional fermions, which turn out to have a lifetime, which makes them potential Dark Matter (DM) candidates.
The paper is organized in the following way. In \sect \ref{sec:Generics} we will discuss the generic features of conformal model building and implications for Dark Matter and neutrino mass phenomenology. In \sect \ref{sec:Model} we will present a concrete UV complete and anomaly free extension of the Standard Model, which we consider as well motivated by precision electro-weak data. Using this model as an example we will demonstrate in \sect \ref{sec:RCSB} how in particular the Radiative Conformal Symmetry Breaking (RCSB) works in this set-up and what it implies for the particle spectrum of the model. In \sect \ref{sec:Phenomenology} we discuss the low energy particle phenomenology of the model and several Dark Matter production mechanisms. We will summarize our findings in \sect \ref{sec:Conclusion}.
\section{\label{sec:Generics} Generics of Conformal Model Building}
\noindent
The idea of spontaneous conformal symmetry breaking is rather old and was put forward by Coleman and Weinberg \cite{Coleman:1973jx}. It has been argued by Bardeen \cite{Bardeen:1995kv}, that its protective feature can avoid the fine-tuning due to quadratic divergences and thus keep the Higgs mass safe, as it is only multiplicatively renormalized. The same argument applies in curved space-time background to diffeomorphism symmetry \cite{Smirnov:2014zga} and can protect the vacuum energy from power divergences. For this mechanism to work, however, the particle content of the theory needs to be specified in order to explain the RG running necessary for the RCSB.
It is, for example, clear that this mechanism can not be at work in the standard model for a top mass above 79~GeV, as the fermionic contribution drives the potential couplings in a way which does not allow for RCSB. It is therefore clear that an extension of the SM by some Hidden Sector (HS) is necessary. The HS can be coupled to the SM via different portals: One portal is connected to neutrino masses. We know that neutrino masses are finite and SM singlet fermions which can connect to a HS are therefore well motivated. Further portal operators arise from the $H^\dagger H $ singlet combination of the Higgs field with other scalars $H'$ by renormalizable $H^\dagger H H'^\dagger H' $ quartic interactions or the kinetic mixing of the photon with an additional massive $U(1)$ gauge boson.
As we will see, the existence of the Higgs portal is an absolute necessity for any RCSB model to work.
Another crucial requirement for the HS is the mass dominance of bosonic degrees of freedom in order to achieve RCSB due to the RG running.
Furthermore, the couplings should be such that no Landau pole appears at an adjacent energy scale making the theory ill defined. Another important feature is to make sure that the quartic couplings of the potential remain positive from the high scale on throughout all the RG running. It is obvious that vacuum stability is a built-in feature of such a model.
The HS itself can contain a Hidden Symmetry group which can be gauged. This additional structure may be used to explain the smallness of the active neutrino masses and we will demonstrate an example of this in the next section. The gauge symmetry needs to be anomaly free
which implies additional constraints on the particle spectrum and may lead to the existence of long-lived particles which can be Dark Matter candidates. In the next section we present a model, in which active neutrinos acquire their mass in an inverse seesaw mechanism, which owes its mass matrix structure to the HS $U(1)$ symmetry. This symmetry is gauged and the anomaly freedom condition requires us to have a particle content which contains a long-lived particle. We observe that imposing constraints from low energy particle physics leads to a parameter region with a warm Dark Matter candidate compatible with all astrophysical observations. Furthermore, several production mechanisms can account for the correct relic density in our model.
\section{\label{sec:Model} The Conformal Inverse Seesaw}
\noindent
We will demonstrate the features described above using an explicit model which was introduced in \cite{Lindner:2014oea}. The Conformal Inverse Seesaw (CISS) has the gauge group $SU(3)_c\times SU(2)_L \times U(1)_Y \times U(1)_X$. The scalar field content is extended by two SM singlet fields $\phi_1$ and $\phi_2$ with $U(1)_X$ charges one and two, respectively, and the potential \eqn \ref{eqn:potential}. The fermion sector contains a total singlet field $\nu_R$ and a pair of chiral SM singlet fields $N_L$ and $N_R$, those, however, carry one unit of $U(1)_X$ charge. Note that the existence of the pair of fields with identical $U(1)_X$ charge is required by anomaly cancellation.
\begin{widetext}
\begin{align}
\label{eq:TheModel}
& \mathcal{L}_\text{CISS} = i \, \bar{N}_L \left( \slashed{\partial} - i\,g_X \,X^\mu \,\gamma_\mu \right)\,N_L + i \, \bar{N}_R \left( \slashed{\partial} - i\,g_X \,X^\mu \,\gamma_\mu \right)\,N_R - \frac{\tilde{y}_1}{2} \left( \bar{N}_R^c\,\nu_R \,\phi_1^* + h.c.\right)- \frac{y_1}{2} \left( \bar{N}_L\,\nu_R \,\phi_1 +h.c.\right) \nonumber \\
& - \frac{y_2}{2} \left( \bar{N}_L\,N_L^c \,\phi_2 +h.c. \right) - \frac{\tilde{y}_2}{2} \left( \bar{N}_R\,N_R^c \,\phi_2 +h.c. \right)+ \frac{y_D}{2} \left( \bar{L}\,\tilde{H} \nu_R +h.c. \right) \nonumber \\
&+ |\left( \partial_\mu -2 \,i\,g_X\,X_\mu \right) \phi_2|^2 + |\left( \partial_\mu - \,i\,g_X\,X_\mu \right) \phi_1|^2 -\frac{1}{4} F_X^{\mu\nu}F^X_{\mu\nu} + \frac{\kappa}{4} F_X^{\mu\nu}\,F_{\mu\nu} - V \left( H, \phi_1, \phi_2 \right)\,.
\end{align}
\end{widetext}
We furthermore assume a L-R exchange symmetry in the Hidden Sector i.e$.$ $N_L \leftrightarrow N_R^c$ which fixes the relations among the Yukawa couplings $y_1 = \tilde{y}_1$ and $y_2 = \tilde{y}_2$.
\begin{table}[h]
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c}
\hline
& $H$ & $\phi_1$ & $\phi_2$ & $L$ & $\nu_R$ & $N_R$ & $N_L$\\
\hline
\hline
$U(1)_X$ & 0 & 1 & 2 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1\\
Lepton Number & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
$U(1)_{Y}$ & 1 & 0 & 0 & -1 & 0 &0 & 0 \\
$SU(2)_{L}$ & 2 & 1 & 1 & 2 & 1 & 1 & 1 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{\label{tab:QuantumNumbers}
Quantum numbers in the Conformal Inverse Seesaw.}
\end{table}
The scalar potential contains all combinations allowed by the quantum numbers
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:potential}
V(H, \phi_1, \phi_2) = \frac{\lambda_H}{2}\,(H^\dagger\,H)^2 + \frac{\lambda_1}{2}\,\phi_1^4 + \frac{\lambda_2}{2} \,\phi_2^4 + \\ \nonumber \lambda_{H1}\,H^\dagger\,H\,\phi_1^2 + \lambda_{H2}\,H^\dagger\,H\,\phi_2^2 +\lambda_{1\,2}\,\phi_2^2\,\phi_1^2\,.
\end{align}
As we will elaborate on shortly, radiative effects break the conformal symmetry and all scalars acquire vacuum expectation values (vevs). This causes the breaking of $SU(2)_L\times U(1)_Y$ symmetry and leads to massive electro-weak gauge bosons. At the same time the breaking of $U(1)_X$ generates a mass for the Hidden Sector gauge boson.
Using the compact notation in the basis $N^T = \left( \nu_L , \nu_R^c, N_L, N_R^c \right)$ the mass term of the form $1/2\,\sum_{ij}\,\mathcal{M}_{ij} \,\bar{N}_i N_j^c$ has the following mass matrix
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:seesawInvDM}
\mathcal{M} =
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & y_D \, \ev{H} & 0 & 0 \\
y_D \, \ev{H} & 0 & y_1 \ev{\phi_1} & \tilde{y}_1 \ev{\phi_1} \\
0 & y_1 \ev{\phi_1} & y_2 \, \ev{\phi_2} & 0 \\
0 & \tilde{y}_1 \ev{\phi_1} & 0 & \tilde{y}_2 \,\ev{\phi_2} \\
\end{pmatrix} \, .
\end{equation}
At this point we emphasize the absence of mass terms for the singlet combinations $\bar{\nu}_R\nu_R^c$ and $\bar{N}_L N_R$ in the mass matrix \eqn \ref{eq:seesawInvDM} due to conformal invariance, see also \fig \ref{fig:CISS_Masses}. These terms would in principle be present in a non-conformal theory, and might be avoided by other extra discrete symmetries and new scalar particles. Note however, that many other phenomenological consequences to be discussed in this paper would not follow.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{CISS_mass_terms2}
\caption{The diagrammatic visualisation of mass relations in the CISS. Conformal invariance forbids masses for singlet field combinations, which would be allowed in any non conformal theory with the same scalar spectrum.}
\label{fig:CISS_Masses}
\end{figure}
\noindent
Note that for simplicity we consider the one-flavour case, which can be straightforwardly generalized to the physical scenario with three flavours, then the Yukawa couplings will be $3\times 2$ and $2\times 2$ matrices, as we discuss shortly. The fermionic particle content comprises a left-handed Majorana fermion which is the active neutrino, a pseudo-Dirac pair of right-handed neutrinos at the mass scale set by $ y_1 \ev{\phi_1} =: M_R$ and a mass splitting of the order $ y_2 \, \ev{\phi_2} =:\mu$, and a Majorana singlet neutrino of the mass $\mu$. We will now demonstrate the diagonalization procedure of the above matrix which will lead to this mass pattern and discuss the mixing among the fermions.
Even though the $L \leftrightarrow R$ symmetry introduces relations among the Yukawa couplings and the induced masses it can be violated by higher-order interactions and for phenomenological purposes we consider the following induced mass matrix
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:seesawInvDM_Pheno}
\mathcal{M} =
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & m_D & 0 & 0 \\
m_D & 0 & M_1 & M_2 \\
0 & M_1 & \mu_1 & 0 \\
0 & M_2 & 0 & \mu_2 \\
\end{pmatrix} \, ,
\end{equation}
with $M_1 \approx M_2$ and $\mu_1 \approx \mu_2$. To study the spectrum of this matrix we perform a rotation by an angle defined by $\tan \phi = \frac{M_1}{M_2}$ in the $\left(\nu_R^c, N_L, N_R^c \right)$ subspace, which leads to the following structure
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:submatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & 0 & \sqrt{M_1^2+M_2^2} \\
0 & \frac{M_2^2 \mu_1 + M_1^2\mu_2}{M_1^2+M_2^2} & \frac{M_1 M_2 \left(\mu_1 - \mu_2\right)}{M_1^2+M_2^2} \\
\sqrt{M_1^2+M_2^2} & \frac{M_1 M_2 \left(\mu_1 - \mu_2\right)}{M_1^2+M_2^2} & \frac{M_1^2 \mu_1 + M_2^2\mu_2}{M_1^2+M_2^2} \\
\end{pmatrix} \, .
\end{equation}
In analogy to the usual inverse seesaw scenario we observe that the heavy particle spectrum contains a pseudo-Dirac particle pair with mass of the order $ \sqrt{M_1^2+M_2^2} =:\mathbf{M}$ and a Majorana type mass splitting of the order $\frac{M_1^2 \mu_1 + M_2^2\mu_2}{M_1^2+M_2^2} =: \mu_D$. The other mass parameters we denote by $\frac{M_1^2 \mu_2 + M_2^2\mu_1}{M_1^2+M_2^2} = \mu_S$ and $ \frac{M_1 M_2 \left(\mu_1 - \mu_2\right)}{M_1^2+M_2^2}:=\delta M$. The difference to the usual inverse seesaw is the existence of two states with Majorana masses. The mass matrix of these states is obtained by application of the usual seesaw formula under the assumption $ \lbrace m_D, \delta M \rbrace \ll \mathbf{M} $ to the rearranged mass matrix $\left(\nu_L, N_L, \nu_R^c , N_R^c \right)$
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:lightseesaw}
\mathcal{M} = \\
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & 0 & m_D & 0\\
0 & \mu_S & 0 & \delta M\\
m_D & 0 & 0 & \mathbf{M}\\
0 & \delta M & \mathbf{M} & \mu_D\\
\end{pmatrix} \,
\end{equation}
and yields the light neutrino mass matrix
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:lightseesaw}
\mathcal{M}_{2\times 2} = \\
\begin{pmatrix}
\frac{ m_D^2 }{ \mathbf{M}^2}\,\mu_D & -\delta M \,\frac{ m_D }{ \mathbf{M}} \\
-\delta M \,\frac{ m_D }{ \mathbf{M}} & \mu_S \\
\end{pmatrix} \, .
\end{equation}
The mass eigenvalues are
\begin{align}
\label{eq:LightEigenvaluesFull}
& m_1 = \frac{1}{2} \left( \mu_D +\frac{\mu_S m_D^2}{ \mathbf{M}^2}+ \right. \nonumber \\
& \left.-\sqrt{\mu_D^2 -2 \mu_D \frac{\mu_S}{\mathbf{M}}m_D + 4 \frac{m_D}{\mathbf{M}^2} \delta M^2 + \mu_S \frac{m_D^4}{\mathbf{M}^4}} \right),\\ \nonumber
& m_2 = \frac{1}{2} \left( \mu_D + \mu_S + \right. \nonumber \\
& \left. + \sqrt{\mu_D^2 -2 \mu_D \frac{\mu_S}{\mathbf{M}}m_D + 4 \frac{m_D}{\mathbf{M}^2} \delta M^2 + \mu_S \frac{m_D^4}{\mathbf{M}^4}} \right)
\end{align}
We assume that the exchange symmetry $L \leftrightarrow R$ in the Hidden Sector is broken by higher-order operators, however it is still approximatively present and allows to simplify the expressions by the use of $\mathbf{M} \approx M_1 \approx M_2$ and thus $\mu_D \approx \mu_S \approx \frac{\mu_1+ \mu_2}{2} =:\mu_+$ and $\delta M \approx \frac{\mu_1 - \mu_2}{2} =:\bar{\mu}$. Under this assumption we can expand in the small parameter $\frac{\bar{\mu}}{\mu_+}$ which leads to the eigenvalues
\begin{align}
\label{eq:LightEigenvaluesApprox}
& m_1 = \mu_+ \frac{m_D^2}{\mathbf{M}^2} - \frac{\bar{\mu}^2}{\mu_+} \frac{m_D^2}{\mathbf{M}^2} + \frac{\bar{\mu}^2}{\mu_+} \approx \mu_+ \frac{m_D^2}{\mathbf{M}^2} + \frac{\bar{\mu}^2}{\mu_+}\\
& m_2 = \mu_+ + \frac{\bar{\mu}^2}{\mu_+}\frac{m_D^2}{\mathbf{M}^2} - \frac{\bar{\mu}^2}{\mu_+} \approx \mu_+ - \frac{\bar{\mu}^2}{\mu_+}\,.
\end{align}
It is found that the active neutrino has a mass of the order $m_\text{active} \approx \mu \, \theta^2$, where $\theta$ is the active-sterile mixing and given by $\theta \approx \frac{m_D}{\mathbf{M}}$ with a perturbation of the order $ \frac{\bar{\mu}^2}{\mu_+}$. The second state is a Majorana neutrino with mass at the $\mu$ scale and its mixing with the active neutrino is of the order $\tilde{\theta} \approx \theta \, \frac{\bar{\mu}}{\mu_+} $, and therefore additionally suppressed by the mass splitting induced by higher-order terms breaking the $L \leftrightarrow R $ symmetry in the Hidden Sector. We observe that, while the mass splitting among $M_1$ and $M_2$ has no dramatic effect on the physical observables the splitting $\mu_1-\mu_2 $ controls the coupling of the additional Majorana state at the $\mu$ mass scale and in the limit of exact $L \leftrightarrow R$ symmetry it even decouples. Thus for later phenomenological considerations it is reasonable to set $M_1 = M_2 = \mathbf{M}$. Since after symmetry breaking one of the Majorana degrees of freedom is responsible for the light neutrino mass, the mass splitting among $\mu_1$ and $\mu_2$ is of order of the light neutrino mass and thus in the eV range. This implies that the correction to the neutrino mass is of order $\frac{\bar{\mu}^2}{\mu_+} \approx 10^{-3} \text{ eV}$ which is within the experimental uncertainty. In addition it predicts an active sterile mixing of the keV mass state of $\tilde{\theta}^2 \approx \left( \frac{m_D}{\mathbf{M}} \frac{\bar{\mu}}{\mu_+} \right)^2 \approx 10^{-10} - 10^{-12}$, which we will compare to experimental constraints in \sect \ref{sec:LowEnergyParticlePheno}.
The situation in the CISS is different from $B-L$ models \cite{Basso:2012ti,Humbert:2015yva} as the interactions $ \bar{N}_L\,\nu_R \,\phi_1$ and $\bar{N}_R^c\,\nu_R \,\phi_1^* $ violate lepton number explicitly. Lepton number is not a symmetry of the full theory, but turns out to be an accidental symmetry of the low energy SM sector.
\section{\label{sec:RCSB} Radiative Conformal Symmetry Breaking and Implications}
\noindent
The hidden sector is responsible for electro-weak symmetry breaking and the pseudo-Goldstone boson (PGB) associated with the conformal symmetry breaking has to reside mainly in the hidden sector, see for example \cite{Radovcic:2014rea}. In the case of one additional bosonic degree of freedom, the Higgs boson is mainly the PGB which phenomenologically requires larger values of quartic couplings and leads to low-scale Landau poles, see for example the discussion in \cite{Foot:2007ay}. This is not the case in the CISS.
We will demonstrate the RCSB in our case. As discussed above the scalar field content is given by the $SU(2)$ doublet $H$ and two SM singlets $\phi_1$ and $\phi_2$. For simplicity we will use spherical coordinates in field space with the replacements
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:fieldDefs}
\phi_2 = r\, \sin \theta \sin \omega \, , \\ \nonumber
H = r \, \sin \theta \cos \omega\, , \\ \nonumber
\phi_1 = r \, \cos \theta\,.
\end{align}
We find with \eqn \ref{eqn:fieldDefs} and the definitions $(\tan \theta)^2 =: \epsilon$ and $(\tan \omega)^2 =:\delta$ that
\begin{align}
& R(\Lambda): = (r\,\cos \theta \, \cos \omega )^4 \, V(r, \theta\, \phi_1) = \\ \nonumber
&\frac{1}{2} \, \left((\delta+1)^2 \lambda_1 + \epsilon (2\,\delta (\delta +1 ) \lambda_{2\,1} + 2 (1+ \delta) \lambda_{H1} \right. \\
&\left. + \epsilon (\delta^2 \lambda_2+ 2 \delta \,\lambda_{2H} +\lambda_H ) ) \right)\,. \nonumber
\end{align}
The vanishing of this quantity at the scale of symmetry breaking $R(\Lambda_{RCSB})=0$ defines the classically flat direction in the potential, it is the renormalization condition.
Assuming that the mixing among the scalars is not large i.e. $\epsilon, \, \delta < 1$ a hierarchical vev structure appears
\begin{align}
\ev{\phi_1} & = \ev{r} (1+\epsilon)^{-1/2} = : v\,, \\ \nonumber
\ev{H} & = v \, \sqrt{\frac{\epsilon}{\epsilon+1}}\,, \\ \nonumber
\ev{\phi_2} & = v\,\sqrt{\frac{\epsilon\,\delta}{\delta+1}}\,, \\ \nonumber
\Rightarrow & \ev{\phi_1} > \ev{H} > \ev{\phi_2} \,.
\end{align}
The scalar spectrum contains two massive excitations and one which is massless on tree level and corresponds to the flat direction in the potential. The idea behind the Gildener-Weinberg approach is that the quantum effects are taken into account in the one-loop correction to the mass of this particle, making it a PGB of broken conformal symmetry. This procedure ensures perturbativity as discussed in detail in \cite{Gildener:1976ih}.
Expanding the fields about their expectation values we obtain the massive scalar spectrum, which has the following form on tree level
\begin{align*}
\frac{M_h^2}{ v^2 } = & \left(\epsilon \left(\frac{3 \delta \lambda _{12} \left(\lambda _H+5 \lambda
_{12}\right)}{3 \lambda _H-\lambda _{12}}+ \right. \right. \\ \nonumber
& \left. \left. \frac{3 \lambda _{\text{H1}} \left(\lambda
_H+5 \lambda _{\text{H1}}\right)}{3 \lambda _H-\lambda _{\text{H1}}}\right)+3 \lambda
_H\right) \, \\ \nonumber
\frac{ M_{\phi_2}^2}{v^2} = & \left(\epsilon \left(-\frac{16 \lambda _{\text{H1}}^2}{3 \lambda _H-\lambda
_{\text{H1}}}+3 \lambda _H+\delta \lambda _{\text{H2}}\right)+\lambda
_{\text{H1}}\right)\,.
\end{align*}
The PGB of the conformal symmetry breaking, which we will denote as Archaon from now on, acquires mass at the quantum level, which is parametrically suppressed
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:PGBMass}
M_{\phi_1}^2 = \frac{1}{8 \pi^2 \ev{r}^2}\left( M_{h}^4 + 6 m_W^4 + 3 m_Z^4 + 3 M_X^4 \right.\\ \nonumber
\left. +M_{\phi_2}^4 -12 m_t^4 - 2 \sum_i M_{N_{i}}^4 \right) \,.
\end{align}
A possible configuration, which leads to the correct Higgs mass and the EW vev, has negative $\lambda_{H1}$ and $\lambda_{H2}$ and quartic couplings of the order $10^{-3}$. Therefore, the RG running remains stable and perturbatively treatable. An interesting observation is that at least one of the portal terms needs to be sizeable, of the order $\mathcal{O}\left( -0.1 \right)$, which makes the additional scalars accessible at the LHC. For the mass spectrum and the vevs we consider two benchmark points as numerical examples:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\ev{\phi_1} = 1380 \text{ GeV}$, $\ev{H} = 246 \text{ GeV}$ , $\ev{\phi_2} = 38 \text{ GeV}$, $M_h = 125.5 \text{ GeV}$ and $ M_{\phi_2} = 2.17 \text{ TeV}$.
\item $\ev{\phi_1} = 1250 \text{ GeV}$, $\ev{H} = 246 \text{ GeV}$ , $\ev{\phi_2} = 181 \text{ GeV}$, $M_h = 124.9 \text{ GeV}$ and $ M_{\phi_2} = 3.06 \text{ TeV}$.
\end{enumerate}
The main differences among the scenarios are the vev hierarchies of $\ev{\phi_2}$ and $\ev{H}$. We find that in the allowed parameter region the vev of $\phi_2$ can be between $\mathcal{O} \left( 10\right)$ GeV and the electro-weak scale. Another observation is, that a large $\ev{\phi_1}$ leads to a heavy $M_{\phi_2}$.
In addition to the breaking of $SU(2)_L\times U(1)_Y$ symmetry the vev of $\phi_1$ breaks the $U(1)_X$ symmetry and generates a mass for the associated gauge boson $X$ of the order of the conformal symmetry breaking scale
\begin{align}
M_X =g_X \sqrt{ \ev{\phi_1}^2 + 4 \ev{\phi_2}^2 } \approx g_X \ev{\phi_1} \,.
\end{align}
Considering the occurrence of spontaneous conformal symmetry breaking we find that for gauge boson masses below a TeV, there is an upper bound on the average mass for the heavy pseudo-Dirac neutrinos, which is $\bar{M}_N < 1200 \text{ GeV}$ and an upper bound on the induced Archaon PGB mass of $400$ GeV, see \fig \ref{fig:ThreeMasses} .
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{ThreeFieldMassPlot}
\caption{The phenomenlogically allowed mass region with RCSB, a Higgs mass of $125$ GeV, $M_{\phi_2} = 2 \text{ TeV}$, Higgs portal mixings compatible with the bound $\sin \theta < 0.37$, perturbative potential parameters and no low-scale Landau pole. Here $M_N$ is the average mass of the heavy right-handed neutrino, $M_X$ is the mass of the HS gauge boson and $M_{\phi_1}$ is the mass of the Archaon PGB. Note the upper bound on the right-handed scale of $1200$ GeV and the upper bound on the PGB mass of $400$ GeV for HS gauge boson masses below a TeV.}
\label{fig:ThreeMasses}
\end{figure}
\noindent
As can be seen from \eqn \ref{eq:TheModel} the Yukawa interactions of $\phi_1$ violate lepton number. If it was a global charge spontaneous breaking would lead to a massless Goldstone boson with known consequences. As it is broken explicitly there is no potential problem with a massless Goldstone particle.
\section{\label{sec:Phenomenology}Phenomenology}
\subsection{Low energy Particle Physics Phenomenology}
\label{sec:LowEnergyParticlePheno}
\noindent
We consider three generations of active neutrinos and the minimal solution which can account for the oscillation phenomenology is a two-flavour set-up in the Hidden Sector, consistent with the findings in \cite{Abada:2014vea}. According to our discussion in \sect \ref{sec:Model} we then obtain a spectrum with two Majarona states at the intermediate scale $\mu$, and two heavy pseudo-Dirac particles at the mass scale \textbf{M} with a mass splitting of the order $\mu$. The latter account for two parametrically suppressed active masses, while the third active neutrino remains massless. In this section we identify regions in the parameter space allowed by low energy particle physics and comment on compatibility with astrophysical observations.
\subsubsection*{Active Neutrino Oscillations}
\noindent
To ensure that our morel is consistent with the oscillation phenomenology we use relation \eqn \ref{eq:LightEigenvaluesApprox}, and as we discussed earlier, the fact that $\bar{\mu} < \sqrt{\mu_+ \,10^{-3} \text{eV}}$. This leads to a parametrization of $m_D$, in a similar approach as in \cite{Casas:2001sr}
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:Parametrization}
& \mathbf{1} = O(\theta)^T\,O(\theta) = \nonumber \\ \nonumber
& m_\text{light}^{-1/2} U_\text{PMNS} \left( m_D^T \left( \mathbf{M}\, \mu_+^{-1} \mathbf{M} \right)^{-1} m_D \right) U_\text{PMNS}^T \, m_\text{light}^{-1/2} \\
& \Rightarrow m_D = \mathbf{M} \, \sqrt{\mu_+^{-1}}\, O(\theta) \sqrt{ m_\text{light} }\, U_\text{PMNS}^T\,,
\end{align}
where $m_\text{light}$ denotes the diagonal active neutrino mass matrix, $O(\theta)$ is a general $2\times 2$ orthogonal matrix and $\mu_+$ can always be assumed diagonal with appropriate field definitions. An interesting observation is that even under the assumption that Yukawa couplings have a strong hierarchy, as in the charged lepton sector, neutrino masses can be much less hierarchical. In the conformal inverse seesaw all masses are generated due to Yukawa interactions and hierarchy in $m_D$ and in $\mathbf{M}$ can cancel, as can be seen from \eqn \ref{eqn:Parametrization} leading to reduced hierarchy among the light neutrino masses.
In addition to the oscillation phenomenology we require the following low energy constraints to hold.
\subsubsection*{Non-unitarity}
\noindent
In the discussed model the active neutrino mixing matrix is no longer exactly unitary. This is a consequence of active-sterile mixing and it induces a number of effects on physical quantities as the Weinberg angle, the W-boson mass, the left- and right-handed couplings $g_L$, $g_R$, the leptonic and invisible Z-boson decay width and the neutrino oscillation probabilities, for more detailed discussion and limits see \cite{Antusch:2006vwa, Akhmedov:2013hec,Antusch:2014woa} and references therein. Thus studying the non-unitarity allows to narrow down the parameter space of a given model. For the study we define flavour dependent observables
\begin{align}
\label{eq:NonUnitarityFlavour}
\epsilon_\alpha = \sum_{i>4} |U_{\alpha i}|^2\,\,,\, \alpha \in \lbrace e, \mu, \tau \rbrace\,,
\end{align}
and the total non-unitarity measure $N := \epsilon_\alpha + \epsilon_\mu + \epsilon_\tau$.
As given by \eqn \ref{eq:LightEigenvaluesApprox} the active-sterile mixing is determined by the ratio $m_D^2/\mathbf{M}^2$ and the general spirit of RCSB with a conformal symmetry breaking scale close to the EW scale suggests sizeable values.
For ratios above $10^{-6}$ the phenomenology is considerably affected. The most sensitive observables are the Z boson invisible decay width and the Muon decay constant, which is used to determine the Fermi constant. The observables' dependence on the non-unitarity parameters (see \eqn \ref{eq:NonUnitarityFlavour}) is given by
\begin{align}
\frac{\Gamma^\text{inv}_Z}{[\Gamma^{\text{inv}}_Z]_\text{SM}} = \frac{1}{3}\sum_{\alpha=e,\mu,\tau} (1-\epsilon_\alpha)^2 \,,\\
G_\mu = G_F (1 - \epsilon_e)(1 - \epsilon_\mu)\,.
\end{align}
The region of sizeable active-sterile mixing with heavy particles is of particular interest, since contributions from heavy sterile neutrinos can improve the electro-weak fit, as discussed in \citep{Akhmedov:2013hec} and physical effects can be measurable. Requiring that the above observables are compatible with the experimental values, constraints for the model parameter space can be found.
\subsubsection*{Lepton Universality}
\noindent
Various experiments, as discussed in \cite{Loinaz:2004qc}, show that the flavour dependent changes to the lepton couplings cannot differ too drastically. Thus we have effectively
\begin{align}
& \epsilon_e - \epsilon_\mu = 0.0022 \pm 0.0025 \,, \\ \nonumber
& \epsilon_\mu - \epsilon_\tau = 0.0017 \pm 0.0038 \,, \\ \nonumber
& \epsilon_e - \epsilon_\tau = 0.0039 \pm 0.0040\,.
\end{align}
We demonstrate the impact of these constraints on the parameter space in \fig \ref{fig:LowEnergyAllowed}.
\subsubsection*{Lepton Number Violation and $0\nu \beta \beta$}
\noindent
In the CISS lepton number is violated explicitly by one unit in the interaction involving $\phi_1$. At the same time after symmetry breaking the same interactions of $\phi_1$ break $U(1)_X$ and violate $X$ by one unit. On the other hand the vev of $\phi_2$ violates $X$ by two units. The interaction among the fermions transfers this violation to the Lepton sector and thus lepton number is also broken by two units, making the $0\nu \beta \beta$ decay possible. The lepton number violating decay $0\nu\beta\beta$, however, is in general suppressed in our scenario, as we will demonstrate. The general expression is \cite{Blennow:2010th} $\ev{m_{ee}} \approx |q^2 \textstyle{\sum_{i}} \mathbf{U}_{e i}^2 \, m_i/(q^2 - m_i^2) |$ . Which now can be studied in three cases, depending on the ratio of $q^2/\mathbf{M}^2$, where the neutrino momentum is $|q| \approx 0.1 \,\text{GeV}$.
If we have $\mathbf{M} \gg 0.1 \text{GeV}$ and using the facts that for $i>5$, $\mathbf{U}_{e i}^2 \approx m_D^2/\mathbf{M}^2$ and $ \mu_+ \,m_D^2/\mathbf{M}^2 \approx m_\nu $ the following approximation holds, with $A_\text{PD} $ being the number of heavy pseudo-Dirac states
\begin{align}
& \ev{m_{ee}} \approx \left|\sum_{i=1}^3 \mathbf{U}_{e i}^2 \, m_i + \sum_{i=4}^5 \frac{m_D^2}{\mathbf{M}^2}\frac{\bar{\mu}}{\mu_+} \, m_i - \frac{q^2}{2} A_\text{PD} \mathbf{U}_{e\, 6/7}^2 \frac{\mu_+}{\mathbf{M}^2} \right| \nonumber \\
& \approx \left|\sum_{i=1}^3 \mathbf{U}_{e i}^2 \, m_i - m_\nu \left( \frac{q^2}{\mathbf{M}^2} - \frac{\bar{\mu}}{\mu_+}\right) \right| \approx \ev{m_{ee}^\text{active}}\,,
\end{align}
which means that the rate is basically given by the light neutrino spectrum with well known phenomenology.
The other limit is $\mathbf{M} \ll 0.1 \,\text{GeV}$, leading to $\ev{m_{ee}} \approx | \textstyle{\sum_{i}} (\mathbf{U}_{e i}^2 \, m_i + 1/q^2\,\mathbf{U}_{e i}^2 \, m_i^3) | = \mathcal{M}_{ee}+O(\mu_+\, m_D^2/q^2)$. Given that $\mu_+\, m_D^2/q^2 < \mu_+ \,\mathbf{M}^2/q^2$ the contribution of the additional states is negligible in this limit.
The only case when the heavy pseudo-Dirac states can measurably contribute to the $0\nu\beta\beta$ decay is when $\mathbf{M} \approx 0.1\, \text{GeV}$. Then we have
\begin{align}
\ev{m_{ee}} \approx \left|m_{ee}^\text{light} + \textstyle{\sum_{i>5}} \mathbf{U}_{e i}^2 \,\mu \left( 1 + \frac{ m_i^2}{|q^2|} \right)^{-1} \right| \\ \nonumber
\approx \left| m_{ee}^\text{light} + \textstyle{\sum_{i>5}} m_\nu \, \left( 1 + \frac{ m_i^2}{|q^2|} \right)^{-1}\right|,
\end{align}
which is of the order of the light neutrino contributions. Thus we can understand why the limit by \cite{Gerda} of $\ev{m_{ee}}<0.4 \, \text{eV}$ only constraints light $\mathbf{M}$ masses of order GeV with considerable active-sterile mixing. Due to the cancellation in the pseudo-Dirac mass contribution this observable, however, does not severely constrain the parameter space of the CISS.
\subsubsection*{Lepton Flavour Violation and $\mu \rightarrow e + \gamma $}
\noindent
An interesting observation is that the suppression of lepton \textit{number} violating processes does not generically suppress lepton \textit{flavour} violating processes. The best constrained value is the branching ratio $\text{Br}(\mu \rightarrow e + \gamma )$, where the limit is placed by the MEG collaboration \cite{Adam:2013mnn} and is $5,7 \cdot 10^{-13}$. The neutral fermion contribution to this loop-induced decay is
\begin{align}
\text{Br}(\mu \rightarrow e + \gamma ) = \frac{3 \alpha_{\text{em}}}{32 \pi} \left| 2 \, \textstyle{\sum_{i}} \mathbf{U}_{\mu i}^* \mathbf{U}_{e i}
\,G \left(\frac{m_i^2}{M_W^2}\right)\right|^2,
\end{align}
with
\begin{align}
& G(x) := \int_0^1 da \, ( 2 (1-a)(2-a) + \nonumber \\
& a (1+a)\,x ) (1-a )/((1-a) +x\,a)\,.
\end{align}
\noindent
Since in the loop function $G(x)$ the masses appear squared the cancellation leading to a suppressed $0\nu\beta\beta$ process cannot work.
We find that the MEG bound together with the lepton universality and neutrino oscillation constraints leads to the most severe limits on the model parameters, as shown in \fig \ref{fig:LowEnergyAllowed}. Note that the MEG collaboration has proposed an update of the experiment with a designated sensitivity of $\text{Br}(\mu \rightarrow e + \gamma ) < 6 \times 10^{-14}$ \cite{Baldini:2013ke}, which will lessen the available parameter space.
Another flavour violating process is the decay $\mu \rightarrow 3e$. The current limit on its branching ratio is set by the SINDRUM collaboration and given by $\text{Br}(\mu \rightarrow 3e) < 1.0 \times 10^{-12}$ \cite{Bellgardt:1987du}. A new experiment, called ``Mu3e'' has been proposed with the aim to reach a sensitivity of $\text{Br}(\mu \rightarrow 3e) \sim 1 \times 10^{-16}$ \cite{Blondel:2013ia}. Note that in our model the branching ratio can be estimated by $\text{Br}(\mu \rightarrow 3e) \approx \text{Br}(\mu \rightarrow e + \gamma) \times \alpha_\text{em}$, since we do not have any particle leading directly to $\mu \rightarrow 3e$. This means that we expect $\text{Br}(\mu \rightarrow 3e)$ to be roughly by a factor of $100$ smaller than $\text{Br}(\mu \rightarrow e + \gamma)$. Comparing this to the future MEG sensibility we expect constraints of the same order of magnitude on the parameter space from $\mu \rightarrow 3e$.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{IO_MRvsMu}
\caption{The heavy pseudo-Dirac mass scale (average mass) $M_R$ versus the DM mass scale $m_\text{DM}$.
The displayed points are from a scan showing cases allowed by low energy observables.
The green region is singled out by the correct dark matter relic abundance from a non-thermal freeze-in mechanism.
Regions which are excluded by lepton universality and dark matter stability are displayed in brown.
Furthermore, the grey-shaded area bounded by a solid (dashed) grey line shows the region where the branching ratio (BR) of $\mu \rightarrow e \gamma$ is excluded by the current (future) upper limit set by the MEG experiment for inverse light neutrino mass hierarchy.}
\label{fig:LowEnergyAllowed}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection*{Combined Limits}
\noindent
We observe that the combined limits from low energy particle physics with the requirement that the state at the intermediate scale $\mu$ is produced in the early universe and is stable on cosmological scales i.e. $\tau_\text{Int.} > (10^2 ) \, \tau_\text{universe}$, leads to a window in the parameter space displayed in \fig \ref{fig:MasterPlot}. The astonishing observation is that this is exactly the region which is compatible with astrophysical requirements for a warm Dark Matter particle \cite{Abazajian:2006yn}, as the bound from X-ray observations, the phase space bound \cite{Tremaine:1979we}, the Lyman-$\alpha$ forest and several production mechanisms we will comment on in \sect \ref{sec:RelicAbundance}. Note that the allowed parameter region overlaps with the region where the Dodelson-Widrow mechanism \cite{Dodelson:1993je} does not produce hot DM, as discussed in \cite{Abada:2014zra}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{NO_MuvsTheta1}
\caption{The dark matter scale $m_\text{DM}$ versus the mixing angle of keV sterile neutrino dark matter with the active neutrinos.
The region of parameter space of the CISS allowed by low energy observables is represented by the population of dots from a parameter scan.
The green region shows the mass scales compatible with a non-thermal freeze-in production mechanism discussed in \sect \ref{sec:RelicAbundance},
which is the most generic production scenario in this model. Furthermore, the Tremaine-Gunn (TG) and the X-ray excluded regions are displayed in brown.
The Lyman-$\alpha$ constraint turns out to be weaker than the TG bound in this case and is therefore omitted.
The claimed signal at 7 keV as discussed in \cite{Boyarsky:2014jta} is represented as a star.}
\label{fig:MasterPlot}
\end{figure}
We present a mass spectrum of a benchmark point in the parameter space allowed by all phenomenological considerations.
Pseudo-Dirac spectrum:
$M_{1/2} = 638 $ GeV with mass splitting of 10 keV and $M_{3/4} = 9.25$ GeV with mass splitting of 9 keV.
Intermediate scale spectrum:
$M_5 = 7.013$ keV and $M_6 = 7.006$ keV
with active-sterile mixing $\sin^2{(2\theta_5)} \approx 7 \cdot \,10^{-11}$ and $\sin^2{(2\theta_6)} \approx 3.2 \cdot \,10^{-13}$.
Light active spectrum:
$M_7 = 0.049$ eV, $M_8 = 0.0085$ eV and $M_9 \approx 0$.
The non-unitarity is $\epsilon \approx 10^{-5}$, the effective mass for $0\nu \beta \beta$ is $\ev{m_{ee}} \approx 0.003$ eV and the branching ratio $\text{Br}(\mu\rightarrow e \gamma) \approx 1.01 \cdot 10^{-13}$.
We find that from the low energy particle physics perspective the most accessible observable seems to be the branching ratio of $\mu \rightarrow e \gamma$.
\subsection{Collider Phenomenology of the Hidden Sector}
\subsubsection*{Pseudo-Dirac Neutrinos}
\noindent
The most promising signature to distinguish the heavy pseudo-Dirac neutrino of the CISS scenario from a heavy Majorana neutrino is a direct test at a collider, which is feasible as all the fermions involved are below the TeV scale. The difference lies in the dominant decay channel of the right-handed neutrinos. Since in the Type-I Majorana seesaw the lepton number violation is unsuppressed, the dominant process is expected to be the lepton number violating decay, see \cite{Keung:1983uu} and \cite{Abada:2013aba,Abada:2014cca, Antusch:2015mia}. As argued in \cite{Almeida:2000pz} the relevant quantity to estimate the efficiency of the LHC concerning the Majorana neutrino detection is $\left| \sum_{i\, \text{hevy}} \mathbf{U}_{e i}^2 \frac{1}{M_i} \right| \geq 6\cdot 10^{-3} \text{ TeV}^{-1} $. In the CISS case there are two heavy pseudo-Dirac neutrinos and the sum simplifies to $\left| \sum_{i = 1,2 } \mathbf{U}_{e i}^2 \left(\frac{1}{M_i}-\frac{1}{M_i+\mu} \right)\right| \approx \left| \mathbf{U}_{e 1}^2 \frac{\mu}{M_1^2} +\mathbf{U}_{e 2}^2 \frac{\mu}{M_2^2} \right| \approx \epsilon \frac{\mu}{\mathbf{M}^2 } $ due to the cancellation among the masses. Since for the process to be relevant $M_i > M_W$ and $\mu$ is at the keV scale, the suppression factor of $\frac{\mu}{\mathbf{M} } \leq 10^{-8}$ makes the signal irrelevant for phenomenology \cite{Kersten:2007vk}.
As argued in \cite{Das:2012ze, Das:2014jxa}, the most interesting channel to consider in case of suppressed same sign dilepton signal is the trilepton decay with missing energy, see \fig \ref{fig:DecayDirac}, since its SM background is significantly lower.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{HeavyDiracDecay}
\caption{New collider signature for the ISS scenario with the trilepton plus missing energy signature.}
\label{fig:DecayDirac}
\end{figure}
As can be seen from the Feynman graph in \fig \ref{fig:DecayDirac}, this decay also crucially depends on the active-sterile mixing squared and thus on the non-unitarity parameter $\epsilon_\alpha$. The interesting feature of the CISS in the RCSB framework is, that a large-scale separation is not expected which results naturally in an active-sterile $\epsilon \approx \theta^2 \approx m_D^2/\mathbf{M}^2$. Thus the most natural value for $\epsilon$, given an order of magnitude between the scales and Yukawa couplings of order one, can be up to one percent. The sizeable active-sterile mixing is compatible with the excess observed in the dilepton channel \cite{CMS:2014jfa}, as we will show in the next subsection, and thus a similar excess is expected to appear in the trilepton decay. Note that the excess of $30 \pm 10$ events as reported in \cite{Khachatryan:2014dka} could be accounted for by a Feynman graph similar to \fig \ref{fig:DecayDirac}, but with the secondary W boson decaying into jets. The number of events produced by this interaction is expected to be small due to the off-shell W boson.
Furthermore, due to suppressed lepton number violation it is clear within the CISS why no corresponding excess in the same-sign dilepton channel has been observed \cite{Chatrchyan:2013fea}, as is expected in the case of a decaying $W_R$. If this pattern was confirmed in the next run of the LHC, it would be a strong point in favour of the CISS.
Note that the recently proposed production mechanism for heavy sterile neutrinos via t-channel processes can further increase the collider sensitivity and test mixings of $\epsilon_e \approx 10^{-4}$ for masses in the few hundred GeV regime, as argued in \cite{Dev:2013wba}.
\subsubsection*{Scalars}
\noindent
We found that in a generic situation one scalar has a mass in the few TeV region, while the mass of the Archaon PGB can be as light as a few hundred GeV. For example we found, that for the HS gauge boson masses below a TeV the PGB has to be lighter than 400 GeV. Additionally for the conformal symmetry breaking to be transmitted to the EW sector there has to be at least one portal coupling which is of the order $\mathcal{O}\left( 0.1\right)$ which means that the PGB could manifest itself at the LHC as a second Higgs like particle with the signal strength reduced roughly by a factor of hundred. Due to the heavier mass the signal is most likely to manifest itself in the $t \bar{t}$ system. As the Yukawa coupling $y_1$ is of order unity, $\phi_1$ will also have decays via HS particles, see for example \fig \ref{fig:HigghsAndLNV}. The second scalar $\phi_2$, on the contrary, has very small Yukawa coupling $y_2\approx \mathcal{O} (10^{-7})$ to the HS and thus will mainly decay through the Higgs portal.
The possible HS decay channels of the Archaon are $\phi_1 \rightarrow N_{DM}\nu_R \rightarrow a \ell^\pm + \text{Jet(s)} + \slashed{E}_T$, where $a \in [0,4]$ is the number of produced charged leptons. The jet multiplicity in the $\phi_1$ decays is not fixed due to initial state radiation independent of the respective decay. In all leptonic decays of $\phi_1$, except for the decay $\phi_1 \rightarrow 2 \ell^\pm + 2 (q^\prime \bar{q})^\mp$, final state neutrinos are produced leading to missing transverse energy $\slashed{E}_T$. The estimated decay rates are
\begin{align*}
&\Gamma_\text{Top} = \frac{3\,y_t^2 M_{\phi_1} \lambda_p^2}{ 8 \pi} \sqrt{1 - \frac{4 \,m_t^2}{M_{\phi_1}^2}} \, ,\\
&\Gamma_{\alpha\,\beta}\approx \frac{y_1^2 M_{\phi_1} s f^2 \left| \sum_{i, \text{heavy}}\mathbf{U}^*_{\alpha i} \mathbf{U}_{\beta i} \right|^2}{8 \pi} \sqrt{1 - \frac{4 \,M_i^2}{M_{\phi_1}^2}}\,,
\end{align*}
where in the second line $s$ denotes a symmetry factor and $f$ accounts for the relative strength of the corresponding decay channel. Regarding the tentative measurement at the LHC of an excess in the decay channel $e^\pm e^\mp + \text{Jets} + \cancel{\it{E}}_{T} $ \cite{CMS:2014jfa} of $(130 \pm 50)$ events at $2.6$ standard deviations, we can estimate the parameter values in the CISS to account for this observation. We find that the production cross section for the Archaon $\phi_1$ should be about $2.5\cdot10^{-1} \text{ pb}$. Assuming that the production is analogous to the Higgs boson, but suppressed by the portal coupling, we estimate that for $M_{\phi_1}$ in the 500 GeV region one needs $\lambda_p^2 \approx 0.25$, if we take the expected Higgs cross section as in \cite{Anastasiou:2012hx}. The mixing matrix elements of the heavy states to the active neutrinos is required to be of about $\epsilon_e\approx \mathcal{O}(10^{-2})$ and to non-active neutrinos $\mathbf{U}_{N i}^2\approx 0.8-1.0$, which is in agreement with the DM phenomenology. As an example we take the benchmark scenario of $\epsilon_e \approx 0.017$ and $U_{Ni}^2 \approx 0.97$ , for which the relevant branching ratios are $\text{BR}(\phi_1 \rightarrow 2 \ell +\text{Jet(s)} + \slashed{E}_T) \approx 1.5~\%$ and $\text{BR}(\phi_1 \rightarrow t\bar{t}) \approx 2.1~\%$ producing a signal of about 75 events in the $\phi_1 \rightarrow 2 \ell +\text{Jet(s)} + \slashed{E}_T$ channel. Due to the small BR($\mu \rightarrow e + \gamma$) we do not expect any direct decays into muons, but that the produced leptons are mainly electrons. Note, however, that a small fraction of $\tau 's$ can well be produced, which themselves decay into $e's$ and $\mu 's$ each with a branching ratio of roughly $20~\%$ \cite{Agashe:2014kda}.
We observe that the parameters needed to explain the measured excess would also lead to an excess of about 100 events in the $t \bar{t}$ decays in the 500 to 600 GeV region, which is in agreement with current uncertainties \cite{Chatrchyan:2013lca,ATLAS-CONF-2013-099}.
In the next LHC run the model hypothesis should manifest itself in the $t \bar{t}$ system as a signal with 500 to 600 GeV invariant mass. At a designated integrated luminosity of $\sim 100\text{ fb}^{-1}$ $(\sim 300\text{ fb}^{-1})$ in the year 2018~(2021) \cite{Chatrchyan:2008aa,CMS:2013xfa}, we predict a signal of $390~(1160)$ events in the $\phi_1 \rightarrow 2 \ell +\text{Jet(s)} + \slashed{E}_T$ channel and a signal of $520~(1560)$ $t\bar{t}$ events using the branching ratios given above.
A different test for the size of the Higgs portal coupling can be performed in a general way by considering the Higgs couplings to the SM particles. The effective Lagrangian reads
\begin{align}
&\mathcal{L}_\text{eff} = (1 + \rho )\,C_{H\,W\,W} H\,W_\mu \,W^\mu + (1+ \rho) C_{H\,Z\,Z} H\,Z_\mu Z^\mu \nonumber \\
&- (1+\rho ) C_{H\,b\,b} H\,\bar{b} b - (1+\rho ) C_{H\,\tau\,\tau} H\,\bar{\tau} \tau \nonumber \\
&+ (1+\rho) C_{H\,g\,g} H \,G_{\mu\nu}G^{\mu\nu} + (1+ \rho)C_{H\,\gamma\,\gamma} H A_{_\mu\nu} A^{\mu\nu} \nonumber \\
& - (1+\rho ) C_{H\,c\,c} H\,\bar{c} c -\rho \, C_{H\,t\,t} H\,\bar{t} t\,.
\end{align}
The coefficient $\rho \approx -\frac{1}{2} \theta^2$ with $\theta$ the sum of mixing angles of the Higgs to additional scalars, is a universal suppression factor. A global fit to the data can lead to a bound on the mixing parameter, which is currently $\sin \theta < 0.36$ \cite{Farzinnia:2013pga}.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{HiggsAndLNVSemLEP}
\caption{The new decay channel of the Archaon scalar $\phi_1$. This digram shows a decay of the scalar partially to the visible sector, while the W decays leptonically. However, all other combinations of decays to two DM particles or to two leptons with two Ws are possible as well.}
\label{fig:HigghsAndLNV}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection*{Hidden Sector Gauge Boson}
\noindent
The gauge boson associated with the breaking of the Hidden Sector $U(1)_X$ symmetry can be searched for mainly in processes where it is produced due to the $U(1)$ mixing controlled by the parameter $\kappa$ in \eqn \ref{eq:TheModel}. As the conformal symmetry breaking scale sets also the scale of the $U(1)_X$ breaking, the new boson is expected to have a TeV scale mass, and thus to be well within reach of the LHC. The HS gauge boson possesses the same decay channels as the $\phi_1$ except for the $t\bar{t}$ channe
. It is, however, not produced over the Higgs portal, but from the mixing of the $U(1)_X$ gauge boson with the SM $U(1)_Y$ gauge boson leading to a different production cross section.
The $X$ decay channels with the most visible events are the $1 \ell$ and $2 \ell$ channels. If we take the parameters as given for the $\phi_1$ decays above to explain the excess of \cite{CMS:2014jfa}, we find an upper limit of $\kappa < 0.02$ in order to be consistent with \cite{ATLAS-CONF-2014-017}.
Concerning the boson masses of the HS we analyse \eqn \ref{eqn:PGBMass} with the mass pattern of $M_{\phi_1} \approx 550 \text{ GeV}$ and $M_{N_i} \lesssim M_{\phi_1}$ to account for the $\phi_1$ decay signal. We find a lower bound of $M_X \gtrsim 1 \text{ TeV}$ for values of $M_{\phi_2} \lesssim 2 \text{ TeV}$.
\subsection{Dark Matter Relic Abundance}
\label{sec:RelicAbundance}
\noindent
In this section we will discuss how the Dark Matter relic abundance in the CISS can be generated to explain the required abundance of Dark Matter.
Depending on the details of the realization there are three possible mechanisms, which could account for the correct relic abundance.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Production through oscillations in the early plasma, known as the Dodelson-Widrow~(DW) mechanism \cite{Dodelson:1993je}. The generic realisation of this mechanism, however, cannot account for the full amount of DM, as it is already severely constrained from structure formation observations. The possibility of a resonant production with a large Lepton asymmetry in the early universe is still allowed by data \cite{Asaka:2005an}. This scenario requires adjustment in the parameters, which is of course not excluded a priori but can make it less attractive from the theoretical perspective.
\item As the Hidden Sector has a gauged symmetry broken by the scalar vevs there is a new massive vector boson, which can thermalize the DM candidate and if the gauge boson mass is sufficiently low the DM will be overproduced. The subsequent injection of entropy by the decay of TeV scale right-handed neutrinos, which can be heavy pseudo-Dirac states in the CISS, allows to avoid the overclosure of the universe, as discussed in \cite{Bezrukov:2009th,Nemevsek:2012cd,Abada:2014zra}. This mechanism also requires a conspiracy between model parameters and is thus not a generic feature.
\item At last we would like to point out that a generic mechanism in the CISS framework does exist, namely the non-thermal freeze-in production. We will now discuss this mechanism in more detail.
\end{enumerate}
It turns out that in the CISS the relic abundance of warm Dark Matter is achieved naturally through a freeze-in mechanism. The first observation is that the scale of the vev which generates the intermediate keV scale is between the GeV and EW scales, which means that the Yukawa coupling is of the order $10^{-7}\, - \, 10^{-8}$. Thus this coupling never thermalizes the keV scale state in the early universe. This also implies that the effective number of relativistic degrees of freedom is unaffected.
The keV state is produced in a decay of the scalar, which generates its mass. The production through the decay of the scalar particle dominates over the decays of the sterile neutrinos, as shown by \cite{Chu:2011be}. The construction of our potential in \eqn \ref{eqn:fieldDefs} is such that the vevs are hierarchical, beginning at the TeV, and going to the EW scale. The smallest vev is between 10 and 200 GeV and due to the hierarchy the mixing among the scalars is in the $0.1$ region. Therefore, in comparison to the mechanism proposed in \cite{Kang:2014cia} no cancellation among the scalars can occur. This cancellation, however, is not necessary, as the decaying scalar has a vev below the EW scale. We find that the relic density can be calculated as discussed in \cite{Hall:2009bx,Merle:2013wta,Klasen:2013ypa} as
\begin{align}
Y_X (\infty) \approx \frac{45 \, g_\text{int}}{1.66 \pi^4 g^{S}_{*} \sqrt{g^\rho }} \frac{\Gamma(7/2)\,\Gamma(5/2)\, M_{Pl}}{16\,M_\phi^2} \, \Gamma\left( \phi \rightarrow N\, N \right)\,,
\end{align}
and leads in our scenario to the following simple relation
\begin{align}
\Omega_{DM\,h^2} \approx 0.11 \, \left(\frac{m_{DM}}{10\,\text{keV} }\right)^3 \left(\frac{\text{TeV}}{\ev{\phi_2}}\right)^2 \left( \frac{100 \text{GeV}}{M_{\phi_2}}\right) \frac{10^3}{g^{S}_{*} \sqrt{g^\rho }} \,,
\end{align}
where $g^{S}_{*}, g^\rho$ are the number of degrees of freedom active at $T \approx M_\phi$ relevant for the entropy and energy density.
We can deduce limits on the Dark Matter particle mass from the requirement that the freeze-in leads to a relic density compatible with observations \footnote{Note that the DW mechanism will lead in our parameter regime to a production of approximately one third of the relic density, as discussed in \cite{Abada:2014vea}. Nevertheless, our considerations are valid to estimate the approximate mass required for the Dark Matter particle.}. Given that in the CISS the SM is augmented by 16 additional degrees of freedom we find that $10^3 / \left( g^{S}_{*} \sqrt{g^\rho } \right) \approx 1 $. As we have observed that the vev of $\phi_2$ is between 10 and 200 GeV with the mass $M_{\phi_2}$ in the few TeV regime we find that the Dark Matter mass has to be $1.5 \,\text{keV} < m_{DM} < 25 \, \text{keV}$.
Two comments are in order. Firstly, for the discussed mechanism to be at work the DM particle must not be thermalized by the HS gauge interactions, which means that the combination of the gauge coupling over the gauge boson mass has to be sufficiently small i.e., as $g_X/M_X \approx \ev{\phi_1}^{-1}$, $\ev{\phi_1}$ has to be above the TeV scale.
Secondly, as discussed in our model there are two states with keV scale masses. We found that there is a hierarchy in the active-sterile mixing of the keV states and the active neutrinos. Therefore, one of the states will not be produced in the DW mechanism and will thus be less abundant by at least 30 $\%$. For astrophysical observations this means that a line signal from the DM decay will lead to a slightly asymmetric double line, with a sub-keV energy splitting.
\section{\label{sec:Conclusion}Conclusion}
\noindent
Motivated by the current experimental situation different realizations of conformal electro-weak
symmetry breaking have been discussed recently by various authors. In the conformal framework there would be
important consequences for the neutrino sector, since no explicit Dirac or Majorana mass term
would be allowed in the Lagrangian. All Dirac and Majorana mass terms had to arise then from
Yukawa couplings times vacuum expectation values of suitable scalars. We presented a simple
extension of the SM which realizes in this framework the so-called inverse seesaw mechanism.
This model can nicely account for non-zero neutrino masses and spontaneous conformal symmetry
breaking while avoiding Landau poles in running couplings.
The discussion of radiative conformal symmetry breaking via a portal to some hidden sector leads to
scenarios where the driving scalar scales are in un-tuned cases generically in the multi-TeV range.
The portal communicates this scale then to the visible sector which sets the electro-weak vacuum
expectation value.
We discussed in this paper the Conformal Inverse Seesaw (CISS), which is a very natural model
for the explanation of small neutrino masses without extremely tiny Yukawa couplings .
In this scenario the explicit lepton number violation in the Hidden Sector (HS) is cast down to the active neutrino sector by spontaneous symmetry breaking of the U(1)$_X$ gauge group through the vacuum expectation values of the HS scalars. It is controlled by Yukawa interactions with a small coupling constant ($y_2 \sim 10^{-7}$), which is natural in the t'Hooft sense. It is a remarkable feature of the model that, since lepton number is not a conserved quantum number in the first place, there is no lepton number violation scale (as would be the case in a theory with e$.$g$.$ a broken U(1)$_{B-L}$), but instead lepton number violating processes are suppressed by the seesaw relation of the CISS. At the same time the inverse seesaw at the TeV scale naturally leads to a long-lived Dark Matter particle at the keV scale, which is consistent with the warm Dark Matter scenario.
The spectrum of the model comprises of two pseudo-Dirac neutrinos of the scale $\mathbf{M}$, which naturally is at the TeV scale. The light neutrino mass is given by \eqn \ref{eq:LightEigenvaluesApprox} and the additional two sterile states have a mass of $\mu \approx \text{keV}$ and a small mixing with the active neutrinos suppressed by $\Delta \mu$, which vanishes in the limit of exact $L \leftrightarrow R$ exchange symmetry in the Hidden Sector. The dominant interaction in that case is the Yukawa coupling to the scalar, which generates the mass for the $\mu$ scale state.
The remarkable feature is that the scale $\mu \approx \text{keV}$ required by the seesaw relation is also the correct scale for this state to be a Dark Matter candidate \cite{Dolgov:2000ew, Bezrukov:2009th}. Furthermore, the parameter region allowed by low energy observables and non-thermal production overlays exactly the region allowed by astrophysical experiments and the phase space density considerations, as discussed in \sect \ref{sec:LowEnergyParticlePheno}.
We find that the CISS can be tested in low energy particle experiments, with the $\mu \rightarrow e \gamma$ measurement being the most promising experiment in the near future. Furthermore, we argue that the pseudo-Dirac states can be produced at the collider if the active sterile mixing is sizeable and their mass is above the W-boson mass. At the same time the decays of the Archaon $\phi_1$ and the HS gauge boson X, may already have been detected at the LHC leading to the excesses in the di-electron final states.
Concluding we find that incorporating neutrino mass generation in radiative conformal symmetry breaking leads to very interesting and testable consequences.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
\noindent
We would like to thank Alexei Smirnov, Werner Rodejohan and Rhorry Gauld for helpful discussions.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{Int}
Afterglow theory predicts that synchrotron flux at frequencies larger than $\nu_c$ and $\nu_m$
($\nu_c$ is the cooling frequency and $\nu_m$ is the typical synchrotron frequency) is determined mostly by the kinetic energy of the blast wave ($E_{kin}$)
and the fraction of energy in shock-accelerated electrons ($\epsilon_e$). Importantly, this flux does not depend on the GRB environment and it depends
very weakly on the fraction of energy in the magnetic field, $\epsilon_B$ and the power law index of the electrons' energy distribution, $p$
(\citealt{Kumar(2000),Freedman(2001)} or, more recently, \citealt{Nava(2014)}).
For $p$ ranging from 2.1 to 2.5 the predicted flux changes by a factor of order unity.
Assuming a typical $\epsilon_e \approx0.1$ one can derive an estimate of the kinetic energy of the blast-wave
from afterglow observations at frequencies above $\nu_c$.
Comparing this energy with the energy radiated at the prompt phase ($E_{\gamma}$), yields an estimate of the prompt efficiency: $\epsilon_{\gamma}=E_{\gamma}/(E_{kin}+E_{\gamma})$.
This method has been often applied to pre-Swift X-ray observations at $\sim $day to estimate the kinetic energy of GRBs. It suggested that the efficiency of the prompt phase of GRBs should be:
$\epsilon_{\gamma}>0.5$ \citep{Frail(2001),Panaitescu(2001a),Panaitescu(2001b),Berger(2003)}.
The discovery of the X-ray plateaus in many of the Swift GRBs, led to an increase in the severity of the efficiency problem. The X-ray flux
at the beginning of the plateau phase (around 500 sec) is lower by $\sim 3$ as compared with the same flux estimated by extrapolating backwards in time the observations at $\sim$day and
therefore leads to an estimate of the kinetic energy lower by the same factor and to efficiencies of up to 0.9 \citep{Granot(2006),Fan(2006),Ioka(2006),Nousek(2006),Zhang(2006),Nysewander(2009)}.
Such high efficiencies pose an immense theoretical difficulty for prompt emission models.
This efficiency includes two distinct processes, the conversion efficiency of bulk to internal energy, i.e. the
efficiency of the energy dissipation process, and the conversion efficiency from internal energy
to radiation. Therefore, a high overall efficiency implies high efficiencies for both processes, which is not at all trivial.
A crucial point in this analysis is the assumption that at around $1\,$day the X-ray band is above the cooling frequency
and that the flux at this frequency is not affected by SSC losses, as was pointed out by \cite{Fan(2006)}.
We examine here whether the X-ray flux is indeed a good proxy for the kinetic energy.
To do so, we need to pin down the location of $\nu_c$ at late times, assess the role of SSC cooling,
and re-derive the efficiency in case the basic assumptions (i.e., negligible Compton cooling and $\nu_X>\nu_c$ at the time of observation) are not valid.
As the position of $\nu_c$ and the Compton parameter, depend on $\epsilon_B$ and $n$ this will require us to self-consistently determine these parameters.
To do this, we collect LAT, X-ray and optical data (when available) for a sample of LAT GRBs. We assume that LAT photons are produced by external shocks (via synchrotron or SSC)
and find (both analytically and numerically) self-consistent solutions for the given set of observations.
\section{The Sample}
\label{Sample}
We have collected a sample of GRBs detected both by Fermi-LAT and by Swift-XRT.
Since we are interested in cases in which both the LAT and the XRT emissions are most likely afterglow radiation from external shocks,
we included in our sample only those bursts for which the LAT emission lasted longer than the prompt phase.
We also consider optical observations, when available.
The final sample includes nine GRBs: 080916C, 090323, 090328, 090510, 090926A, 100414A, 110625A, 110731A and 130427A.
\section{The prompt efficiency - an apparent inconsistency}
\label{efficiency}
Our basic assumption is that LAT photons are produced by synchrotron emission from the forward shock. In this case we
can calculate the kinetic energy of the blast wave both from X-ray and LAT data by inverting the equation $F_\nu(\nu>\nu_c)\propto\epsilon_e^{p-1} E_{kin}^{2+p \over 4} \nu^{-p/2}t^{2-3p \over 4}$.
We find that the kinetic energies inferred from the LAT flux are on average $\sim 50$ times larger than those derived from X-rays.
In turn, the efficiency derived from LAT is much smaller (0.15 on average as opposed to 0.87 obtained from X-rays).
There could be two solutions to the apparent discrepancy between the energies derived from LAT and X-rays. First, the X-ray flux could be suppressed due to IC losses.
If Compton losses are important, than a factor $(1+Y)^{-1}$ (where $Y$ is the Compton parameter) should be added to the equation for the flux above the cooling frequency: $F_{\nu}(\nu>\nu_c)\propto E_{kin}^{(2+p)/4}(1+Y)^{-1}$,
and therefore $\frac{E_{kin,X}}{E_{kin,LAT}} \propto (\frac{1+Y_X}{1+Y_{LAT}})^{4/(2+p)}$ ($Y_X$ is the Compton
parameter for X-ray radiating electrons and $Y_{LAT}$ is that of electrons radiating at the LAT band).
Since LAT photons are typically above the Klein-Nishina (KN) frequency, IC scattering of these photons is highly suppressed, and as a result $Y_{LAT}\lesssim1$.
However, X-ray emitting electrons are not in the KN regime therefore their SSC losses can explain the discrepancy in flux.
We refer to this possibility as ``SSC-suppression". A second possibility is that the X-ray band is actually below the cooling frequency.
In this spectral regime the flux depends strongly also on $\epsilon_B$ and on the external density. We refer to this possibility as ``slow cooling" scenario.
In both cases the X-ray flux is no longer a good proxy for the energy.
If one of the two scenarios can account for the data, then the kinetic energy estimated by the LAT flux is a better
estimate of the kinetic energies.
\section{Numerical results}
\label{numres}
We turn now to a general numerical solution, assuming only that both the X-ray and LAT photons are produced by the same external shock.
We relax the simplifying assumptions made above\footnote{Except for the assumption $\epsilon_e=0.1$.}, such as the assumption that the cooling frequency
is below the LAT band at the time of LAT observations or even that the LAT and X-ray fluxes are dominated by synchrotron and not SSC. For each burst,
we run over all possible values of $\epsilon_B, n, E_{kin}$ and change $p$ in the range: 2.1 to 2.8. For each set of values we use \cite{Nakar(2009)} to calculate
the Compton parameter $Y(\nu)$, including possible corrections due to KN effects, and estimate the synchrotron SED (using \citealt{Granot(2002)} with the addition of the effect of SSC suppression)
and the IC SED (using \citealt{Nakar(2009)}). We then calculate the fluxes at: $t_{LAT},t_X, t_{opt}$ (the latter is the time of optical observations, in case such observations are available)
at $100\,$MeV, keV, eV respectively. We compare these fluxes with the observed values, and in case the difference is within the reported uncertainty of the observations and the accuracy of the model
(which we estimate to be up to $\sim50\%$), we accept the solution.
We find a good agreement between the numerical calculations and the simplified analysis outlined above.
A typical example of allowed parameters space for GRB 110731A in an ISM environment can be seen in Fig. \ref{fig:110731A}. Three types of solutions can be seen in this figure. The lower branch
(lower densities, below the dot-dashed line) branch consists of solutions where X-rays are synchrotron radiation from slow cooling electrons, whereas the LAT flux is produced by synchrotron fast cooling electrons.
This is the slow cooling case in \S \ref{efficiency}. The intermediate branch (between the dot-dashed and the dashed line), consists of solutions where both X-rays and LAT are dominated by fast cooling synchrotron,
but the X-ray emitting electrons are suppressed by SSC. This corresponds to the SSC suppressed case discussed in \S \ref{efficiency}. The uppermost branch of solutions (above the dashed line),
consists of cases where the X-rays are still produced by synchrotron from SSC-suppressed fast cooling electrons, but the LAT photons are dominated by the SSC component instead of synchrotron.
In this case the spectral slope of $\nu F_{\nu}$ in LAT is rising ($\sim 0.5$) and is therefore in contradiction with LAT observations, ruling out this possibility
Both allowed solutions suggest that the prompt efficiency is moderate: $\epsilon_{\gamma}\leq 0.6$, corresponding to isotropic equivalent kinetic energies satisfying: $E_{kin}\geq 3\times 10^{53}$erg.
In addition, the allowed parameter space results in upper limits on the magnetization: $\epsilon_B \leq 5\times10^{-3}$.
Typical SEDs of the ``slow cooling'' and ``SSC suppressed'' solutions, presented in Fig. \ref{fig:110731A} can be seen in Fig. \ref{fig:SED}. As shown in the figures, the X-ray flux has to be significantly suppressed as compared
with the flux obtained by assuming fast cooling synchrotron in this band. The LAT flux is typically not affected by IC suppression.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{110731AISMfig4.png}
\caption{The allowed parameter space for GRB 110731A in an ISM environment. Colours depict isotropic equivalent kinetic energies (or equivalently, values for the prompt efficiency in parenthesis)
for each point in the ($\epsilon_B, n$) plane.
The lower branch (below the dot-dashed line) corresponds to the ``slow cooling" solutions. Solutions above this line correspond to ``SSC suppressed" solutions.
The uppermost branch (in the upper left corner, above the dashed line) corresponds to situations in which X-rays are synchrotron from SSC-suppressed fast cooling electrons and the LAT is dominated by SSC photons.
However these solutions are ruled out by more detailed modeling of the spectrum.
For reasonable values of $3\times10^{-2}\mbox{ cm}^{-3} \lesssim n\lesssim 30 \mbox{ cm}^{-3} $, we obtain: $\epsilon_{\gamma}\lesssim 0.6$, $E_{kin}\gtrsim 5 \times 10^{53}$ and $\epsilon_B \lesssim5\times 10^{-3}$
independent of the type of solution.}
\label{fig:110731A}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{110731ASED1.png}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{110731ASED2.png}
\caption{Observed and predicted spectra for GRB 110731A. Left: ``slow cooling" SED for $\epsilon_B=8\times10^{-5}, n=0.015\mbox{ cm}^{-3}, E_{kin}=2\times 10^{54} erg, p=2.4$ (corresponding to a typical ``slow cooling'' type solution).
Right: ``SSC suppressed" SED for $\epsilon_B=2.6\times10^{-5}, n=0.7\mbox{ cm}^{-3}, E_{kin}=10^{54} erg, p=2.2$ (corresponding to a typical ``SSC suppressed'' type solution).
The solid curves are the results of the simulation. The red curve is the SED at the time of LAT observation (at 300 sec), the blue curve is the SED at the time of X-ray observations
(at 1.22 days) and the green curve is the SED at the time of optical observations (at 0.012 days). The observations in these three bands are denoted by filled circles with error-bars.
The red and blue dashed lines are the LAT and X-ray flux (accordingly) assuming fast cooling synchrotron with no IC suppression. It can readily be seen that there is no significant suppression
for LAT flux whereas for X-rays the suppression is by a factor of $\sim 10$ as compared with fast cooling synchrotron with no IC suppression.}
\label{fig:SED}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
We have examined a sample of GRBs with both LAT and X-ray afterglow data.
Our basic assumption is that LAT photons (or at least the late tail of these photons) are produced by synchrotron emission from the forward shock.
We find that the X-ray flux is not a good proxy for the kinetic energy of the blast wave, either because the X-ray emitting electrons are slow cooling
or because the X-ray flux is suppressed by SSC losses. The LAT flux, is not prone to these problems and is therefore a better proxy of the energy.
The derived prompt efficiencies using LAT photons are considerably lower as compared with efficiency estimates using the X-rays
(15$\%$ as opposed to 87$\%$ and higher).
These afterglow models require small values of $\epsilon_B$: $10^{-6}\lesssim \epsilon_B \lesssim 10^{-3}$.
Such low values would arise if either there is no extra amplification of the external magnetic field beyond shock compression (see \citealt{RBD(2014)}) or if
strong magnetic fields are created by micro-turbulence near the shock, but then these fields decay rapidly with the distance from the shock front \citep{Derishev(2007),Lemoine(2013)}
and the bulk of the afterglow emission is produced in a low magnetic field region.
This work was supported by a Marie Curie IEF (LN), by the ERC grant GRBs, by a grant from the Israel ISF - China NSF collaboration,
by a grant from the Israel Space Agency, and by the I-Core Center of Excellence in Astrophysics.
|
\section{Introduction}
The modelling of charged particles in electromagnetic fields has been an area of great interest to accelerator physicists for decades, using a number of simplifications for computational ease. Increasingly large fields such as those that will be produced at ELI \cite{ELI} and HiPER \cite{HiPER} now mean that the validity of these simplifications must be considered more closely.
The classical radiation reaction force has long been considered as an averaged effect for sufficiently low electromagnetic fields in accelerator physics and more recently the Landau-Lifshitz equation has been used to model the motion of such particles in detail \cite{berezhiani2004radiation,hazeltine2004radiation,tamburini2011radiation}.
The Landau-Lifshitz equation is however only valid for sufficiently weak and slowly varying background fields \cite{BurtonNobleReview}.
The increasingly large electromagnetic fields expected to be deployed at experiments such as ELI and HiPER may be strong enough to render the Landau-Lifshitz equation invalid and this has led to recent interest in alternative models \cite{noblekravetsjaroszynski2013}, computational simplifications \cite{Vranicetal2015} and extensive consideration of quantum effects (for a recent review, see \cite{BurtonNobleReview}). Thus, calculation of the effective trajectories from first principles proves problematic, due to the various candidate effective theories. Recently \cite{Vranicetal2015}, various radiation reaction models have been been included in PIC codes via the Osiris framework, which is commonly used in the laser wakefield context.
While the effects of the increasingly large electromagnetic field {strengths} have been studied, the effects of large field \emph{gradients}, created in laser wakefield accelerators, have received very little attention.
In contexts where the field gradient is considered to be non-trivial the radiation reaction contributions are included via the Landau-Lifshitz equation, though the effects of spin are often neglected despite being of comparable size \cite{Piazza}.
The Stern-Gerlach force, caused by the coupling of the spin of a charged particle with the background electromagnetic field, was first observed in the splitting of a beam of silver atoms by an inhomogeneous magnetic field.
In high field-gradient systems, such as those created in ultra-intense laser-driven plasma density waves, we suggest that the Stern-Gerlach force is not only non-trivial but in some circumstances may be \emph{more important} than the radiation reaction force. These Stern-Gerlach effects may lead to behaviour that does not appear to have been adequately addressed in the context of laser wakefield accelerators: the purpose of this article is to illustrate the significance of the Stern-Gerlach forces in a simple model of such an accelerator.
Modelling quantum mechanical electrons as covariant classical spinning particles has been well-studied. There have been various approaches from the work of Frenkel \cite{frenkel1926elektrodynamik} and Thomas \cite{thomas1927kinematics} in the 1920s through the work of Nakano \cite{nakano1956relativistic}, Tulczyjew \cite{tulczyjew1959motion}, Dixon \cite{dixon1964,dixon1965,dixon1967}, Corben \cite{corben1961spin1,corben1961spin2}, Suttorp and de Groot \cite{suttorpdegroot,de1972foundations} and Ellis \cite{ellis1975motion} in the 1950-70s.
The equations of motion and the validity of the auxiliary condition on the spin and the momentum necessary to close the system have still received discussion in recent years \cite{Costaetal2012}.
The approaches used to derive these equations are varied, and for completeness we include a new method using de Rham currents and distributional methods in Appendix \ref{app:derivation}.
The systems in which the Stern-Gerlach force is most prominent are those with a high electromagnetic field gradient. Chapter 2 considers the implications of the coupling between the spin of a classical electron and the rapidly varying electromagnetic field produced by a laser-driven plasma wave. Sufficiently short, high-intensity laser pulses can form longitudinal waves within the electron density of a plasma. These density waves propagate with speed comparable to the group speed of the laser pulse. Not all plasma electrons form this wave, however; some of the electrons are caught up in the wave and accelerated by its high fields. The wave eventually collapses as these electrons damp the wave (the wave `breaks'). The extremely high electric field gradient of a plasma wave near wavebreaking provides an excellent theoretical testing ground for the effects of Stern-Gerlach-type contributions to the trajectory of a test electron.
In what follows, the equations of motion for a spinning electron in such a density wave are found to have a particular solution which does not exist for a particle without spin - trajectories corresponding to electrons `surfing' orthogonal to the wave vector in the frame of the wave. The perturbations around a `surfing' trajectory are found to be linearly unstable for the vast majority of the parameter space. Since the family of new trajectories found in Section 2 correspond to electrons travelling orthogonal to the motion of the plasma electrons and are unstable, the electrons following such trajectories could cause undesirable properties for effective bunching of electrons in laser wakefield accelerators.
These `surfing' trajectories exist only for a particle with non-zero spin in a background field with non-zero gradient. Furthermore, the electrons are non-accelerating and therefore the radiation reaction forces are expected to be negligible. Clearly, the spin-field coupling is much more significant than radiation reaction in the present context.
{~}
We use Heaviside-Lorentz units with the speed of light $c=1$ (except at the end of Section \ref{stabilitysection} for the sake of clarity) and we assume that the effects of spacetime curvature are negligible so that the spacetime metric is simply the Minkowski metric $g_{ab} = \text{diag}\{-1,1,1,1\}$. Lower case Latin indices run over 0, 1, 2, 3.
\section{Effects of Stern-Gerlach-type forces on a classical charged particle}
\subsection{Preliminaries}
The equations of motion that govern a classical particle with worldline $C : \tau \mapsto x^a=C^a(\tau)$, charge $q$, momentum $P^{a}$ and spin $S_{ab}$ in a background electromagnetic field described by the tensor components $F_{ab}$ are
\begin{align}
&\frac{d}{d\tau}\left(P^a + \frac{{F}^{ab}\Sigma_{bc} {P}^c}{\dot{C}^dP_d}\right)= -q{F}^{ab}{\dot{C}_b}-\frac{1}{2}\Sigma^{bc}\partial^a{F}_{bc},\label{myeqgeneral1}\\
&\frac{d}{d\tau}S^{ab}= -\dot{C}^a\left(P^b + \frac{{F}^{bc}\Sigma_{cd} {P}^d}{\dot{C}^eP_e}\right)+\dot{C}^b\left(P^a + \frac{{F}^{ac}\Sigma_{cd} {P}^d}{\dot{C}^eP_e}\right) +{F}^{bc}\Sigma^{~a}_{c} -{F}^{ac}\Sigma^{~b}_{c},\label{myeqgeneral2}
\end{align}
where $\tau$ is the proper time of the particle, $\dot{C}^a = \frac{d}{d\tau}C^a(\tau)$ is the 4-velocity of the particle and $\Sigma_{ab}$ is the electromagnetic dipole tensor (see \cite{suttorpdegroot}, or for a new derivation of these equations, see Appendix A). However, this is not a complete system; an additional condition is required. There are a number of possible conditions, though two of the most commonly used are the Frenkel condition \cite{frenkel1926elektrodynamik}
\begin{align}
\dot{C}^aS_{ab} = 0\label{Frenkelcond}
\end{align}
and the Nakano-Tulczyjew \cite{nakano1956relativistic, tulczyjew1959motion} condition
\begin{align}
P^aS_{ab} = 0.\label{Tulczcond}
\end{align}
The Frenkel condition, whilst being simple and intuitive, is considered by some to be unphysical since it yields helical solutions in field-free systems (sometimes called Zittebewegung) \cite{corben1961spin1,corben1961spin2}, though others argue against this unphysicality \cite{Costaetal2012}.
We initially adopt the Nakano-Tulczyjew condition \eqref{Tulczcond}, which has already been abundantly studied \cite{dixon1964,dixon1965,dixon1967,suttorpdegroot} though we subsequently show that in fact the conditions \eqref{Frenkelcond} and \eqref{Tulczcond} are \emph{equivalent} to first order in $S_{ab}$.
A particle with spin has a magnetic dipole moment related to the spin by the gyromagnetic ratio $\frac{{g}q}{2M_0}$, where $M_0$ is the particle's rest mass and ${g}$ is the $g$-factor of the particle. Furthermore, a particle with a zero electric dipole moment and a non-zero magnetic dipole moment is characterised by $\Sigma_{ab} = \frac{{g}q}{2M_0}S_{ab}$\label{sym:gnumber}\label{sym:restmassM0}. Thus the equations of motion, together with the condition \eqref{Tulczcond}, are
\begin{align}
&\frac{d}{d\tau}P^a= -q{F}^{ab}{\dot{C}_b}-\frac{{g}q}{4M_0}S^{bc}\partial^a{F}_{bc},\label{eqofmotionPa}\\
&\frac{d}{d\tau}S^{ab}= -\dot{C}^aP^b+\dot{C}^bP^a + \frac{{g}q}{2M_0}{F}^{bc}S^{~a}_{c} -\frac{{g}q}{2M_0}{F}^{ac}S^{~b}_{c},
\end{align}
where the 4-momentum $P^a$ satisfies the condition
\begin{align}
P_b = -P^a\dot{C}_a\dot{C}_b - \frac{\left(S_{ab}+S_{ad}\dot{C}^d\dot{C}_b\right)}{P^e\dot{C}_e}\left(qF^{ac}\dot{C}_c+\frac{{g}q}{4M_0}\partial^aF_{cd}S^{cd}+\frac{{g}q}{2M_0}P^cF_{c}^{~a}\right),\label{Pfulleqdef}
\end{align}
found by differentiation of the Nakano-Tulczyjew condition \eqref{Tulczcond} with respect to $\tau$. Note that the first term on the right-hand side of \eqref{eqofmotionPa} is the standard Lorentz force on a charged particle and the second term, the coupling of the spin and the gradient of the electromagnetic field, is a Stern-Gerlach-type contribution.
A classical electron has $g$-factor equal to 2, charge $q=q_{\text{e}}=-e$ (where $e$ is the elementary charge) and rest mass $M_0 = m_{\text{e}}$ giving the system of equations
\begin{align}
&\frac{d}{d\tau}P^a= -q_{\text{e}}{F}^{ab}{\dot{C}_b}-\frac{q_{\text{e}}}{2m_{\text{e}}}S^{bc}\partial^a{F}_{bc},\label{syseqelectron1}\\
&\frac{d}{d\tau}S^{ab}= -\dot{C}^aP^b+\dot{C}^bP^a +\frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}}{F}^{bc}S^{~a}_{c} -\frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}}{F}^{ac}S^{~b}_{c},\label{syseqelectron2}\\
&P^aS_{ab}=0\label{syseqelectron3},\\
&P^a = -P^b\dot{C}_b\dot{C}^a - \frac{\left(S^{~a}_{b}+S_{bd}\dot{C}^d\dot{C}^a\right)}{P^e\dot{C}_e}\left(q_{\text{e}}F^{bc}\dot{C}_c+\frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}}\partial^bF_{cd}S^{cd}+\frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}}P^cF_{c}^{~b}\right)\label{syseqelectron4}.
\end{align}
Integration of \eqref{syseqelectron1}-\eqref{syseqelectron4} is far from straightforward due to constraints \eqref{syseqelectron3}, \eqref{syseqelectron4} and it is useful to reduce \eqref{syseqelectron1}-\eqref{syseqelectron4} to a model that captures the essential physics that we wish to explore. In order to simplify the system, we choose to linearise \eqref{syseqelectron1}-\eqref{syseqelectron4} in the spin\footnote{For a system of equations linearised in $F_{ab}$, see \cite{suttorpdegroot}.} $S_{ab}$. Firstly, note that linearising the momentum condition \eqref{syseqelectron4} results in the straightforward expression
\begin{align}
P^a = \left(m_{\text{e}} + \frac{q_{\text{e}}}{2m_{\text{e}}}S^{bc}F_{bc}\right)\dot{C}^a,\label{PSexplicitansatz}
\end{align}
for the 4-momentum and hence the Frenkel condition \eqref{Frenkelcond} and the Nakano-Tulczyjew condition \eqref{Tulczcond} are equivalent to first order in $S^{ab}$. The linearised system of equations is
\begin{align}
&\frac{d}{d\tau}\dot{C}^a = -\left(1 - \frac{q_{\text{e}}}{2m_{\text{e}}^2}S^{bc}F_{bc}\right)\frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}}{F}^{ab}{\dot{C}_b}-\frac{q_{\text{e}}}{2m_{\text{e}}^2}S^{bc}\left(\Pi^\perp_{\dot{C}}\right)^{ad}\partial_dF_{bc}\label{eqmotlinS1},\\
&\frac{d}{d\tau}S^{ab}= \frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}}\left({F}^{bc}S^{~a}_{c} -{F}^{ac}S^{~b}_{c}\right)\label{eqmotlinS2},\\
&\dot{C}^aS_{ab}=0,\label{Frenkelcond2}
\end{align}
along with \eqref{PSexplicitansatz}, where
$(\Pi^\perp_{\dot{C}})^{ab} = g^{ab} + \dot{C}^a\dot{C}^b$.
Notably, the effects of the third term (the Stern-Gerlach-type term) on the right-hand side of \eqref{eqmotlinS1} are most apparent in a system with a high field gradient. Although we can demand that \eqref{Frenkelcond2} is satisfied at a particular instant in proper time $\tau$, it is only satisfied to second order in $S^{ab}$ at other times. Henceforth we adopt \eqref{eqmotlinS1}, \eqref{eqmotlinS2} as the system of equations for a classical electron with spin subject to $\dot{C}^aS_{ab}|_{\tau=0}=0$ in order to readily demonstrate the effects of the Stern-Gerlach term (the final term on the right-hand side) of \eqref{eqmotlinS1}.
\subsection{Effects of the Stern-Gerlach force on the motion of an electron in a plasma wave}
For clarity we use the simplified notation $t = C^0$, $x = C^1$, $y = C^2$, $z = C^3$ for the components of the worldline $C$. Consider a system with the electromagnetic field 2-form $F$ associated with an electrostatic wave
\begin{align}
F_{ab} = \left\{\begin{array}{c}
E(\xi)\text{ for }a=0, b=3\\
-E(\xi)\text{ for }a=3, b=0\\
0\text{ otherwise},\\
\end{array}\right.\label{generalzwaveE}
\end{align}
where $\xi = z-vt$ is the phase of the wave. The evolution equations \eqref{eqmotlinS1} are simply
\begin{align}
&\ddot{t} = \left(1 + \frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}^2}S_{03}E\right)\frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}}E{\dot{z}}+\frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}^2}\left(v+\dot{t}\left(\dot{z}-v\dot{t}\right)\right)E'S_{03}\label{SGcomp1},\\
&\ddot{x} = \frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}^2}\dot{x}\left(\dot{z}-v\dot{t}\right)E'S_{03}\label{SGcomp2},\\
&\ddot{y} = \frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}^2}\dot{y}\left(\dot{z}-v\dot{t}\right)E'S_{03}\label{SGcomp3},\\
&\ddot{z} = \left(1 + \frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}^2}S_{03}E\right)\frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}}E\dot{t}+\frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}^2}\left(1+\dot{z}\left(\dot{z}-v\dot{t}\right)\right)E'S_{03}\label{SGcomp4},
\end{align}
since $\frac{d}{d\tau}\dot{C}=\ddot{C}$ and $F_{03}=-F^{03}$. Note that dots denote derivatives with respect to the proper time $\tau$ and primes denote derivatives with respect to the phase $\xi$. Similarly from \eqref{eqmotlinS2} the spin evolution equations are
\begin{align}
&\dot{S}_{01}= \frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}}ES_{13},\quad\quad\dot{S}_{13}= \frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}}ES_{01},\\
&\dot{S}_{02}= \frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}}ES_{23},\quad\quad\dot{S}_{23}= \frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}}ES_{02},\\
&\dot{S}_{03}= 0,~~~~\quad\quad\quad\quad\dot{S}_{12}= 0.\label{spincompconst}
\end{align}
Notably, the only component of the spin in \eqref{SGcomp1}-\eqref{SGcomp4} i.e. the only component that affects the trajectory of the particle is $S_{03}$, which according to \eqref{spincompconst} is constant. We hence neglect the remaining spin equations of motion when solving for the worldline of the electron. Writing the remaining equations of the system, \eqref{SGcomp1}-\eqref{SGcomp4}, in the coordinate system $\{\gamma\zeta,x,y,\gamma\xi\}$, adapted to an observer travelling with the plasma wave at speed $v$, where $\gamma = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-v^2}}$ is the Lorentz factor of the wave and $\zeta = -t+vz$, we find
\begin{align}
\ddot{\zeta} &= \frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}^2}S_{03}E'\dot{\zeta}\dot{\xi} -\left(1 + \frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}^2}S_{03}E\right)\frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}}E{\dot{\xi}}\label{PWSPINEQOFMOTION1},\\
\ddot{\xi} &=\frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}^2}S_{03}E'\dot{\xi}\dot{\xi} -\left(1 + \frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}^2}S_{03}E\right)\frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}}E\dot{\zeta} + \frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}^2\gamma^2}S_{03}E',\label{PWSPINEQOFMOTION4}\\
\ddot{x} &= \frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}^2}S_{03}E'\dot{x}\dot{\xi}\label{PWSPINEQOFMOTION2},\\
\ddot{y} &= \frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}^2}S_{03}E'\dot{y}\dot{\xi}\label{PWSPINEQOFMOTION3}.
\end{align}
A particular solution to \eqref{PWSPINEQOFMOTION1}-\eqref{PWSPINEQOFMOTION3} includes a constant value for phase $\xi$ and has the form
\begin{align}
\zeta_{\text{sol}}(\tau)&=\frac{1}{\left(1+\frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}^2}S_{03}E_{\text{C}}\right)}\frac{S_{03}}{m_{\text{e}}\gamma^2}\frac{E'_{\text{C}}}{E_{\text{C}}}\tau + \zeta_0,\label{trajectoryzeta}\\
x_{\text{sol}}(\tau) &= \dot{x}_0\tau + x_0,\label{trajectoryx}\\
y_{\text{sol}}(\tau) &= \dot{y}_0\tau + y_0,\label{trajectoryy}\\
\xi_{\text{sol}} &= \xi_{\text{C}}\label{trajectotyxi},
\end{align}
and where $E_{\text{C}}$ denotes the value of the electric field at $\xi=\xi_{\text{C}}$. Here $x_0$, $y_0$, $\zeta_0$ are arbitrary constants and $\dot{x}_0$, $\dot{y}_0$ are arbitrary constants up to fulfilment of the normalisation condition $g_{ab}\dot{C}^a\dot{C}^b = -1$ on the worldline of the electron, i.e.
\begin{align}
-\frac{1}{\left(1+\frac{q_{\text{e}}}{m_{\text{e}}^2}S_{03}E_{\text{C}}\right)^2}\left(\frac{S_{03}}{m_{\text{e}}\gamma^2}\frac{E'_{\text{C}}}{E_{\text{C}}}\right)^2 + \dot{x}^2_0 + \dot{y}^2_0=-1.\label{normalisationtrajectoryspin}
\end{align}
Note that condition \eqref{normalisationtrajectoryspin} places restrictions on the system parameters, for instance $S_{03}, E_{\text{C}}, E'_{\text{C}} \neq 0$. Consequently, the solution family \eqref{trajectoryzeta}-\eqref{trajectotyxi} does not exist for a spinless particle, nor a constant electromagnetic background.
Also note that since we wish to consider a system with a large field gradient, we consider $\frac{E'_{\text{C}}}{E_{\text{C}}}$ to be of order $(S_{03})^{-1}$.
A sufficiently short and intense laser pulse propagating through a plasma may create a travelling longitudinal
plasma wave whose velocity is approximately the same as the laser pulse's group velocity. The electric field produced by such a plasma wave provides an excellent example of an electric field of the form \eqref{generalzwaveE}:
\begin{align}
E = \frac{m_{\text{e}}\nu'}{q_{\text{e}}\gamma^2},\label{PWEintermsofnudef}
\end{align}
where $\nu$ must satisfy
\begin{align}
\frac{m_{\text{e}}^2}{2q_{\text{e}}^2\gamma^4}\nu'^2 - m_{\text{e}}Zn_{\text{ion}}\left(v\sqrt{\nu^2-\gamma^2}-\nu+\gamma\right) = 0\label{smallernucondition}
\end{align}
in order to satisfy the Maxwell equations and the Lorentz force equation (see Appendix \ref{App:PW} for details).
Here $Z$ is the degree of ionisation, $n_{\text{ion}}$ is the proper number density of the (background) ions.
In laser wakefield acceleration, the ``target" is the dephasing point, where accelerated electrons begin to overtake the plasma wave. At this point the field gradient is much larger than the electric field, hence $\frac{E'_{\text{C}}}{E_{\text{C}}}$ can be said to be large (of order $(S_{03})^{-1}$).
The family of trajectories given by \eqref{trajectoryzeta}-\eqref{trajectotyxi} with the electric field \eqref{PWEintermsofnudef} is illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:PerturbationTrajectories}. Despite the propagation of the plasma electrons in the $\xi$ direction, the electrons described by the solution family \eqref{trajectoryzeta}-\eqref{trajectotyxi} travel transversely, along lines of constant $E$ (they `surf' along the wave).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.2]{Fig1_Wave-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\begin{picture}(0,0)
\put(-168,46){\scriptsize{$C_1$}}
\put(-159,65){\scriptsize{$C_2$}}
\put(-148,91){\scriptsize{$C_3$}}
\put(-140,108){\scriptsize{$C_4$}}
\put(-200,120){\small{$E$}}
\put(-10,15){\small{$\xi$}}
\put(-130,-5){\small{$x$}}
\end{picture}
\caption{Illustration of several example trajectories $C_1$, $C_2$, $C_3$, $C_4$ given by different choices of $\xi_{\text{C}}$. Whilst the plasma electrons travel along $\xi$, test electrons described by \eqref{trajectoryzeta}-\eqref{trajectotyxi} travel transversely to the wave's velocity, `surfing' along the wave.}
\label{fig:PerturbationTrajectories}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Stability of the `surfing' solutions in a plasma wave}
\label{stabilitysection}
It is natural now to consider the linear stability of the family of `surfing' solutions described by \eqref{trajectoryzeta}-\eqref{trajectotyxi} for the plasma wave electric field \eqref{PWEintermsofnudef}. In order to investigate this, consider the following:
\begin{align}
\zeta(\tau) &= \zeta_{\text{sol}}(\tau)+\varepsilon\Delta\zeta(\tau) \label{perturbedsol1},\\
x(\tau) &= x_{\text{sol}}(\tau) +\varepsilon\Delta x(\tau)\label{perturbedsol2},\\
y(\tau) &= y_{\text{sol}}(\tau) +\varepsilon\Delta y(\tau)\label{perturbedsol3},\\
\xi(\tau) &= \xi_{\text{sol}} +\varepsilon\Delta\xi(\tau) \label{perturbedsol4},
\end{align}
where $\varepsilon$ is a small constant and the $\Delta$ terms correspond to perturbations. Substituting \eqref{perturbedsol4} into $\nu$ and taking Taylor series in $\varepsilon$ gives:
\begin{align}
\nu(\xi_{\text{C}}+\varepsilon\Delta\xi) = \nu_C+\varepsilon\nu'_{\text{C}}\Delta\xi + \mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2)\label{nuperturb},
\end{align}
where $\nu_C = \nu(\xi_C)$, $\left.\nu'_C= \frac{d\nu(\xi)}{d\xi}\right|_{\xi=\xi_C}$ and so on for the higher derivatives. Substituting \eqref{nuperturb}, its derivatives and \eqref{perturbedsol1}-\eqref{perturbedsol4} into the equations of motion \eqref{PWSPINEQOFMOTION1}-\eqref{PWSPINEQOFMOTION3} gives, to first order in the perturbations,
\begin{align}
&\ddot{\Delta\zeta} = \left[-\left(1 - \mathcal{S}\nu'_{\text{C}}\right)\frac{\nu'_{\text{C}}}{\gamma^2}+\frac{\mathcal{S}^2}{1-\mathcal{S}\nu'_{\text{C}}}\frac{(\nu''_{\text{C}})^2}{\nu'_{\text{C}}}\right]\dot{\Delta\xi}= \mathcal{A}_1\dot{\Delta\xi},\label{PWSPINEQOFMOTION1firstorder}\\
&\ddot{\Delta x} =\left[-\mathcal{S}\dot{x}_0\nu''_{\text{C}}\right]\dot{\Delta\xi}=\mathcal{A}_2\dot{\Delta\xi},\label{PWSPINEQOFMOTION2firstorder}\\
&\ddot{\Delta y} =\left[-\mathcal{S}\dot{y}_0\nu''_{\text{C}}\right]\dot{\Delta\xi}=\mathcal{A}_3\dot{\Delta\xi},\label{PWSPINEQOFMOTION3firstorder}\\
&\ddot{\Delta \xi} = \left[(1-\mathcal{S}\nu'_{\text{C}})^2\frac{(\nu'_{\text{C}})^2}{\gamma^4}+\left(\frac{1-\mathcal{S}\nu'_{\text{C}}}{\nu'_{\text{C}}}-\frac{\mathcal{S}}{1-\mathcal{S}\nu'_{\text{C}}}\right)\frac{\mathcal{S}(\nu''_{\text{C}})^2}{\gamma^2}-\mathcal{S}\frac{\nu'''_{\text{C}}}{\gamma^2}\right]\Delta\xi=\mathcal{A}_4\Delta\xi,\label{PWSPINEQOFMOTION4firstorder}
\end{align}
where $\mathcal{S} = -\frac{S_{03}}{m_{\text{e}}\gamma^2}$ and the constants $\mathcal{A}_n$ depend on the spin, electric field and the plasma wave speed. A solution to \eqref{PWSPINEQOFMOTION1firstorder}-\eqref{PWSPINEQOFMOTION4firstorder} is
\begin{align}
\Delta\zeta &= \frac{\mathcal{A}_1}{\sqrt{\mathcal{A}_4}}\left({\mathcal{C}_1}e^{\sqrt{\mathcal{A}_4}\tau} + {\mathcal{C}_2}e^{-\sqrt{\mathcal{A}_4}\tau}\right)\label{Deltaperturbedsol1},\\
\Delta x &= \frac{\mathcal{A}_2}{\sqrt{\mathcal{A}_4}}\left({\mathcal{C}_1}e^{\sqrt{\mathcal{A}_4}\tau} + {\mathcal{C}_2}e^{-\sqrt{\mathcal{A}_4}\tau}\right)\label{Deltaperturbedsol2},\\
\Delta y &= \frac{\mathcal{A}_3}{\sqrt{\mathcal{A}_4}}\left({\mathcal{C}_1}e^{\sqrt{\mathcal{A}_4}\tau} + {\mathcal{C}_2}e^{-\sqrt{\mathcal{A}_4}\tau}\right)\label{Deltaperturbedsol3},\\
\Delta\xi &=\mathcal{C}_1e^{\sqrt{\mathcal{A}_4}\tau} + \mathcal{C}_2e^{-\sqrt{\mathcal{A}_4}\tau},\label{Deltaperturbedsol4}
\end{align}
where $\mathcal{C}_1$, $\mathcal{C}_2$ are integration constants. The stability of the system hence depends solely on the sign of the quantity $\mathcal{A}_4$, defined in \eqref{PWSPINEQOFMOTION4firstorder}. Written as a Taylor series in $\mathcal{S}$, $\mathcal{A}_4$ can be expressed as
\begin{align}
{\mathcal{A}}_4 &= \left(\frac{\nu'_{\text{C}}}{\gamma^2}\right)^2 + \left(\left(\frac{\nu''_{\text{C}}}{\nu'_{\text{C}}}\right)^2-2\left(\frac{\nu'_{\text{C}}}{\gamma}\right)^2-\frac{\nu'''_{\text{C}}}{\nu'_{\text{C}}}\right)\frac{\mathcal{S}\nu'_{\text{C}}}{\gamma^2} + \mathcal{O}(\mathcal{S}^2)\label{linearisedA4}.
\end{align}
Assuming that the zeroth and first order terms are dominant we neglect the higher order terms\footnote{The range of validity of this assumption is ascertained in the subsequent section.}. Consequently, the exponential terms in the perturbations \eqref{Deltaperturbedsol1}-\eqref{Deltaperturbedsol4} become
\begin{align}
e^{\sqrt{\mathcal{A}_4}}\tau \approx& \left(1+N_{\text{C}}\mathcal{S}\tau\right)e^{\frac{\left|\nu'_{\text{C}}\right|}{\gamma^2}\tau},\label{expassumption}
\end{align}
\label{sym:NC}to first order in $\mathcal{S}$, where
\begin{align}
N_{\text{C}} = \frac{1}{2}\frac{\nu'_{\text{C}}}{|\nu'_{\text{C}}|}\left(\left(\frac{\nu''_{\text{C}}}{\nu'_{\text{C}}}\right)^2-2\left(\frac{\nu'_{\text{C}}}{\gamma}\right)^2-\frac{\nu'''_{\text{C}}}{\nu'_{\text{C}}}\right).
\end{align}
Hence the $\xi$ perturbation \eqref{perturbedsol4} to first order in $\mathcal{S}$ is
\begin{align}
\Delta \xi = \mathcal{C}_1\left(1+N_{\text{C}}\mathcal{S}\tau\right)e^{\frac{\left|q_{\text{e}}E_{\text{C}}\right|}{m_{\text{e}}}\tau} + \mathcal{C}_2\left(1-N_{\text{C}}\mathcal{S}\tau\right)e^{-\frac{\left|q_{\text{e}}E_{\text{C}}\right|}{m_{\text{e}}}\tau},
\end{align}
that is the perturbation $\Delta\xi$ is unstable (to first order in $\mathcal{S}$) as the first exponential will diverge as $\tau$ increases, unless $\mathcal{C}_1=0$. Since the other three perturbations are closely linked to $\Delta\xi$, the complete perturbation is also divergent (unless the integration constant $\mathcal{C}_1=0$).
\subsection{The range of validity of {\eqref{expassumption}}}
In order to confirm that the zeroth and first order terms of $\mathcal{S}$ in $\mathcal{A}_4$ are dominant, consider the ratio $R$ of the sum of the zeroth and first order terms to the full expression for $\mathcal{A}_4$ \eqref{PWSPINEQOFMOTION4firstorder}. The ratio $R$ can be written as
\begin{align}
R = \frac{\hat{\nu'}}{(1-\hat{\nu'})}\left[\frac{(\hat{\nu'})^4-2\gamma^2(\hat{\nu''})^2 +\hat{\nu'}\left(\gamma^2(\hat{\nu''})^2-(\hat{\nu'})^4\right)}{(\hat{\nu'})^3 + \gamma^2(\hat{\nu''})^2-2(\hat{\nu'})^4-\gamma^2\hat{\nu'''}\hat{\nu'}}\right],\label{RelativeR2}
\end{align}
where $\hat{\nu'} = \frac{d}{d({\mathcal{S}^{-1}\xi})}\nu(\xi)$.
Returning to SI units for clarity, introducing the Schwinger limit $E_{\text{S}} = \frac{m_{\text{e}}^2c^3}{q_{\text{e}}\hbar}$\label{sym:Eschwinger} and the maximum electric field (the wave breaking limit) for a cold plasma, $E_{\text{\text{max}}} = c\sqrt{\frac{2(\gamma-1)m_{\text{e}}Zn_{\text{ion}}}{\epsilon_0}}$\label{sym:EmaxPW}, allows the convenient re-parameterisation of the system in terms of the free parameters $\{v, \hat{\nu'}, k\}$ where
\begin{align}
\hat{\nu'} &= -\frac{E}{E_{\text{S}}}\frac{S_{03}}{\hbar},\\
k &= \left(\frac{E_{\text{\text{max}}}}{E_{\text{S}}}\right)^2\left(\frac{S_{03}}{\hbar}\right)^2.
\end{align}
The Schwinger limit characterises the electric field strength at which quantum vacuum effects are expected to be significant \cite{Piazza}
. The present analysis does not take such phenomena into account and therefore the conditions $E<E_{\rm S}$, $E_{\rm max}<E_{\rm S}$ are required. Thus, in addition to $0<v<1$, it follows that $-1<\hat{\nu'}<1$ and $0<k<1$. We also have the restriction
\begin{align}
\frac{(\hat{\nu'})^2}{k} = \left(\frac{E}{E_{\text{max}}}\right)^2 < 1\label{paramspacelimit},
\end{align}
to ensure that $E < E_{\text{max}}$.
The combination of these conditions also guarantees that $\nu > \gamma$, ensuring that the square root in \eqref{smallernucondition} remains real. The maximum amplitude plasma equation \eqref{smallernucondition} and its derivatives relate $\hat{\nu'}$ and its derivatives:
\begin{align}
\hat{\nu}_\pm &= -\gamma^2\left((\gamma-1)\frac{(\hat{\nu'})^2}{k}-\gamma\right)\pm\gamma^2v\sqrt{\left((\gamma-1)\frac{(\hat{\nu'})^2}{k}-\gamma\right)^2-1}\label{nunondim2},\\
\hat{\nu''} &= \frac{1}{2}\frac{k}{\gamma-1}\left(v\frac{\hat{\nu}_\pm}{\sqrt{\hat{\nu}_\pm^2-\gamma^2}}-1\right)\label{dnunondim2},\\
\hat{\nu'''} &= -\frac{1}{2}\frac{k}{\gamma-1}v\gamma^2\frac{\hat{\nu'}}{(\hat{\nu}_\pm^2-\gamma^2)^{3/2}}\label{d2nunondim2}.
\end{align}
Figure \ref{fig:parameterspaceplots} illustrates the size of \eqref{RelativeR2} across the parameter space ($\hat{\nu'}$, $k$) -- it is clear that $|R|\ll 1$ for the majority of the parameter space. Several things should be made clear, however. Firstly, the black region in each plot is excluded by the condition \eqref{paramspacelimit} -- these dark regions correspond to electric fields $E > E_{\text{max}}$. The central line present in some plots indicates that the electric field must be non-zero, as is already stipulated by the normalisation condition \eqref{normalisationtrajectoryspin}. Secondly, the result of the numerical analysis is unreliable in certain regions of the plots, for example near the edge of the parabola or along the line $\hat{\nu'} = 0$.
For values of the electric field $E$ of the plasma wave (and the maximum electric field of the cold plasma $E_{\text{max}}$) that are much less than the Schwinger limit $E_{\text{S}}$, both $|\hat{\nu'}|$ and $k$ are much less than 1 -- hence the crucial regions of the parameter space to consider are relatively close to the origin. Figure \ref{fig:parameterspaceplotszoom} illustrates the size of \eqref{RelativeR2} across a smaller range of electric fields. Here in almost every plot the relative size of terms \eqref{RelativeR2} is typically much less than 1, and hence the assumption \eqref{expassumption} is generally valid. Hence it is safe to conclude that the trajectories described by \eqref{trajectoryzeta}-\eqref{trajectotyxi} corresponding to the `surfing' particles are linearly unstable across the vast majority of the parameter space for $E \ll E_{\text{S}}$.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.3]{Fig2_Ratios.png}
\begin{picture}(0,0)
\put(-435,8){\scriptsize{-1}}
\put(-389,8){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-346,8){\scriptsize{1}}
\put(-331,8){\scriptsize{-1}}
\put(-285,8){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-242,8){\scriptsize{1}}
\put(-227,8){\scriptsize{-1}}
\put(-181,8){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-138,8){\scriptsize{1}}
\put(-123,8){\scriptsize{-1}}
\put(-77,8){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-34,8){\scriptsize{1}}
\put(-435,113){\scriptsize{-1}}
\put(-389,113){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-346,113){\scriptsize{1}}
\put(-331,113){\scriptsize{-1}}
\put(-285,113){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-242,113){\scriptsize{1}}
\put(-227,113){\scriptsize{-1}}
\put(-181,113){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-138,113){\scriptsize{1}}
\put(-123,113){\scriptsize{-1}}
\put(-77,113){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-34,113){\scriptsize{1}}
\put(-438,14){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-438,86){\scriptsize{1}}
\put(-334,14){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-334,86){\scriptsize{1}}
\put(-230,14){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-230,86){\scriptsize{1}}
\put(-126,14){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-126,86){\scriptsize{1}}
\put(-438,119){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-438,191){\scriptsize{1}}
\put(-334,119){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-334,191){\scriptsize{1}}
\put(-230,119){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-230,191){\scriptsize{1}}
\put(-126,119){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-126,191){\scriptsize{1}}
\put(-389,-2){\scriptsize{$\hat{\nu'}$}}
\put(-285,-2){\scriptsize{$\hat{\nu'}$}}
\put(-181,-2){\scriptsize{$\hat{\nu'}$}}
\put(-77,-2){\scriptsize{$\hat{\nu'}$}}
\put(-389,103){\scriptsize{$\hat{\nu'}$}}
\put(-285,103){\scriptsize{$\hat{\nu'}$}}
\put(-181,103){\scriptsize{$\hat{\nu'}$}}
\put(-77,103){\scriptsize{$\hat{\nu'}$}}
\put(-440,51){\scriptsize{$k$}}
\put(-336,51){\scriptsize{$k$}}
\put(-232,51){\scriptsize{$k$}}
\put(-128,51){\scriptsize{$k$}}
\put(-440,156){\scriptsize{$k$}}
\put(-336,156){\scriptsize{$k$}}
\put(-232,156){\scriptsize{$k$}}
\put(-128,156){\scriptsize{$k$}}
\put(0,98){\scriptsize{$|R|$}}
\put(-3,128){\scriptsize{$1$}}
\put(-3,63){\scriptsize{$0$}}
\put(-399,203){\scriptsize{$v$ = $0.1c$}}
\put(-295,203){\scriptsize{$v$ = $0.5c$}}
\put(-191,203){\scriptsize{$v$ = $0.9c$}}
\put(-87,203){\scriptsize{$v$ = $0.999c$}}
\put(-338,208){\line(0,-1){210}}
\put(-234,208){\line(0,-1){210}}
\put(-130,208){\line(0,-1){210}}
\end{picture}
\caption{The relative size of terms $R$ in the parameter space ($\hat{\nu'}$, $k$) for four values of plasma wave speed $v$. For each speed there are two plots, the upper using $\hat{\nu}$ \eqref{nunondim2} with the positive sign and the lower using the negative sign. The regions in which the trajectories of `surfing' particles \eqref{trajectoryzeta}-\eqref{trajectotyxi} are linearly unstable (i.e. the assumptions made in Section \ref{stabilitysection} are valid) are the regions where $|R| \ll 1$.}
\label{fig:parameterspaceplots}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=.345]{Fig3_Ratios_Zoom.png}
\begin{picture}(0,0)
\put(-435,5){\scriptsize{-0.25}}
\put(-388,5){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-355,5){\scriptsize{0.25}}
\put(-331,5){\scriptsize{-0.25}}
\put(-285,5){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-251,5){\scriptsize{0.25}}
\put(-227,5){\scriptsize{-0.25}}
\put(-182,5){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-148,5){\scriptsize{0.25}}
\put(-123,5){\scriptsize{-0.25}}
\put(-79,5){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-45,5){\scriptsize{0.25}}
\put(-435,126){\scriptsize{-0.25}}
\put(-388,126){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-355,126){\scriptsize{0.25}}
\put(-331,126){\scriptsize{-0.25}}
\put(-285,126){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-251,126){\scriptsize{0.25}}
\put(-227,126){\scriptsize{-0.25}}
\put(-182,126){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-148,126){\scriptsize{0.25}}
\put(-123,126){\scriptsize{-0.25}}
\put(-79,126){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-45,126){\scriptsize{0.25}}
\put(-435,12){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-435,100){\scriptsize{0.25}}
\put(-334,12){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-334,100){\scriptsize{0.25}}
\put(-230,12){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-230,100){\scriptsize{0.25}}
\put(-126,12){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-126,100){\scriptsize{0.25}}
\put(-435,133){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-435,221){\scriptsize{0.25}}
\put(-334,133){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-334,221){\scriptsize{0.25}}
\put(-230,133){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-230,221){\scriptsize{0.25}}
\put(-126,133){\scriptsize{0}}
\put(-126,221){\scriptsize{0.25}}
\put(-388,-5){\scriptsize{$\hat{\nu'}$}}
\put(-285,-5){\scriptsize{$\hat{\nu'}$}}
\put(-182,-5){\scriptsize{$\hat{\nu'}$}}
\put(-79,-5){\scriptsize{$\hat{\nu'}$}}
\put(-388,115){\scriptsize{$\hat{\nu'}$}}
\put(-285,115){\scriptsize{$\hat{\nu'}$}}
\put(-182,115){\scriptsize{$\hat{\nu'}$}}
\put(-79,115){\scriptsize{$\hat{\nu'}$}}
\put(-440,55){\scriptsize{$k$}}
\put(-336,55){\scriptsize{$k$}}
\put(-232,55){\scriptsize{$k$}}
\put(-128,55){\scriptsize{$k$}}
\put(-440,175){\scriptsize{$k$}}
\put(-336,175){\scriptsize{$k$}}
\put(-232,175){\scriptsize{$k$}}
\put(-128,175){\scriptsize{$k$}}
\put(0,120){\scriptsize{$|R|$}}
\put(-3,155){\scriptsize{$1$}}
\put(-3,80){\scriptsize{$0$}}
\put(-399,230){\scriptsize{$v$ = $0.1c$}}
\put(-295,230){\scriptsize{$v$ = $0.5c$}}
\put(-191,230){\scriptsize{$v$ = $0.9c$}}
\put(-87,230){\scriptsize{$v$ = $0.999c$}}
\put(-338,235){\line(0,-1){240}}
\put(-235,235){\line(0,-1){240}}
\put(-132,235){\line(0,-1){240}}
\end{picture}
\caption{The relative size of terms $R$ in the parameter space ($\hat{\nu'}$, $k$) for four values of plasma wave speed $v$. For each speed there are two plots, the upper using $\hat{\nu}$ \eqref{nunondim2} with the positive sign and the lower using the negative sign. The regions in which the trajectories \eqref{trajectoryzeta}-\eqref{trajectotyxi} of `surfing' particles are linearly unstable (i.e. the assumptions made in Section \ref{stabilitysection} are valid) are the regions where $|R| \ll 1$.}
\label{fig:parameterspaceplotszoom}
\end{figure*}
\section{Conclusion}
A new family of trajectories for a classical charged particle with spin in an electrostatic plasma wave has been presented -- notably these trajectories do not exist for a non-spinning particle, nor for a non-varying electric field. These trajectories represent particles moving transverse to the wave propagation, `surfing' along the wave. The linear stability of these trajectories depends on the values of the plasma wave speed, the electric field and the spin component $S_{03}$. As shown in Section \ref{stabilitysection}, these trajectories are linearly unstable for the majority of the parameter space, though there are some small regions in the parameter space where this may not be the case, where the assumptions of \eqref{expassumption} are invalid. For lower electric field, as in Figure \ref{fig:parameterspaceplotszoom}, these regions are even less prominent.
The existence of transverse trajectories has adverse consequences for the size of electron bunches in laser wakefield accelerators; electrons may slip into and out of these transverse trajectories once they catch up with the wave, spreading out into a disc oriented with normal parallel to the wave propagation direction. The linear instability of these solutions, however, implies that any electron that enters a transverse trajectory would likely leave it soon afterwards.
It is important to note, however, that this is an instance in which the spin of a particle affects its trajectory more than radiation reaction effects -- indeed in this instance, since the particles in the new trajectories are travelling at constant speed, the radiation reaction effects are negligible. Hence we recommend that researchers aiming to model such systems consider including spin effects in their PIC codes.
\section{Acknowledgements}
This work was undertaken as part of the ALPHA-X consortium funded under EPSRC grant EP/J018171/1 and with support from the Cockcroft Institute of Accelerator Science and Technology (STFC grant ST/G008248/1). S.P. Flood was funded by an EPSRC studentship. The authors thank Adam Noble for helpful comments on the manuscript.
|
\section{\label{}}
\section{Nallow-line radio-loud Seyfert 1 galaxy (RL-NLS1)}
Narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxy (NLS1) is a class of active galactic nuclei
(AGN). The width of optical emission lines is narrower than that of
Seyfert 1 galaxies, and NLS1s do not exhihit strong X-ray absorption
like Seyfert 2 galaxy. In the X-ray spectrum, there is often a large soft-excess. NLS1s are identified by the following three characteristics.
\begin{enumerate}
\item FWHM (H$\beta$) $<$ 2000 kms$^{-1}$ (Goodrich 1989)
\item $[$OIII$]$ / H$\beta <$ 3 (Osterbrock \& Pogge 1985)
\item strong permitted Fe II emission lines (Boroson \& Green 1992)
\end{enumerate}
NLS1s have a small-mass black hole, but its mass accretion rate is almost
as high as Eddington limit (Marconi et al. 2008). We can study the
evolution of supermassive black holes at the center of galaxies by
observing NLS1s.
\subsection{Nallow-line radio-loud Seyfert 1 galaxy (RL-NLS1)}
Most of NLS1s are radio-quiet (R $<$ 10, R : radio loudness, ratio
of 5 GHz radio to B-band flux densities) (Kellermann et al. 1989),
but ~7 $\%$ of NLS1s are radio-loud (R $>$ 10) and ~2.5 $\%$ are
very radio-loud (R $>$ 100) (Komossa et al. 2006), and they are
called as radio-loud narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxies (RL-NLS1).
With early Fermi observation,
GeV gamma-ray emission has been discovered from PMN J0948+0022,
one of RL-NLS1s (Abdo et al. 2009a).
After that, GeV gamma-ray emission was found from other three RL-NLS1s (Abdo et
al. 2009b), so it is found that RL-NLS1s generally emit GeV gamma-rays.
From past observations, the multi-wavelength spectrum of RL-NLS1 is
similar to that of typical blazars; the synchrotron emission in
the lower energy band up to the optical band and the inverse Compton
scatterred X-ray and gamma-ray emission of low energy photons from disk, torus, and broad line
region. X-ray band is a transition region between the synchrotron
and the inverse Compton, and also there is a possible disk/corona emission.
As described above, X-ray emission mechanism of RL-NLS1s is
uncertain. Therefore, we studied the energy-dependence of time
variability of the X-ray emission of a RL-NLS1s 1H 0323+342, which have been observed by Suzaku in 2009 and 2013.
\section{Data analysis}
\subsection{Energy-dependence of time variability}
Fig.\ref{lc13} is a light curve of 1H 0323+342 observed by Suzaku in
2013. 1H 0323+342 varies with a time scale of
several ks, but the soft X-ray band below 1 keV shows a independent
behavior from the other bands . Fig.\ref{multi} shows correlations of
count rates between 2--3 keV and other bands. The lower energy below 2 keV and the higher energy above 7 keV show a different variability from the middle energy band, suggesting that there are at least two spectral components in the X-ray band.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0 \linewidth]{term.eps}
\caption{Suzaku X-ray light curves of 1H 0323+342 in varios energy bands. Band1 :
0.5--1 keV (black), band2 : 1--2 keV (red), band3 : 2--3 keV (green),
band4 : 3--5 keV (blue), band5 : 5--7 keV (orange), band6 : 7--10 keV
(magenta), band7 : Fe-k line region (cyan). Definition of bright and
dark period is also shown for spectral analysis.} \label{lc13}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0 \linewidth]{multiplot2.eps}
\caption{Correlations of count rates between band3 (2--3 keV) and other energy bands in 2013} \label{multi}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Spectral fitting}
First, we fit the X-ray spectrum of 1H 0323+342 with the absorbed
power-law model, but there remain redisuals at the higher and lower
energy region ($\chi^2 / dof$ = 1017.26/528) and thus the spectrum is not a simple power-law shape (Fig. \ref{redisual}).
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0 \linewidth]{power_redisual.eps}
\caption{Redisuals of fitting of the 1H 0323+342 spectra in 2013 with
the absorved power-law model.} \label{redisual}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Jet emission model}
To reduce the redisual in Fig.\ref{redisual}, we added a broken
power-law model This model of one hard power-law and one broken
power-law represents a jet emission of inverse Compton and synchrotron,
respectively.
As in Fig.\ref{bkn09all} and Fig.\ref{bkn13all}, X-ray spectra can be fitted with this model for 2009 and 2013 (Table I). The breaking energy becomes around 0.7 keV.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0 \linewidth]{09bknpo.eps}
\caption{Fitting the 2009 spectrum with a broken power-law plus a
power-law model (jet emission model).} \label{bkn09all}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0 \linewidth]{13bknpo.eps}
\caption{Fitting the 2013 spectrum with a broken power-law plus a
power-law model (jet emission model).} \label{bkn13all}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[htbp]
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|}\hline
&photon&breaking&photon& photon& $\chi ^2 /dof$ \\
&index 1& energy (keV)&index 2&index& \\ \hline
2009 &1.3$\pm$0.1&0.80$\pm$0.03&2.1(fix)&1.5(fix)&602.10/496 \\ \hline
2013 &0.33$\pm$0.36&0.63$\pm$0.02&2.1(fix)&1.5(fix)&975.22/536\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Fitting parameters of jet emission model in 2009 and 2013} \label{paraeter1}
\end{table}
Next, we analyzed the spectra of three periods during the 2013
observation as in Fig.\ref{lc13}, defined by brightness in 2013.
Only a broken power-law component varied, suggesting a fast variable
synchrotron emission if the jet emission model is correct.
This behavior is similar to blazars.
\subsubsection{Disk emission model}
When we look at the residual fitted with jet emission model in 2013
(Fig.\ref{bkn13all}) in detail, there is a feature like a broad Fe line around 6 keV.
Therefore, we fit the 2013 spectrum with an additional Fe-K line (E = 6.5 keV, width = 0.5 keV), together with the above jet emission model (Fig.\ref{13poline}).
Fe line intensity is (1.2$\pm$0.4)$\times10^{-5}$ counts/s/cm$^2$
(2.7$\sigma$ statistical significance) and $\chi ^2 /dof = $ 908.28/528;
the fit improved.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0 \linewidth]{13power_line.eps}
\caption{Fitting with an additional Fe-K line (E=6.5keV, width=0.5keV), together with the above jet emission model.} \label{13poline}
\end{figure}
Then, we try to fit the spectra with a single power-law model plus a
relativistic reflection model.
The relativistic refelction component represents a reflection of a
power-law incident photons by the ionized accretion disk around a rotating black hole.
We call this disk emission model.
In this case, the spectra are also be fitted (Fig.\ref{09kerall} and
Fig.\ref{13kerall}).
The broad Fe line feature is represented by the relativistic reflection component.
The broken-like feature around 0.7 keV is
represented by the Fe-L line complex.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0 \linewidth]{09_poker.eps}
\caption{Fitting the 2009 spectrum with disk emission model. See the
text in detail.} \label{09kerall}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0 \linewidth]{13poker.eps}
\caption{Fitting the 2013 spectrum with disk emission model. See the
text in detail.} \label{13kerall}
\end{figure}
\begin{table*}[htbp]
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}\hline
&cut-off energy(keV)&fold energy (keV)&photon index&a&Inclination (degree)&Fe/solar&Xi&$\chi ^2 /dof$ \\\hline
2009&0.1(fix)&1000(fix)&2.02$\pm$0.02&0.998$\pm$0.02&84.3$\pm$1.4&4.55$\pm$1.00&10.0(fix)&640.69/493\\\hline
2013&0.1(fix)&20(fix)&1.92$\pm$0.017&0.998$\pm$0.014&84.6$\pm$1.07&5.00$\pm$1.25&10.0(fix)&984.40/534\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Fitting parameters of disk emission model in 2009 and 2013} \label{parameter2}
\end{table*}
We also try to fit the spectra of two periods defined in fig \ref{lc13}
with disk emission model, as jet emission model.
As a result, a "powerlaw" component varied.
If disk model is correct, the variability is almost attributed to the
disk/corona component and the reflection component is stable.
This behavior is similar to other Seyfert galaxies.
\section{Sammary and Future works}
We suggests that X-ray emission of 1H 0323+342 has at least two emission
components, based on energy-dependence of time variability. If the X-ray
emission of 1H 0323+342 is dominated by jet emission, a variable
component is a synchrotron, and it is similar to other blazers. If the emission is dominated by disk/corona emission, disk/corona emission varies while disk reflection is stable, this is similar to Seyfert galaxies.
We cannot distinguish these two models by current data. Therefore an
extensive study by ASTRO-H observations with high energy resolution and
good sensitivity in wide X-ray band is hopeful.
|
\section{Introduction}
General Relativity (GR) has been a hugely successful theory enabling us to explain gravitational phenomena on both astrophysical and cosmological scales. The theory has passed many rigorous tests, such as solar system constraints \cite{Will14} or tests using binary pulsars \cite{Taylor82}. However, these tests only involve weak gravitational fields and/or velocities $v \ll c$, meaning that General Relativity is still essentially untested in the strong-field, highly dynamical $v \sim c$ regime, where high-energy corrections to gravitation may occur. Examples of such strong field systems include black holes and neutron stars, which are of particular interest for existing (Advanced LIGO/Virgo) \cite{Harry10} and future GW detectors. These systems are also expected to provide a testing ground in which we can understand the dynamical and phenomenological features of modified theories of gravitation in the strong field regime. In this paper, we revisit linear perturbations to the Schwarzschild black hole in both GR and $f(R)$ theories using the 1+1+2 semi-tetrad formalism. There are a few advantages to this approach. The first is that the system of equations describing the structure of the spacetime will be a set of first order differential equations in the physical curvature and dynamical variables of the covariant derivatives of tetrad vectors, unlike metric approaches which express the Einstein field equations (EFE) as a system of second order partial differential equations in terms of metric functions. Secondly, gauge-invariance will be naturally realised via the Stewart-Walker lemma \cite{Stewart74}. Finally, all objects will have a well defined physical and geometrical meaning, as the variables are related to the kinematical properties of timelike and spacelike congruences.
Some of the most natural extensions to General Relativity are those that appear in the low energy limit of various fundamental theories. Among the most popular candidates for ultraviolet modifications to GR are the set of \textit{fourth order} theories of gravity (FOG), for which the Einstein-Hilbert action is modified by additional terms that lead to a set of field equations that are fourth order in the metric tensor. A particular subclass of fourth order theories that has received a lot of attention in the literature are the $f(R)$ theories in which the modification is some function of the Ricci scalar. A motivation for considering such a class of theories can be taken from the equivalence of metric-$f(R)$ gravity to a scalar-tensor (ST) counterpart, in which the gravitational interaction is mediated by the spin-2 graviton degrees of freedom as well as a non-minimally coupled spin-0 scalar degree of freedom. From a fundamental point of view, such ST theories arise as a natural by-product of string theory (e.g. \cite{Damour92,Damour94,Damour02}) and date back to the original work by Jordan \cite{Jordan59}, Fierz \cite{Fierz56} and Brans and Dicke \cite{Brans61}.
In order for $f(R)$ theories to be viable alternatives to General Relativity, there are a number of minimal constraints that we can impose. For example, they must reproduce cosmological dynamics consistent with observations, they must be free from tachyonic instabilities and ghosts and they must reproduce acceptable Newtonian and post-Newtonian limits. In addition, we can also demand that certain well defined solutions in General Relativity, such as the Schwarzschild solution, be stable against perturbations in any theory of modified gravity. The analysis of linear non-spherical perturbations of a Schwarzschild black hole in ST theories has previously been considered in \cite{DeFelice11,Myung11,Nzioki14}.
In General Relativity, the Jebsen-Birkhoff theorem constrains spherically symmetric vacuum spacetimes to be either static or spatially homogeneous. It has been shown that the rigidity of the theorem is upheld even upon the introduction of perturbations. Notably, almost spherical symmetry and/or almost vacuum imply an almost static or almost spatially homogeneous spacetime \cite{Goswami11,Goswami12,Ellis13}. However, it is not clear that this theorem should necessarily hold for theories with additional degrees of freedom, as is the case for scalar-tensor and fourth order theories. Importantly, \cite{Nzioki13} found a non-zero measure in the parameter space of $f(R)$ theories for which a Jebsen-Birkhoff like theorem exists. This provides us with an additional set of constraints that guarantee the stability of a Schwarzschild solution under generic perturbations. Using these results, \cite{Nzioki14} applied the 1+1+2 semi-tetrad formalism to study non-spherical linear perturbations to the Schwarzschild black hole in $f(R)$ gravity. Working in the Jordan frame, \cite{Nzioki14} derived a modified Regge-Wheeler tensor that unifies the axial and polar degrees of freedom into a single transverse-traceless tensor obeying a tensorial form of the Regge-Wheeler equation \cite{Clarkson03,Pratten14}.
In this paper, however, we advocate that a cleaner way to study the evolution of gravitational perturbations in the Schwarzschild spacetime is via the Weyl tensor. In particular, we introduce a perturbation variable $\pazocal{J}_{ab}$ constructed from the electric and magnetic Weyl 2-tensors. We show that this variable obeys a covariant, gauge-invariant and frame-invariant wave equation that is valid in both the polar and axial sectors. As such, this variable unifies the Regge-Wheeler and Zerilli equations into a single compact form. Unlike the modified Regge-Wheeler variable for $f(R)$ gravity, this perturbation variable demonstrates the decoupling of the scalar and gravitational wave modes in a clean and transparent manner. All equations presented here will be valid in both $f(R)$ and General Relativity unless explicitly stated otherwise. Secondly, we introduce a purely axial variable $\pazocal{V}_{ab}$ that constitutes a covariant, gauge-invariant generalisation of the Regge-Wheeler (RW) variable. This variable can also be used to re-interpret the RW term as the radial part of the magnetic Weyl tensor. The variable $\pazocal{V}_{ab}$ also obeys a covariant and gauge-invariant wave equation that reduces to the RW equation when restricting ourselves to the RW tortoise coordinates.
Finally, we argue that the 1+1+2 formalism provides a powerful tool for understanding the physical and geometrical interpretation of other approaches to perturbation theory in General Relativity. Notably, we see that the Newman-Penrose (NP) Weyl scalars $\Psi_{0}$ and $\Psi_4$ can be related to our perturbation variable $\pazocal{J}_{ab}$ and the imaginary part of the NP Weyl scalar $\Psi_2$ can be related to our perturbation variable $\pazocal{V}_{ab}$. Likewise, for the 2+2 formalism, the polar master variables $\chi$ and $\varphi$ are just related to the electric Weyl 2-tensor ${\cal E}_{ab}$ and the master variable $\varsigma$ is related to $\mathcal{H}_{ab}$. In the axial sector, the master variable $\Pi$ can be exactly related to $\pazocal{V}_{ab}$, as is expected. A roadmap to the set of master equations in the 2+2 formalism for $f(R)$ gravity is highlighted based on the results presented here.
This paper is organised as follows. In Sec. \ref{sec:MG} we summarise fourth order theories of gravity and summarise the approach taken to model the $f(R)$ theory. In Sec. \ref{sec:1p3} we introduce the 1+3 formalism as the starting point for the 1+1+2 approach used here. Sec. \ref{sec:1+1+2} builds on the previous Section and introduces the 1+1+2 formalism and defines all necessary variables and operators that will be required in subsequent sections. In Sec. \ref{sec:WT} we start with review of the previous approaches to studying gravitational perturbations in the Schwarzschild spacetime with the 1+1+2 approach including the extension to $f(R)$. We then introduce a set of new perturbation variables derived from the Weyl tensor that are central to the remainder of the paper. In Sec. \ref{sec:OtherFormalism} we use the results from the previous section to provide intuition and insight into other approaches to perturbations of the Schwarzschild spacetime. Notably, we discuss the geometric interpretation of the NP Weyl and NP Ricci scalars before discussing the physical interpretation of the 2+2 gauge invariant master variables.
\section{Modified Gravity and Black Holes}
\label{sec:MG}
\subsection{Fourth Order Gravity}
General Relativity is a unique four-dimensional theory for which the gravitational interactions are mediated by a massless spin-2 particle, the graviton, and the field equations are second order. In fourth order gravity, we consider the following modification to the Einstein-Hilbert action
\begin{align}
\int d^4 x \, \sqrt{-g} \, R \rightarrow \int d^4 x \, \sqrt{-g} \, f \left( R, R_{ab} R^{ab} , C_{abcd} C^{abcd} \right) .
\end{align}
\noindent
As the curvature functions contain second derivatives of the metric, the resulting field equations are fourth order. In fact, a consequence of Lovelock's theorem is that the field equations for a metric theory of modified gravity in a four-dimensional Riemannian manifold will admit higher than second order derivatives \cite{Lovelock71,Lovelock72}. Such higher order derivatives are potentially problematic as they typically lead to Ostrogradski instabilities \cite{Ostrogradski}. The sub-class of $f(R)$ theories evade these instabilities as they are degenerate, i.e. the highest derivative term cannot be written as a function of canonical variables. This can be seen through the fact that in the Ricci scalar $R$, only a single component of the metric appears with second derivatives. The concomitant new degree of freedom can then be completely fixed by the $g_{00}$ constraint preventing ghost instabilities from arising in $f(R)$ theories. Alternatively, the $f(R)$ class of theories can simply be re-cast as a scalar-tensor theory for which the gravitational interaction is mediated by a spin-0 scalar as well as the spin-2 graviton degrees of freedom \cite{Sotiriou08}. Were we to consider theories involving curvature invariants $R_{a b} R^{ab}$, $R_{a b c d} R^{a b c d}$ or Weyl invariants $C_{abcd} C^{abcd}$, these would be non-degenerate and our resulting theory would be plagued by Ostrogradski instabilities. In this paper, we restrict ourselves to the Ostrogradski stable $f(R)$ theories.
\subsection{$f(R)$ Gravity}
The action for $f(R)$ gravity can be written as a simple generalisation of the Einstein-Hilbert action
\begin{align}
S &= \frac{1}{2} \int \, dV \, \left[ \sqrt{-g} \, f(R) + 2 \mathcal{L}_M (g_{ab} , \psi ) \right] ,
\end{align}
\noindent
where $\mathcal{L}_M$ corresponds to matter fields present in the theory. Upon variation with respect to the metric, the perturbed action can be written as
\begin{align}
\delta S &= - \frac{1}{2} \int dV \, \sqrt{-g} \, \left[ \frac{1}{2} f g_{ab} \delta g^{ab} - f^{\prime} \delta R + T^M_{ab} \, \delta g^{ab} \right]
\end{align}
\noindent
where, following the notation of \cite{Nzioki14}, a $^{\prime}$ denotes differentiation with respect to $R$ and $T^M_{ab}$ is the standard energy-momentum tensor of matter. Demanding that the action be stationary with respect to variations in the metric, it follows that
\begin{align}
f^{\prime} \left( R_{ab} - \frac{1}{2} g_{ab} R \right) &= \frac{1}{2} g_{ab} \, \left( f - R f^{\prime} \right) + \nabla_a \nabla_b f^{\prime} - g_{ab} \Box f^{\prime} + T^M_{ab} .
\end{align}
\noindent
Clearly, if $f=R$ then the field equations reduce to those of General Relativity. In the covariant approach to fourth order gravity, the field equations for $f(R)$ can be re-expressed in the form of effective Einstein field equations
\begin{align}
G_{ab} &= \left( R_{ab} - \frac{1}{2} g_{ab} R \right) = T_{ab}
\end{align}
\noindent
where $T_{ab}$ is now a combination of two effective fluids corresponding to an effective curvature fluid and an effective matter fluid,
\begin{align}
T_{ab}& = \tilde{T}^M_{ab} + T^R_{ab} \\
\tilde{T}^M_{aB} &= \frac{T^M_{ab}}{f^{\prime}} \\
T^R_{ab} &= \frac{1}{f^{\prime}} \, \left[ \frac{1}{2} g_{ab} \left(f - R f^{\prime} \right) + \nabla_a \nabla_b f^{\prime} - g_{ab} \Box f^{\prime} \right]
\label{eqn:EM_Curvature}
\end{align}
\noindent
The key advantage to this representation is that it is much easier to adapt techniques from the covariant approaches to relativistic cosmology to $f(R)$ gravity \cite{Ellis99,Nzioki14}.
In the field equations presented above, we have terms involving higher than second order derivatives of the metric. For example, in \cref{eqn:EM_Curvature}, we have terms of the form $\nabla_a \nabla_b f^{\prime}$. In non-degenerate theories, such terms would be problematic.
As per \cite{Nzioki14}, the calculations are restricted to the Jordan frame for which matter is minimally coupled and the gravitational scalar is non-minimally coupled to the curvature. In this frame, the dynamics of the extra gravitational degree of freedom will be determined by trace of the effective Einstein field equations (EFE) resulting in a linearised scalar wave equation for the Ricci scalar.
\subsection{Schwarzschild Black Hole in f(R)}
In \cite{Nzioki10,Nzioki13}, it was demonstrated that for $f(R)$ theories, where $f$ is of class $C^3$ at $R=0$ with the conditions $f(0) = 0$ and $f^{\prime} (0) \neq 0$, any almost spherically symmetric solution with almost vanishing Ricci scalar in empty space for some open set $\mathcal{S}$ will be locally almost equivalent a part of the maximally extended Schwarzschild solution in $\mathcal{S}$. This important result constitutes a Jebsen-Birkhoff like theorem that details the conditions required for the existence of Schwarzschild spacetimes in $f(R)$ theories.
As $f$ is of class $C^3$ at $R=0$, it is implied that \cite{Nzioki13}
\begin{align}
| f^{\prime} (0) | < + \infty , \qquad | f^{\prime \prime} (0) | < + \infty , \qquad | f^{\prime \prime \prime} (0) | < + \infty ,
\end{align}
\noindent
with the constraint that \cite{Nzioki13}
\begin{align}
f(0) = 0 \qquad R = 0.
\end{align}
\noindent
Performing a Taylor series expansion about the background, the linear order result yields
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:fRSch}
f(R) &= f^{\prime}_0 R .
\end{align}
\section{The 1+3 Covariant Formalism}
\label{sec:1p3}
\subsection{The Formalism}
\label{sec:1+3}
We use a covariant and gauge-invariant approach built on a local 1+3 threading of spacetime with respect to a preferred timelike congruence \cite{Ellis99,Tsagas07}. Consider a spacetime $( \mathcal{M} , g)$ and introduce a preferred timelike congruence $u^a$ generated by a set of observers with 4-velocity
\begin{align}
u^a = \frac{d x^a}{d \tau} , \qquad u^a u_a = -1,
\end{align}
\noindent
where $\tau$ is the proper time as measured by the fundamental observers. The spacetime is then locally split in the form $R \otimes H$ with $R$ denoting the timeline along $u^a$ and $H$ denoting the tangent 3-spaces perpendicular to $u^a$. The induced metric tensor on the 3-spaces is $h_{ab} = g_{ab} + u_a u_b$ and can be used to project tensors onto the spatial surfaces. For example, any 4-vector $X^a$ can be decomposed into a 3-vector component defined on the 3-space and a (1+3) scalar component parallel to the congruence:
\begin{align}
X^a &= \pazocal{X}^a_{\perp} + u^a \pazocal{X}_{\parallel} \qquad \textrm{where} \qquad \pazocal{X}^a_{\perp} = h^a_{\phantom{a} b} X^b \quad \textrm{and} \quad \pazocal{X}_{\parallel} = u_b X^b
\end{align}
\noindent
Similarly, any second rank tensor may be irreducibly split into scalar, 3-vector and \textit{projected, symmetric, trace-free (PSTF)} 3-tensor components:
\begin{align}
X_{ab} &= \underbrace{ \frac{1}{3} \pazocal{X} \, h_{ab} }_{\textcolor{violet}{\text{scalar}}} \; + \; \overbrace{ \pazocal{X}_{[a b]} }^{\textcolor{violet}{\text{3-vector}}} \; + \; \underbrace{ \pazocal{X}_{\langle a b \rangle} }_{\textcolor{violet}{\text{3-tensor}}} ,
\end{align}
\noindent
where the 3-vector component can be re-expressed in terms of a genuine 3-vector and the alternating tensor $\epsilon_{abc} = u^d \, \eta_{dabc}$. Together, the timelike congruence $u^a$ and induced metric $h_{ab}$ allow us to define two preferred derivative operators. The first operator is a convective derivative along $u^a$
\begin{align}
\dot{\pazocal{X}}_{a \dots b}^{\phantom{a \dots b} c \dots d} &\defeq u^e \, \nabla_e \, \pazocal{X}_{a \dots b}^{\phantom{a \dots b} c \dots d}
\end{align}
\noindent
and the second is a totally projected spatial derivative defined in the 3-surfaces orthogonal to $u^a$
\begin{align}
D_e \, \pazocal{X}^{a \dots b}_{\phantom{a \dots b} c \dots d} &\defeq h^a_{\phantom{a} m} \dots h^b_{\phantom{b} n} h_c^{\phantom{c} p} \dots h_d^{\phantom{d} q} h^r_{\phantom{r} e} \, \nabla_r \pazocal{X}^{m \dots n}_{\phantom{p \dots q} p \dots q} .
\end{align}
\subsection{The Variables}
The three main groups of variables in the 1+3 formalism are the set of kinematical variables describing the flow of $u^a$, the set of variables associated with the gravitational field as well as the variables describing the energy-momentum tensor. The kinematical variables arise from the irreducible decomposition of the covariant derivative of the timelike congruence:
\begin{align}
\nabla_b u_a &= \dot{u}_a u_b + \frac{1}{3} \Theta h_{ab} + \sigma_{ab} + \omega_{ab} ,
\end{align}
\noindent
where $\dot{u}_a$ is the acceleration of the congruence, $\sigma_{ab}$ the volume preserving shear, $\omega_{ab}$ the vorticity and $\theta$ the expansion of the congruence. These variables describe the kinematical properties of the flow associated to the observer $u^a$.
The gravitational field is covariantly described by the Ricci tensor and the Weyl tensor. The Ricci tensor describes the local gravitational field at a given point due to the local matter content, as can be seen via the EFE. The Weyl tensor describes the non-local gravitational field that is mediated by gravitational waves and tidal forces. These two objects allow us to decompose the gravitational field into the local and non-local terms as follows:
\begin{align}
R_{abcd} &= C_{abcd} + \frac{1}{2} \left( g_{ac} R_{bd} + g_{bd} R_{ac} - g_{bc} R_{ad} - g_{ad} R_{bc} \right) - \frac{R}{6} \left( g_{ac} g_{bd} - g_{ad} g_{bc} \right) .
\end{align}
\noindent
In addition, we can decompose the Weyl tensor into its irreducible parts
\begin{align}
E_{ab} &= C_{acbd} u^c u^d \qquad \textrm{and} \qquad H_{ab} = \frac{1}{2} \epsilon_{a}^{\phantom{a} cd} C_{cdbe} u^e ,
\end{align}
\noindent
where $E_{ab}$ denotes the electric Weyl tensor and $H_{ab}$ the magnetic Weyl tensor. The electric Weyl tensor generalises the Newtonian tidal tensor whereas the magnetic Weyl tensor has no Newtonian counterpart as it describes genuine relativistic effects such as frame dragging.
\subsection{The Equations}
In the 1+3 approach, the evolution and constraint equations for the variables arises from two sets of identities satisfied by the Riemann tensor with the EFE only being used to algebraically substitute the Ricci tensor for the equivalent energy-momentum terms. The first set of equations are given by the Ricci identities applied to $u^a$
\begin{align}
2 \nabla_{[a} \nabla_{b]} u_c &= R_{abcd} u^d ,
\end{align}
\noindent
a second set of equations are provided by the once contracted Bianchi identities,
\begin{align}
\nabla^d C_{abcd} &= \nabla_{[b} R_{a]c} + \frac{1}{6} g_{c[b} \nabla_{a]} R ,
\end{align}
\noindent
and the last set of equations are provided by the twice contracted Bianchi identities
\begin{align}
\nabla^b T_{ab} = 0 .
\end{align}
\noindent
The algebraic relations for the Ricci tensor are given by EFE
\begin{align}
R_{ab} &= T_{ab} - \frac{1}{2} T g_{ab} + \Lambda g_{ab} .
\end{align}
\section{The 1+1+2 Covariant Formalism}
\label{sec:1+1+2}
\subsection{The Formalism}
The 1+3 formalism has been hugely successful in relativistic cosmology as it is particularly adapted to the models that it aims to describe. For homogeneous and isotropic cosmologies, the 1+3 formalism covariantly factorises out the only essential coordinate, time. The background spacetime is described by a system of ODEs for a set of 1+3 covariant scalar variables and all conventional ODE methods may be invoked. As the 3-vectors and 3-tensors vanish in the background due to the symmetry, they are implicitly gauge invariant as per the Stewart-Walker lemma \cite{Stewart74}. Covariant and gauge-invariant linear is realised in this approach by noting that the non-vanishing background variables will be zeroth order and all variables that vanish in the background will be first order. We can then linearise the full system of equations about a specified background, dropping all terms that are second order and higher. Under this procedure, all vector-tensor and tensor-tensor couplings are killed off as they are implicitly second order or higher. The result is a system of equations that is tractable and may be solved.
If we relax the symmetry of the spacetime, there will be non-zero vectors and tensors in the background and the 1+3 system of equations is rendered intractable. However, if the spacetime possesses a preferred spatial direction at each point (such as spherical symmetry, local rotational symmetry or $G_2$ spacetimes) we can introduce an additional frame vector such that it covariantly factors out the two essential coordinates: time and the preferred radial direction. Consequently, all vectors and tensors will vanish on the 2-surfaces of homogeneity resulting in a system of ODEs for 1+1+2 scalar variables. Historically, such decompositions were originally introduced by \cite{Greenberg70} and were further developed by \cite{Tsamparlis83,Mason85,Tsamparlis92,Clarkson03,Betschart04,Burston06,Clarkson07}. In this paper, we follow the approach to the 1+1+2 formalism as given in \cite{Clarkson03,Clarkson07}.
In the 1+1+2 formalism we start by introducing a preferred spacelike congruence $n^a$ that is orthogonal to $u^a$ such that
\begin{align}
n_a u^a = 0, \qquad n_a n^a = 1 .
\end{align}
\noindent
The induced metric on the tangent 2-surfaces orthogonal to $n^a$ and $u^a$ is defined by
\begin{align}
N_{ab} &= h_{ab} - n_a n_b = g_{ab} + u_a u_b - n_a n_b ,
\end{align}
\noindent
and can be used to project all vectors and tensors orthogonal to $u^a$: $n^a N_{ab} = u^a N_{ab} = 0$. Any 3-vector $\psi_a$ may be irreducibly split into a scalar ${\bf{\Psi}}$ parallel to $n^a$ and a 2-vector ${\bf{\Psi}}_a$ lying in the 2-surfaces orthogonal to $n^a$:
\begin{align}
\psi_a &= {\bf{\Psi}} n_a + {\bf{\Psi}}_a .
\end{align}
\noindent
Similarly, any 3-tensor $\psi_{ab}$ can be irreducibly split into a scalar, 2-vector and PSTF (with respect to $n^a$) 2-tensor:
\begin{align}
\psi_{ab} &= \underbrace{ {\bf{\Psi}} }_{\textcolor{violet}{\text{scalar}}} \left( n_a n_b - \frac{1}{2} N_{ab} \right) \; + \; \overbrace{ 2 {\bf{\Psi}}_{(a} n_{b)} }^{\textcolor{violet}{\text{2-vector}}} \; + \; \underbrace{ {\bf{\Psi}}_{\lbrace ab \rbrace} }_{\textcolor{violet}{\text{2-tensor}}} ,
\end{align}
\noindent
where
\begin{align}
{\bf{\Psi}} &= n^a n^b \psi_{ab} , \qquad {\bf{\Psi}}_a = N_a^{\phantom{a} b} n^c \psi_{bc} \qquad \textrm{and} \qquad {\bf{\Psi}}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} = \psi_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} = \left( N_{(a}^{\phantom{(a} c} N_{b)}^{\phantom{b)} d} - \frac{1}{2} N_{ab} N^{cd} \right) \psi_{cd} .
\end{align}
\noindent
In the above, we have introduced the notation ${\bf{\Psi}}_{\lbrace a \dots c \rbrace}$ to denote PSTF with respect to $n^a$. As in the 1+3 formalism, the existence of the preferred spatial congruence and induced metric $N_{ab}$ allows us to define two derivative operators. The first is a convective derivative along the spacelike congruence
\begin{align}
\hat{\psi}_{a \dots b}^{\phantom{a \dots b} c \dots d} &\defeq n^e \, D_e \, \psi_{a \dots b}^{\phantom{a \dots b} c \dots d} ,
\end{align}
\noindent
and the second is a totally projected derivative on the 2-surfaces
\begin{align}
\delta_e \psi_{a \dots b}^{\phantom{a \dots b} c \dots d} &\defeq N_e^{\phantom{e} j} \, N_a^{\phantom{e} f} \dots N_b^{\phantom{e} g} N_h^{\phantom{e} c} \dots N_i^{\phantom{e} d} \, D_j \, \psi_{f \dots g}^{\phantom{a \dots b} h \dots i} .
\end{align}
We can now decompose the covariant spatial derivative of $n^a$ into its irreducible parts\cite{Clarkson03,Clarkson07}
\begin{align}
D_a n_b &= n_a a_b + \frac{1}{2} \phi N_{ab} + \xi \epsilon_{ab} + \zeta_{ab} ,
\end{align}
\noindent
where
\begin{align}
a_a &= n^c D_c n_a = \hat{n}_a ,\\
\phi &= \delta_a n^a ,\\
\xi &= \frac{1}{2} \epsilon^{ab} \delta_a n_b ,\\
\zeta_{ab} &= \delta_{\lbrace a} n_{b \rbrace} .
\end{align}
\noindent
Here, we interpret $\phi$ as the expansion of the 2-surface, $\zeta_{ab}$ as the distortion of the 2-surface (or shear of $n^a$), $a^a$ the acceleration and $\xi$ the rotation of $n^a$. Likewise, we can also perform an irreducible split of the timelike derivative of $n^a$,
\begin{align}
\dot{n}_a &= \mathcal{A} u_a + \alpha_a \qquad \textrm{where} \quad \alpha_a = \dot{n}_a \quad \textrm{and} \quad \mathcal{A} = n^a \dot{u}_a .
\end{align}
The remaining 1+1+2 variables arise from the irreducible decomposition of the usual kinematical and gravitational variables in the 1+3 formalism \cite{Clarkson03,Clarkson07}:
\begin{align}
\dot{u}^a &= {\mathcal{A}} n^A + {\mathcal{A}}^a \\
\omega^a &= \Omega n^a + \Omega^a \\
\sigma_{ab} &= \Sigma \left( n_a n_b - \frac{1}{2} N_{ab} \right) + 2 \Sigma_{(a} n_{b)} + \Sigma_{ab} \\
E_{ab} &= {\cal E} \left( n_a n_b - \frac{1}{2} N_{ab} \right) + 2 {\cal E}_{(a} n_{b)} + {\cal E}_{ab} \\
H_{ab} &= {\cal H} \left( n_a n_b - \frac{1}{2} N_{ab} \right) + 2 {\cal H}_{(a} n_{b)} + {\cal H}_{ab} .
\end{align}
The key variables in the 1+1+2 formalism for vacuum spacetimes are therefore
\begin{align}
\lbrace \Theta, {\mathcal{A}}, \phi, \Sigma, {\cal E}, \Omega, {\cal H}, \xi, {\mathcal{A}}^a, \Omega^a, \Sigma^a, \alpha^a, a^a, {\cal E}^a, {\cal H}^a, \Sigma_{ab}, {\cal E}_{ab}, {\cal H}_{ab}, \zeta_{ab} \rbrace
\end{align}
\noindent
In the extension to studying perturbations to the $f(R)$ Schwarzschild black hole, we must also implicitly include the 1+1+2 energy-momentum variables in order to describe the effective curvature fluid. The 1+1+2 energy-momentum tensor can be written as follows:
\begin{align}
T_{ab} &= \mu u_a u_b + p \left( N_{ab} - n_a n_b \right) + 2 Q u_{(a} n_{b)} + 2 u_{(a} Q_{b)} + \Pi \left( n_a n_b - \frac{1}{2} N_{ab} \right) + \Pi_{(a} n_{b)} + \Pi_{ab} .
\end{align}
\noindent
The full decomposition of the curvature fluid energy-momentum tensor into its 1+1+2 form is given by \cite{Nzioki14}. The linearisation procedure around a Schwarzschild proceeds by substituting \cref{eqn:fRSch} into \cref{eqn:EM_Curvature} and performing a 1+1+2 decomposition. Zeroth order terms are given by the set of Schwarzschild scalars $\lbrace {\cal E}, \phi, {\mathcal{A}} \rbrace$ and all products of first order terms or higher are dropped from the resulting expressions, leading to the following definitions \cite{Nzioki14}
\begin{align}
\mu^R &= \frac{1}{f^{\prime}_0} \left[ f^{\prime \prime}_0 \hat{\hat{R}} + \phi f^{\prime \prime}_0 \hat{R} + f^{\prime \prime}_0 \delta^2 R \right] , \\
p^R &= \frac{1}{f^{\prime}_0} \left[ f^{\prime \prime}_0 \ddot{R} - \mathcal{A} f^{\prime \prime}_0 \hat{R} - \frac{2}{3} \phi f^{\prime \prime}_0 \hat{R} - \frac{2}{3} f^{\prime \prime}_0 \delta^2 R - \frac{2}{3} f^{\prime \prime}_0 \hat{\hat{R}} \right], \\
Q^R &= - \frac{1}{f^{\prime}_0} \left[ f^{\prime \prime}_0 \left( \dot{\hat{R}} - \mathcal{A} \dot{R} \right) \right] , \\
Q^R_a &= - \frac{f^{\prime \prime}_0}{f^{\prime}_0} \delta_a \dot{R} , \\
\Pi^R &= \frac{1}{f^{\prime}_0} \left[ \frac{2}{3} f^{\prime \prime}_0 \hat{\hat{R}} - \frac{1}{3} \phi f^{\prime \prime}_0 \hat{R} - \frac{1}{3} f^{\prime \prime}_0 \delta^2 R \right] , \\
\Pi^R_a &= \frac{1}{f^{\prime}_0} \left[ f^{\prime \prime}_0 \delta_a \hat{R} - \frac{1}{2} \phi f^{\prime \prime}_0 \delta_a R \right] , \\
\Pi^R_{ab} &= \frac{f^{\prime \prime}_0}{f^{\prime}_0} \, \delta_{\lbrace a} \delta_{b \rbrace} R .
\end{align}
\noindent
The identities
\begin{align}
\dot{\Pi}^R_{\lbrace ab \rbrace} &= - \delta_{\lbrace a} Q_{b \rbrace} \qquad \textrm{and} \qquad \epsilon_{c \lbrace a} \hat{\Pi}_{b \rbrace}^{\phantom{b \rbrace} c} - \epsilon_{c \lbrace a} \delta^c \Pi_{b \rbrace} + \frac{1}{2} \phi \epsilon_{c \lbrace a} \Pi_{b \rbrace}^{\phantom{b \rbrace} c} = 0 ,
\end{align}
\noindent
have been used to simplify the evolution and propagation equations for the electric and magnetic Weyl 2-tensors as given in \cref{eqn:WeylPropEv}.
\subsection{The Equations}
The full system of 1+1+2 equations arises from the decomposition of the 1+3 equations coupled with a further system of equations defined by the Ricci identities for $n^a$.
\begin{align}
R_{abc} &= 2 \nabla_{[a} \nabla_{b]} n_c - R_{abcd} n^d = 0 .
\end{align}
\noindent
The Ricci identity applied to $n^a$ guarantees that we have sufficient equations in order to determine the $1+1+2$ variables. In particular, this third rank tensor can be covariantly split with respect to $u^a$ and $n^a$ to give dynamical equations for the variables derived from the irreducible decomposition of $n^a$ $(\alpha_a , a_a , \phi , \xi , \zeta_{ab})$ \cite{Clarkson03,Clarkson07}. The complete system of equations can be covariantly split into propagation, evolution and constraint equations by projections with respect to $u^a, n^a, N^{ab}$ as well as various symmetry operations. Evolution equations involve dot derivatives, propagation equations involve hat derivatives, mixed propagation and evolution involve both and constraint equations are restricted to the 2-surfaces. The full system of 1+1+2 equations can be found in \cite{Clarkson03,Clarkson07} and the system of 1+1+2 equations for the $f(R)$ Schwarzschild spacetime in \cite{Nzioki14}. We will not reproduce these equations here.
\section{The Regge-Wheeler Tensor}
\label{sec:WT}
\subsection{Review: The Background Spacetime}
The Schwarzschild spacetime is covariantly characterised by the following non-zero 1+1+2 scalars: $\lbrace {\mathcal{A}} , {\cal E}, \phi \rbrace$. The system of equations that covariantly describes the Schwarzschild spacetime can be written in the following compact form:
\begin{align}
\hat{\phi} &= - \frac{1}{2} \phi^2 - {\cal E}, \\
\hat{{\cal E}} &= - \frac{3}{2} {\cal E} \phi , \\
\hat{{\mathcal{A}}} &= - {\mathcal{A}} \left( \phi + {\mathcal{A}} \right) ,
\end{align}
\noindent
with the constraint equation
\begin{align}
{\cal E} + \phi {\mathcal{A}} &= 0 .
\end{align}
\noindent
A parametric solution for these equations can be found \cite{Clarkson03}:
\begin{align}
\phi &= \frac{2}{r} \sqrt{1 - \frac{2 M}{r}} , \qquad {\mathcal{A}} = \frac{M}{r^2} \left[ 1 - \frac{2 M}{r} \right]^{-\frac{1}{2}} , \qquad {\cal E} = - \frac{2 M}{r^3} .
\label{eqn:bgpara}
\end{align}
\subsection{Review: Gauge Invariant Perturbations}
In more conventional approaches to linear perturbation theory in GR, the perturbation to some tensor quantity is the difference between its value at some event in the physical spacetime and its value at the corresponding event in the background spacetime. Following \cite{StewartBook}, if we consider a background 4-dimensional spacetime $\mathcal{M}_0$ then we can introduce a 5-dimensional smooth manifold that contains a 1-parameter family of smooth non-intersecting 4-manifolds $\mathcal{M}_{\epsilon}$. These manifolds are interpreted as perturbations to the background spacetime. Implicitly, this means that to define a perturbation we must choose a gauge, or a mapping from $\mathcal{M}_0$ to $\mathcal{M}_{\epsilon}$. If $Q$ is some geometric object in the background and $Q_{\epsilon}$ the corresponding object in the perturbed spacetime then we can define a Taylor series expansion along the integral curves of a vector field $V$ that is everywhere orthogonal to $\mathcal{M}_{\epsilon}$ via the 1-parameter group of transformations $h_{\epsilon}$ from $\mathcal{M}_0$ to $\mathcal{M}_{\epsilon}$:
\begin{align}
Q_{\epsilon} &= h_{\epsilon \ast} \, \left[ Q_0 + \epsilon \left( \mathcal{L}_V Q_{\epsilon} \right)_{\epsilon = 0} + \mathcal{O} (\epsilon^2) \right] .
\end{align}
\noindent
The immediate implication here is that the first order term, the linearised perturbation of $Q$, will be gauge-invariant iff
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}_V Q_0 = 0 ,
\end{align}
\noindent
for all 4-vectors $V$ on $\mathcal{M}_0$. This will be the case if:
\begin{itemize}
\item $Q_0$ vanishes in the background.
\item $Q_0$ is a constant scalar field.
\item $Q_0$ is some linear combination of Kronecker deltas with constant coefficients.
\end{itemize}
\noindent
This is known as the Stewart-Walker lemma \cite{Stewart74} and provides a very powerful foundation from which gauge-invariant variables can be defined in the covariant approach to perturbation theory. This is due to the fact that in the covariant approach we aim to avoid any reference to a background spacetime and only invoke the background when determining which variables are zeroth order. Gauge-invariance of our set of equations is then guaranteed by the Stewart-Walker lemma if we find a complete set of variables that vanishes in the background. For the Schwarzschild spacetime, the only non-zero variables in the background were $\lbrace {\cal E}, \phi , {\mathcal{A}} \rbrace$ with all other scalars, vectors and tensors vanishing in the background due to symmetry. To construct gauge-invariant variables from these non-vanishing scalars, we just need to invoke spherical symmetry, which necessitates that the angular derivatives of the background scalars must vanish and will therefore constitute a set of gauge invariant variables. The set of variables which we will therefore work with in the linearised perturbation equations are as follows:
\begin{align}
\delta_a \lbrace {\cal E} , \phi , {\mathcal{A}} \rbrace &= \lbrace X_a , Y_a , Z_a \rbrace .
\end{align}
\noindent
In the formalism we have outlined above, we also have another implicit type of 'gauge' freedom, namely the freedom to choose a frame basis in the tangent space at each point. This is the same as in any other tetrad based approach, such as the Newman-Penrose formalism. As in \cite{Clarkson03}, we will use the term gauge-invariance to refer to invariance under a mapping between the true and background spacetimes and frame invariance to refer to invariance under our choice of frame vectors.
\subsection{Review: The Regge Wheeler Tensor}
In the metric approach to GR, a master equation for axial gravitational perturbations was originally derived by Regge and Wheeler \cite{Regge57} with the corresponding polar equation being derived by Zerilli \cite{Zerilli70} over a decade later. The structure of these wave equations can be shown to reduce to a Schr\"odinger like equation defined in terms of an effective potential $V_{\textrm{eff}}$. These original studies have formed the basis for many different approaches to studying linear perturbations to the Schwarzschild black hole \cite{Vishveshwara70,Price72,Moncrief74,Cunningham78,MartinGarcia00,Clarkson03,Martel05,Nagar05}. In the 1+1+2 approach to gravitational perturbations of a Schwarzschild black hole, the master variables for the polar and axial sectors can be unified into a single covariant, gauge invariant and frame invariant tensor $W_{\lbrace a b \rbrace}$ \cite{Clarkson03}.
Building on this work, a master variable $W_{\lbrace a b \rbrace}$ for gravitational perturbations for the $f(R)$ Schwarzschild black hole has recently been derived in \cite{Nzioki14} and is given in terms of the shear 2-tensor $\zeta_{ab}$, a TT tensor constructed from the radial part of the electric Weyl tensor $\delta_{\lbrace a} X_{b \rbrace}$ and a TT tensor constructed from the curvature scalar $\delta_{\lbrace a} \delta_{b \rbrace} R$. The dimensionless, gauge-invariant, frame-invariant and transverse-traceless tensor $W_{ab}$ is defined by \cite{Nzioki14} \footnote{Note that \cite{Nzioki14} denotes this tensor as $M_{ab}$ whereas we use the notation of \cite{Clarkson03}.}
\begin{align}
W_{ab} &= \frac{1}{2} \phi r^2 \zeta_{ab} - \frac{1}{3} \frac{r^2}{{\cal E}} \delta_{\lbrace a} X_{b \rbrace} + \frac{f^{\prime \prime}_0}{3 f^{\prime}_0} r^2 \delta_{\lbrace a} \delta_{b \rbrace} R ,
\label{eqn:RWTensor}
\end{align}
\noindent
where the even part of $W_{ab}$ is coupled to a curvature term:
\begin{align}
\frac{1}{3} \frac{f^{\prime \prime}_0}{f^{\prime}_0} \delta_{\lbrace a} \delta_{b \rbrace} R = \frac{1}{3} \Pi_{ab}^R .
\end{align}
Consequentially, we have to include the trace equation for the curvature scalar in order for the wave equation to close. The curvature term vanishes in the axial sector and the variable $W_{ab}$ reduces to exactly the same form as in GR. The covariant wave equation this variable obeys is given by \cite{Nzioki14}
\begin{align}
\ddot{W}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} - \hat{\hat{W}}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} - {\mathcal{A}} \hat{W}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} + \left( \phi^2 - {\cal E} \right) W_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} - \delta^2 W_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} &= 0 ,
\end{align}
\noindent
which is identical to the covariant wave equation in GR \cite{Clarkson03,Pratten14}. Note that both the even and odd parity components of $W_{ab}$ obey the same wave equation. This tensor equation can be decomposed into scalar harmonics (see Appendix \ref{app:harmonics})
\begin{align}
\ddot{W} - \hat{\hat{W}} - {\mathcal{A}} \hat{W} + \left[ \frac{\ell (\ell + 1)}{r^2} + 3 {\cal E} \right] W &= 0 ,
\label{eqn:RWEqn}
\end{align}
\noindent
where $W = \lbrace W_T , \bar{W}_T \rbrace$. Associating the hat derivative with an affine parameter $\rho$, i.e. $\hat{\phantom{c}} = d / d \rho$, we can convert to the parameter $r$, $\rho \rightarrow r$, and then switch to the tortoise coordinates of Regge and Wheeler
\begin{align}
r_{\ast} &= r + 2 M \ln \left( \frac{r}{2M} - 1 \right) .
\end{align}
\noindent
Letting
\begin{align}
\psi = \psi_{\textrm{RW}} = W ,
\end{align}
\noindent
we find that the harmonic equation reduces to a Schr\"odinger type equation
\begin{align}
\left( \frac{d^2}{dr^2} + \sigma^2 \right) \psi &= V \psi ,
\end{align}
\noindent
with an effective potential $V_T$
\begin{align}
V_T &= \left( 1 - \frac{2M}{r} \right) \, \left[ \frac{\ell ( \ell + 1 )}{r^2} - \frac{6 M}{r^3} \right] ,
\end{align}
\noindent
which is just the Regge-Wheeler (RW) potential for gravitational perturbations to the Schwarzschild spacetime \cite{Regge57,Clarkson03,Nzioki14}.
\subsection{Review: Scalar Perturbations}
In FOG we note the presence of scalar modes that are not possible in Einstein GR. The trace equation yields a wave equation in terms of the Ricci scalar $R$. The equation obeys the same functional form as the generalised Regge-Wheeler equation for massive scalar perturbations in Einstein GR but with an effective mass given by \cite{Nzioki14}
\begin{align}
U^2 &= \frac{f^{\prime}_0}{3 f^{\prime \prime}_0} .
\end{align}
\noindent
The covariant wave equation that the variable obeys is given by \cite{Nzioki14}
\begin{align}
\ddot{\pazocal{R}} - \hat{\hat{\pazocal{R}}} - {\mathcal{A}} \hat{\pazocal{R}} - \left( {\cal E} - U^2 + \delta^2 \right) \pazocal{R} &= 0 ,
\end{align}
\noindent
where $\pazocal{R} = r \, R$. Introducing scalar spherical harmonics, this equation reduces to \cite{Nzioki14}
\begin{align}
\ddot{\pazocal{R}}_S - \hat{\hat{\pazocal{R}}}_S - {\mathcal{A}} \hat{\pazocal{R}}_S - \left[ {\cal E} - \tilde{U}^2 - \frac{\ell (\ell + 1)}{r^2} \right] \pazocal{R}_S &= 0 ,
\end{align}
\noindent
where $\tilde{U} = C_1 / (3 C_2 )$, with $C_1$ and $C_2$ constants. Converting from the parameter $\rho$ to $r$ and then introducing tortoise coordinates, we find \cite{Nzioki14}
\begin{align}
\left[ \frac{d^2}{d r_{\ast}^2} + \kappa^2 - V_S \right] \pazocal{R} &= 0 ,
\end{align}
\noindent
where
\begin{align}
V_S &= \left( 1 - \frac{2 M}{r} \right) \, \left[ \frac{\ell (\ell + 1)}{r^2} + \frac{2M}{r^2} + \tilde{U}^2 \right] .
\end{align}
\section{The Weyl Terms}\label{sec:WTMain}
We now move on to the core subject of the paper, namely the description of gravitational perturbations via the Weyl tensor in the 1+1+2 formalism. The definition of a master variable for gravitational perturbations is non-unique (see e.g. \cite{Nagar05}) and different definitions will provide different advantages or insight. The previous definition of the RW tensor $W_{ab}$ given in \cref{eqn:RWTensor} allows us to interpret the RW equation as being related to the fluctuations in the radial part of the electric Weyl tensor as well as the distortions of the sheet, given by $\zeta_{ab}$. Alternatively, we may directly invoke the decomposition of the Weyl tensor to introduce a set of new master variables. This allows us to relate the 1+1+2 RW tensor to $h_{+}$ and $h_{\times}$, the NP Weyl scalars and the 2+2 gauge invariant master variables in a clear, transparent manner.
\subsubsection{Unified Polar and Axial Gravitational Perturbations}
It is a well established fact that gravitational waves propagate in a perturbed Schwarzschild spacetime and it would be reasonable to expect that the transverse-traceless tensors governing the gravitational perturbations will obey wave equations that reduce to the plane wave case in the limit $M \rightarrow 0$. The most natural variables to study would be those relating to the transverse-traceless (TT) degrees of freedom in the Weyl curvature tensor, as this provides a description of the free gravitational field. In the 1+1+2 formalism, the TT components of the electric and magnetic Weyl tensor will just be the 2-tensors $\mathcal{E}_{ab}$ and $\mathcal{H}_{ab}$. Constructing the wave equations for these variables, however, we find that they do not form a closed system, they contain forcing terms from other 1+1+2 tensors. Such couplings are not present in the plane wave limit making the interpretation and solution of these wave equations in isolation non-trivial.
In order to find a wave equation for the Weyl curvature 2-tensors, we need to perform a 1+1+2 decomposition of the 1+3 evolution equations for the Weyl curvature (see Eqns. 1.3.42 and 1.3.43 in \cite{Tsagas07}). Linearising about the Schwarzschild background, this yields \cite{Clarkson03,Nzioki14}:
\begin{align}
\dot{{\cal E}}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} - \epsilon_{c \lbrace a} \hat{{\cal H}}_{b \rbrace}^{\phantom{b \rbrace} c} &= - \epsilon_{c \lbrace a} \delta^c {\cal H}_{b \rbrace} + \left( \frac{1}{2} \phi + 2 {\mathcal{A}} \right) \epsilon_{c \lbrace a} {\cal H}_{b \rbrace}^{\phantom{b \rbrace} c} - \frac{3}{2} {\cal E} \Sigma_{ab} , \label{eqn:HWeylPropEv} \\
\dot{{\cal H}}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} + \epsilon_{c \lbrace a} \hat{{\cal E}}_{b \rbrace}^{\phantom{b \rbrace} c} &= \epsilon_{c \lbrace a} \delta^c {\cal E}_{b \rbrace} + \frac{3}{2} {\cal E} \epsilon_{c \lbrace a} \zeta_{b \rbrace} - \left( \frac{1}{2} \phi + 2 {\mathcal{A}} \right) \epsilon_{c \lbrace a} {\cal E}_{b \rbrace}^{\phantom{b \rbrace} c} .
\label{eqn:EWeylPropEv}
\end{align}
\noindent
The covariant wave equations for the electric and magnetic Weyl 2-tensors can now be derived by applying the wave operator $\ddot{\Psi} - \hat{\hat{\Psi}}$ to ${\cal E}_{ab}$ and ${\cal H}_{ab}$ using the above expressions to yield
\begin{align}
&\ddot{{\cal H}}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} - \hat{\hat{{\cal H}}}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} - \left( \phi + 5 {\mathcal{A}} \right) \hat{{\cal H}}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} - \delta^2 {\cal H}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} + \left[ \frac{1}{2} \phi^2 - 5 {\cal E} \right] {\cal H}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} = \left[ - 3 {\cal E} \, \epsilon_{\lbrace a} \Sigma_{b \rbrace}^{\phantom{\rbrace b} c} + 2 \delta_{\lbrace a} {\cal H}_{b \rbrace} \right] \left( \phi - 2 {\mathcal{A}} \right) \label{eqn-HWave} \\
&\ddot{{\cal E}}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} - \hat{\hat{{\cal E}}}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} - \left( \phi + 5 {\mathcal{A}} \right) \hat{{\cal E}}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} - \delta^2 {\cal E}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} + \left[ \frac{1}{2} \phi^2 - 5 {\cal E} \right] {\cal E}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} = \left[ 3 {\cal E} \zeta_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} + 2 \delta_{\lbrace a} {\cal E}_{b \rbrace} \right] \left( \phi - 2 {\mathcal{A}} \right) . \label{eqn-EWave}
\end{align}
\noindent
Clearly, these wave equations are coupled to the 1+1+2 tensors $\Sigma_{\lbrace a b \rbrace}$, $\zeta_{\lbrace a b \rbrace}$, $\mathcal{E}_a$ and $\mathcal{H}_a$. Neither of these variables alone will obey a closed system of equations. By inspection of the propagation and evolution equation we can start to see similarities in the structures of these two wave equations. Importantly, the coupling terms can be on the RHS of Eqns. (\ref{eqn:HWeylPropEv}) and (\ref{eqn:EWeylPropEv}) share similar pre-factors that are reflected in the RHS of Eqns. (\ref{eqn-HWave}) and (\ref{eqn-EWave}) suggesting that we should be able to decouple these 2-tensors from the other 1+1+2 variables.
Following this insight, we can construct a new variable from the linear combination of the electric and magnetic Weyl 2-tensors $\pazocal{J}^{\pm}_{ab}$ that completely decouples from the other 1+1+2 variables. Explicitly, this new perturbation variable is given by
\begin{align}
\pazocal{J}^{\pm}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} &= {\cal E}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} \pm \epsilon_{c \lbrace a} {\cal H}_{b \rbrace}^{ \phantom{ b \rbrace } c} , \\
&= \left[ {\cal E}_T \mp \bar{{\cal H}}_T \right] Q_{ab} + \left[ \bar{{\cal E}}_T \pm {\cal H}_T \right] \bar{Q}_{ab} ,
\label{eqn:WeylMaster}
\end{align}
\noindent
where in the second line we have decomposed the perturbation variable into tensorial harmonics as per Appendix \ref{app:harmonics}. More importantly, this variable can be shown to obey the following closed, covariant and gauge invariant wave equation
\begin{align}
\ddot{\pazocal{J}}^{\pm}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} - \hat{\hat{\pazocal{J}}}^{\pm}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} - \left( {\mathcal{A}} + 3 \phi \right) \hat{\pazocal{J}}^{\pm}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} \mp \left( 4 {\mathcal{A}} - 2 \phi \right) \dot{\pazocal{J}}^{\pm}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} - \left( \delta^2 + 2 K \right) \pazocal{J}^{\pm}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} + \left( 4 {\mathcal{A}}^2 - 4 {\cal E} \right) \pazocal{J}^{\pm}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} &= 0 ,
\label{eqn:WeylMasterWave}
\end{align}
\noindent
which, when decomposed into covariant harmonics, reduces to
\begin{align}
\ddot{\pazocal{J}}^{\pm} - \hat{\hat{\pazocal{J}}}^{\pm} - \left( {\mathcal{A}} + 3 \phi \right) \hat{\pazocal{J}}^{\pm} \mp \left( 4 {\mathcal{A}} - 2 \phi \right) \dot{\pazocal{J}}^{\pm} + \left[ \frac{\ell (\ell + 1)}{r^2} - \frac{3}{2} \phi^2 + 2 {\cal E} + 4 {\mathcal{A}}^2 \right] \pazocal{J}^{\pm} &= 0 ,
\end{align}
\noindent
where $\pazocal{J}^{\pm} = \lbrace \pazocal{J}^{\pm}_T , \bar{\pazocal{J}}^{\pm}_T \rbrace$. As with $W_{\lbrace ab \rbrace}$, this variable unifies the even and odd parity perturbations into a single transverse-traceless tensor $\pazocal{J}_{ab}$. By construction, this variable is defined by the transverse-traceless degrees of freedom in the electric and magnetic Weyl tensors. It is therefore natural that this variable should describe the propagation of gravitational waves in the Schwarzschild spacetime. In the limit $M \rightarrow 0$, we recover the plane wave case, as expected. Additionally, we note that gauge invariance of our perturbation variable is guaranteed by the Stewart-Walker lemma \cite{Stewart74} as all vectors and tensors vanish in the background spacetime.
In the context of $f(R)$ gravity, it may seem a little curious that the wave equation for this perturbation variable is exactly the same as found in General Relativity. However, this result should not come as too much of a surprise. The perturbation variable, being TT in nature, explicitly describes massless modes that propagate along null curves. The scalar modes, having an effective mass of $U^2$, will physically propagate along timelike curves on the black hole background. In addition, we are explicitly considering a constrained class of solutions in $f(R)$ for which the scalar modes are not excited in the background spacetime. As such, the scalar modes and tensor modes decouple at linear order. This decoupling between the massive and massless modes has previously been noted \cite{Myung11,Nzioki14} but the derivation via metric based approaches can often obfuscate the underlying physics. By adopting the geometrically and physically meaningful 1+1+2 semi-tetrad approach, we can explicitly see which kinematical and gravitational terms are of importance and we can isolate physically meaningful variables, such as the TT components of the electric and magnetic Weyl tensors.
As a side note, by geometrically and physically meaningful we are referring to the notion that everything can be related to the dynamics and kinematics of congruences as well as the fact that all objects are gauge-invariant and covariantly defined without reference to a given coordinate system. The derivative operators appearing in the wave equation are just convective derivatives along the timelike and spacelike congruences or angular derivatives on the 2-surface. The perturbation variable itself tells us about the evolution of the Weyl 2-tensors that are defined on the 2-surfaces and therefore provides a natural description of gravitational radiation. In addition, these variables can be transparently related to the broader class of LRS-II spacetimes, where it can be shown that the perturbation variable defined above describes gravitational perturbations to vacuum LRS-II spacetimes \cite{PrattenThesis}.
Finally, it is also worth noting that were we to consider more astrophysical realistic systems or systems with matter content, the role of the scalar modes can become pronounced. An example of such behaviour can be seen in the dynamical secularisation of isolated neutron stars in the late-inspiral and merger phases of a compact binary coalescence \cite{Barausse13}. A study of neutron star systems in the 1+1+2 formalism would provide a natural extension to this work.
\subsubsection{Axial Gravitational Perturbations}\label{sec:112Axial}
As mentioned previously, the curvature term only occurs in the even parity sector. This means that axial gravitational perturbations to the $f(R)$ Schwarzschild black hole will be governed by the same covariant wave equation as in General Relativity. A natural candidate for such a perturbation variable is the magnetic Weyl tensor. Consequentially, we introduce a perturbation variable $\pazocal{V}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace}$ constructed from the radial part of the magnetic Weyl tensor
\begin{align}
\pazocal{V}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} &= r^2 \, \delta_{\lbrace a} \delta_{b \rbrace } {\cal H} .
\label{eqn:WeylMasterAxial}
\end{align}
\noindent
This variable can be shown to obey the following covariant wave equation
\begin{align}
\ddot{\pazocal{V}}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} - \hat{\hat{\pazocal{V}}}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} - \left( {\mathcal{A}} + 3 \phi \right) \hat{\pazocal{V}}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} - \left[ \delta^2 + 2 K \right] \pazocal{V}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace} &= 0 .
\label{eqn:WeylMasterWaveAxial}
\end{align}
\noindent
Decomposing the above equation into tensor harmonics\footnote{As per Appendix \ref{app:harmonics}} we find that
\begin{align}
\ddot{\pazocal{V}} - \hat{\hat{\pazocal{V}}} - \left( {\mathcal{A}} + 3 \phi \right) \hat{\pazocal{V}} + \left[ \frac{\ell \left( \ell + 1 \right)}{r^2} - \frac{3}{2} \phi^2 + 6 {\cal E} \right] \pazocal{V} &= 0 .
\label{eqn:WeylMasterWaveAxialHarmonic}
\end{align}
Though this harmonic equation looks different to the Regge-Wheeler equation, this variable is related to Regge-Wheeler variable. This can be seen by rescaling the tensor defined above as follows: $\pazocal{X} = r^3 \pazocal{V}$, \cref{eqn:WeylMasterWaveAxialHarmonic} then reduces to
\begin{align}
0 &= \frac{1}{r^3} \left[ \ddot{\pazocal{X}} - \hat{\hat{\pazocal{X}}} - {\mathcal{A}} \hat{\pazocal{X}} + \left\lbrace \frac{\ell (\ell + 1)}{r^2} + 3 {\cal E} \right\rbrace \pazocal{X} \right] \\
&= \ddot{\pazocal{X}} - \hat{\hat{\pazocal{X}}} - {\mathcal{A}} \pazocal{X} + \left\lbrace \frac{\ell (\ell + 1)}{r^2} + 3 {\cal E} \right\rbrace \pazocal{X} .
\end{align}
\noindent
This is nothing more than the Regge-Wheeler equation as per \cref{eqn:RWEqn}. This allows us to reinterpret the RW master variable as simply the radial part of the magnetic Weyl scalar as ${\cal H} = n^a n^b H_{ab}$. This is more physically intuitive than the original derivation via metric perturbation theory and is manifestly covariant and gauge invariant.
\section{Relation to Other Formalisms}\label{sec:OtherFormalism}
\subsection{The Newman-Penrose Formalism}
Another way to interpret our new perturbation variables is to re-express the Newman-Penrose scalars in terms of the 1+1+2 variables. The Newman-Penrose formalism is a full tetrad approach in which the underlying frame vectors form a null tetrad consisting of two real null vectors $( l^a , k^a)$ and a complex-conjugate pair $(m^a , \bar{m}^a)$ \cite{Newman62}. The two real null vectors correspond to ingoing and outgoing null congruences, whereas the complex-conjugate pair will simply correspond to a decomposition of the 2-surface orthogonal to $u^a$ and $n^a$. The frame vectors are defined as follows:
\begin{align}
l_a &= \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left( u_a + n_a \right) \qquad && l_a l^a = 0\\
k_a &= \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left( u_a - n_a \right) \qquad && k_a k^a = 0 \qquad l_a k^a = -1\\
m_a &= \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \left( v_a - i w_a \right) \qquad && m^a \bar{m}_a = 1 \qquad m^a m_a = \bar{m}^a \bar{m}_a = 0,
\end{align}
\noindent
with the metric being decomposed as follows
\begin{align}
g_{ab} &= - l_a k_b - k_a l_b + 2 m_{(a} \bar{m}_{b)} \\
&= -u_a u_b + n_a n_b + N_{ab},
\end{align}
\noindent
where we have identified the induced 2-metric with the two complex frame vectors: $N_{ab} = 2 m_{(a} \bar{m}_{b)}$. The Newman-Penrose scalars are defined by the appropriate contractions of the Weyl tensor with respect to this null tetrad and are given by\footnote{Note that other definitions or conventions exist.}
\begin{align}
\Psi_0 &= C_{abcd} l^a m^b l^c m^d \\
\Psi_1 &= C_{abcd} l^a m^b l^c k^d \\
\Psi_2 &= C_{abcd} l^a m^b \bar{m}^c k^d \\
\Psi_3 &= C_{abcd} l^a k^b \bar{m}^c k^d \\
\Psi_4 &= C_{abcd} \bar{m}^a k^b \bar{m}^c k^d ,
\end{align}
\noindent
with the 5 complex Weyl scalars encoding the 10 independent components of the Weyl tensor. The conventional physical intuition applied to these scalars is as follows: $\Psi_0$ describes transverse radiation along $k^a$ and thereby describes ingoing gravitational radiation. $\Psi_1$ is an ingoing gauge wave described by the longitudinal radiation along $k^a$. $\Psi_2$ is a Coulomb term related to gravitation attraction and frame dragging effects. $\Psi_3$ describes longitudinal radiation along $l^a$ and is therefore an outgoing gauge wave. Finally, $\Psi_4$ describes transverse radiation along $l^a$ and is thereby characterises outgoing gravitational radiation.
One of the motivations for considering the Weyl scalars is that the response of a GW detector will be encoded in these curvature scalars in the Jordan frame \cite{Eardley74}. In particular, for outgoing waves, the Weyl peeling theorem tells us how the Weyl scalars fall off along outgoing radial null geodesics in some neighbourhood of future null infinity $\cal{J}^{+}$:
\begin{align}
\Psi_n \sim r^{n-5} .
\end{align}
\noindent
This result is relatively robust and valid for a wide range of tetrad frames given a suitable choice for $r$. In an asymptotically flat spacetime, given that we are sufficiently far away from the source, the outgoing waves can be expressed within the realms of linearised gravity in the TT gauge:
\begin{align}
\Psi_0 = \Psi_1 = \Psi_2 = \Psi_3 = 0 \qquad \Psi_4 = - \ddot{h}_{+} + i \ddot{h}_{\times} ,
\end{align}
\noindent
with $h_{+}$ and $h_{\times}$ the standard gravitational wave polarisations, i.e the 2 graviton degrees of freedom. This means that in General Relativity, the radiative degrees of freedom that decay as $r^{-1}$ and are observable by GW detectors are simply encoded in $\Psi_4$. The extension to $f(R)$ gives us the possibility of exciting an additional transverse, radiative scalar mode. However, under many general considerations, the radiative component of this scalar mode tends to vanish due to constraints on the underlying scalar-tensor theory \cite{Barausse13}. As such, the scalar modes will only couple weakly to a GW detector making direct detections difficult \cite{Damour98,Barausse13}.
Performing a systematic decomposition of all the Weyl tensor into it's constituent 1+1+2 components, the Weyl scalars can be re-written as follows \cite{StephaniBook}:
\begin{align}
\Psi_0 &= \left[ \mathcal{E}_{ab} + \epsilon_{r \lbrace a} \mathcal{H}_{b \rbrace}^{\phantom{b \rbrace} r} \right] \, m^a m^b \\
\Psi_1 &= - \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \, \left[ \mathcal{E}_a - \epsilon_{ab} \mathcal{H}^b \right] m^a \\
\Psi_2 &= \frac{1}{2} \left[ \mathcal{E} - i \mathcal{H} \right] \\
\Psi_3 &= \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \, \left[ \mathcal{E}_a + \epsilon_{a b} \mathcal{H}^b \right] \, \bar{m}^a \\
\Psi_4 &= \left[ \mathcal{E}_{ab} - \epsilon_{r \lbrace a} \mathcal{H}_{b \rbrace}^{\phantom{b \rbrace} r} \right] \, \bar{m}^a \bar{m}^b .
\end{align}
\noindent
This decomposition follows from analogous results derived in a 3+1 or 1+3 approach \cite{Barnes89,StephaniBook,AlcubierreBook}.
As is usual in a tetrad formalism, these scalars will, in general, be frame-dependent with the behaviour of these scalars under transformations explicitly known \cite{StewartBook}.
Reassuringly, the only Newman-Penrose scalar that is non-vanishing in the background spacetime is $\Psi_2$ for which we recover:
\begin{align}
\Psi_2 &= \frac{1}{2} {\cal E} = - \frac{M}{r^3} ,
\end{align}
\noindent
as per the parametric solution for the 1+1+2 variables in \cref{eqn:bgpara}. The above results are also consistent with the literature in the sense that all LRS spacetimes will be of Petrov type D or O \cite{Ellis99}\footnote{See Appendix \ref{app:Petrov} for a brief review of the Petrov classification.}. This can be seen by the simple requirement that under LRS, all 2-vectors and 2-tensors must vanish in the background. This leaves $\Psi_2 \neq 0$ with the Petrov type determined by ${\cal E}$ and ${\cal H}$. If these scalars vanish the Petrov type is O, otherwise the Petrov type is D. Under perturbations, the Petrov type will be asymptotically type N due to the Weyl peeling theorem. We can extend this discussion to include the four non-zero vacuum invariants constructed from the Riemann curvature tensor \cite{AlcubierreBook}
\begin{align}
I &= 3 \Psi^2_2 - 4 \Psi_1 \Psi_3 + \Psi_0 \Psi_4 , \\
J &= \Psi_0 \Psi_2 \Psi_4 + 2 \Psi_1 \Psi_2 \Psi_3 - \Psi_0 \Psi^2_3 - \Psi^2_1 \Psi_4 - \Psi^3_2 .
\end{align}
\noindent
In a Petrov type D spacetime, as Petrov type O is trivial, these invariants reduce to
\begin{align}
I = 3 \Psi^2_2 \qquad \textrm{and} \qquad J = - \Psi^3_2 .
\end{align}
\noindent
From our decomposition of the NP scalars, these can be expressed via the 1+1+2 scalars as
\begin{align}
I &= \frac{3}{4} \left[ {\cal E}^2 - {\cal H}^2 - 2 i {\cal E} {\cal H} \right] , \\
J &= - \frac{1}{8} \left[ {\cal E}^2 - 3 i {\cal E}^2 {\cal H} - 3 {\cal E} {\cal H}^2 + i {\cal H}^3 \right] , \\
S &= 27 \frac{J^2}{I^3} = 1 \qquad \textrm{For Type D or Type II Spacetimes.}
\end{align}
From these decompositions we can immediately identify the correspondence between the perturbation variable $\pazocal{V}_{ab}$ and the imaginary part of $\Psi_2$:
\begin{align}
\Im{\left[r^3 \Psi_2\right]} \sim \psi_{RW} \sim r^3 {\cal H} .
\end{align}
\noindent
The relationship between the imaginary part of $\Psi_2$ and the Regge-Wheeler variable was first discussed by \cite{Price72} \footnote{Note that \cite{Price72} uses a different notation for the NP scalars based on their spin-weight: $\lbrace \Psi_{-2} , \Psi_{-1}, \Psi_0, \Psi_1 , \Psi_2 \rbrace$.}.
Similarly, we can immediately identify a correspondence between $\lbrace \Psi_0 , \Psi_4 \rbrace$ and the perturbation variable $\pazocal{J}^{\pm}_{ab}$. Notably, we see that
\begin{align}
\Psi_0 = \pazocal{J}^{+}_{ab} \; m^a m^b , \\
\Psi_4 = \pazocal{J}^{-}_{ab} \; \bar{m}^a \bar{m}^b .
\end{align}
\noindent
This allows us to associate $\pazocal{J}^{-}_{ab}$ with outgoing gravitational radiation\footnote{See Appendix \ref{app:Energy}.} and reinforces the notion that $\pazocal{J}^{\pm}_{ab}$ contains, in a compact form, the gravitational wave polarisations $\lbrace h_{+} , h_{\times} \rbrace$.
By construction, the scalar degrees of freedom present in the class of $f(R)$ theories considered here do not enter the Weyl scalars. This is reflected in our ability to both construct a closed, covariant wave equation that decouples from the scalar modes as well as the inability of the scalar modes to affect the potential of the tensor degrees of freedom at linear order.
A useful approach for studying the curvature-fluid perturbations is via the Ricci scalars. In the most general case, these scalar quantities will encode the ten independent components of the Ricci tensor in the form of three real scalars $\lbrace \Phi_{00} , \Phi_{11} , \Phi_{22} \rbrace$ and six complex scalars $\lbrace \Phi_{01} = \bar{\Phi}_{10} , \Phi_{02} = \bar{\Phi}_{20} , \Phi_{12} = \bar{\Phi}_{21} \rbrace$. Unlike the Weyl scalars, the Ricci scalars are implicitly related to the energy-momentum distribution of the spacetime via EFE. In the context of perturbations to the $f(R)$ Schwarzschild black hole, these scalars will measure excitations of the curvature fluid. The Ricci scalars are defined as follows \cite{StephaniBook}:
\begin{align}
\Phi_{00} &= \frac{1}{2} R_{ab} l^a l^b , \\
\Phi_{11} &= \frac{1}{4} R_{ab} \left( l^a k^b + m^a \bar{m}^b \right) , \\
\Phi_{22} &= \frac{1}{2} R_{ab} k^a k^b , \\
\Phi_{01} &= \bar{\Phi}_{10} = - \frac{1}{2} R_{ab} l^a m^b , \\
\Phi_{02} &= \bar{\Phi}_{20} = \frac{1}{2} R_{ab} m^a m^b \\
\Phi_{12} &= \bar{\Phi}_{21} = \frac{1}{2} R_{ab} \bar{m}^a k^b .
\end{align}
\noindent
As per the Weyl scalars, we can systematically decompose the Ricci scalars into their constituent 1+1+2 variables. We find the following:
\begin{align}
\Phi_{00} &= \frac{1}{2} \left( p - Q + \frac{1}{2} \Pi \right) , \\
\Phi_{11} &= \frac{1}{4} \left( \mu - \Pi + \Pi_{ab} m^a \bar{m}^b \right) , \\
\Phi_{22} &= \frac{1}{2} \left( p + Q + \frac{1}{2} \Pi \right) , \\
\Phi_{01} &= \frac{1}{2 \sqrt{2}} \left( \Pi_a - Q_a \right) m^a , \\
\Phi_{02} &= \frac{1}{2} \Pi_{ab} m^a m^b , \\
\Phi_{12} &= - \frac{1}{2 \sqrt{2}} \left( \Pi_a + Q_a \right) \bar{m}^a .
\end{align}
\noindent
The 1+1+2 expressions presented above are valid in both General Relativity as well as the $f(R)$ extension considered in this paper. In the Schwarzschild background, these variables naturally vanish as we only consider vacuum gravitational perturbations, i.e. $T^M_{ab}$ vanishes to all orders. In the $f(R)$ extension however, these variables will vanish in the background but will be non-zero once we consider first-order perturbations involving the scalar degrees of freedom. For example, we can explicitly insert the linearised energy-momentum tensor for the curvature fluid into $\Phi_{00}$ and $\Phi_{22}$ to obtain:
\begin{align}
\Phi_{00} &= \frac{f^{\prime \prime}_0}{2 f^{\prime}_0} \left[ \ddot{R} - \frac{1}{3} \hat{\hat{R}} - \hat{R} \left( \mathcal{A} + \frac{5}{6} \phi \right) - \frac{5}{6} \delta^2 R + \dot{\hat{R}} - \mathcal{A} \dot{R} \right] , \\
\Phi_{22} &= \frac{f^{\prime \prime}_0}{2 f^{\prime}_0} \left[ \ddot{R} + \frac{1}{3} \hat{\hat{R}} - \hat{R} \left( {\mathcal{A}} + \frac{5}{6} \phi \right) - \frac{5}{6} \delta^2 R - \frac{5}{3} \hat{\dot{R}} \right] .
\end{align}
\subsection{The 2+2 Formalism}
The other approach to which we wish to make a connection is that of the 2+2 formalism. This formalism was originally introduced in \cite{Gerlach79,Gerlach80} and a completion of this formalism was given by \cite{Gundlach00} who providing a systematic derivation of the gauge-invariants, introduced a fluid-frame decomposition and wrote down the resulting system of master equations governing gravitational perturbations of spherically symmetric spacetimes. The approach is built around the decomposition of the background 4-dimensional spacetime $\mathcal{M}^4$ into a warped product $\mathcal{M}^4 = \mathcal{M}^2 \otimes S^2$, where $\mathcal{M}^2$ is a 2-dimensional Lorentzian manifold and $S^2$ is the 2-sphere. In essence, we are covariantly factorising out the spherical symmetry and reducing the problem to a two-dimensional problem written in terms of the two essential coordinates: time and radius. As such, the metric can be written as\footnote{Note carefully: In this section, $\lbrace A, B, \dots \rbrace$ denote coordinates on $\mathcal{M}^2$ and $\lbrace a, b, \dots \rbrace$ denote coordinates on $S^2$.}
\begin{align}
ds^2 = g_{AB} (x^C) dx^a dx^B + r^2 (x^C) \gamma_{ab} dx^a dx^b ,
\end{align}
\noindent
where $g_{AB}$ is the metric on $\mathcal{M}^2$ and $\gamma_{ab}$ is the metric on the unit sphere $S^2$. The scalar $r = r(X^a)$ is defined on $\mathcal{M}^2$ and can be identified as the invariantly defined radial coordinate of spherically-symmetric spacetimes. Using this decomposition, the EFE in vacua can be re-expressed as
\begin{align}
G_{AB} &= - 2 \left( v_{A | B} + v_A v_B \right) + 2 \left( v_C^{\phantom{C} |C} + 3 v_C v^C - \frac{1}{r^2} \right) g_{AB} = t_{AB} , \\
\frac{1}{2} G^a_{\phantom{a} a} &= v_C^{\phantom{C} |C} + v_C v^C - \mathcal{R} = Q, \\
\nonumber v_A &= \frac{r_{|A}}{r} ,
\end{align}
\noindent
where $\mathcal{R} = \frac{1}{2} R^A_{\phantom{A}}$ is the Gaussian curvature of $\mathcal{M}^2$. The energy-momentum conservation equations take the following form:
\begin{align}
t_{AB}^{\phantom{AB} | B} + 2 t_{AB} v^B - 2 v^A Q &= 0 .
\end{align}
Following \cite{Gundlach00}, all metric perturbations can be written as a scalar, vector or tensor field on $\mathcal{M}^2$ times a spherical harmonic scalar, vector or tensor field on $S^2$. As such, the axial metric perturbations can be written as:
\begin{align}
h^{\textrm{Axial}}_{\mu \nu} &= \left(
\begin{array}{ll}
0 & h^{\textrm{Axial}}_A \, \bar{Y}_a \\
h^{\textrm{Axial}}_A \, \bar{Y}_a & h \bar{Y}_{a b}
\end{array} \right) ,
\end{align}
\noindent
and the polar metric perturbations as:
\begin{align}
h^{\textrm{Polar}}_{\mu \nu} &= \left(
\begin{array}{ll}
h_{AB} \, Y & h^{\textrm{Polar}}_A \, {Y}_a \\
h^{\textrm{Polar}}_A \, {Y}_a & r^2 \left( K \, Y \, \gamma_{a b} + G {Y}_{: a b} \right)
\end{array} \right) .
\end{align}
\noindent
Note that there is a natural correspondence between the covariant harmonics $\lbrace Q , Q_a , Q_{ab} \rbrace$ and their spherical harmonic counterparts $\lbrace Y , Y_a , Y_{ab} \rbrace$, this is discussed in Appendix \ref{app:harmonics}. In practice it is often convenient to adopt the Regge-Wheeler gauge $\lbrace h, h^{\textrm{Polar}}_A , G \rbrace = 0$ as, in this gauge, the remaining gauge-invariant variables simply correspond one-to-one with the bare perturbations. Knowing how the variables transform under general gauge-transformations, we could always map to a different gauge using known algebraic relations.
\subsubsection{Polar Perturbations and Correspondence}
Using a radial-frame in $\mathcal{M}^2$, the metric perturbation $k_{AB}$ can be split into three gauge-invariant scalars $\lbrace \chi , \varphi, \varsigma \rbrace$
\begin{align}
k_{AB} &= \left( \chi + \varphi \right) \left( n_A n_B + u_A u_B \right) + \varsigma \left( u_A n_B + n_A u_B \right) .
\label{eq.FluidFramekAB}
\end{align}
\noindent
Substituting this decomposition into the 2+2 EFE, we can recover a system of scalar equations by the appropriate projection operations with respect to the basis $\lbrace u, n \rbrace$. The system of master equations for the Schwarzschild spacetime in GR can be written as follows \cite{Gundlach00,Nagar05}\footnote{Note that in this section a dot derivative is defined by $u^A \tilde{\nabla}_A$ and a prime derivative by $n^A \tilde{\nabla}_A$, where $\tilde{\nabla}_A$ is the covariant derivative on $\mathcal{M}^2$, i.e. $\tilde{\nabla}_C g_{AB} = 0$.}
\begin{align}
-\ddot{\chi} + \chi^{\prime \prime} &= -2 \left[ 2 \nu^2 - \frac{6 M}{r^3} \right] \left( \chi + \varphi \right) - \left( 5 \nu - 2 W \right) \chi^{\prime} + \frac{(\ell + 2)(\ell - 1)}{r^2} \chi , \label{eqn:2p2Master} \\
-\ddot{\varphi} &= - W \chi^{\prime} - \nu \varphi^{\prime} - \frac{4 M}{r^3} \left( \chi + \varphi \right) - \frac{(\ell + 2)(\ell - 1)}{2 r^2} \chi , \nonumber \\
-\dot{\varsigma} &= 2 \nu \left( \chi + \varphi \right) + \chi^{\prime} . \nonumber
\end{align}
\noindent
In addition, we also have three constraint equations on the Cauchy data for $\lbrace \chi, \varphi , \varsigma \rbrace$:
\begin{align}
\left( \dot{\varphi} \right)^{\prime} &= - W \dot{\chi} + \frac{\ell (\ell + 1)}{2 r^2} \varsigma , \\
\varphi^{\prime \prime} &= \frac{\ell (\ell + 1)}{r^2} \left( \chi + \varphi \right) - \frac{(\ell + 2)(\ell - 1)}{2 r^2} \chi + W \chi^{\prime} - 2 W \varphi^{\prime} , \\
\varsigma^{\prime} &= - 2 \nu \varsigma - \dot{\chi} - 2 \dot{\varphi} .
\end{align}
\noindent
Clearly, from the above, the highest derivatives of $\chi$ form a wave equation with characteristics set by the metric $g_{\mu \nu}$ and Cauchy data $\lbrace \chi , \dot{\chi} \rbrace$ that can be set independently of matter perturbations \cite{Gundlach00}. It was therefore noted in \cite{Gundlach00} that $\chi$ can be reasonably said to characterise polar gravitational waves. The interpretation of $\varphi$ is a less trivial but was originally noted to correspond to longitudinal gravitational waves made physical by the presence of matter. As we work in a vacuum spacetime, how we should interpret $\varphi$ is not clear. Finally, $\varsigma$ was noted to be a term that is advected with the fluid. These physical descriptions of the gauge-invariants can be made manifest by explicitly writing down a correspondence between the 1+1+2 variables and the 2+2 gauge invariant perturbations. In essence, this approach to understanding the physical and geometrical meaning of gauge invariant perturbations is reminiscent of \cite{Bruni92} but adapted to spherically symmetric spacetimes.
Performing a systematic study of the 1+1+2 variables in terms of the 2+2 gauge invariants, we find the that the gauge-invariant perturbations are captured by the electric and magnetic Weyl 2-tensors:
\begin{align}
\mathcal{E}_{ab} &= - \frac{1}{2} \left( \chi + \varphi \right) \, Y_{ab} , \\
\mathcal{H}_{ab} &= - \frac{1}{2} \varsigma \, Y_{ab} .
\end{align}
\noindent
In many ways this is highly reassuring. After all, it was noted that $\chi$ and $\varphi$ somehow relate to polar gravitational wave degrees of freedom. Similarly, the interpretation of $\varsigma$ was less transparent but, via the 1+1+2 approach, we can clearly see that this gauge-invariant perturbation is related to the magnetic Weyl 2-tensor and therefore will be related to genuine relativistic effects, such as frame-dragging. This also corresponds to the the result presented earlier in \cref{eqn:WeylMasterWave} whereby the TT degrees of freedom of the Weyl tensor were shown to obey a closed covariant wave equation. As such, the master variable $\pazocal{J}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace}$ and its concomitant wave equation are simply a covariant, gauge-invariant and frame-invariant repackaging of the system of equations given by \cref{eqn:2p2Master} for the gauge-invariant perturbations $\lbrace \chi, \varphi , \varsigma \rbrace$.
From the result in \cref{eqn:WeylMasterWave}, which is valid for both General Relativity as well as $f(R)$, it would be natural to assume that were a 2+2 decomposition of the $f(R)$ field equations to be performed, an analogous closed system of equations for these gauge invariant perturbations could be found. Implicitly, we would also have to fold in first-order energy momentum perturbations corresponding to excitations of the scalar degrees of freedom. This would follow a procedure analogous to that used in the 1+1+2 decomposition and linearisation of the energy-momentum tensor for the curvature fluid.
As a final point, we can complete the correspondence between the 1+1+2, 2+2 and NP polar sector perturbations by studying the perturbations to $\Psi_4$ in terms of the 2+2 gauge-invariant variables. In the background spacetime, $\Psi_4$ vanishes and therefore its perturbation is naturally gauge-invariant. This perturbed Weyl scalar can be written as
\begin{align}
\delta \Psi_4 &= \delta C_{abcd} \bar{m}^a k^b \bar{m}^c k^d \\
&= \delta R_{a B c D} \bar{m}^a \bar{m}^c k^B k^D \\
&= - \frac{1}{2} k^B k^D \, k_{BD} \, \left[ \bar{m}^a \bar{m}^c Y_{ac} \right] \\
&= - \frac{1}{2} \left[ \chi + \varphi + \varsigma \right] \left[ \bar{m}^a \bar{m}^c Y_{ac} \right] \\
&\sim \pazocal{J}^{-}_{\lbrace a c \rbrace} \bar{m}^a \bar{m}^c .
\end{align}
\noindent
The expression in the last line is obtained by decomposing the radial-frame metric perturbation $k_{AB}$ into the 2+2 gauge-invariants as per Eq. (\ref{eq.FluidFramekAB}). Immediately we can see that this expression is nothing more than the harmonic decomposition of our perturbation variable $\pazocal{J}^{-}_{ac}$ projected with $\bar{m}^a \bar{m}^c$. This is in agreement with the correspondence between the 1+1+2 master variables and the NP Weyl scalars as well as the correspondence between the 1+1+2 variables and the 2+2 gauge invariant perturbations.
\subsubsection{Axial Perturbations and Correspondence}
In exactly the same manner as we did for the polar perturbations, we can analyse the axial sector and how the results correspond to those derived in both \cref{eqn:WeylMasterWave} and \cref{eqn:WeylMasterWaveAxial}. Luckily, the analysis is greatly simplified as the system of equations for the axial sector are less entangled than their polar sector counterparts. Perturbations to the axial sector, in vacuum, are completely characterised by a single scalar variable $\Pi$ defined by \cite{Gerlach79,Gerlach80,Gundlach00}
\begin{align}
\Pi &= \epsilon^{AB} \left( r^{-2} \, k_A \right)_{| B} \\
&= \frac{1}{r^2} \left[ - \left( 1 - \frac{2 M}{r} \right)^{-1/2} k^{\prime}_t + \frac{2}{r} k_t + \left( 1 - \frac{2 M}{r} \right)^{1/2} \dot{k}_r \right] ,
\end{align}
\noindent
where we have explicitly evaluated $\Pi$ in terms of its metric components for Schwarzschild coordinates. The corresponding scalar wave equation is
\begin{align}
\left[ \frac{1}{r^2} \, \left( r^4 \Pi \right)_{|A} \, \right]^{|A} - \left( \ell + 2 \right) \left( \ell - 1 \right) &= 0 .
\end{align}
\noindent
On a Cauchy surface, the two first-order degrees of freedom are given by $\lbrace \Pi , \dot{\Pi} \rbrace$. Explicitly evaluating the covariant derivatives, we would find a scalar wave equation with characteristics set by the metric:
\begin{align}
-\ddot{\Pi} + \Pi^{\prime \prime} = \mathcal{S}_{\Pi} .
\end{align}
\noindent
Consequentially, it is reasonable to state that $\Pi$ describes axial gravitational waves. Expressing the 1+1+2 variables in terms of 2+2 gauge-invariants we can immediately identify the axial master variable with the radial part of the magnetic Weyl 2-tensor
\begin{align}
\mathcal{H} &= \frac{\ell (\ell + 1)}{2} \Pi .
\end{align}
\noindent
Following our previous discussion, the master variable $\pazocal{V}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace}$ is a covariant, gauge-invariant repackaging of the 2+2 gauge invariant master variable $\Pi$ whose physical significance is made manifest by the identification of $\pazocal{V}_{ab}$ with the radial part of the magnetic Weyl 2-tensor.
Finally, we can complete the correspondence by noting the link between the perturbed Weyl scalars and the 2+2 gauge invariants \cite{Nolan04}, the most significant of which is the perturbation to $\Psi_2$:
\begin{align}
\delta \Psi_2 &= - \frac{i}{4} \ell (\ell + 1) \, \Pi \, Y \\
&\sim \mathcal{H} \\
&\sim \Psi_{\textrm{RW}}.
\end{align}
\noindent
This summarises the results detailed in this paper, namely that the radial part of the magnetic Weyl Tensor corresponds to the Regge-Wheeler variable and this can be expressed in many different ways in many different approaches. To make life more difficult, it is clear from \cref{eqn:WeylMaster}) and \cref{eqn:WeylMasterAxial}) that there is a non-uniqueness in the definition of a master variable. As the scalar mode $R$ vanishes in the axial sector, these equations and correspondences will hold even in the extension to $f(R)$ gravity.
\section{Summary}
We have presented a further analysis of linear, non-spherical perturbations to the Schwarzschild black hole in $f(R)$ gravity. Notably, we have advocated using the Weyl tensor as a powerful object for studying the evolution of gravitational waves. The two main perturbation variables that we introduce, $\pazocal{J}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace}$ and $\pazocal{V}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace}$, obey closed, covariant, gauge-invariant and frame-invariant wave equations that happen to be exactly the same in both General Relativity as well as to the $f(R)$ extensions considered here.
The first perturbation variable $\pazocal{J}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace}$ is constructed from the transverse-traceless degrees of freedom of the Weyl tensor and is a particularly convenient way to study the evolution of gravitational perturbations in the Schwarzschild spacetime. Imposing a set of basic constraints and imposing that $f(0) = 0$ and $R=0$ in the background, the resulting equation decouples from the scalar modes at the linear level. In part this is due to the setup used, namely that we consider a vacuum Schwarzschild spacetime for which there are initially no scalar mode excitations. The scalar modes in $f(R)$ gravity correspond to massive modes, with the mass of the particles set by the parameters of the theory $f^{\prime} (0)$ and $f^{\prime \prime} (0)$, that propagate along timelike curves. The pure tensor modes described by $\pazocal{J}_{ab}$, however, will be massless and propagate along null curves. Were we to consider a more complicated spacetime, by either reducing symmetries or by introducing a matter to the system, it is likely that the scalar modes and tensor modes will be more entangled. As such, our results are in agreement with the literature on the subject \cite{DeFelice11,Myung11,Nzioki14}. The variable $\pazocal{J}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace}$ was shown to correspond to the radiative degrees of freedom in the Newman-Penrose formalism \cite{Newman62}, i.e. $\Psi_4$ and $\Psi_0$, as well as the gauge-invariant master variables $\chi$ and $\varphi$ in the 2+2 formalism \cite{Gundlach00}. This should not be of too much surprise, given that the NP Weyl scalars are projections of the Weyl tensor, which describes the free gravitational field and one of the primary reasons as to why we advocate its use in the 1+1+2 formalism.
The second perturbation variable $\pazocal{V}_{\lbrace a b \rbrace}$ is defined to be the radial part of the magnetic Weyl tensor and is a purely axial variable. Given that the scalar modes are even parity in nature, it is unsurprising that the form for this equation is exactly the same as in General Relativity. In fact, by an appropriate rescaling, it can be shown that the radial part of the magnetic Weyl tensor is exactly the Regge-Wheeler variable. Alternatively, it can be shown that this variable is exactly $\Psi_2$ in the Newman-Penrose formalism \cite{Newman62} or $\Pi$ in the 2+2 decomposition \cite{Gundlach00}.
Finally, we highlighted how the curvature-fluid terms can be expressed via the NP Ricci scalars, e.g. $\Phi_{00}$ and $\Phi_{11}$, which would necessarily be zero in General Relativity.
\section{Acknowledgements}
GP would like to thank Chris Clarkson, Rituparno Goswami, Antony Lewis, Anne Marie Nzioki, David Seery and Patricia Schmidt for useful discussions and/or comments. GP would also like to thank the California Institute of Technology for hospitality where parts of this work were completed. The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Research Council under the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP/2007-2013) / ERC Grant Agreement No. [616170].
|
\section{Introduction}
When an energetic quark or gluon propagates through a dense partonic system such as the quark-gluon plasma (QGP), it interacts with the hot medium through multiple scattering and induced gluon bremsstrahlung, leading to transverse momentum broadening and energy loss of the propagating parton. As a consequence, spectra of large transverse momentum hadrons and jets in high-energy heavy-ion collisions should be suppressed if a dense partonic matter is formed in the early stage of the collisions. This phenomenon is called jet quenching and has been proposed as a powerful tool for the study of properties of the QGP in high-energy heavy-ion collisions \cite{Bjorken:1982tu,Gyulassy:1990ye,Wang:1991xy}. It has been observed in experiments at both the Relativistic Heavy-ion Collider (RHIC) \cite{Adams:2005dq,Adcox:2004mh} and the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) \cite{Muller:2012zq} as evidence for the formation of strongly interacting QGP in high-energy heavy-ion collisions. Investigators observed not only the suppression of single inclusive hadron spectra at large transverse momentum \cite{Adcox:2001jp,Adler:2002xw,Aamodt:2010jd,CMS:2012aa} but also back-to-back dihadron \cite{stardihadron} and gamma-hadron correlations \cite{Adare:2009vd,Abelev:2009gu}. The jet quenching phenomenon becomes even more dramatic in heavy-ion collisions at LHC when one observes the onset of dijets and gamma jets with large asymmetries in transverse energy \cite{Aad:2010bu,Chatrchyan:2011sx,Chatrchyan:2012gt}. These patterns of jet quenching can all be understood quantitatively within the picture of multiple scattering and parton energy loss \cite{Wang:2004dn}-\cite{Dai:2012am}.
Within the picture of perturbative QCD (pQCD), the interaction between an energetic parton and the medium is dominated by small-angle scattering and induced gluon radiation. The transverse momentum broadening and energy loss of the propagating parton depend on the transverse momentum transfer from the medium during each scattering which in turn encodes the interaction among medium partons at the scale as probed by the energetic parton. The jet transport parameter defined as the averaged transverse momentum broadening squared per unit length of propagation represents a fundamental property of the medium \cite{Gyulassy:1993hr}-\cite{Arnold:2002ja}. Recent phenomenological studies of single-hadron suppression in high-energy heavy-ion collisions within collinear factorized pQCD models give extracted values of the transport parameter $\hat q\approx 1.2\pm 0.3$ GeV$^2$/fm and $\hat q\approx 1.9\pm 0.7$ GeV$^2$/fm at an initial time $\tau_0=0.6$ fm/$c$ for a 10 GeV quark at the center of most central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s}=200$ GeV and Pb+Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s}=2.76$ TeV, respectively \cite{Burke:2013yra}. These values are about two orders of magnitude higher than in large cold nuclei \cite{Wang:2009qb,Chang:2014fba}.
Given such large values of the jet transport parameter, the energy lost to the medium by a propagating parton is also very large. Dissipation of this large amount of lost energy in the medium can lead to jet-induced medium excitations such as supersonic waves or Mach cones \cite{CasalderreySolana:2004qm,Stoecker:2004qu}. Study of such jet-induced medium excitations can shed light on the transport properties of the bulk medium which complements that obtained from analyses of anisotropic flows due to collective expansion. Several types of models can be employed to study jet-induced medium excitations such as hydrodynamical models \cite{Chaudhuri:2005vc,Betz:2008ka,Neufeld:2009ep,Qin:2009uh}, string theory \cite{Chesler:2007sv,Gubser:2007ga} and parton transport models \cite{Bouras:2012mh}. The Linear Boltzmann Transport (LBT) model \cite{Li:2010ts,Wang:2010yz,Wang:2013cia,Wang:2014hla} combines a kinetic description of parton propagation and hydrodynamic description of the underlying medium evolution. Since it also keeps track of thermal recoil partons from each scattering and their further propagation in the medium, the LBT model can be used to study both jet transport in medium and jet-induced medium excitations.
Jet-induced medium excitations in the form of thermal recoil partons and their further propagation are also important for the study of jet quenching through reconstructed jets and the corresponding jet profiles. Reconstructed jets defined through a jet-finding algorithm \cite{Cacciari:2011ma} in experiments are collections of collimated showers of hadrons within a jet cone.
Neglecting nonperturbative effects through hadronization, jets reconstructed through jet shower partons and final hadrons are equivalent and have approximately the same energy. Since interaction in pQCD between an energetic parton and the thermal medium is dominated by small-angle scatterings, a large fraction of thermal recoil partons from jet-medium interaction fall within the jet cone and therefore should become a part of the reconstructed jet. These thermal recoil partons within the jet cone can contribute to a non-negligible fraction of the total jet energy and modify both the jet transverse profile (transverse energy distribution inside the jet cone) and fragmentation functions (particle distributions in longitudinal momentum inside the jet cone) \cite{Wang:2013cia}. In addition, a diffusion wake generated behind a propagating parton effectively modifies the underlying fluid background and therefore also affects jet reconstruction, the final jet energy, and the jet profile. These effects can all be studied within the LBT model and are important for understanding the medium modified jet cross section and jet profiles \cite{Chatrchyan:2013kwa}.
In this paper, we describe in detail the LBT model that has been developed over the last few years and improvements to the early versions that have been used for the study of jet-induced medium excitations \cite{Li:2010ts,Wang:2010yz}, jet transport, and medium modifications \cite{Wang:2013cia,Wang:2014hla}. We also employ the model to study elastic energy loss through multiple scattering, propagation of jet-induced medium excitations, and their contributions to parton distribution and jet profiles of reconstructed jets using the anti-$k_T$ algorithm in FASTJET \cite{Cacciari:2011ma}.
Instead of using the small-angle approximation for parton scatterings in the early versions of the LBT model, we have included the complete set of $2\rightarrow 2$ ``elastic" parton scattering processes with full scattering matrix elements including large-angle scatterings, annihilation processes, and flavor conversion. These are necessary for more accurate description of parton transport in medium. Simulations of parton transport according to the Boltzmann equation in the LBT model are based on local rates of scattering in a medium that evolves according to relativistic hydrodynamic equations. We keep track of medium recoil partons from each parton-medium scattering and neglect interactions among jet shower partons and thermal recoil partons, wherein lies the meaning of ``linear" in LBT. The model is therefore Lorentz covariant and can avoid difficulties of implementing the test-particle method in a full-fledged parton transport model \cite{Xu:2004mz}. Furthermore, it also allows us to study jet transport and jet-induced medium excitations based on event-by-event simulations with full fluctuations and correlations.
This article is devoted to a general description and test of elastic scatterings in the LBT model and the corresponding jet transport and jet-induced medium excitations in a uniform QGP medium. The final medium modification of jets and the effect of jet-induced medium excitations will depend strongly on the inelastic parton-medium scatterings and the dynamical expansion of the medium. These will be described in the future when we carry out realistic studies of jet transport and medium modification in high-energy heavy-ion collisions.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. We first give a detailed description of the LBT model in Sec.~II. We compare numerical and approximate analytic results for local parton scattering rates for different channels, parton energies, and local temperatures. Differential scattering rates as functions of the final-state momentum and scattering angle of the medium recoil parton from Monte Carlo simulations are also tested against results calculated with numerical integrations. In Sec.~III, we study the elastic energy loss from multiple scattering and in particular the energy and time or length dependence in a static and uniform QGP medium. Time evolution of the transverse momentum distribution of the leading parton is also investigated. Propagation of medium recoil partons in terms of jet-induced medium excitations are investigated in Sec. IV. A supersonic shock wave along with a diffusion wake is shown to arise from the propagation of the energy and momentum deposited by the propagating energetic parton. In Sec.~V, we investigate contributions from medium recoil partons to the reconstructed jet energy using the anti-$k_T$ algorithm in FASTJET jet finding package and study the influence of medium recoil partons to the jet energy profile and parton distributions. Finally, a summary and discussions are given in Sec. VI.
\section{The linear Boltzmann transport model}
Considering only $2 \rightarrow 2$ parton scattering, jet transport and propagation in a QGP medium can be approximately described by a set of linear Boltzmann equations,
\begin{equation}
\label{LBT}
\begin{split}
p_1\cdot\partial f_a(p_1) &= -\int \negthickspace \frac{d^3p_2}{(2\pi)^3 2E_2} \negthickspace \int \negthickspace
\frac{d^3p_3}{(2\pi)^3 2E_3} \int \negthickspace \frac{d^3p_4}{(2\pi)^3 2E_4} \\
\sum_{b(c,d)}&\left[ f_a(p_1)f_b(p_2)-f_c(p_3)f_d(p_4)\right] \, |M_{ab\rightarrow cd}|^2 \\
&\times S_2(s, t, u)(2\pi)^4\delta^4(p_1+p_2-p_3-p_4),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where the sum is over the flavor of the initial thermal parton ($b$) and all possible scattering channels $a+b\rightarrow c+d $
for different flavors of the final partons ($c$,$d$). $|M_{ab\rightarrow cb }|^2$ is the corresponding matrix element \cite{Eichten:1984eu} that is averaged (summed) over the initial (final) spin and color as a function of standard Mandelstam variables $s$, $t$, and $u$. We have neglected the effect of quantum statistics in this study. The phase-space distributions for thermal partons in the QGP medium $f_i$ $(i=b,d)$ are the Bose-Einstein distribution for gluons and Fermi-Dirac distribution for quarks and antiquarks with a local temperature $T$ and fluid velocity $u=(1, \vec{v})/\sqrt{1-\vec{v}^2}$. For $N_c=3$ number of colors in QCD, the spin and color degeneracy factors are $g_g=2\cdot(N_c^2-1)=16$ and $g_q=2\cdot N_c = 6$ for gluons and each flavor of quark or antiquark, respectively. The propagating parton before and after each scattering is assumed to follow a classical trajectory with $f_i=(2\pi)^3\delta^3(\vec{p}-\vec{p_i})\delta^3(\vec{x}-\vec{x_i}-\vec{p_i}t/E_i)$ $(i=a,c)$ as the phase-space density.
Most matrix elements $|M_{ab\rightarrow cb }|^2$ for two-parton scattering diverge at small angle, $u, t\rightarrow 0$, for massless partons. Such divergences disappear when quasi-particle modes due to hard-thermal-loop (HTL) corrections are taken into account in the calculation of scattering rates and transport coefficients \cite{Arnold:2001ba,Arnold:2002ja}. While an exact formulation of the Boltzmann transport within HTL pQCD is difficult, we introduce a screening mass for light quarks and gluons in matrix elements for two-parton scattering. This is the same approach as in Refs.~\cite{Zapp:2008gi,Auvinen:2009qm}. This is equivalent to
introducing a Lorentz-invariant regularization condition,
\begin{equation}
\label{cutoff}
S_2(s, t, u) = \theta(s\ge 2\mu_{D}^2)\theta(-s+\mu_{D}^2\le t\le -\mu_{D}^2),
\end{equation}
in the interaction kernel in the Boltzmann transport equations [Eq.~(\ref{LBT})],
where $\mu_{D}$ is the Debye screening mass,
\begin{equation}
\label{cutoff}
\mu_{D}^2 = \frac{g^2 T^2}{3} (N_c + \frac{N_f}{2} ) \ ,
\end{equation}
for $N_f=3$ number of active quark flavors in the QGP.
Matrix elements for parton scattering we use in this paper are leading-order pQCD results. The strong coupling constant
$\alpha_{\rm s}=g^{2}/4\pi$ will be kept at a constant value and should be determined through comparisons to the experimental data.
Since we will only consider parton propagation in a uniform medium in this study, we set $\alpha_{\rm s}=0.3$ throughout the paper.
\subsection{Scattering rates}
For Monte Carlo simulations of the Boltzmann transport equation, we need to evaluate the rate for a hard parton of type $a$ scattering with a thermal parton of type $b$ via a specific channel $a+b\rightarrow c+d $,
\begin{equation}
\label{singlerate}
\begin{split}
\Gamma_{ab\rightarrow cd} = &\frac{1}{2E_1} \int \negthickspace \frac{d^3p_2}{(2\pi)^3 2E_2} \negthickspace \int \negthickspace \frac{d^3p_3}{(2\pi)^3 2E_3} \int \negthickspace \frac{d^3p_4}{(2\pi)^3 2E_4} \\
&\times f_b (p_2) \, |M|_{ab\rightarrow cd}^2(s,t,u) \, S_2(s, t, u) \\
&\times (2\pi)^4 \delta^{(4)}(p_1+p_2-p_3-p_4).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Summing over all types of initial thermal partons ($b$) and all possible channels with different types of final-state partons ($c$,$d$),
we can obtain the total scattering rate for an energetic parton $a$ with thermal partons in a thermal QGP medium:
\begin{equation}
\label{totalrate}
\Gamma_a = \sum_{b,(cd)} \, \Gamma_{ab\rightarrow cd}.
\end{equation}
These scattering rates for different parton types and different channels will be used in Monte Carlo simulations of the LBT model. Shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:rates_vs_E} are the total scattering rates for an energetic gluon (upper panel) and quark (lower panel) as a function of the incident energy $E$ in a thermal QGP medium with zero baryon chemical potential at a constant temperature $T=200$ MeV. Also shown are contributions from different channels. Dominant contributions to the total scattering rate of a gluon come from gluon-gluon and gluon-quark scattering. Contributions from gluon-gluon to quark-antiquark conversion are about two orders of magnitude smaller. The dominant channel to the quark scattering rate is from quark-gluon Compton scattering followed by quark-quark scattering. Contributions from quark-antiquark annihilation are also many orders of magnitude smaller.
As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:rates_vs_E}, scattering rates for $s$-channel annihilation processes decrease with the incident energy as $\Gamma=\sigma\rho\sim \alpha_{\rm s}^2 T^2/E$. Total parton scattering rates are dominated by $t$-channel gluon-gluon, gluon-quark, and quark-quark scattering processes, whose rates are approximately independent of the incident energy $E$.
In the high-energy limit $E\gg T$, $t$-channel gluon and quark scattering cross sections can be approximated by their small-angle limits ,
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\sigma_{ab}}{dq_\perp^2} \approx C_{ab} \frac{2\pi\alpha_{\rm s}^2}{q_\perp^4} \left(C_{gg}=\frac{9}{4}, C_{qg}=1, C_{qq}=\frac{4}{9}\right).
\label{eq-small-el}
\end{equation}
Scattering rates for energetic partons in a thermal QGP medium are then \cite{Auvinen:2009qm,Wang:1996yf},
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{analytic_gammag}
\Gamma_g &\approx& \sum_{b=g,q_i,\bar q_i} \Gamma_{g b \rightarrow g b}
\approx 42C_A\zeta(3) \frac{\alpha_s^2T^3}{\pi \mu_D^2},\\
\label{analytic_gammaq}
\Gamma_{q} &\approx& \sum_{b=g,q_i,\bar q_i}\Gamma_{q b \rightarrow q b }
\approx 42C_F\zeta(3) \frac{\alpha_{\rm s}^2T^3}{\pi \mu_D^2},
\end{eqnarray}
where $\zeta(3)\approx 1.202$ is the Ap\'{e}ry's constant, $C_A=N_c$ and $C_F=(N_c^2-1)/2N_c$. With the Debye screening mass given in Eq.~(\ref{cutoff}), the above scattering rates are independent of the incident energy and proportional to the temperature $T$. As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:rates_vs_E} as solid lines, the above analytic estimates of total parton scattering rates agree with numerical results very well for $E\gg T$. We also show in Fig.~\ref{fig:rates_vs_T} both numerical results (symbols) and analytic estimates (solid lines) of total scattering rates and contributions from different channels as functions of the temperature in a thermal QGP medium for a fixed parton incident energy $E=100$ GeV. As given in the above analytic estimates, total rates as well as rates for $t$ channels increase linearly with the temperature $T$, while rates for $s$ channels increase quadratically with $T$. Note that the parton scattering rates given here are only valid in a medium above the QCD phase transition temperature $T>T_c$. For a rapid crossover as indicated by recent lattice QCD simulations \cite{Bazavov:2014pvz}, the effective degrees of freedom around the phase transition temperature $T_c\approx 155 $ MeV become ambiguous. One has to rely on model assumptions to treat parton medium interaction \cite{Wang:2013cia,Chen:2010te,Chen:2011vt}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{rategE.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{rateqE.pdf}\\
\caption{(Color online) Flavor-summed scattering rates of different processes \(\Gamma_{ab\rightarrow cd}\) and total scattering rates \(\Gamma_a\) of (a) a gluon or (b) a quark (antiquark) as a function of the parton energy \(E_0\) in a static and uniform QGP medium. Analytic estimates for the total rates discussed in the text are shown as solid lines.}
\label{fig:rates_vs_E}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{rategT.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{rateqT.pdf}\\
\caption{(Color online) Flavor-summed scattering rates of different processes \(\Gamma_{ab\rightarrow cd}\) and the total scattering rates \(\Gamma_a\) of (a) a gluon or (b) a quark (antiquark) as a function of the temperature \(T\) in a static and uniform QGP medium. Analytic estimates for the total rates discussed in the text are shown as solid lines.}
\label{fig:rates_vs_T}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Differential rates}
To sample the initial thermal and final parton four-momenta in a $2 \rightarrow 2$ scattering, we choose the $z$ axis as the direction of the incident parton $a$ with its four-momentum $p_1=(E_1,\vec 0_\perp, p_{1z})$. One can integrate out the four-dimensional $\delta$ function in Eq.~(\ref{singlerate}) and express the the scattering rate for a given channel in a differential form:
\begin{equation}
\label{scattrate2}
\begin{split}
\Gamma _{ab\rightarrow cd}=&\frac{1}{16E_1(2\pi )^4}\int \negthickspace d\theta _2\int \negthickspace d\theta_3\int \negthickspace d\phi _{23}\int \negthickspace dE_3 \\
&\times f_b(E_2,T)\left| M \right|_{ab\to cd}^{2}(s,t,u){{S}_{2}}(s,t,u) \\
&\times \frac{E_2 E_3\sin \theta_2\sin\theta_3}{E_1(1-\cos\theta_{12})-E_3(1-\cos\theta_{23})}, \\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation*}
{{E}_{2}}=\frac{{{E}_{1}}{{E}_{3}}(1-\cos {{\theta }_{3}})}{{{E}_{1}}(1-\cos {{\theta }_{12}})-{{E}_{3}}(1-\cos {{\theta }_{23}})},
\end{equation*}
$\phi_i$ is the azimuth angle, $\theta_i$ the polar angle of a parton's momentum $p_i$, and $\phi_{ij}$ and $\theta_{ij}$ are the azimuth and polar angles between two partons' momenta $p_i$ and $p_j$, respectively.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.0cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{dnde-gg.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=8.0cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{dnde-gq.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) Energy distributions of the outgoing parton in (a) $g+ b\rightarrow g + b (b=g,q,\bar q) $ or (b) $g+g\rightarrow q + \bar q $ scattering processes with different initial parton energy $E_0$ in a thermal QGP medium at a temperature $T=200$ MeV. Solid lines are results from Eq.~(\ref{scattrate2}) with direct integration while histograms are from the corresponding Monte Carlo simulations.}
\label{fig-e-gluon}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.0cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{dnde-qg.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=8.0cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{dnde-qq.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) The same as Fig.~\ref{fig-e-gluon} in (a) $q+\bar q \rightarrow g+g$ or (b) $q+b \rightarrow q +b (b=g,q\prime,\bar q\prime)$ scattering processes.}
\label{fig-e-quark}
\end{figure}
One can further carry out the integration over the direction of the initial thermal parton $b$'s momentum $(\theta_2, \phi_{23})$ and obtain the final parton $c$'s angular ($\theta_3$) and energy ($E_3$) distributions. Shown in Figs.~\ref{fig-e-gluon} and \ref{fig-e-quark} as solid lines are the energy distributions of an outgoing parton in some selected channels of parton-medium interaction in a thermal QGP with a temperature $T=200$ MeV. The gluon-medium interaction is dominated by $t$ and $u$-channel gluon-gluon and gluon-quark(antiquark) scattering. The outgoing gluon can either be the deflected incoming gluon which carries most of the incident energy $E_0$ minus elastic energy loss $\sim \mu_D^2/T$ or the thermal recoil gluon whose average energy is its initial thermal energy $\sim T$ plus the elastic energy transfer from the scattering. The energy spectrum of the outgoing gluon therefore has two peaks at $E\sim T$ and $E_0$ as shown in the upper panel of Fig.~\ref{fig-e-gluon}. Large-angle and $s$-channel scatterings contribute to the valley region between these two peaks which is suppressed by a factor of $\mu_D^2/E_0T$. The energy spectrum of the outgoing gluon does not vanish at the incident energy $E_0$. It instead has an exponential fall-off with a slope as given by the temperature, indicating that the energetic incident parton can also gain energy due to its interaction with thermal partons.
The energy spectra of the outgoing quark in the quark-antiquark pair production $g+g\rightarrow q + \bar q$ (lower panel of Fig.~\ref{fig-e-gluon}) and the outgoing gluon in the quark-antiquark annihilation $q+\bar q\rightarrow g+g$ process (upper panel of Fig.~\ref{fig-e-quark}) have a similar structure with two peaks at $E\sim T$ and $E_0$. This structure, however, arises mainly from the $u$ and $t$ channels of the pair production or annihilation process in which the two outgoing partons have an equal probability to carry most of the incident energy. Contributions from the $s$ channels in these processes are suppressed by a factor of $\mu_D^2/TE_0$ with a flat energy distribution between $E\sim T - E_0$.
To illustrate the typical energy spectra of thermal recoil partons from parton-medium interaction we show in the lower panel of Fig.~\ref{fig-e-quark} the energy distribution of the recoil parton $b$ in $q+b \rightarrow q+b$ ($b=g,q^\prime,\bar q^\prime$) processes. For an energetic quark $q$, these processes are dominated by $t$ channels in which recoil partons carry an energy $E_b\sim q_T^2/T$. The recoil parton spectra should have a power law behavior $dN/dE_b \sim 1/q_T^4 \sim 1/E_b^2$ with a peak at $E_b\sim T+ \mu_D^2/T$. The recoil gluon spectra in the $s$ and $u$ channels in the quark-gluon Compton scattering $q+g\rightarrow q+g$, however, still has a peak at $E_b\sim E_0-\mu_D^2/T$, but is suppressed by a factor of $\mu_D^2/E_0T$ relative to the $t$ channel.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.0cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{dndtheta-gg.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=8.0cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{dndtheta-gq.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) Polar angle distributions of the thermal recoil parton of different energies relative to the incoming parton direction after (a) $g+ b\rightarrow g + b \, (b=g,q,\bar q) $ or (b) $g+g\rightarrow q + \bar q $ scattering processes with initial parton energy $E_0=20$ GeV in a uniform medium at a temperature $T=200$ MeV. Solid lines are for results from the numerical integration and histograms for LBT Monte Carlo simulations. }
\label{fig-theta-gluon}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.0cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{dndtheta-qg.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=8.0cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{dndtheta-qq.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) The same as Fig.~\ref{fig-theta-gluon} for (a) $ q + \bar q \rightarrow g+g $ or (b) $q+ b\rightarrow q + b \, (b=g,q^\prime,\bar q^\prime) $ scattering processes.}
\label{fig-theta-quark}
\end{figure}
Because of the dominance of $t$ and $u$ channels of the small-angle scattering, only one of the outgoing partons in parton-medium scattering carries most of the incident energy for most of the time, whose flavor can be, however, different from the incident parton. Therefore, we will refer to the more energetic parton in the final state of each parton-medium scattering as the leading parton and the other less energetic one as the thermal recoil parton.
For Monte Carlo simulations in the LBT model, we change the variable of the energy integration in Eq.~(\ref{scattrate2}) from the outgoing parton $c$'s energy $E_3$ to the initial parton $b$'s thermal energy $E_2$. The integrand then can be used to sample the thermal parton $b$'s energy $E_2$, polar angle $\theta_2$ and the outgoing parton $c$'s direction ($\theta_3,\phi_{23}$) with the rejection method. The energy of the outgoing parton $c$ $E_3$ and parton $d$'s four-momentum $p_4$ can be determined by energy-momentum conservation. Shown as histograms in Figs.~\ref{fig-e-gluon} and \ref{fig-e-quark} are the energy distributions of the outgoing parton in some elected channels of parton-medium scattering. The agreement between Monte Carlo results and those from direct integration in Eq.~(\ref{scattrate2}) provides numerical verifications of the Monte Carlo code for parton-medium scatterings in the LBT model.
For the purpose of discussing jet-induced medium excitation later, we show in Figs.~\ref{fig-theta-gluon} and \ref{fig-theta-quark} distributions in the polar angle of the thermal recoil parton from parton-medium scatterings via the same selected channels as in Figs.~\ref{fig-e-gluon} and \ref{fig-e-quark} from both Monte Carlo simulations (histograms) and numerical integration of Eq.~(\ref{scattrate2}) (solid lines). The polar angle of the thermal recoil parton in two different energy ranges, $E=$0-1 and 1-2 GeV, is calculated with respect to the direction of the incident parton with $E_0=20$ GeV. As shown in the figures, thermal recoil partons with energy significantly larger than the typical thermal energy gain their energy and momentum through elastic scattering and therefore are dragged along in the same direction of the energetic incident parton. Soft thermal recoil partons with $E$=0-1 GeV, on the other hand, have large angles, almost perpendicular to the incident parton on the average. These features of parton-medium scattering will determine the jet-induced medium excitation due to multiple parton scattering as we will describe later.
\subsection{Multiple scatterings}
In the LBT model, we initiate the Monte Carlo program by calculating parton scattering rates according to Eqs.~(\ref{singlerate}) and (\ref{totalrate}) for a range of incident energies and medium temperatures which are stored in two-dimensional tables for later use. We then approximate the propagation of partons in medium with a discretized time internal $\Delta t$ in the frame of hydrodynamic evolution of the QGP medium. We sample the probability for $n$ number of parton-medium scatterings within a time interval $\Delta t$ according to a Poisson distribution,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{prob}
P_{a,n}(E,\Delta t)&=&\frac{[\Delta N_a(E)]^n}{n!} e^{-\Delta N_a(E,\Delta t)}, \\
\Delta N_a(E,\Delta t)&=&\Delta t \frac{p\cdot u}{E} \Gamma_a (p\cdot u,T),
\end{eqnarray}
where the scattering rate $\Gamma_a (p\cdot u,T)$ for a parton $a$ is evaluated at the local fluid comoving frame with incident energy $E_u=p\cdot u$ and $u$ is the local fluid four-velocity. After determining the number of parton scatterings $n$, one can assume these $n$ number of scatterings occur sequentially within the time interval $\Delta t$ and energy and momentum are strictly conserved in each scattering along the classical trajectory.
If we choose the value of time interval $\Delta t$ to be much smaller than the mean-free-path length $\Delta t \ll 1/\max(\Gamma_g,\Gamma_q)$, one can approximate the probability for at least one parton-medium scattering,
\begin{equation}
P_a(E,\Delta t)=1-e^{-\Delta N_a(E,\Delta t)},
\end{equation}
as the probability for one parton-medium scattering during the time interval $\Delta t$.
For each parton-medium scattering, we use fractional rates $\Gamma_{ab\rightarrow cd}/\Gamma_a$ to decide the channel and flavors of the initial thermal parton $b$ and outgoing partons $c$ and $d$. The kinematics of the parton-parton scattering $a+b\rightarrow c+d$ is sampled according to the differential rate in Eq.~(\ref{scattrate2}). The more energetic parton of the two outgoing partons is chosen as the leading parton for the next parton-medium scattering. In the LBT model, all outgoing partons, both the leading and thermal recoil partons, in each parton-medium scattering are recorded and are allowed to go through further parton-medium scattering in the subsequent time intervals. Each parton-medium scattering could in principle accompanied by induced gluon bremsstrahlung. We focus mainly on elastic scattering processes in the LBT model in this paper and leave the discussion on the implementation of induced gluon bremsstrahlung for the subsequent publication.
To take into account of the back-reaction in the Boltzmann transport equation (\ref{LBT}), we also record the initial thermal parton $b$ and its four-momentum $p_2$ in each scattering process, which we denote as ``negative'' partons and are allowed to transport further according to the Boltzmann equation. These ``negative'' partons should be subtracted from the final parton spectra and energy-momentum density of the jet-induced medium excitation. Thermal recoil partons and the``negative" partons are collectively called {\it jet-induced medium partons} in this study.
\section{Transverse momentum broadening and elastic energy loss}
In the LBT model, all channels of $2\rightarrow 2$ scattering are considered for parton-medium interaction in which the flavor of the most energetic parton in the final state can be different from the incident parton. In the LBT Monte Carlo simulations, we designate the more energetic one of the two final partons as the leading parton. One can then follow the propagation of the leading parton and study its transverse momentum broadening and elastic energy loss.
\subsection{$p_T$ broadening}
During the propagation of an energetic parton in a QGP medium, each parton-medium scattering contributes to the transverse momentum (perpendicular to the initial direction of the propagating parton) of the final leading parton according to matrix elements of the $2\rightarrow 2$ parton-parton scattering, leading to the increase of the averaged transverse momentum squared over time or the transverse momentum broadening. The averaged transverse momentum squared per unit length is often defined as the jet transport parameter $\hat q$ \cite{Gyulassy:1993hr}-\cite{Arnold:2002ja} which characterizes both the local gluon number density and the strength of jet-medium interaction.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{qhat-g56.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{qhat-q58.pdf}\\
\caption{(Color online) The jet transport parameter $\hat q$ or transverse momentum broadening squared per unit length of the leading parton for (a) an initial gluon or (b) quark with different initial energies going through a single (open symbols) or multiple scatterings (solid symbols) in a uniform and static QGP medium at different temperatures. Solid lines are analytic results from a single scattering with the small-angle approximation. }
\label{qhat}
\end{figure}
Employing the small-angle approximation of $2\rightarrow 2$ cross sections in Eq.~(\ref{eq-small-el}), one can estimate the transverse momentum broadening squared per mean-free-path length as,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{<qperp>}
\hat q_a&=&\langle q_{\bot }^{2}/\lambda\rangle_a =\sum_{b,(cd)} \int_{\mu _{D}^{2}}^{s/4}{dq_{\bot }^{2} \, \frac{d\sigma_{ab\rightarrow cd}}{dq_{\bot }^2}}\rho_b \, q_{\bot }^{2}\nonumber \\
&=&\Gamma_a \langle q_{\bot }^{2}\rangle
\approx C_a \frac{42 \zeta(3)}{\pi} \alpha_{\rm s}^2T^3 \ln (\frac{s^*}{4\mu _D^2}),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\langle q_{\bot }^{2}\rangle$ is the transverse momentum transfer per scattering which is independent of the parton's flavor, $C_a=C_F=4/3$ for a quark and $C_a=C_A=3$ for a gluon. The variable in the logarithm is defined as $\ln s^*=\langle \ln s\rangle$ averaged over the kinematics of a single parton-medium scattering and $s$ is the center-of-mass energy squared for each parton-parton scattering. One can assume, however, $s^*=2cE_0T$ with the constant $c$ determined from the numerical calculations.
During multiple scatterings in the LBT model, one can follow the propagation of the leading parton and study its final transverse momentum distribution and accumulated transverse momentum broadening. Shown in Fig.~\ref{qhat} are the transverse momentum broadening per unit length from single and multiple scattering of an energetic parton with different initial energy $E_0$ in a static and uniform QGP at different temperatures over a length of $L=8$ fm.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{jg-dndpt2.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{jq-dndpt2.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) Transverse momentum distributions (solid lines) of the leading jet parton at different times for an initial (a) gluon or (b) quark propagating in a uniform and static medium at a temperature $T=400$ MeV. Gaussian fits are shown in dashed lines. }
\label{pt-broadening}
\end{figure}
We also show in Fig.~\ref{pt-broadening} the transverse momentum distributions (solid lines) of the leading parton at different times for an initial gluon (upper panel) or quark (lower panel) with energy $E_0=100$ GeV propagating in a uniform medium at a temperature $T=400$ MeV. The transverse momentum broadening manifests in these distributions as the increase of the widths of distributions with time. Such an increase of the width gives rise to an approximately time-independent jet transport parameter $\hat q$ as shown in Fig.~\ref{qhat}. To illustrate the evolution of the transverse momentum distribution with time beyond the change of the width, we also compare each distribution with a Gaussian,
\begin{equation}
\label{ptfitfunc}
\frac{dN}{d p_T^2}=\frac{1}{\left\langle p_{T}^{2} \right\rangle } \, \exp (-\frac{p_{T}^{2}}{\left\langle p_{T}^{2} \right\rangle }),
\end{equation}
where $\langle p_{T}^{2} \rangle$ is the average transverse momentum squared from each corresponding transverse momentum distribution from LBT simulations. The $p_T$ distribution from a single scattering follows a power law $\sim 1/p_T^4$ at small angles $p_T^2\ll s^*/4$. At later times, the distribution deviates from the power law behavior due to multiple scattering. According to Eqs.~(\ref{analytic_gammag}) and (\ref{analytic_gammaq}), the total scattering rate for a gluon (quark) is $\Gamma_{g} \, (\Gamma_q) \approx 1.53$ (0.68) 1/fm. The leading parton should experience several scatterings with medium partons after a few fm/$c$ of time. Its transverse momentum distribution will start to deviate from the power law and approach to a Gaussian according to the central limit theorem because the transverse momentum transfers during each scattering are independent of each other. Since a gluon's scattering rate is more than twice that of a quark, its approach a Gaussian form of the $p_T$ distribution is also twice sooner than a quark. In the high $p_T$ region, the power-law-like tail, however, will always remain due to a single hard or large-angle scattering. This evolution of the transverse momentum distribution of the leading parton is also shown in a recent perturbative calculation within a HTL pQCD approach \cite{deramo}.
\subsection{Elastic energy loss}
Following the propagation of the leading parton, one can also calculate the elastic energy loss in the LBT model. Shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:elossE} is the calculated elastic energy loss per unit length from LBT simulations as a function of the initial parton's energy for a gluon (upper panel) or a quark (lower panel) propagating in a uniform QGP medium with a length $L=8$ fm at different constant temperatures. Also shown in the figure are the simulated elastic energy loss per unit mean-free-path length from a single scattering,
\begin{equation}
\label{eloss}
\frac{dE_{\rm el}^{a}}{d\lambda}=\langle \Gamma_a\nu \rangle,
\end{equation}
where $\nu$ is the energy transfer of the leading parton to a thermal medium parton which should depend on the energy $\omega$ of the thermal parton and the transverse momentum transfer squared $q_{\bot }^{2}$ in each scattering. Results from a single scattering are in good agreement with that from multiple scatterings over a long distance, especially for more energetic quarks at lower temperatures. The difference between results from a single and multiple scatterings becomes bigger for lower energy gluons at higher temperature, which can be understood by the energy dependence of the energy loss in a single scattering. Using the small-angle approximation for elastic scattering cross sections
in Eq.~(\ref{eq-small-el}) and $\nu \approx q_{\bot}^2 /{2\omega}$, the elastic energy loss per mean free path can be expressed as the product of the averaged transverse momentum transfer squared per scattering $\langle q_{\bot }^{2} \rangle\approx \mu_D^2\ln(s^*/4\mu_D^2)$ and the $1/\omega$-weighted scattering rate \cite{Wang:1996yf}:
\begin{equation}
\left\langle \frac{\Gamma_a}{2\omega} \right\rangle =C_a \frac{3\pi \alpha _{\rm s}^{2}}{2\mu _{D}^{2}} \, {{T}^{2}}.
\end{equation}
One obtains the analytic form of the elastic energy loss per unit mean free path,
\begin{equation}
\label{elossg}
\frac{dE_{\rm el}^a}{d\lambda}=C_a\frac{3\pi}{2} \alpha_{\rm s}^2 T^2 \ln (\frac{s^*}{4\mu _D^2}),
\end{equation}
under the small-angle scattering approximation. This analytic result agrees with the full HTL pQCD result \cite{Thoma1,Thoma2} in the leading logarithmic approximation and has a logarithmic dependence on the initial parton energy. As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:elossE} (solid lines), this analytic result under small-angle scattering approximation agrees well with LBT simulations of a single scattering.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{eloss-gE.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{eloss-qE.pdf}\\
\caption{(Color online) Elastic energy loss per unit length $dE/dz$ of (a) a gluon or (b) a quark in a uniform and static medium with a temperature $T=200$, 300 and 400 MeV as a function of the initial energy $E_0$ from LBT simulations of a single scattering (open symbols) or multiple scatterings ($L$=8fm) (solid symbols) as compared to analytic results (solid lines) with a small-angle approximation.}
\label{fig:elossE}
\end{figure}
The logarithmic energy dependence of the elastic energy loss can also explain the difference between single and multiple scatterings in Fig.~\ref{fig:elossE}. During multiple scatterings in the LBT model, energy and momentum is conserved during each scattering. The leading parton will lose its energy along its propagation path. The reduced energy of the leading parton will then lead to smaller elastic energy loss for subsequent scatterings according to the logarithmic energy dependence. This will lead to an overall reduction of the averaged energy loss per unit distance during multiple scattering over a long distance. This reduction on the averaged energy loss per unit distance is more significant when the total energy loss $\Delta E=L dE/dz$ is comparable to parton's initial energy. Since a gluon's energy loss is $9/4$ times larger than that of a quark, this degradation of energy and the energy loss is more significant for a gluon with lower energies in a QGP medium at higher temperatures as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:elossE}. To illustrate this degradation of energy loss over time, we show in
Figs.~\ref{fig:elosstimeg} and \ref{fig:elosstimeq} the averaged elastic energy loss per unit distance as a function of propagation time for different initial parton energies and medium temperatures. It is clear that the degradation of parton energy loss with time is the strongest for a gluon with the lowest initial energy and in a medium at the highest temperature. For an initial high energy quark, the energy loss remains almost a constant even at a later time.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{eloss-gt2b.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{eloss-gt3b.pdf}\\
\caption{(Color online) Energy loss per unit path length $dE/dz$ of a gluon with different initial energies in a uniform medium with a constant temperature (a) $T=200$ MeV and (b) $T=300$ MeV as a function of the propagation time.}
\label{fig:elosstimeg}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{eloss-qt2b.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{eloss-qt3b.pdf}\\
\caption{(Color online) The same as Fig.~\ref{fig:elosstimeg} for a quark.}
\label{fig:elosstimeq}
\end{figure}
In the LBT model, energy and momentum are conserved in each parton-medium scattering (with the energy and momentum of ``negative" partons subtracted from the sum) along the path of the parton propagation. The energy lost by the leading parton as shown in the above calculations will be carried by thermal recoil partons, minus that of ``negative" partons, in the form of jet-induced medium excitations. To illustrate the transfer of energy from the leading partons to jet-induced medium excitations, we plot in Fig.~\ref{spectra-time} the energy spectra of all partons including both leading and the thermal recoil partons (with the ``negative" partons subtracted) at different times ($t=2$, 6, and 10 fm/$c$) during the propagation of an initial gluon with energy $E_0=100$ GeV in a uniform QGP medium at a constant temperature $T=400$ MeV. At the beginning of the parton propagation, leading partons peak around the initial energy $E_0$ with power law tails towards small values due to the dominant $t$-channel scattering, while thermal recoil partons (minus ``negative" partons) peak around their thermal energy $\sim T+\mu_D^2/T$ with a power law tail. At later times, leading partons continue to lose energy due to multiple scattering and peak at smaller energies $\sim E_0-t dE/dz$ with increasingly broadened distributions. The number of jet-induced medium partons (thermal recoil partons minus ``negative" partons), on the other hand, will continue to increase with softened spectra which resemble a thermal distribution at later times. In principle, the spectra of leading and jet-induced medium partons will eventually merge and approach a thermal spectrum as a result of the equilibration. But this limit is beyond the validity of the LBT model.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{dnde-t-all.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) Energy spectra of leading partons and jet-induced medium partons (thermal recoil partons minus ``negative" partons) at different times during the propagation of an initial gluon with energy $E_0=100$ GeV in a uniform QGP medium at a constant temperature $T=400$ MeV.}
\label{spectra-time}
\end{figure}
\section{Jet-induced Medium excitations}
During the parton propagation in a QGP medium, the energy and momentum deposited in the medium should dissipate with time and propagate like a sound wave. Since the leading massless parton travels at the speed of light which is much faster than the maximum sound velocity $c_s=1/\sqrt{3}$ in an ideal QGP, the sound wave induced by the propagating parton becomes supersonic. It can form a Mach-cone shock wave as shown in many recent studies \cite{CasalderreySolana:2004qm,Stoecker:2004qu,Chaudhuri:2005vc,Betz:2008ka,Qin:2009uh,Neufeld:2009ep,Chesler:2007sv,Gubser:2007ga}. Simulations of jet propagation within parton transport models also show similar Mach-cone-like features \cite{Bouras:2012mh,Li:2010ts}. Studies of such jet-induced medium excitations can help us to understand the experimental data on dissipation of energy lost by quenched jets \cite{Tachibana:2014lja} and extract bulk medium properties such as sound velocity or the equation of state (EoS) of the QGP medium. Since this article is devoted to a general description and test of the LBT model in a uniform medium, we will focus on the effect of dynamical scatterings of propagating partons in a uniform medium. This is similar to the effect of viscosity on the propagation of shockwaves in a QGP medium \cite{Bouras:2012mh,Bouras:2009nn,Bouras:2010hm,Bouras:2014rea}. We will discuss the propagation of jet-induced Mach cones in an expanding QGP medium in the future when we carry out realistic studies of jet-medium interaction in high-energy heavy-ion collisions.
\subsection{Diffused Mach cone}
To study jet transport and jet-induced medium excitations at the same time in a QGP medium, both of the outgoing partons in each $2\rightarrow 2$ scattering are tracked in LBT Monte Carlo simulations. They are allowed to undergo further propagation and scattering in the medium.
Of the two outgoing partons,
the more energetic one is designated as the leading parton for further propagation and scattering. The flavor of the outgoing leading parton can be different from incident parton though this is quite rare since the scattering is dominated by small-angle $t$-channel processes. The less energetic or soft parton from each parton-medium scattering is considered as the recoil medium parton that is also allowed to further propagate and interact with the medium. In addition, the initial parton from the thermal medium participating in the scattering is also tracked and allowed to further propagate in the LBT model whose four-momentum is subtracted from the final result to account for the back-reaction in the Boltzmann transport equation. These thermal partons from the back-reaction are denoted as ``negative" partons in our study and are included in all final results on parton spectra and jet reconstruction. In general, we refer to the thermal recoil and ``negative" partons as jet-induced thermal partons.
Since jet-induced thermal partons are allowed to propagate in the QGP medium according to the Boltzmann transport equation in the LBT model, we can study the linear response of the medium to jet-medium interaction along the path of a jet's propagation. Interactions among jet-induced medium partons are neglected. Such an approximation of linear response is valid when the jet-induced medium excitation is much smaller than the thermal background, $\delta f\ll f$.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=9.0cm]{conegE100T04-4fm-020.pdf}\\
\vspace{-0.4 cm}
\includegraphics[width=9.0cm]{conegE100T04-8fm-020.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) Energy density distribution of the jet-induced medium excitation by a gluon with an initial energy $E_0=100$ GeV along ($z$) and transverse ($r$) to the initial parton direction after (a) 4 and (b) 8 fm of propagation in a uniform QGP medium at a constant temperature $T=400$ MeV. The jet parton starts propagating along the $z$ direction at $z=0$ and $r=0$.}
\label{fig:g-cone}
\end{figure}
The energy and momentum lost to the medium by the propagating parton will act like a source for jet-induced medium excitation through the propagation and transport of the jet-induced medium partons. Shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:g-cone} are two-dimensional and contour energy density distributions of the medium excitation induced by a propagating gluon with an initial energy $E_0=100$ GeV along ($z$) and transverse ($r$) to the initial parton direction after 4 fm/$c$ (upper panel) and 8 fm/$c$ (lower panel) of propagation in a uniform QGP medium at a constant temperature $T=400$ MeV. The jet parton starts propagating along the $z$ direction at $z=0$ and $r=0$. Note that in each event of parton propagation there are only a limited number of jet-induced medium partons. Figure \ref{fig:g-cone} shows the energy density distributions of jet-induced medium partons or medium excitation averaged over many events. The number of medium recoil and ``negative" partons increases separately with time in LBT Monte Carlo simulations. The net energy density, however, remains approximately constant because of energy-momentum conservation and the near constant energy-momentum transfer rate via parton-medium interaction. One can see clearly the formation and propagation of a Mach-cone-like shock wave trailing the leading parton. The edge of the shock wave travels at a speed limited by the velocity of light while the peak of the shock wave propagates at the effective sound velocity in the medium. The shock wave is significantly diffused during its propagation because of the dissipation due to finite values of viscosities as a result of parton-parton collisions as implemented in the LBT model. The energy density of jet-induced medium partons is negative behind the propagating parton. This is the diffusion wake induced by the jet-medium interaction which essentially depletes the thermal medium parton density behind the path of the propagating parton.
The diffused shock wave in the shape of an elliptic paraboloid induced by jet-medium interaction within the LBT model as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:g-cone} is sharply different from the Mach-cone shape given by other linear response theories \cite{Neufeld:2009ep}, hydrodynamic simulations \cite{Chaudhuri:2005vc,Betz:2008ka,Qin:2009uh} or anti-de Sitter/Conformal field theory (AdS/CFT) correspondence studies \cite{Chesler:2007sv,Gubser:2007ga} with a source term that travels along a given direction. The leading parton in the LBT Monte Carlo simulations, however, does not travel along a fixed direction. It receives transverse momentum transfers in random directions and accumulates transverse momentum broadening along its propagation path. Such momentum broadening amounts to a smearing in the direction of the source term for jet-induced medium excitation and the width of the smearing increases with the propagation time. This eventually leads to the elliptic paraboloid shape of the shock wave instead of a sharp Mach-cone.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.0cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{phi-gE100T04-2fmb.pdf}\\
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=8.0cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{phi-gE100T04-6fmb.pdf}\\
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=8.0cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{phi-gE100T04-10fmb.pdf}\\
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\caption{(Color online) Angular distributions of medium partons with energy $E=1.0-1.25$ (solid), 1.5-1.75 (dashed), 3.0-3.25 GeV (dotted) induced by a gluon with an initial energy $E_0=100$ GeV after (a) $t=2$, (b) 6 and (c) 10 fm/$c$ of propagation in a uniform QGP medium at a constant temperature $T=400$ MeV.}
\label{fig:g-angle100}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Azimuthal diffusion}
To illustrate consequences of the transverse momentum broadening of leading partons on the final spectra of jet-induced medium partons, we show in Fig.~\ref{fig:g-angle100} angular distributions of jet-induced medium partons with different ranges of energy relative to the initial direction of a gluon with energy $E_0=100$ GeV after $t=2$ (upper panel), 6 (middle panel), and 10 fm/$c$ (lower panel) of propagation in a uniform medium at a constant temperature $T=400$ MeV. In a uniform medium, event-averaged parton distributions should be azimuthal symmetric with respect to the initial direction of the propagating parton. For the convenience of future study of azimuthal distributions in a cylindrical frame along the beam direction in high-energy heavy-ion collisions, we project the angular distribution onto a plane aligned with the initial propagating parton,
\begin{equation}
\frac{dN}{d\phi}=\int d\theta d\varphi \frac{dN}{d\theta d\varphi} \delta\left( \phi - \arctan[\tan \theta \cos\varphi]\right),
\end{equation}
where $\theta$ and $\varphi$ are the polar and azimuthal angles, respectively, relative to the initial jet parton direction. We refer to the angle $\phi$ as the projected azimuthal angle and the distribution as the projected azimuthal distribution. Soft jet-induced medium partons ($E=0-1$ GeV) are mostly ``negative" partons from the the back-reaction whose contributions to the spectra are negative according to our subtraction scheme. These ``negative" partons have a broad angular distribution that does not change much over time. Contributions to more energetic jet-induced medium partons from ``negative" partons decrease with time, especially along the initial direction of the propagating parton, and thermal recoil partons dominate. Intermediate energy thermal recoil partons during the early time have an angular distribution similar to that of a single scattering as shown in Figs.~\ref{fig-theta-gluon} and \ref{fig-theta-quark} that has two peaks away from the initial direction. At later times, however, the double-peak structure disappears due to transverse momentum broadening of the leading parton and diffusion of thermal recoil partons due to multiple scatterings. The effect of the transverse momentum broadening on the angular distribution of thermal recoil partons is stronger for less energetic initial partons at later times, especially when the total energy loss becomes sizable relative to the initial parton energy.
\section{Reconstructed jets in medium}
In high-energy heavy-ion collision experiments, reconstructed jets have become a powerful tool for the study of jet quenching \cite{Aad:2010bu,Chatrchyan:2011sx,Chatrchyan:2012gt,Qin:2010mn,Young:2011qx,He:2011pd,Renk:2012cx,Zapp:2012ak}. These jets are collimated clusters of hadrons and are reconstructed from the calorimetric energy of final hadrons within a jet cone,
\begin{equation}
\sqrt{(\eta-\eta_J)^2+(\phi-\phi_J)^2} \le R,
\end{equation}
using a jet finding algorithm \cite{Cacciari:2011ma}, where $\eta$ ($\eta_J$) and $\phi$ ($\phi_J$) are the pseudorapidity and azimuthal angle of the final hadron (jet), respectively. In heavy-ion collisions, one should also subtract the background energy within the jet cone from hadrons in the underlying events. Such background subtraction is extremely nontrivial and may affect the final jet energy and jet spectra.
If we neglect nonperturbative effects of parton hadronization, we can approximate final hadronic jets with partonic jets reconstructed from final partons in theoretical simulations. In our LBT Monte Carlo simulations, we assume a perfect subtraction of the background from underlying events if the initial propagating parton is not present. We achieve this by including both leading partons as well as jet-induced medium partons for the jet reconstruction. We use a modified version of the FASTJET code \cite{Cacciari:2011ma} with the anti-$k_T$ algorithm for jet reconstruction in our study within the LBT model in which a ``negative" parton is treated as a normal one when its pseudorapidity and azimuthal angle are calculated, but its energy and momentum are subtracted from the total energy and momentum of the reconstructed jet in each iteration of the jet-finding algorithm. We only consider the leading jet per event through the FASTJET jet finding package with the given algorithm.
\subsection{Jet energy loss and $p_T$ broadening}
During the propagation of a fast parton, it undergoes multiple scatterings with medium partons in the LBT model. The leading parton loses energy and experiences transverse momentum broadening. The lost energy and momentum transfer are then carried by jet-induced medium partons which will propagate and go through further scattering with the medium leading to jet-induced medium excitations. Some fraction of the energy and momentum carried by jet-induced medium partons will still be confined within the jet cone. However, an increasing fraction will be transported outside the jet cone via large-angle scattering and diffusion of jet-induced medium partons over the course of the parton propagation. This will lead to a reduction of the energy of the reconstructed jet. Shown in Fig.~\ref{jet-eloss} is the energy loss of reconstructed jets with a cone size $R=0.3$ as a function of time for an initial gluon with energy $E_0=50$ and 100 GeV in a uniform QGP medium with a constant temperature $T=400$ MeV. The solid symbols represent the energy loss of jets reconstructed with all of jet-induced medium partons while the open symbols represent jets without ``negative" partons. The jet energy loss increases linearly with time or distance of propagation similarly to the elastic energy loss of a propagating parton.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{leadingjet-eloss.pdf}\\
\caption{(Color online) Jet energy loss in a uniform QGP medium at a temperature $T=400$ MeV as a function of propagation time of an initial gluon with energy $E_0=50$ and 100 GeV. Jets are reconstructed with all partons (leading and jet-induced medium partons) (solid symbols) or without ``negative" partons (open symbols). }
\label{jet-eloss}
\end{figure}
Th effect of ``negative" partons from the diffusion wake is negligible during the early stage of the parton propagation because there are very few of them. At the later stage, as the number of these ``negative" partons becomes large, they deplete significantly the thermal medium behind the propagating parton and effectively modify the background underlying the jet. When such modification of the underlying background is taken into account via the subtraction of ``negative" partons from the jet cone, the effective jet energy loss becomes bigger as shown in Fig.~\ref{jet-eloss}. Without subtraction of ``negative" partons, the jet energy loss tends to saturate at later times. The linear time dependence of the total effective jet energy loss is restored only after the energy of ``negative" partons is subtracted.
During the propagation of an energetic parton, the leading parton experiences transverse momentum broadening through interaction with medium partons. The thermal recoil parton in the same scattering should also carry the same amount of transverse momentum as the leading parton but in the opposite direction. If a reconstructed jet contains both the leading parton and the thermal recoil partons (minus the ``negative" partons), its total transverse momentum should not be influenced by the scattering. However, reconstructed jets do not contain all jet-induced medium partons because of the finite jet-cone size $R$. Large-angle scatterings and diffusion of jet-induced medium partons should lead to a reduction of the jet energy, as shown in the above, as well as a net transverse momentum with respect to the initial parton direction. Shown in Fig.~\ref{fig-jet-pt} are the transverse momentum distributions of reconstructed jets with respect to the initial direction of a propagating gluon with energy $E_0=100$ GeV in a uniform medium at a constant temperature $T=400$ MeV. There is an apparent transverse momentum broadening at later times during jet transport, similar to the broadening of leading partons. There is also a power law tail in the transverse momentum distribution. This is caused mainly by a single large angle parton-medium scattering during the jet propagation.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{dndpt2leadingjet50.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{dndpt2leadingjet100.pdf}\\
\caption{(Color online) Jet transverse momentum distributions at different times during the propagation of an initial gluon with energy (a) $E_0=50$ GeV and (b) $E_0=100$ GeV in a uniform QGP medium at a temperature $T=400$ MeV. Jets are reconstructed with all partons (leading and jet-induced medium partons) (solid symbols) or without ``negative" partons (open symbols).}
\label{fig-jet-pt}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Medium modification of jet structures}
Reconstructed jets in LBT Monte Carlo simulations in this study contain both leading partons and jet-induced medium partons inside the jet cone. To examine the composition of reconstructed jets and their evolution with time, we show parton distributions within reconstructed jets as functions of the longitudinal momentum fraction $z_J=p_L/E_{\rm jet}$ in Fig.~\ref{jet-ff} and $z_0=p_L/E_0$ in Fig.~\ref{jet-ff0}, where $p_L$ is a parton's longitudinal momentum along the direction of a reconstructed jet with energy $E_{\rm jet}$. Since we start with a single energetic parton, the initial parton distribution function should be a $\delta$ function at $z_J=z_0=1$. Jet-induced medium partons from parton-medium interaction and leading partons with reduced energy populate the distribution at $z_J<1$ or $z_0<1$ after the jet transport begins. Further scatterings of both leading partons and jet-induced medium partons lead to the enhancement of soft partons at $z_J\ll 1$ or $z_0\ll 1$ as shown in Figs.~\ref{jet-ff} and \ref{jet-ff0}. Since the definition of momentum fraction $z_J$ is normalized by the reconstructed jet energy $E_{\rm jet}$ which is still dominated by the energetic leading parton, the parton distribution in $z_J$ continues to have a peak at $z_J\sim 1$. The parton distribution in $z_0$ which is normalized by the initial parton energy $E_0$ is, however, suppressed at large $z_0\sim 1$ and its initial peak at large $z_0\sim 1$ disappears at later times as the leading parton continues to lose energy during its propagation through the medium. Similar behavior was reported in the study of $\gamma$-triggered jets in high-energy heavy-ion collisions \cite{Wang:2013cia}. The modified fragmentation functions in terms of momentum fraction of the original jet energy (or the $\gamma$'s energy) are much more sensitive to parton energy loss than that in terms of the momentum fraction of the reconstructed jet energy. Since ``negative" partons are subtracted from both the parton distribution and the reconstructed jet energy (reducing $E_{\rm jet}$), they will reduce the soft parton distributions at small $z_J\ll1$ or $z_0\ll 1$ and enhance the parton distribution at large $z_J\sim 1$.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{ff-zE50.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{ff-zE100.pdf}\\
\caption{(Color online) Parton distributions in the momentum fraction $z_J=p_L/E_{\rm jet}$ within the jet cone $R=0.3$ at different times for a propagating gluon with initial energy (a) $E_0=50$ and (b) 100 GeV in a uniform QGP medium at a temperature $T=400$ MeV. Solid symbols represent all partons including leading, recoil, and ``negative" partons while the open symbols show results without ``negative" partons.}
\label{jet-ff}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{ff-z0E50.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{ff-z0E100.pdf}\\
\caption{(Color online) Parton distributions in the momentum fraction $z_0=p_L/E_0$ within the jet cone $R=0.3$ at different times for a propagating gluon with initial energy (a) $E_0=50$ and (b) 100 GeV in a uniform QGP medium at a temperature $T=400$ MeV. Solid symbols represent all partons including leading, recoil, and ``negative" partons while the open symbols show results without ``negative" partons.}
\label{jet-ff0}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{rho-jetE50.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm,bb=15 150 585 687]{rho-jetE100.pdf}\\
\caption{(Color online) Jet transverse profile of the leading jet by a propagating gluon with initial energy (a) $E_0=50$ and (b) 100 GeV at different times in a static and homogeneous medium at temperature \(T=400\) MeV. Results that include all (leading+positive+negative) partons are presented in solid symbols while results without ``negative" partons are presented in open symbols. }
\label{jet-profile}
\end{figure}
To study the evolution of the jet transverse structure, we show in Fig.~\ref{jet-profile} the transverse profile of reconstructed jets at different times for a propagating gluon with an initial energy $E_0=50$ GeV (upper panel) and $E_0=100$ GeV (lower panel) in a uniform QGP medium at a constant temperature $T=400$ MeV. The jet transverse profile is defined as the average fraction of jet energy inside an annulus in the $\eta-\phi$ plane,
\begin{equation}
\rho(r)=\frac{1}{\Delta r}\frac{1}{N^\text{jet}}\sum_\text{jets}\frac{E(r-\Delta r/2,r+\Delta r/2)}{E(0,R)},
\end{equation}
as a function of $r=\sqrt{(\eta-\eta_J)^2+(\phi-\phi_J)^2}$, where $E(r_1,r_2)$ is the summed energy of all partons in the annulus between radius $r_1$ and $r_2$ inside the jet cone. When a high energy parton propagates through the plasma, it loses energy to the medium. The lost energy is carried away by thermal recoil partons whose further diffusion through multiple scatterings will transport some of the lost energy outside the jet cone leading to the jet energy loss and broadening of the transverse profile toward the edge of the jet cone, as seen in Fig.~\ref{jet-profile}. The ``negative" partons are mostly soft partons at large angles away from the initial parton's direction. When their energy is subtracted from the reconstructed jet, the broadening of the transverse profile will be reduced, especially near the edge of the jet cone.
\section{Summary and Discussions}
In this paper we have described in detail the basic elements of the LBT model for the study of jet transport in a QGP medium with the complete set of elastic $2\rightarrow 2$ scattering processes. We verified the Monte Carlo code in the LBT model by direct comparisons to semi-analytic results of total and differential scattering rates via numerical integrations. We calculated the transverse momentum broadening and elastic energy loss of the leading parton along the path of the parton propagation. Within the pQCD approach to each elastic scattering between the leading and thermal medium parton, both the jet transport coefficient $\hat q$ and the energy loss per mean-free-path have a logarithmic dependence on the parton energy. Such an energy dependence leads to some nontrivial time or distance dependence of the average transverse momentum broadening and energy loss per unit distance due to the decrease of the leading partons' energy over time. This dependence is more significant when the total energy loss becomes comparable to the initial parton's energy.
We have also illustrated the dissipation of the energy and momentum lost by a propagating parton in the medium via transport of jet-induced medium partons (thermal recoil partons and ``negative" partons from the back-reaction) in the LBT model. The transport of these jet-induced medium partons within the LBT model effectively forms a supersonic shock wave and a diffusion wake behind the leading parton. The supersonic wave has a diffused Mach-cone shape because of the transverse momentum broadening of the leading parton along its path. The energy spectra of jet-induced medium partons in the supersonic wave are shown to resemble that of a thermal distribution at later times of the jet propagation.
Using a modified version of the FASTJET jet-finding package with the anti-$k_T$ algorithm \cite{Cacciari:2011ma} in which the energy of ``negative" partons from the back-reaction is subtracted, we show the effect of jet-induced medium partons and their dissipation in medium on reconstructed jets. Transport of these jet-induced medium partons outside the jet cone constitutes a significant reduction of jet energy loss which should be taken into account for any realistic study of jet suppression in high-energy heavy-ion collisions. Their inclusion in the jet reconstruction also influences the transverse momentum broadening, parton distributions (fragmentation functions) and transverse profiles of reconstructed jets.
Transverse momentum distributions of both leading partons and reconstructed jets are shown to have a power law tail underneath Gaussian distributions from multiple scattering. These power law tails come from a single large angle parton-medium scattering during the jet propagation. Study of these power law tails in heavy-ion collisions can shed light on the microscopic nature of the QGP medium at different scales.
For a realistic description of jet transport in the QGP medium in high-energy heavy-ion collisions, we will have to implement inelastic processes such as gluon bremsstrahlung induced by multiple parton-medium scattering \cite{Wang:2013cia,Wang:2014hla} and couple LBT Monte Carlo simulations with bulk medium evolutions from 3+1D hydrodynamic model calculations, which should be constrained by bulk hadron spectra from existing experimental data. These parts of the LBT model and the phenomenological study of jet suppression in heavy-ion collisions will be discussed in subsequent publications.
\begin{acknowledgments}
We thank Wei Chen for helpful discussions, in particular on the elliptic paraboloid shape of the shock wave induced by a propagating parton.
This work is supported by China MOST under Grant No. 2014DFG02050, the NSFC under Grant No. 11221504, the Major State Basic Research Development Program in China (Grant No. 2014CB845404), by the Director, Office of Energy
Research, Office of High Energy and Nuclear Physics, Division of Nuclear Physics of the U.S. Department of
Energy under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231 and within the framework of the JET Collaboration. Y.-Z. is also supported by European Research Council Grant No. HotLHC ERC-2011-StG-279579.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{Introduction}
Shape coexistence in nuclei is a phenomenon whereby two or more nucleon configurations, each with a different macroscopic shape, exist together at similar energy.
It has been observed in a number of regions of the nuclear chart and, over the last decade and more, extensive experimental evidence has been found in support of the shape coexistence in the Pb region~\cite{Heyde2011}.
The most-striking early indications came from isotope-shift measurements in mercury ($Z=80$), which showed a large discontinuity in the mean-square-charge radii between $^{185}$Hg and $^{187}$Hg~\cite{Bonn1972}.
This was interpreted as a dramatic change in shape using calculations based upon the Strutinsky shell-correction method~\cite{Frauendorf1975}.
The ground states of the heavier isotopes were calculated to be weakly deformed and oblate in nature, but when approaching the neutron mid-shell at $N=104$, this picture changed to a more-strongly deformed prolate shape.
These shapes are associated with structures based upon two different proton-hole excitations across the $Z=82$ shell closure, namely \mbox{$\pi$($0p$-$2h$)} and \mbox{$\pi$($2p$-$4h$)}.
Recently, the first direct evidence of shape coexistence in the even-mass Hg isotopes came from Coulomb-excitation experiments~\cite{Bree2014,Wrzosek-Lipska2015}, which quantified the deformation of ground and excited $0^{+}$ states for the first time in this region.
At $Z=82$, the lead isotopes remain spherical in their ground state all the way to mid-shell, as indicated by isotope-shift measurements employing laser spectroscopy~\cite{DeWitte2007,Seliverstov2009}.
In the case of $^{186}$Pb$_{104}$, competition between three shape minima is observed - oblate, prolate and the spherical ground state. This was inferred from $\alpha$-decay measurements of $^{190}$Po~\cite{Andreyev2000}, where the three states lying lowest in energy were observed to be $0^{+}$ states.
This triple shape coexistence is apparent all around the mid-shell in the parabolic behaviour of the intruder energy levels as a function of mass number~\cite[Figure 3 of Ref.][]{Rahkila2010}, recently investigated down to $^{180}$Pb$_{98}$~\cite{Rahkila2010}.
The phenomenon persists in nuclei above $Z=82$, where the polonium isotopes were recently observed to have a much earlier and more gradual onset of deformation than observed in mercury~\cite{Cocolios2011}, without the unusual odd-even staggering~\cite{Seliverstov2013}.
One might consider that mercury ($Z=80$) and polonium ($Z=84$) are analogues with respect to their nucleon configuration; the oblate structure in the mercury isotopes, driven by $\pi$($0p$-$2h$) configurations, should manifest itself in polonium in $\pi$($2p$-$0h$) configurations and similarly for the prolate structure.
Indeed, the same parabolic behaviour of intruder states was observed when approaching mid-shell~\cite{Julin2001} and was interpreted to be of $\pi$($4p$-$2h$) configuration~\cite{Oros1999}.
Coulomb-excitation measurements recently determined multiple low-lying matrix elements for nuclei in the transitional region where the onset of deformation is observed~\cite{Kesteloot2015}.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig1-crop.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) Systematics of excited states in even-even radon nuclei. The lowest-known even-spin positive-parity states are shown, with the first- (red) and second-excited (blue) states each connected by a solid line to guide the eye).}
\label{fig:system}
\end{figure}
The radon isotopes ($Z=86$) can be expected to have similar proton-hole analogues to the platinum isotopes, where spectroscopic information on deformed intruder states exists beyond the neutron mid-shell~\cite{Dracoulis1994}. The energy level systematics of the even-spin positive-parity states in the light even-mass radon isotopes are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:system}, where one can observe decreasing excitation energy of the $2^{+}$ state towards $^{198}$Rn~\cite{Taylor1996,Taylor1999}.
A corresponding deviation from sphericity at $N=116$ is observed in the mean-square-charge radii~\cite{Borchers1987,Georg1995,*Georg1997}, earlier still than in the Po isotopes~\cite{Cocolios2011}.
This may indicate that there is indeed a region of deformation towards the neutron mid-shell that is unreachable within the current experimental limitations.
A more detailed understanding, with complementary experimental probes, of the isotopes around this transition region, $^{198-204}$Rn($N=112-118$), would help to determine if this behaviour is in fact due to the presence of shape-coexisting intruder states.
Low-lying excited states in the isotopes around the $N=126$ shell closure are generally considered to be associated with a seniority scheme~\cite{Ressler2004,Grahn2013}, while lower masses are proposed to be candidates for vibrational nuclei.
The observed equal level spacing i.e. a ratio of the $4^{+}$ to $2^{+}$ excitation energy (R$_{42}$) close to 2, indicates a possible vibrational nature and the existence of a second $2^{+}$ state at a similar energy to the $4^{+}_{1}$ in $^{202}$Rn adds further weight to this argument.
The harmonic quadrupole vibrator should lead to a very definite and simple pattern of states with a single-phonon state with $I^{\pi}=2^{+}$, a triplet of two-phonon states with $J^{\pi} = 0^{+}$, $2^{+}$ and $4^{+}$, and so on.
As far as $^{202}$Rn and $^{204}$Rn~\cite{Dobson2002} are concerned, several of the expected members of vibrational multiplets are missing, although it is not presently clear if this is due to an experimental limitation. Their low-lying level schemes of interest to this study are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:levels}.
In particular, no observations of a excited $0^{+}$ states have been made in any of these nuclei.
Although its existence is expected in both a vibrational and intruder picture, the energy and $B(E2)$ values connecting $2^{+}$ states would definitively determine the structure.
Detailed investigations of excited $0^{+}$ states into the cadmium isotopes have proceeded in a similar vein~\cite{Garrett2008}, where the vibrational picture was found not to be adequate~\cite{Wood2012}.
Additionally, the presence of two near-parallel $6^{+}$ states in both nuclei is hard to accommodate in a simple vibrational picture.
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.98\columnwidth]{Fig2-crop.pdf}
\caption{Level schemes for $^{202}$Rn and $^{204}$Rn showing low-energy states included in the GOSIA analysis.}
\label{fig:levels}
\end{figure}
A detailed understanding of shape coexistence, or vibrational nuclei, will never be achievable from a single class of measurement.
A comprehensive picture of the underlying physics can only come from extraction of electromagnetic matrix elements involving a complementary set of experimental probes.
Transition matrix elements may be derived from lifetime measurements, in combination with precision branching and mixing ratios, from in-beam or decay spectroscopy.
Coulomb excitation allows not only the extraction of transition matrix elements but also of diagonal matrix elements, including their sign.
These can be used to further conclude on the sign of the spectroscopic quadrupole moment for excited states and hence, the type of nuclear deformation.
Multi-step Coulomb excitation needed to investigate low-lying non-yrast states in these nuclei, requires the availability of intense accelerated radioactive ISOL beams, which have only recently become available at facilities such as SPIRAL and REX-ISOLDE.
A pioneering example of this technique was in $^{74,76}$Kr~\cite{Clement2007} at SPIRAL.
An intense program of Coulomb-excitation experiments at REX-ISOLDE has been underway to study the $Z=82$ region.
This facility is chosen as it is uniquely capable of producing beams of heavy proton-rich nuclei from spallation reactions.
Furthermore, key techniques such as laser ionisation have been developed to produce isobarically-pure secondary beams.
Experiments involving very heavy ($A>200$), post-accelerated beams have proven successful at REX-ISOLDE in recent years, including those employing radon~\cite{Gaffney2013}.
Studies such as these, performed at ISOL facilities around the world, are currently pushing the boundaries of nuclear spectroscopy on the precision frontier in exotic nuclei~\cite{Jenkins2014}.
In addition to the possibility of measuring electromagnetic matrix elements, Coulomb excitation is a well adapted technique for locating missing states, especially low-lying, non-yrast states that may not otherwise be populated in-decay or fusion evaporation experiments. Since low-lying $0^{+}$ states are key to the understanding of these nuclei, exploring the possibility of populating a $0^{+}_{2}$ state via a two-step Coulomb-excitation process is desirable.
\section{Experiment and Data Analysis}
Radioactive beams of $^{202}$Rn and $^{204}$Rn were produced at the ISOLDE facility in CERN via bombardment of a uranium-carbide primary target with 1.4-GeV protons from the PS Booster.
The target-ion-source coupling in this experiment was key to reduce isobaric impurities expected when working with a noble-gas beam.
A plasma ion source~\cite{Penescu2010} was utilised and an extraction voltage of 30~kV was applied along the transfer line and continuously cooled by a water flow in order to suppress the transport of less volatile elements.
At the beginning of the running period, the yield of the two radioactive species were measured using the dedicated ISOLDE tape station and found to be $9\times10^{5}$~ions/$\mu$C ($^{202}$Rn) and $2\times10^{7}$~ions/$\mu$C for $^{204}$Rn.
The singly-charged ions were accumulated and cooled in an ion trap, REX-TRAP~\cite{Wolf2003,Wenander2010}.
At intervals of 58~ms, the potential barrier was lowered allowing bunches of cooled ions to escape into an electron-beam ion source, REX-EBIS~\cite{Wolf2003,Wenander2010}, where the charge state of the ions was increased by charge breeding up to $47^{+}$.
The $^{202}$Rn and $^{204}$Rn beams were then accelerated to 2.9 and 2.845~MeV/u, in the 2008 and 2010 campaigns, respectively, by the REX linear accelerator~\cite{Voulot2008}.
A failure of the 9-gap resonator, the final element of the REX-LINAC, in the original 2008 campaign restricted the running period. This meant that a significant amount data, for both $^{204}$Rn and $^{202}$Rn, was taken at the lower beam energy of 2.28~MeV/$u$.
The secondary radioactive beams were incident on thin metallic foil targets positioned at the centre of the Miniball germanium detector array~\cite{Warr2013}.
The delivered beam currents at the target position were estimated to be around $3\times10^{4}$~ions/s for $^{202}$Rn and $2\times10^{5}$~ions/s for $^{204}$Rn.
The isobaric purity of the beam was monitored through inspection of the $\gamma$-ray spectrum obtained with a germanium detector positioned at the beam dump, approximately 3~m downstream of the target chamber.
Aside from transitions due to normal room background, the beam-dump spectrum only contained $\gamma$-ray transitions following the $\beta$- and $\alpha$-decay of the isotopes of interest.
However, during the second campaign in 2010, the cooling of the transfer line of the ion source failed.
This higher temperature allowed volatile elements to pass, in particular, a significant amount of the stable $^{202}$Hg, which caused contamination of the beam.
From the observation in the Coulomb-excitation spectrum of the $^{202}$Hg($2^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 0^{+}_{1}$) transition at 439.5~keV, in combination with the previously measured ${B(E2;2^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 0^{+}_{1})}$ value~\cite{Zhu2008}, the integrated beam current associated with $^{202}$Hg was deduced and represented 10\% of that associated with $^{202}$Rn.
The Miniball array~\cite{Warr2013} comprises eight triple-cluster germanium detectors; each crystal is six-fold segmented, leading to a total of 144 discrete detector elements. The total efficiency of the array is $\approx7\%$ for 1.33~MeV $\gamma$ rays.
Scattered heavy ions were detected in an 500-$\mu$m-thick annular silicon double-sided silicon strip detector (DSSSD) segmented into four quadrants.
This CD detector, so-called due to its resemblance to a Compact-Disc, has 16 annular strips on the front face and 24 sectors on the back, and covered the range of laboratory angles from $\theta=16.2^{\circ}$ to $53.3^{\circ}$.
Figure~\ref{fig:kinematics} illustrates the kinematics for scattering of $^{204}$Rn on $^{109}$Ag at a centre-of-target energy of 535~MeV.
The reactions are performed in inverse kinematics so there are two solutions for the projectile case. In addition, for the lowest laboratory angles, there is an ambiguity between the scattered projectile and target ions, such that the first two strips of the CD detector cannot be utilised in the analysis.
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\def0.98\textwidth{1.0\columnwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig3-crop.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) A two-dimensional spectrum, as a function of energy and laboratory angle, of scattered projectiles and recoils in the CD detector in the $^{109}$Ag($^{202}$Rn) reaction, at a beam energy of 2.85~MeV/$u$ and target thickness of 1.9~mg/cm$^{2}$. There is no condition on the detection of a $\gamma$ ray.}
\label{fig:kinematics}
\end{figure}
In order to resolve the issue of having an ambiguous conversion from laboratory angle to centre-of-mass (CoM) scattering angle, crucial for the calculation of the Coulomb-excitation cross sections, a coincidence gate on the recoiling target nuclei is applied. Here, the events corresponding to the second solution, at the very lowest CoM scattering angles, are not detected since the recoils do not have enough energy to exit the finite width of the target from the point of reaction.
Any of those that do (e.g. when the reaction occurs at the back of the target) are below the energy threshold of the CD detector.
Therefore, one can confidently assume that all recoil events are from the higher CoM-scattering-angle solution.
Triggered by the release of EBIS, data is collected from all detectors during 800-$\mu$s wide ``beam-on'' window following by an equally-wide ``beam-off'' window 4-10~ms later. In software, a correlation window of 6~$\mu$s is defined around the each $\gamma$-ray event of the ``beam-on'' window, and all particles that fall within this window are associated with that $\gamma$-ray.
In this way, it is possible for a single particle to be correlated to multiple $\gamma$ rays, but not vice versa.
Prompt and random windows are defined by taking the time difference between the particle and $\gamma$-ray triggers, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:tdiff}.
The particle multiplicity, shown in Figure~\ref{fig:multp}, of each event can now be defined as $m$p-$n$r, where $m$($n$) is the number of prompt(random) particles.
In order to subtract the randomly coincident background from the spectra, 0p-2r and 0p-1r events are treated in exactly the same way as their prompt counterparts, but given a weight of $-T_{p}/T_{r}$, where $T_{p,r}$ is the width of the prompt and random time windows, respectively.
The $\gamma$-ray spectra of Figures~\ref{fig:202onag}, \ref{fig:204onag}, \ref{fig:202onsn}, and~\ref{fig:204onsn} show background-subtracted 2p-0r events, where each particle can be identified as a recoil and projectile coincident within a particle-particle time window of 150~ns.
Additionally, 1p-0r events, where only the recoil is identified, are included. In these cases, the projectile kinematics, i.e. laboratory angle and exit energy, must be reconstructed for the purposes of performing an optimal Doppler correction.
Here, two-body elastic scattering is assumed and the energy loss is calculated by integrating phenomenological stopping power curves fitted to data from SRIM~\cite{srim2010}.
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig4-crop.pdf}
\caption{Time difference between a $\gamma$ ray, which is acting as a trigger, and all correlated particles. The effects of the 800-ns downscaling window is clearly visible. Two regions are indicated in order to define a particle as in ``prompt'' coincidence, or in ``random'' coincidence.}
\label{fig:tdiff}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig5-crop.pdf}
\caption{Particle multiplicity for each $\gamma$-ray: the number of particles that are defined as prompt or random according to Figure~\ref{fig:tdiff}.}
\label{fig:multp}
\end{figure}
By definition, the $\gamma$-ray multiplicity is one, but $\gamma$-$\gamma$ events can still be built by looking for events that have the same prompt particle correlations.
In these experiments, such $\gamma$-$\gamma$ coincidences didn't provide any additional information (see inset of Figure~\ref{fig:204onsn}).
As shown in Figure~\ref{fig:multp}, higher-order particle multiplicities do not account for a significant fraction of the data and are not taken into account in this analysis. Events where both $m$ and $n$ are greater than zero, i.e., at least one prompt particle and at least one random particle, are also not considered due to ambiguity in assigning prompt or random status.
In the case that this represents a significant amount of data, it is possible to assume a prompt nature for such events, but the weighting of random events must be re-considered to account for this.
Usually, the ratio of intensities of transitions associated with $\beta$-decaying daughter products of the beam, assumed to be purely random in time, is then used.
Due to the inherent difficulties in performing an absolute normalisation to elastically-scattered particles with Miniball, caused by an imprecise knowledge of the dead-time with different coincidence conditions, normalisation to the excitation of the target is preferred~\cite{Zielinska2015}.
In this case, the $^{202}$Rn($^{204}$Rn) beam was incident on a 4.0(1.9)~mg/cm$^{2}$ target of $^{109}$Ag, for which the relevant matrix elements are sufficiently well-established experimentally.
The resulting de-excitation $\gamma$-ray spectra are shown in Figures~\ref{fig:202onag}(\ref{fig:204onag}).
In the excitation process on the $^{109}$Ag target, only the $2^{+}_{1}$ states are populated in the $^{202,204}$Rn projectiles.
This means that the $B(E2;2^{+}_{1}\rightarrow0^{+}_{1})$ and $Q_{s}(2^{+}_{1})$ can be determined by utilising the first-order assumption that matrix elements connecting higher-lying states, of which we have no direct experimental information, do not contribute.
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig6-crop.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) $\gamma$-ray de-excitation spectra associated with the Coulomb excitation of $^{202}$Rn on $^{109}$Ag at 2.90~MeV/u, Doppler-corrected for projectiles (black) and target recoils ({\color{red}red}). Only events identified in prompt coincidence with a recoiling target nucleus are shown; random events, with respect to the particle-$\gamma$ coincidence time, have been subtracted. Peaks are marked with their energy in keV.}
\label{fig:202onag}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig7-crop.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) $\gamma$-ray de-excitation spectra associated with the Coulomb excitation of $^{204}$Rn on $^{109}$Ag at 2.90~MeV/u, Doppler-corrected for projectiles (black) and target recoils ({\color{red}red}). Only events identified in prompt coincidence with a recoiling target nucleus are shown.; random events, with respect to the particle-$\gamma$ coincidence time, have been subtracted. Peaks are marked with their energy in keV.}
\label{fig:204onag}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig8-crop.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) As in Figure~\ref{fig:202onag} but for the $^{120}$Sn target. The inset shows an expanded portion of the spectrum, with a bin width of 4~keV. Peaks are marked with their energy in keV.}
\label{fig:202onsn}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig9-crop.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) As in Figure~\ref{fig:204onag} but for the $^{120}$Sn target. Peaks are marked with their energy in keV. The inset shows the background-subtracted $\gamma$-$\gamma$ matrix, gated on the 543-keV $2^{+}_{1} \to 0^{+}_{1}$ transition, with a bin width of 4~keV.}
\label{fig:204onsn}
\end{figure}
Due to the presence of de-excitation $\gamma$-rays from the target that are Doppler shifted differently to those from the projectile, it is not easy to locate weak $\gamma$-ray transitions in the projectile.
Accordingly, data was also taken on a 2.0~mg/cm$^{2}$ target of $^{120}$Sn, chosen to reduce the number and intensity of $\gamma$-ray transitions resulting from target excitation.
A high-lying first-excited $2^{+}$ state at 1171~keV, with a relatively small $B(E2)$ of 11.4~W.u., means that this state is not strongly populated.
This reduces the complexity of the spectra as well as the background from Compton-scattered, escaped events, as can be seen in Figures~\ref{fig:202onsn} and~\ref{fig:204onsn}.
In all of the $\gamma$-ray spectra, the intensity of radon K X-rays is markedly high, inconsistent with the expectations of internal conversion of $E2$ transitions. The residual fraction of these X rays is associated to K-vacancy creation in atomic collisions between the high-Z beam and target~\cite{Bree2015}.
Population of higher-lying states in $^{204}$Rn was inconclusive based on the $^{120}$Sn-target data (see Figure~\ref{fig:204onsn}), possibly due in part to a poor $\gamma$-ray resolution caused by noise on the CD detector in this part of the experiment, which affected the Doppler correction.
It may also be that the population of the states was simply below the detection limit of the experiment. An upper limit for the observation of the $4^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 2^{+}_{1}$ transition was determined.
In $^{202}$Rn, the $4^{+}_{1}$ state is a little lower in energy and there exists a previously-observed $2^{+}_{2}$ state at 1029~keV. Both of these states are clearly populated in the $^{120}$Sn-target data (see Figure~\ref{fig:202onsn}), albeit with low intensity.
It helps that both transitions sit at higher energy in the spectra than the dominant $2^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 0^{+}_{1}$ transitions, since they are clear of the Compton background and can be fitted with a smaller uncertainty.
The extracted intensities are presented in Tables~\ref{tab:yields_202} and~\ref{tab:yields_204}. No additional data is obtained from the lower-beam-energy runs and it is not considered in the cross-section analysis due to large uncertainties on $\gamma$-ray intensities.
\begin{table}[tb]
\begin{center}
\caption{Intensities of $\gamma$-ray transitions observed in the current Coulomb-excitation experiments of $^{202}$Rn. Efficiency correction has been performed, relative to the $2^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 0^{+}_{1}$ transition of the projectile in each experiment. Transition intensities in the $^{109}$Ag target are also included and can be identified by the odd-spin transitions.}
\label{tab:yields_202}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{cccc}
Beam Energy & Target & Transition & $I_{\gamma}$ \\[2pt]
\hline
2.845~MeV/$u$ & $^{120}$Sn & $2^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 0^{+}_{1}$ & 990(37) \\
& (2.0~mg/cm$^{2}$) & $2^{+}_{2} \rightarrow 2^{+}_{1}$ & 27(7) \\
& & $4^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 2^{+}_{1}$ & 29(6) \\
& & $2^{+}_{2} \rightarrow 0^{+}_{1}$ & $<19(9)$ \\[2pt]
2.90~MeV/$u$ & $^{109}$Ag & $2^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 0^{+}_{1}$ & 923(40) \\
& (4.0~mg/cm$^{2}$) & $3/2^{-}_{1} \rightarrow 1/2^{-}_{1}$ & 1260(60) \\
& & $5/2^{-}_{1} \rightarrow 1/2^{-}_{1}$ & 1000(50) \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[tb]
\begin{center}
\caption{Intensities of $\gamma$-ray transitions observed in the current Coulomb-excitation experiments of $^{204}$Rn. Efficiency correction has been performed, relative to the $2^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 0^{+}_{1}$ transition of the projectile in each experiment. Transition intensities in the $^{109}$Ag target are also included and can be identified by the odd-spin transitions}
\label{tab:yields_204}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{cccc}
Beam Energy & Target & Transition & $I_{\gamma}$ \\[2pt]
\hline
2.845~MeV/$u$ & $^{120}$Sn & $2^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 0^{+}_{1}$ & $6130(200)$ \\
& (2.0~mg/cm$^{2}$) & $2^{+}_{2} \rightarrow 2^{+}_{1}$ & $<190(160)$ \\
& & $4^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 2^{+}_{1}$ & $<240(90)$ \\[2pt]
2.90~MeV/$u$ & $^{109}$Ag & $2^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 0^{+}_{1}$ & 660(40) \\
& (1.9~mg/cm$^{2}$) & $3/2^{-}_{1} \rightarrow 1/2^{-}_{1}$ & 720(50) \\
& & $5/2^{-}_{1} \rightarrow 1/2^{-}_{1}$ & 700(50) \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Aside from the known $4^{+}_{1}$ state in $^{204}$Rn, there is the potential for the population of an unobserved $2^{+}_{2}$ state. Assuming it decays predominantly to the $2^{+}_{1}$ state as in $^{202}$Rn, the $\gamma$-ray de-excitation could form a doublet with the ${2^{+}_{1} \to 0^{+}_{1}}$ transition at 543~keV.
This would place the state around twice the energy of the $2^{+}_{1}$ state, something that is expected with a vibrational-like structure.
To investigate this possibility, the background-subtracted $\gamma$-$\gamma$ matrix for the $^{120}$Sn-target data was projected with a gate between 520 and 570~keV, as shown in the inset of Figure~\ref{fig:204onsn}.
A 1$\sigma$ upper limit of a peak~\cite{Helene1983} was determined for the region between 520 and 570~keV of 21(19) counts.
The $\gamma$-$\gamma$ efficiency, $\epsilon_{\gamma\gamma}(E_{\gamma})$, was determined at 311~keV through the $5/2^{-}_{1} \to 3/2^{-}_{1} \to 1/2^{-}_{1}$ cascade in $^{109}$Ag and extrapolated using the singles efficiency determined for a $^{152}$Eu/$^{133}$Ba source combination to give $\epsilon_{\gamma\gamma}(543~\mathrm{keV})=11(3)\%$.
Consequently, the 1$\sigma$ upper limit of the number of counts in the singles spectrum is 190(160) counts, which corresponds to less than 3\% of $I_{\gamma}(2^{+}_{1} \to 0^{+}_{1})$ transition.
Assuming a similar excitation probability for the Ag ($Z=47$) target as the Sn ($Z=50$) target, one can assume that this would not significantly affect the determination of the $B(E2; 2^{+}_{1} \to 0^{+}_{1})$ value, since it is less than the statistical precision of the transition intensity.
\section{Results}
For the Coulomb-excitation analysis, the \gosia{}~\cite{Czosnyka1983,GosiaManual} code was utilised in order to calculate excitation probabilities, and consequently de-excitation $\gamma$-ray intensities, for a given set of electromagnetic matrix elements.
The calculated intensities are then compared to experimental data, along with additional spectroscopic information, such as excited-state lifetimes, $E2/M1$ mixing ratios and $\gamma$-ray branching ratios.
Conversion coefficients used in \gosia{} were calculated using the BrIcc data tables~\cite{Kibedi2008}.
A $\chi^{2}$-like, least-squares function is constructed and can be minimised with respect to the electromagnetic matrix elements as input parameters, along with a set of normalisation constants.
For the cases where normalization to the $^{109}$Ag target excitation was used, a special version of the code, \gosia{}2, is employed.
Here, the total $\chi^{2}$ is calculated for fixed values of the projectile matrix elements, ${\langle 0^{+}_{1} \| E2 \| 2^{+}_{1} \rangle}$ and ${\langle 2^{+}_{1} \| E2 \| 2^{+}_{1} \rangle}$, scanning a large-scale two-dimensional surface in order to search for the best solution at $\chi^{2}_{\mathrm{min}}$.
The associated $1\sigma$ uncertainties can then be extracted by cutting the surface at $\chi^{2}_{\mathrm{min}}+1$ and projecting the limits to the relevant axis.
These procedures are described in detail in Ref.~\cite{Zielinska2015}.
In the first step, the level schemes as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:levels} are defined in \gosia{}2, where the $6^{+}_{1}$ and $4^{+}_{2}$ are buffer states in $^{202}$Rn ($4^{+}_{1}$ in $^{204}$Rn) to prevent an artificial build-up of population in the highest-energy observed states.
Both the $^{202}$Rn and $^{204}$Rn data are segmented into five different angular ranges, utilising the segmentation of the CD detector, yielding five independent experiments.
This gives a total of five data points in the projectile system; the intensity ($I_{\gamma}$) of the $2^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 0^{+}_{1}$ transition in each experiment.
There are, however, seven parameters; the matrix elements ${\langle 0^{+}_{1} \| E2 \| 2^{+}_{1} \rangle}$ and ${\langle 2^{+}_{1} \| E2 \| 2^{+}_{1} \rangle}$, plus five normalisation constants, which can be considered as a product of the integrated beam current, live-time fraction and particle-$\gamma$ efficiencies at the given scattering angle.
The target system is over-determined with ten transition intensities, two in each of the five independent experiments (angular ranges), in addition to the nine additional spectroscopic data presented in Table~\ref{tab:specdata109ag}, fitted to a total of seven matrix elements and five normalisation constants.
These five normalisation constants are shared between the projectile and target systems and can be fitted simultaneously in both data sets.
This allows for an over-determination of the whole system, which can be reduced to a two-parameter system with five data points for the projectile.
\begin{table}[tb]
\begin{center}
\caption{Spectroscopic data related to the low-lying level-scheme ($1/2^{-}_{1}$, $3/2^{-}_{1}$, $5/2^{-}_{1}$) of $^{109}$Ag included in the \gosia{}2 fit. An average was taken of the two possible solutions for ${\langle 5/2^{-}_{1} \| E2 \| 5/2^{-}_{1} \rangle}$. Matrix elements connecting the higher-lying states ($3/2^{-}_{2}$, $5/2^{-}_{2}$) were determined from previous Coulomb-excitation measurements~\cite{Robinson1970,Zielinska2009a} and fixed in the fit. The $9/2^{+}$ isomeric state was not included.}
\label{tab:specdata109ag}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\multicolumn{2}{c}{Spectroscopic data for $^{109}$Ag} & Reference \\[1pt]
\hline
$B(E2;1/2^{-}_{1}\rightarrow 3/2^{-}_{1})$ & $0.222(19)$~$e^{2}$b$^{2}$ & \cite{Robinson1970} \\[2pt]
$B(E2;1/2^{-}_{1}\rightarrow 5/2^{-}_{1})$ & $0.320(26)$~$e^{2}$b$^{2}$ & \cite{Robinson1970} \\[2pt]
${\langle 3/2^{-}_{1} \| E2 \| 3/2^{-}_{1} \rangle}$ & $-1.3^{+0.3}_{-0.4}$~$e$b & \cite{Zielinska2009a} \\[2pt]
${\langle 5/2^{-}_{1} \| E2 \| 5/2^{-}_{1} \rangle}$ & $-0.21$ or $-0.56$~$e$b & \cite{Throop1972} \\[2pt]
$\frac{I_{\gamma}(5/2^{-}_{1} \rightarrow 3/2^{-}_{1})}{I_{\gamma}(5/2^{-}_{1} \rightarrow 1/2^{-}_{1})}$ & $0.069(16)$ & \cite{Blachot2006} \\[2pt]
$\tau(3/2^{-}_{1})$ & $8.5(10)$~ps & \cite{Miller1974} \\[2pt]
$\tau(5/2^{-}_{1})$ & $47(2)$~ps & \cite{Loiselet1989} \\[2pt]
$\delta(3/2^{-}_{1} \rightarrow 1/2^{-}_{1})$ & $-0.196(27)$ & \cite{Robinson1970} \\[2pt]
$\delta(5/2^{-}_{1} \rightarrow 3/2^{-}_{1})$ & $-0.039(17)$ & \cite{Robinson1970} \\[2pt]
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Two-dimensional $\chi^{2}$ surfaces are plotted in Figures~\ref{fig:chisqsurface202} and~\ref{fig:chisqsurface204} for $^{202}$Rn and $^{204}$Rn, respectively.
The kinematics of the experimental set-up limited the observed range of CoM scattering angles, which in turn limited the sensitivity to the diagonal matrix element, ${\langle 2^{+}_{1} \| E2 \| 2^{+}_{1} \rangle}$.
A good determination of the spectroscopic quadrupole moment, $Q_{s}(2^{+}_{1})$, which is proportional to ${\langle 2^{+}_{1} \| E2 \| 2^{+}_{1} \rangle}$, requires not only statistical precision but data at both high and low scattering angles.
This in turn achieves a variation in sensitivity to subtle higher-order effects.
For the current data set, a strong overlap in the $\chi^{2}$ functions of the different experiments leads to an elongation of the 1$\sigma$ confidence region in the ${\langle 2^{+}_{1} \| E2 \| 2^{+}_{1} \rangle}$ axis.
The strong correlation between the two parameters means that the determination of ${\langle 0^{+}_{1} \| E2 \| 2^{+}_{1} \rangle}$ or ${B(E2;2^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 0^{+}_{1})}$ is also adversely affected, increasing the projected uncertainty.
Under the assumption of no second-order effect for $Q_{s}$, the uncertainty is equivalent to that of the statistical uncertainty of the $\gamma$-ray intensity, but under-estimates the true uncertainty by a factor $\simeq3.5$ in both $^{202,204}$Rn.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig10-crop.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) Two-dimensional total-$\chi^{2}$ surface for $^{202}$Rn on $^{109}$Ag at 2.9~MeV/u, extracted from \gosia{}. The data were segmented in to five angular ranges.}
\label{fig:chisqsurface202}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig11-crop.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) Two-dimensional total-$\chi^{2}$ surface for $^{204}$Rn on $^{109}$Ag at 2.9~MeV/u, extracted from \gosia{}. The data were segmented in to five angular ranges.}
\label{fig:chisqsurface204}
\end{figure}
Following the extraction of $B(E2;2^{+}_{1}\rightarrow0^{+}_{1})$, the higher-statistics data for Coulomb excitation on the $^{120}$Sn target is analysed in a second step.
The ratio of transition intensities ${I_{\gamma}(4^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 2^{+}_{1})/I_{\gamma}(2^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 0^{+}_{1})}$ can be considered to be almost directly proportional to the $B(E2;4^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 2^{+}_{1})$ value, with negligible influence from other matrix elements, including ${\langle 0^{+}_{1} \| E2 \| 2^{+}_{1} \rangle}$.
This is because the population of the $4^{+}_{1}$ state occurs almost exclusively in the two-step $E2$-excitation process involving the $2^{+}_{1}$ state.
The population of the $2^{+}_{1}$ is known very well from $I_{\gamma}(2^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 0^{+}_{1})$ since any significant feeding (i.e. from $4^{+}_{1}$ and $2^{+}_{2}$) can be accounted for. In $^{204}$Rn, the upper limit of $I_{\gamma}(4^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 2^{+}_{1})$ is used to calculate an upper limit for $B(E2;4^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 2^{+}_{1})$, shown in Table~\ref{tab:me}.
In the current experiment, the population of the $2^{+}_{2}$ state in $^{202}$Rn can be considered to occur exclusively via a two-step $E2$ excitation via the $2^{+}_{1}$ state.
The single-step process, directly from the ground state, can be assumed to be negligible due to the combination of the large energy difference and the small $B(E2; 2^{+}_{2} \rightarrow 0^{+}_{1})$ relative to the $B(E2; 2^{+}_{2} \rightarrow 2^{+}_{1})$ extracted from the upper limit of the branching ratio of 6.9\%~\cite{Gillespie_privcomms}.
Additionally, $M1$ excitation is calculated to be more than 100 times weaker than the corresponding $E2$ between the two $2^{+}$ states.
No complementary data (such as the lifetime, $\tau_{2^{+}_{2}}$, $E2/M1$ mixing ratio, $\delta(2^{+}_{2} \rightarrow 2^{+}_{1})$ or conversion coefficient, $\alpha(2^{+}_{2} \rightarrow 2^{+}_{1})$) are available to constrain the ${\langle 2^{+}_{1} \| M1 \| 2^{+}_{2} \rangle}$ matrix element and consequently it is currently not possible to extract its value.
It can however be shown that the current data set is insensitive to the value of the $M1$ component, and the determination of ${\langle 2^{+}_{1} \| E2 \| 2^{+}_{2} \rangle}$ is unaffected.
The $M1$ matrix element was coupled to the $E2$ matrix element using $|\delta(2^{+}_{2} \rightarrow 2^{+}_{1})|=1.1$, by comparison to known values in the region.
All of the data for $^{202}$Rn, collected with both $^{109}$Ag and $^{120}$Sn targets, are fitted using the least-squares search code, \gosia{}~\cite{Czosnyka1983,GosiaManual}, in order to fully investigate all potential couplings to unknown matrix elements~\cite{Zielinska2015}. In the final fit, many matrix elements were coupled, or fixed to reasonable values, when the fit was found to be insensitive to their values. The diagonal $E2$ matrix elements of the $4^{+}_{1}$ and $2^{+}_{2}$ were coupled to their transitional counterparts, assuming a constant $Q_{0}$ and $K=0$ within the rigid rotor model.
A particular concern with regards to correlations is the ${\langle 4^{+}_{1} \| E2 \| 2^{+}_{2} \rangle}$ matrix element, which influences the populations of both the $4^{+}_{1}$ and $2^{+}_{2}$ states.
It was fixed to 0.005~$e$b in the final fit, although values up to 1.5~$e$b were tested and shown to influence the final result at the few percent level, much less than the statistical uncertainty.
For the correlated error calculation, it was allowed to vary with limits of $\pm1.5$~$e$b.
Once the $\chi^{2}$ minimum is found, the uncertainties are calculated by \gosia{} in a two-stage process.
At this point, all couplings and fixed matrix elements are freed in order to correctly include the influence of correlations to unknown matrix elements.
Firstly, the diagonal, or uncorrelated, uncertainties on each matrix element are computed by varying it about the minimum until an increase in $\chi^{2}$ is achieved, satisfying the $1\sigma$ condition~\cite{GosiaManual}.
At the same time, a multi-dimensional correlation matrix is built, which is then used in the second step in order to compute the fully correlated errors on each matrix element.
It was shown that the ${\langle 4^{+}_{1} \| E2 \| 2^{+}_{1} \rangle}$ matrix element is insensitive to changes in other transitional matrix elements and only very weakly ($<<1\sigma$) dependent on ${\langle 4^{+}_{1} \| E2 \| 4^{+}_{1} \rangle}$.
This leads to an uncertainty on $B(E2;4^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 2^{+}_{1})$ roughly equivalent to the statistical uncertainty of $I_{\gamma}(4^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 2^{+}_{1})$.
For ${\langle 2^{+}_{1} \| E2 \| 2^{+}_{2} \rangle}$, however, the correlations play a much stronger role and the uncertainty on $B(E2;2^{+}_{2} \rightarrow 2^{+}_{1})$ is relatively large (see Table~\ref{tab:me}).
\begin{table}[tb]
\begin{center}
\caption{Transition strengths, $B(E2)$, and spectroscopic quadrupole moments, $Q_{s}$, along with their uncertainties obtained from the two-dimensional $\chi^{2}$ analyses and \gosia{} minimisation. In the case of $^{202}$Rn, the final values are extracted from the full simultaneous analysis of data on both the $^{109}$Ag and $^{120}$Sn targets. The uncertainties include correlations to all seven matrix elements in the fit. The fit is shown to converge with the two-dimensional $\chi^{2}$ analysis and produces consistent uncertainties, proving that the correlations are small.}
\label{tab:me}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
& $^{202}$Rn & $^{204}$Rn \\[2pt]
\hline
${B(E2;2^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 0^{+}_{1})}$ & $29^{+8}_{-8}$~W.u. & $43^{+17}_{-12}$~W.u. \\
${B(E2;2^{+}_{2} \rightarrow 2^{+}_{1})}$ & $160^{+90}_{-50}$~W.u. & -- \\
${B(E2;2^{+}_{2} \rightarrow 0^{+}_{1})}$ & $<0.4(3)$~W.u. & -- \\
${B(E2;4^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 2^{+}_{1})}$ & $63^{+18}_{-18}$~W.u. & $<74(30)$ \\
$Q_{s}(2^{+}_{1})$ & $0.9^{+2.9}_{-1.8}$~$e$b & $-0.4^{+1.5}_{-1.2}$~$e$b \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\section{Discussion}
Under the assumption that the quadrupole charge distribution is uniform and can describe the nuclear shape, the deformation can be deduced from the following sum over $B(E2)$ values~\cite{Raman2001}:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:beta2_clx}
\sum_{i} B(E2; 0^{+}_{1} \to 2^{+}_{i}) = \left( \frac{3}{4\pi} Z e R_{0}^{2} \right)^{2} \langle\beta_{2}^{2}\rangle ~,
\end{equation}
where $Ze$ is the nuclear charge and $R_{0}=1.2A^{1/3}$~fm.
From the limit of the $2^{+}_{2}$ branching ratio in $^{202}$Rn~\cite{Gillespie_privcomms} (see Table~\ref{tab:me}) it is a reasonable assumption that the $E2$ transition strength from the ground state is dominated by the first-excited $2^{+}$ state in these nuclei.
Thus, one can limit the sum in Equation~\ref{eq:beta2_clx} to $i=1$.
The deduced deformations are then ${\langle\beta_{2}^{2}\rangle^{1/2}(^{202}\mathrm{Rn}) = 0.099^{+0.015}_{-0.014}}$ and ${\langle\beta_{2}^{2}\rangle^{1/2}(^{204}\mathrm{Rn}) = 0.120^{+0.021}_{-0.019}}$, indicating a weak deformation.
Another indication of the ground-state deformation can be deduced from isotope-shift measurements~\cite{Borchers1987,Georg1995,*Georg1997}, where mean-square charge radii, $\langle r^{2} \rangle_{A}$, is related to the deformation (to first order) in the following way:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:beta2_laser}
\langle r^{2} \rangle_{A} \approx \langle r^{2} \rangle_{A}^{\mathrm{sph}} \left( 1 + \frac{5}{4\pi} \langle\widetilde{\beta}_{2}^{2} \rangle_{A} \right) ~,
\end{equation}
where $\langle r^{2} \rangle_{A}^{\mathrm{sph}}$ is the mean-square charge radius of a spherical liquid-drop-like nucleus with mass, $A$~\cite{Otten1989}. This is calculated using the modified liquid-drop model of Ref.~\cite{Myers1983} and the updated parameter set of Ref.~\cite{Berdichevsky1985}.
Assuming that $\langle \widetilde{\beta}_{2}^{2} \rangle_{212}=0.062(5)$, from the Grodzins-Raman rule~\cite{Raman2001} and Equation~\ref{eq:beta2_laser}, and using the tabulated $\Delta\langle r^{2} \rangle_{A,212}$ values from Ref.~\cite{Otten1989}, ${\langle \widetilde{\beta}_{2}^{2} \rangle_{A}}$ can be deduced. All of the derived values for $\langle \beta^{2}_{2} \rangle^{1/2}$ and $\langle \widetilde{\beta}^{2}_{2} \rangle^{1/2}$ as a function of mass number are plotted in Figure~\ref{fig:deformation} for comparison.
A good level of consistency between the two deformation parameters is observed.
Furthermore, the values obtained from the isotope shift at the heaviest masses remain relatively constant apart from the odd-even staggering effect.
This might be considered as due to dynamical effects about a spherical shape, i.e. vibration, whereas increase of ${\langle \widetilde{\beta}_{2}^{2} \rangle}$ in the lightest isotopes points towards an onset of deformation in the ground state.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig12-crop.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) Experimental $\langle\beta_{2}^{2}\rangle^{1/2}$ values deduced from the $B(E2; 0^{+}_{1} \to 2^{+}_{1})$ values measured in this work (black circles, ``CLX'') and those from isotope-shift measurements and liquid-drop model for both the ground ({\color{red}red} down triangles, ``IS(g)'') and isomeric ({\color{red}red} up triangles, ``IS(m)'') states. The uncertainties on the latter are dominated by the propagation of the uncertainty in the Grodzins-Raman rule~\cite{Raman2001}, which is a systematic contribution. The isotope shift values are slightly offset from integer $A$ values for clarity of presentation.}
\label{fig:deformation}
\end{figure}
A less model-dependent picture of the quadrupole collectivity is the transitional quadrupole moment, $Q_{t}$, related to the experimental matrix elements by the following relationship:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:qt}
Q_{t} ( I_{i} \to I_{f} ) = \frac{ \langle I_{f} \| E2 \| I_{i} \rangle } { \langle I_{f} 0 2 0 | I_{i} 0 \rangle } \cdot \sqrt{ \frac{16\pi}{5\left(2I_{f}+1\right)} }~ ,
\end{equation}
where $\langle I_{f} 0 2 0 | I_{i} 0 \rangle$ is the Clebsch-Gordan coefficient. The values deduced from the current experiment are given on the level schemes of Figure~\ref{fig:BMF_levels_qt}. Here, we can observe that, as a function of increasing spin, $Q_{t}$ remains constant in $^{202}$Rn as far as the data extends.
This can be an indicator that these states form a single rotational band, but the current level of uncertainty and number of data is not enough to make firm conclusions within such a simple picture.
The alternative and equally simplistic picture of an harmonic vibrator gives the relationship between transition strengths of two-phonon ($N_{ph}=2$) and one-phonon ($N_{ph}=1$) states as:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:phonon}
\frac{ B(E2; J^{+}_{N_{ph}=2} \to J^{+}_{N_{ph}=1}) }{ B(E2; J^{+}_{N_{ph}=1} \to J^{+}_{N_{ph}=0}) } = 2 ~.
\end{equation}
While this is consistent with the ${B(E2; 4^{+}_{1} \to 2^{+}_{1})}$ from this experiment, it is at odds with the observation of a strong ${B(E2; 2^{+}_{2} \to 2^{+}_{1})}$ value, pointing to the fact that these nuclei can not be described as simple vibrators (see Table~\ref{tab:me}).
For these reasons, comparisons to state-of-the-art nuclear models are required to understand the behaviour of these nuclei.
\begin{figure*}[tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{Fig13-crop.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of the results of beyond-mean-field calculations and experimental energy levels (italics; in units of keV) and transitional quadrupole moments, $|Q_{t}|$ (in units of $e$b). The width of the arrows are proportional to $|Q_{t}|$. Only states up to $4^{+}_{1}$ and $2^{+}_{2}$ are included for clarity of presentation.}
\label{fig:BMF_levels_qt}
\end{figure*}
Beyond mean-field calculations have recently been performed for a range of nuclei in this region~\cite{Yao2013}, having particular success in describing the electromagnetic matrix elements above and below $Z=82$ in the polonium~\cite{Kesteloot2015} and mercury~\cite{Bree2014,Wrzosek-Lipska2015} isotopes.
In these calculations, self-consistent mean-field wave functions are generated within the Hartree-Fock (HF) + BCS framework with a Skyrme energy-density functional.
These are then projected to particle number and angular momentum, before being mixed by the generator coordinate method (GCM) to give physical states.
The pure mean-field wave-functions are constrained to axial symmetry.
While the parameters of the microscopic Skyrme interaction are fitted to large sets of data, the extraction of nuclear observables from the projected mean-field states can be considered parameter free.
This is very advantageous when making predictions of behaviour where experimental data is not already present.
As can be seen in Figure~\ref{fig:BMF_levels_qt}, and has also been observed in the polonium~\cite{Kesteloot2015} and mercury~\cite{Bree2014,Wrzosek-Lipska2015} isotopes, the absolute values of the energy levels predicted by the BMF model~\cite{Yao2013} appear vastly overestimated, but the general pattern is reproduced.
The prediction of a $0^{+}_{2}$ state close in energy to the $2^{+}_{2}$ state was not able to be tested in this experiment.
An observation of this state, along with its de-excitation branching ratio, would give a further test to the model.
What is interesting to note is the prediction of a very weak $2^{+}_{2} \to 0^{+}_{1}$ decay branch, consistent with the observed data, with no need to invoke arguments for a forbidden $\Delta N_{ph}=2$ transition in the harmonic-vibrator model.
In Figure~\ref{fig:BMF_Qt}, the transitional quadrupole moments are compared for a range of nuclei extending to $A\ge194$.
An increase in collectivity for the lighter radon isotopes is predicted by an increasing $Q_{t}(2^{+}_{1} \to 0^{+}_{1})$ value, consistent with the $E(2^{+}_{1})$ systematics and isotope shift measurements~\cite{Borchers1987,Georg1995,*Georg1997}.
A more stringent test of this model would come from measurements of non-yrast and inter-band $Q_{t}$ values, which show more significant deviations when approaching mid-shell.
The current production rates at ISOLDE do not allow Coulomb-excitation experiments to be extended to isotopes lighter than $^{200}$Rn.
However, with the higher beam energies afforded by HIE-ISOLDE~\cite{Lindroos2008}, multiple-step Coulomb-excitation experiments will be able to provide a complete set of electromagnetic matrix elements for the heavier-mass isotopes, which may act as a verification of model predictions at lower masses.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Fig14-crop.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) Experimental $Q_{t}$ values in black compared to those predicted by beyond-mean-field calculations in red, connected by lines to guide the eye. The upper limits in the data are indicated by the downward pointing arrows.}
\label{fig:BMF_Qt}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
Coulomb excitation of secondary, post-accelerated radioactive beams of $^{202}$Rn and $^{204}$Rn has been performed at the REX-ISOLDE facility in CERN.
${B(E2;2^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 0^{+}_{1})}$ values have been extracted in both $^{202}$Rn and $^{204}$Rn and limits on $Q_{s}(2^{+}_{1})$ have been determined.
In $^{202}$Rn, population of the $2^{+}_{2}$ and $4^{+}_{1}$ states was observed, allowing the extraction of ${B(E2;4^{+}_{1} \rightarrow 2^{+}_{1})}$ and ${B(E2;2^{+}_{2} \rightarrow 2^{+}_{1})}$ values in this nucleus.
While the excitation energies of the observed states in these Rn isotopes coincide with that expected of a simple quadrupole vibrator structure, the $2^{+}_{2} \to 2^{+}_{1}$ transition strength does not support such an interpretation.
The results have been compared to recent beyond-mean-field calculations~\cite{Yao2013}.
While the energy levels seem to be unreasonably expanded, the relative behaviour and absolute transitions strengths shows consistency between experiment and the model description.
A more sensitive test of the nuclear shape would come from the spectroscopic quadrupole moment, $Q_{s}(2^{+}_{1})$, but the precision from this experiment is not sufficient to distinguish between \mbox{oblate-,} prolate- and spherical-like charge distributions.
Extending $B(E2)$ measurements to lighter, more exotic nuclei, where shape-coexistence effects and ground-state deformations are expected to be stronger due to the parabolic behaviour of the intruding structure, would test the BMF description further.
Observation of a $0^{+}_{2}$ state is still lacking in the light radon isotopes.
New experiments at higher beam energy would increase the probability of populating this state, should it exist.
A future coupling of Miniball with the SPEDE electron detector in Coulomb-excitation experiments~\cite{Konki2013,spede} may allow direct detection of the $E0(0^{+}_{2} \to 0^{+}_{1})$ decay.
This will lead not only to a placement of the $0^{+}_{2}$ state in energy, but also to the determination of the $E2(0^{+}_{2} \to 2^{+}_{1})/E0(0^{+}_{2} \to 0^{+}_{1})$ branching ratio, key to distinguishing between an intruder and a phonon structure.
Indeed, few-nucleon transfer reactions such as ($t$,$p$) and ($d$,$p$) also have the ability to populate such excited $0^{+}$ states and could be utilised to elucidate their nucleon configuration.
\begin{acknowledgements}
We acknowledge the support of the ISOLDE Collaboration and technical teams.
This work was supported
by GOA/2010/10 (BOF KULeuven),
by the IAP Belgian Science Policy (BriX network P6/23 and P7/12),
by the U.K. Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC),
by the German BMBF under contract Nos. 05P12PKFNE, 06DA9036I and 05P12RDCIA,
by the Academy of Finland (Contract No. 131665),
by the European Commission through the Marie Curie Actions call PIEFGA-2008-219175 (J.P.).
L.P.G. acknowledges FWO-Vlaanderen (Belgium) as an FWO Pegasus Marie Curie Fellow.
\end{acknowledgements}
\bibliographystyle{aip_doi}
|
\section{Relative and rest observables}
The quantum dynamics of a molecular system consisting of $N$ nuclei and $n$ electrons is obtained from the classical dynamics by applying the ``correspondence principle''. The position and momentum observables of the nucleus $\mu$ are characterised respectively by the self-adjoint operators $\boldsymbol{R}_{\mu}\,\otimes\,\mathbb{1}_{e}$ and $\boldsymbol{P}_{\mu}\,\otimes\,\mathbb{1}_{e}$, where $\mu=1,..,N$, acting trivially on the Hilbert subspace $\mathcal{H}_{e}$ associated to the electrons. Similarly, the position and momentum observables of the electron $\nu$ are respectively characterised respectively by the self-adjoint operators $\mathbb{1}_{\mathcal{N}}\,\otimes\,\boldsymbol{r}_{\nu}$ and $\mathbb{1}_{\mathcal{N}}\,\otimes\,\boldsymbol{p}_{\nu}$ where $\nu=1,..,n$, acting trivially on the Hilbert subspace $\mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{N}}$ associated to the nuclei. These operators satisfy the canonical commutation relations, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{3.0}
\begin{split}
&\left[\ \boldsymbol{e}_{j}\cdot\boldsymbol{P}_{\mu}, \boldsymbol{e}^{k}\cdot\boldsymbol{R}_{\mu}\ \right]= -\,i\hbar\left(\boldsymbol{e}_{j}\cdot\boldsymbol{e}^{k}\right)\mathbb{1}_{\mathcal{N}}\\
&\left[\ \boldsymbol{e}_{j}\cdot\boldsymbol{p}_{\nu}, \boldsymbol{e}^{k}\cdot\boldsymbol{r}_{\nu}\ \right]= -\,i\hbar\left(\boldsymbol{e}_{j}\cdot\boldsymbol{e}^{k}\right)\mathbb{1}_{e}\,,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where where $\boldsymbol{e}_{j}$ are the units vectors of an orthonormal basis and $\boldsymbol{e}^{k}$ are the units vectors of the dual orthonormal basis.
In order to treat molecular rotations as genuine quantum degrees of freedom, we introduce explicitly the rotation group and the associated Lie algebra~\cite{Brechet:2014}. In such a treatment, we introduce a molecular orientation operator $\boldsymbol{\omega}$ that is fully determined by the position operators $\boldsymbol{R}_{\mu}$ and $\boldsymbol{r}_{\nu}$, which ensures that it is a self-adjoint operator. Since the position operators commute, the components of the operator $\boldsymbol{\omega}$ satisfy the trivial commutation relations,
\begin{equation}\label{A.2.0}
\left[\ \boldsymbol{e}^j\cdot\boldsymbol{\omega},\ \boldsymbol{e}^k\cdot\boldsymbol{\omega}\ \right]=0\,.
\end{equation}
The orientation operator $\boldsymbol{\omega}$ should not be confused with the angle velocity operator or the phase operator. The orientation operator $\boldsymbol{\omega}$ is related to the molecular rotation operator $\mathsf{R}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)$ that belongs to the rotation group by exponentiation, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{3.21}
\mathsf{R}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right) =\exp\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\cdot\boldsymbol{\mathsf{G}}\right)\,,
\end{equation}
taking into account the commutation relation~\eqref{A.2.0}. The components of the vector $\boldsymbol{\mathsf{G}}$ are rank-$2$ tensors and generators of the rotation group. The action of the rotation group is locally defined as,
\begin{equation}\label{3.23bis}
\left(\boldsymbol{e}_{j}\cdot\boldsymbol{\mathsf{G}}\right)\,\boldsymbol{x}=\boldsymbol{e}_{j}\times\boldsymbol{x}\,.
\end{equation}
The action of the rotation operator on a vectorial observable $\boldsymbol{A}\in\mathcal{L}\left(\mathcal{H}\right)$ is expressed in terms of the unitary representation of the rotation group $\mathsf{U}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)$ acting on the Hilbert space $\mathcal{H}$ by the well-known relation~\cite{Weinberg:2013},
\begin{equation}\label{3.24}
\mathsf{U}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)^{-1}\,\left(\boldsymbol{e}^{k}\cdot\boldsymbol{A}\right)\,\mathsf{U}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right) = \left(\boldsymbol{e}^{k}\cdot\mathsf{R}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)\cdot\boldsymbol{e}_{j}\right)\,\left(\boldsymbol{e}^{j}\cdot\boldsymbol{A}\right)\,.
\end{equation}
We also introduce the operators $\boldsymbol{n}_{(j)}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)$ that are Killing vectors~\cite{Szekeres:2004} of the Lie algebra of the rotation group, which are related to the rotation operator $\mathsf{R}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)$ and the rotation generators $\boldsymbol{\mathsf{G}}$ as,
\begin{equation}\label{3.38}
\mathsf{R}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)^{-1}\cdot\left(\boldsymbol{e}_j\cdot\partial_{\boldsymbol{\omega}}\right)\,\mathsf{R}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right) = \boldsymbol{n}_{(j)}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)\cdot\boldsymbol{\mathsf{G}}\,.
\end{equation}
The dual operator $\boldsymbol{m}^{(k)}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)$ satisfies the duality condition,
\begin{equation}\label{3.39}
\boldsymbol{n}_{(j)}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)\cdot\boldsymbol{m}^{(k)}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right) = \boldsymbol{e}_{j}\cdot\boldsymbol{e}^{k}\,.
\end{equation}
The operators $\boldsymbol{n}_{(j)}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)$ and $\boldsymbol{m}^{(k)}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)$ determine the structure of the Lie algebra of the rotation group.
The description of molecular dynamics in a classical framework would be much simpler than in a quantum framework since in the former a rest frame could be attached easily to the physical system. In quantum physics, the approach is slightly different because observables are described mathematically by operators, which implies that there exists no rest frame and no centre of mass frame associated to the molecular system. However, even in the absence of a centre of mass frame, the position and momentum observables of the centre of mass can be expressed mathematically as self-adjoint operators. This enables us to define other position and momentum observables with respect to the centre of mass. We shall refer to them as ``relative'' position and momentum observables because they are the quantum equivalent of the classical relative position and momentum variables defined with respect to the center of mass frame. Then, using the rotation operator, we define the ``rest'' position and momentum observables, which are the quantum equivalent of the classical position and momentum variables defined in the molecular rest frame. The description of molecular dynamics is illustrated in Fig~\ref{frame}.
\begin{figure}[htb]\hspace{3mm}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\columnwidth]{frame.pdf}
\caption{Methyl bisulfate molecule rotating under the action of the rotation tensor $\mathsf{R}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)$ around the orientation axis $\boldsymbol{\omega}$. The vector $\boldsymbol{R}_{\mu}$ and $\boldsymbol{R}^{\prime\prime}_{\mu}$ denote respectively the position and the ``rest'' position of the nucleus $\mu$. The vectors $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{Q}}$ and $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{P}}$ denote the position and momentum of the molecular centre of mass.}
\label{frame}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Applying the correspondence principle, the position, momentum and angular momentum observables associated to the center of mass are respectively given by the self-adjoint operators,
\begin{equation}\label{3.3}
\begin{split}
&\boldsymbol{\mathcal{Q}}=\frac{1}{\mathcal{M}}\left(\ \sum_{\mu=1}^{N} M_{\mu}\,\boldsymbol{R}_{\mu}\otimes\mathbb{1}_{e}+\sum_{\nu=1}^{n}\,\mathbb{1}_{\mathcal{N}}\otimes m\,\boldsymbol{r}_{\nu}\ \right)\\
&\boldsymbol{\mathcal{P}}=\sum_{\mu=1}^{N}\boldsymbol{P}_{\mu}\otimes\mathbb{1}_{e}+\sum_{\nu=1}^{n}\,\mathbb{1}_{\mathcal{N}}\otimes\boldsymbol{p}_{\nu}\,,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $M_{\mu}$ is the mass of the nucleus $\mu$, $m$ is the mass of the electron, $\mathcal{M}= M + nm$ is the mass of the molecule defined in terms of the mass $M$ of the nuclei. The definitions~\eqref{3.3} and the commutation relations~\eqref{3.0} imply that the operators $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{P}}$ and $\boldsymbol{\mathcal{Q}}$ satisfy the commutation relation,
\begin{equation}
\label{3.6}
\left[\ \boldsymbol{e}_{j}\cdot\boldsymbol{\mathcal{P}}, \boldsymbol{e}^{k}\cdot\boldsymbol{\mathcal{Q}}\ \right]= -\,i\hbar\left(\boldsymbol{e}_{j}\cdot\boldsymbol{e}^{k}\right)\mathbb{1}\,.
\end{equation}
The ``relative'' position operators $\boldsymbol{R}^{\prime}_{\mu}$ and $\boldsymbol{r}^{\prime}_{\nu}$, and the ``relative'' momentum operators $\boldsymbol{P}^{\prime}_{\mu}$ and $\boldsymbol{p}^{\prime}_{\nu}$ are related respectively to the operators $\boldsymbol{R}_{\mu}$, $\boldsymbol{r}_{\nu}$, $\boldsymbol{P}_{\mu}$ and $\boldsymbol{p}_{\nu}$ by
\begin{equation}\label{3.9}
\begin{split}
&\boldsymbol{R}^{\prime}_{\mu}=\boldsymbol{R}_{\mu}\otimes\mathbb{1}_{e}-\boldsymbol{\mathcal{Q}}\,,\vphantom{\frac{m}{\mathcal{M}}}\\
&\boldsymbol{r}^{\prime}_{\nu}=\mathbb{1}_{\mathcal{N}}\otimes\boldsymbol{r}_{\nu}-\boldsymbol{\mathcal{Q}}\,,\vphantom{\frac{m}{\mathcal{M}}}\\
&\boldsymbol{P}^{\prime}_{\mu}=\boldsymbol{P}_{\mu}\otimes\mathbb{1}_{e}-\frac{M_{\mu}}{\mathcal{M}}\ \boldsymbol{\mathcal{P}}\,,\\
&\boldsymbol{p}^{\prime}_{\nu}=\mathbb{1}_{\mathcal{N}}\otimes\boldsymbol{p}_{\nu}-\frac{m}{\mathcal{M}}\ \boldsymbol{\mathcal{P}}\,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
and satisfy the conditions,
\begin{equation}\label{3.11}
\begin{split}
&\sum_{\mu=1}^{N}\,M_{\mu}\,\boldsymbol{R}^{\prime}_{\mu}+\sum_{\nu=1}^{n} m\ \boldsymbol{r}^{\prime}_{\nu} = \boldsymbol{0}\,,\\
&\sum_{\mu=1}^{N}\,\boldsymbol{P}^{\prime}_{\mu}+\sum_{\nu=1}^{n}\,\boldsymbol{p}^{\prime}_{\nu} = \boldsymbol{0}\,,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
that are a direct consequence of the definitions~\eqref{3.3} and~\eqref{3.9}. The definitions~\eqref{3.9} and the canonical commutations relations~\eqref{3.0} and~\eqref{3.6} imply that the canonical commutations relations between the ``relative'' observables are given by,
\begin{equation}\label{3.13}
\begin{split}
&\left[\ \boldsymbol{e}_j\cdot\boldsymbol{P}^{\prime}_{\mu},\ \boldsymbol{e}^k\cdot\boldsymbol{R}^{\prime}_{\nu}\ \right] = -\,i\hbar\left(\boldsymbol{e}_j\cdot\boldsymbol{e}^k\right)\left( \delta_{\mu\nu}-\,\frac{M_{\mu}}{\mathcal{M}} \right)\,\mathbb{1}\,,\\
&\left[\ \boldsymbol{e}_j\cdot\boldsymbol{p}^{\prime}_{\mu},\ \boldsymbol{e}^k\cdot\boldsymbol{r}^{\prime}_{\nu}\ \right] = -\,i\hbar\left(\boldsymbol{e}_j\cdot\boldsymbol{e}^k\right)\left( \delta_{\mu\nu}-\,\frac{m}{\mathcal{M}} \right)\,\mathbb{1}\,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The ``rest'' position operators $\boldsymbol{R}^{\prime\prime}_{\mu}$ and $\boldsymbol{r}^{\prime\prime}_{\nu}$, and the ``rest'' momentum operators $\boldsymbol{P}^{\prime\prime}_{\mu}$ and $\boldsymbol{p}^{\prime\prime}_{\nu}$ are related respectively to the operators ``relative'' $\boldsymbol{R}^{\prime}_{\mu}$, $\boldsymbol{r}^{\prime}_{\nu}$, $\boldsymbol{P}^{\prime}_{\mu}$ and $\boldsymbol{p}^{\prime}_{\nu}$ by
\begin{equation}\label{3.13bis}
\begin{split}
&\boldsymbol{e}^{j}\cdot\boldsymbol{R}^{\prime\prime}_{\mu} = \left(\boldsymbol{e}^{j}\cdot\mathsf{R}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)^{-1}\cdot\boldsymbol{e}_{k}\right)\,\left(\boldsymbol{e}^{k}\cdot\boldsymbol{R}^{\prime}_{\mu}\right)\,,\\
&\boldsymbol{e}^{j}\cdot\boldsymbol{r}^{\prime\prime}_{\nu} = \left(\boldsymbol{e}^{j}\cdot\mathsf{R}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)^{-1}\cdot\boldsymbol{e}_{k}\right)\,\left(\boldsymbol{e}^{k}\cdot\boldsymbol{r}^{\prime}_{\nu}\right)\,,\\
&\boldsymbol{e}_{j}\cdot\boldsymbol{P}^{\prime\prime}_{\mu} = \frac{1}{2}\,\left\{\ \boldsymbol{e}^{k}\cdot\mathsf{R}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)\cdot\boldsymbol{e}_{j},\ \boldsymbol{e}_k\cdot\boldsymbol{P}^{\prime}_{\mu}\ \right\}\,,\\
&\boldsymbol{e}_{j}\cdot\boldsymbol{p}^{\prime\prime}_{\nu} = \left(\boldsymbol{e}^{k}\cdot\mathsf{R}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)\cdot\boldsymbol{e}_{j}\right)\,\left(\boldsymbol{e}_{k}\cdot\boldsymbol{p}^{\prime}_{\nu}\right)\,.\vphantom{\frac{1}{2}}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $\mathsf{R}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)$ is a rotation operator, which is a tensorial operator that is a function of the pseudo-vectorial operator $\boldsymbol{\omega}$ describing the orientation of the molecular system. The brackets $\{\ ,\ \}$ in the definitions~\eqref{3.13bis} denote an anticommutator accounting for the fact that the rotation operator $\mathsf{R}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)$ does not commute with the position operator $\boldsymbol{P}^{\prime}_{\mu}$ of the nuclei. In the definitions~\eqref{3.13bis}, we used the Einstein summation convention on alternated indices. The ``rest'' observables satisfy the conditions,
\begin{equation}\label{3.11bis}
\begin{split}
&\sum_{\mu=1}^{N}\,M_{\mu}\,\boldsymbol{R}^{\prime\prime}_{\mu} + \sum_{\nu=1}^{n}\,m\,\boldsymbol{r}^{\prime\prime}_{\nu} = \boldsymbol{0}\,,\\
&\sum_{\mu=1}^{N}\,\boldsymbol{P}^{\prime\prime}_{\mu}+\sum_{\nu=1}^{n}\,\boldsymbol{p}^{\prime\prime}_{\nu} = \boldsymbol{0}\,,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
that are a direct consequence of the conditions~\eqref{3.11} and the definitions~\eqref{3.13bis}.
The definitions~\eqref{3.13bis}, the commutation relations~\eqref{3.13}, the rotational group action~\eqref{3.23bis} and the relation~\eqref{3.38} imply that the canonical commutation relations between the ``rest'' observables are given by,~\cite{Brechet:2014}
\begin{align}\label{3.17quad}
&\left[\ \boldsymbol{e}_j\cdot\boldsymbol{P}^{\prime\prime}_{\mu},\ \boldsymbol{e}^k\cdot\boldsymbol{R}^{\prime\prime}_{\nu}\ \right] = -\,i\hbar\left(\boldsymbol{e}_j\cdot\boldsymbol{e}^k\right)\left(\delta_{\mu\nu}-\frac{M_{\mu}}{\mathcal{M}}\right)\,\mathbb{1}\nonumber\\ &-\left[\,\boldsymbol{e}_{j}\cdot\boldsymbol{P}^{\prime\prime}_{\mu},\,\boldsymbol{e}^{\ell}\cdot\boldsymbol{\omega}\,\right]\,\boldsymbol{e}^{k}\cdot\left(\boldsymbol{n}_{(\ell)}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)\times\boldsymbol{R}^{\prime\prime}_{\nu}\right)\,,\\
&\left[\ \boldsymbol{e}_j\cdot\boldsymbol{p}^{\prime\prime}_{\mu},\ \boldsymbol{e}^k\cdot\boldsymbol{r}^{\prime\prime}_{\nu}\ \right] = -\,i\hbar\left(\boldsymbol{e}_j\cdot\boldsymbol{e}^k\right)\left(\delta_{\mu\nu}-\frac{m}{\mathcal{M}}\right)\,\mathbb{1}\,,
\end{align}
where the structural differences are due to the fact that the nuclear ``rest'' momentum $\boldsymbol{P}^{\prime\prime}_{\mu}$ does not commute with the molecular orientation operator $\boldsymbol{\omega}$ whereas the electronic ``rest'' momentum $\boldsymbol{p}^{\prime\prime}_{\nu}$ does.
\section{Internal observables}
The ``rest'' position and momentum observables can be recast in terms of internal observables characterising the vibrational, rotational and electronic degrees of freedom of the quantum molecular system. In order to do so, we introduce the scalar operators $Q^{\alpha}$, where $\alpha = 1,..,3N-6$, characterising the deformation amplitude of the vibrational modes of the $N$ nuclei and the vectorial operators $\boldsymbol{q}_{(\nu)}$, where $\nu = 1,..,n$, related to the position of the electrons. The ``rest'' position operators $\boldsymbol{R}^{\prime\prime}_{\mu}$ and $\boldsymbol{r}^{\prime\prime}_{\mu}$ are expressed in terms of the operators $Q^{\alpha}$, $\boldsymbol{q}_{(\nu)}$ and the equilibrium configuration $\boldsymbol{R}^{(0)}_{\mu}$ of the nucleus $\mu$, i.e.~\cite{Brechet:2014}
\begin{align}\label{3.14}
&\boldsymbol{R}^{\prime\prime}_{\mu} = \boldsymbol{R}^{(0)}_{\mu}\,\mathbb{1}+\frac{1}{\sqrt{M_{\mu}}}\,Q^{\alpha}\,\boldsymbol{X}_{\mu\alpha} -\,\frac{m}{M}\!\sum_{\nu,\nu^{\prime} = 1}^{n}\!A_{\nu\nu^{\prime}}\,\boldsymbol{q}_{(\nu^{\prime})}\,,\nonumber\\
&\boldsymbol{r}^{\prime\prime}_{\nu} = \sum_{\nu^{\prime} = 1}^{n}\,A_{\nu\nu^{\prime}}\,\boldsymbol{q}_{(\nu^{\prime})}\,,
\end{align}
where we used Einstein's implicit summation convention for the vibrational modes $\alpha$, and the matrix elements $A_{\nu\nu^{\prime}}$ are defined as,
\begin{equation}\label{3.15.A}
A_{\nu\nu^{\prime}} \equiv \delta_{\nu\nu^{\prime}} + \frac{1}{n}\,\left(\sqrt{\frac{M}{\mathcal{M}}}-\,1\right)\,.
\end{equation}
Similarly, the ``rest'' momentum operators $\boldsymbol{P}^{\prime\prime}_{\mu}$ and are expressed in terms of the operators $P_{\alpha}$, $\boldsymbol{p}_{(\nu^{\prime})}$ and the angular velocity pseudo-vectorial operator $\boldsymbol{\Omega}$, i.e.~\cite{Brechet:2014}
\begin{align}\label{3.25}
&\boldsymbol{P}^{\prime\prime}_{\mu} = \boldsymbol{\Omega}\times\left(M_{\mu}\,\boldsymbol{R}^{(0)}_{\mu}\right) + \sqrt{M_{\mu}}\,P_{\alpha}\,\boldsymbol{X}^{\alpha}_{\mu}\nonumber\\
&\phantom{\boldsymbol{P}^{\prime\prime}_{\mu} =}-\,\frac{M_{\mu}}{M}\!\sum_{\nu,\nu^{\prime} = 1}^{n}\!A_{\nu\nu^{\prime}}\,\boldsymbol{p}_{(\nu^{\prime})}\,,\nonumber\\
&\boldsymbol{p}^{\prime\prime}_{\nu} = \sum_{\nu^{\prime} = 1}^{n}\,A_{\nu\nu^{\prime}}\,\boldsymbol{p}_{(\nu^{\prime})}\,.
\end{align}
The definition~\eqref{3.15.A} is not unique and the particular choice made here leads to the usual structure~\eqref{3.32.1} of the canonical commutation relation between the operators $\boldsymbol{q}_{(\nu)}$ and $\boldsymbol{p}_{(\nu)}$. The vector set $\{\boldsymbol{X}_{\mu\alpha}\}$ is the basis characterising the vibrational modes that is orthonormal to the dual orthonormal basis $\{\boldsymbol{X}^{\beta}_{\mu}\}$, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{3.18}
\sum_{\mu=1}^{N}\,\boldsymbol{X}_{\mu\alpha}\cdot\boldsymbol{X}^{\beta}_{\mu} = \delta^{\beta}_{\alpha}\,.
\end{equation}
In order for the identities~\eqref{3.14} and~\eqref{3.25} to satisfy the conditions~\eqref{3.11bis}, we need to impose conditions on the vectors $\boldsymbol{R}^{(0)}_{\mu}$ and $\boldsymbol{X}_{\mu\alpha}$. First, we choose the origin of the coordinate system such that it coincides with the center of mass at equilibrium, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{3.16}
\sum_{\mu=1}^{N} M_{\mu}\,\boldsymbol{R}^{(0)}_{\mu} = \boldsymbol{0}\,.\\
\end{equation}
Then, we require the deformation modes of the molecule to preserve the momentum, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{3.17}
\sum_{\mu=1}^{N}\,\sqrt{M_{\mu}}\,\boldsymbol{X}_{\mu\alpha}=\boldsymbol{0}\,.
\end{equation}
We also require the deformation modes of the molecule to preserve the orbital angular momentum, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{3.17bis}
\sum_{\mu=1}^{N} \sqrt{M_{\mu}}\,\left(\boldsymbol{R}^{(0)}_{\mu}\times\boldsymbol{X}_{\mu\alpha}\right)=\boldsymbol{0}\,.
\end{equation}
The constraints~\eqref{3.16}-\eqref{3.17bis} are known as the Eckart conditions~\cite{Eckart:1935}. Finally, we choose the orientation of the coordinate system such that the inertia tensor of the equilibrium position of the nuclei is diagonal, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{3.16bis}
\begin{split}
&\sum_{\mu=1}^{N} M_{\mu}\left(\boldsymbol{e}_j\cdot\boldsymbol{R}^{(0)}_{\mu}\right)\left(\boldsymbol{e}_k\cdot\boldsymbol{R}^{(0)}_{\mu}\right)\\
&= \sum_{\mu=1}^{N} M_{\mu}\left(\boldsymbol{e}_j\cdot\boldsymbol{e}_k\right)\left(\boldsymbol{e}_k\cdot\boldsymbol{R}^{(0)}_{\mu}\right)^2\,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The first relation~\eqref{3.13bis} and the physical constraints~\eqref{3.16} and~\eqref{3.17bis} determine the rotation operator $\mathsf{R}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)$, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{3.39 ter}
\sum_{\mu=1}^{N}\, M_{\mu}\,\boldsymbol{R}^{(0)}_{\mu}\times\left(\mathsf{R}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)^{-1}\cdot\boldsymbol{R}^{\prime}_{\mu}\right)=\boldsymbol{0}\,.
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[htb]\hspace{3mm}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.80\columnwidth]{molecule.pdf}
\caption{Molecule rotating with an angular velocity $\boldsymbol{\Omega}$ around the vertical axis coinciding with the orientation $\boldsymbol{\omega}$. The vector $\boldsymbol{R}^{(0)}_{\mu}$ and the vectorial operator $\boldsymbol{R}^{\prime\prime}_{\mu}$ are respectively the equilibrium configuration and ``rest'' position of the nucleus $\mu$. The scalar $Q_{\alpha}$ is the molecular vibration mode $\alpha$.}
\label{molecule}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
To emphasize the physical motivation behind the previous formal development, we consider the classical counterpart of a quantum molecular system illustrated on Fig~\ref{molecule}. In a classical framework, the classical counterpart of the operatorial relation~\eqref{3.39 ter} determines the rest frame of the molecular system. Moreover, the equilibrium configuration of a molecule is given by a vector set $\{\boldsymbol{R}^{(0)}_{\mu}\}$ describing the position of the nuclei. The condition~\eqref{3.16} implies that the centre of mass of the molecule coincides with the origin of the coordinate system and the condition~\eqref{3.16bis} requires the inertial tensor of this molecule to be diagonal with respect to the coordinate system. The set of orthonormal vectors $\{\boldsymbol{X}_{\mu\alpha}\}$ characterise the $3N-6$ normal deformation modes of the molecule and thus account for the vibrations. The condition~\eqref{3.17} implies that the normal deformation modes preserve the momentum of the molecule and the condition~\eqref{3.17bis} requires that these modes also to preserve the orbital angular momentum.
The internal observables are described by the scalar operators $Q^{\alpha}$, $P_{\alpha}$, the vectorial operators $\boldsymbol{q}_{(\nu)}$, $\boldsymbol{p}_{(\nu)}$ and the pseudo-vectorial operators $\boldsymbol{\Omega}$ and $\boldsymbol{\omega}$. The inversion of the definitions~\eqref{3.14} and~\eqref{3.25} yields explicit expressions for the internal observables $Q^{\alpha}$, $P_{\alpha}$, $\boldsymbol{q}_{(\nu)}$ and $\boldsymbol{p}_{(\nu)}$, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{3.27 prime}
\begin{split}
&Q^{\alpha} = \sum_{\mu=1}^{N}\,\sqrt{M_{\mu}}\, \boldsymbol{X}^{\alpha}_{\mu}\cdot\Big(\boldsymbol{R}^{\prime\prime}_{\mu}-\,\boldsymbol{R}^{(0)}_{\mu}\,\mathbb{1}\Big)\,,\\
&\boldsymbol{q}_{(\nu)} = \sum_{\nu^{\prime}=1}^{n}\left(\delta_{\nu\nu^{\prime}} + \frac{1}{n}\,\left(\sqrt{\frac{\mathcal{M}}{M}}-\,1\right)\right)\,\boldsymbol{r}^{\prime\prime}_{\nu^{\prime}}\,,\\
&P_{\alpha} = \sum_{\mu=1}^{N}\frac{1}{\sqrt{M_{\mu}}}\,\left(\boldsymbol{X}_{\mu\alpha}\cdot\boldsymbol{P}^{\prime\prime}_{\mu}\right)\,,\\
&\boldsymbol{p}_{(\nu)} = \sum_{\nu^{\prime}=1}^{n}\left(\delta_{\nu\nu^{\prime}} + \frac{1}{n}\,\left(\sqrt{\frac{\mathcal{M}}{M}}-\,1\right)\right)\,\boldsymbol{p}^{\prime\prime}_{\nu^{\prime}}\,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The expressions~\eqref{3.27 prime}, the commutations relations~\eqref{3.17quad} between the ``rest'' observables and the Eckart conditions~\eqref{3.16}-\eqref{3.17bis} yield the canonical commutation relations relations between the vibrational internal observables and the electronic internal observables respectively, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{3.32.1}
\begin{split}
&\left[\ P_{\alpha},\ Q^{\beta}\ \right] = -\,i\hbar\,\delta^{\beta}_{\alpha}\,\mathbb{1}\,,\\
&\left[\ \boldsymbol{e}_{j}\cdot\boldsymbol{p}_{(\nu)},\ \boldsymbol{e}^{k}\cdot\boldsymbol{q}_{(\nu^{\prime})}\ \right] = -\,i\hbar\,\left(\boldsymbol{e}_{j}\cdot\boldsymbol{e}^{k}\right)\,\delta_{\nu\nu^{\prime}}\,\mathbb{1}\,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\section{Orbital angular momentum observable}
The ``relative'' orbital angular momentum operator $\boldsymbol{L}^{\prime}$ is defined as,
\begin{equation}\label{3.17pet}
\boldsymbol{L}^{\prime} = \sum_{\mu=1}^{N}\,\boldsymbol{R}^{\prime}_{\mu}\times\boldsymbol{P}^{\prime}_{\mu} + \sum_{\nu=1}^{n}\,\boldsymbol{r}^{\prime}_{\nu}\times\boldsymbol{p}^{\prime}_{\nu}\,,
\end{equation}
and the ``rest'' orbital angular momentum operator $\boldsymbol{L}$ is defined as,
\begin{equation}\label{3.26bis}
\boldsymbol{L} = \frac{1}{2}\,\sum_{\mu=1}^{N}\,\left[\ \boldsymbol{R}^{\prime\prime}_{\mu},\ \boldsymbol{P}^{\prime\prime}_{\mu}\ \right]_{\boldsymbol{\times}} + \frac{1}{2}\,\sum_{\nu=1}^{n}\,\left[\ \boldsymbol{r}^{\prime\prime}_{\nu},\ \boldsymbol{p}^{\prime\prime}_{\nu}\ \right]_{\boldsymbol{\times}}\,,
\end{equation}
where we used the notation convention $\left[\ \boldsymbol{A},\ \boldsymbol{B}\ \right]_{\boldsymbol{\times}} = \boldsymbol{A}\times\boldsymbol{B} -\,\boldsymbol{B}\times\boldsymbol{A}$.
In order to express ``rest'' orbital angular momentum operator $\boldsymbol{L}$ in terms of the internal observables, we introduce the the inertia tensorial operator $\mathsf{I}\left(Q^{\,\boldsymbol{.}}\right)$. The components of the operator are defined as,
\begin{equation}\label{3.31}
\boldsymbol{e}_{k}\cdot\mathsf{I}\left(Q^{\,\boldsymbol{.}}\right)\cdot\boldsymbol{e}_{\ell} = \left(\boldsymbol{e}_{k}\cdot\mathsf{I}_{0}\cdot\boldsymbol{e}_{\ell}\right)\,\mathbb{1} + Q^{\alpha}\,\left(\boldsymbol{e}_{k}\cdot\mathsf{I}_{\alpha}\cdot\boldsymbol{e}_{\ell}\right)\,,
\end{equation}
where the dot in the argument of the operator $\mathsf{I}\left(Q^{\,\boldsymbol{.}}\right)$ refers to all the vibrational modes. The first term on the RHS of the definition~\eqref{3.31} is required to be diagonal with respect to the rotating molecular system according to the constraint~\eqref{3.16bis}, i.e.
\begin{align}\label{3.32bis}
&\boldsymbol{e}_{k}\cdot\mathsf{I}_{0}\cdot\boldsymbol{e}_{\ell} = \left(\boldsymbol{e}_{k}\cdot\mathsf{I}_{0}\cdot\boldsymbol{e}_{k}\right)\left(\boldsymbol{e}_{k}\cdot\boldsymbol{e}_{\ell}\right)\\
&\phantom{\boldsymbol{e}_{k}\cdot\mathsf{I}_{0}\cdot\boldsymbol{e}_{\ell}}= \sum_{\mu=1}^{N}\,M_{\mu}\,\left({\boldsymbol{R}^{(0)}_{\mu}}^{2}-\,\left(\boldsymbol{e}_{k}\cdot\boldsymbol{R}^{(0)}_{\mu}\right)^{2}\right)\left(\boldsymbol{e}_{k}\cdot\boldsymbol{e}_{\ell}\right)\,,\nonumber
\end{align}
and the second term on the RHS, i.e.
\begin{align}\label{3.33}
&\boldsymbol{e}_{k}\cdot\mathsf{I}_{\alpha}\cdot\boldsymbol{e}_{\ell} = \sum_{\mu=1}^{N}\,\sqrt{M_{\mu}}\, \left(\boldsymbol{e}_{k}\times\boldsymbol{X}_{\mu\alpha}\right)\cdot\left(\boldsymbol{e}_{\ell}\times\boldsymbol{R}^{(0)}_{\mu}\right)\nonumber\\
&\phantom{\boldsymbol{e}_{k}\cdot\mathsf{I}_{\alpha}\cdot\boldsymbol{e}_{\ell}} = \boldsymbol{e}_{\ell}\cdot\mathsf{I}_{\alpha}\cdot\boldsymbol{e}_{k}\,,
\end{align}
is symmetric under the condition~\eqref{3.17bis}. Using the definitions~\eqref{3.14}-\eqref{3.25} and~\eqref{3.31}-\eqref{3.33} the ``rest'' orbital angular momentum~\eqref{3.26bis} is recast as,~\cite{Brechet:2014}
\begin{align}\label{3.27}
&\boldsymbol{L} = \frac{1}{2}\,\Big\{\ \mathsf{I}\left(Q^{\,\boldsymbol{.}}\right),\ \boldsymbol{\Omega}\ \Big\}_{\mathsmaller{\bullet}} + \frac{1}{2}\,\sum_{\mu = 1}^{N}\,\left[\ Q^{\alpha}\,\boldsymbol{X}_{\mu\alpha},\ P_{\beta}\,\boldsymbol{X}^{\beta}_{\mu}\ \right]_{\times}\nonumber\\
&\phantom{\boldsymbol{L} =} + \frac{1}{2}\,\sum_{\nu = 1}^{n}\,\left[\ \boldsymbol{q}_{(\nu)},\ \boldsymbol{p}_{(\nu)}\ \right]_{\boldsymbol{\times}}\,,
\end{align}
where we used the convention $\left\{\ \boldsymbol{A},\ \boldsymbol{B}\ \right\}_{\mathsmaller{\bullet}} = \boldsymbol{A}\cdot\boldsymbol{B} + \boldsymbol{B}\cdot\boldsymbol{A}$. In expression~\eqref{3.27}, the first term on the RHS represents the molecular orbital angular momentum, the second term corresponds to the deformation orbital angular momentum and the last term is the electronic orbital angular momentum.
The orbital angular momentum operator $\boldsymbol{L}$ commutes with the operators $Q^{\alpha}$, $P_{\beta}$, $\boldsymbol{q}_{(\nu)}$ and $\boldsymbol{p}_{(\nu)}$ but it does not commute with the orientation operator $\boldsymbol{\omega}$. The commutation relation between the angular velocity operator $\boldsymbol{\Omega}$ and the molecular orientation operator $\boldsymbol{\omega}$ is given by,~\cite{Brechet:2014}
\begin{equation}\label{3.33.1}
\left[\ \boldsymbol{e}^{j}\cdot\boldsymbol{\Omega},\ \boldsymbol{e}^k\cdot\boldsymbol{\omega}\ \right] = -\,i\hbar\,\left(\boldsymbol{e}^{j}\cdot\mathsf{I}\left(Q^{\,\boldsymbol{.}}\right)^{-1}\cdot\boldsymbol{m}^{(k)}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)\right)\,.
\end{equation}
The definition~\eqref{3.27} and the commutation relation~\eqref{3.33.1} yield the commutation relation between $\boldsymbol{L}$ and $\boldsymbol{\omega}$, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{3.35.1}
\left[\ \boldsymbol{L},\ \boldsymbol{e}^{j}\cdot\boldsymbol{\omega}\ \right] = -\,i\hbar\ \boldsymbol{m}^{(j)}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)\,.
\end{equation}
The property~\eqref{3.39} and the commutation relation~\eqref{3.35.1} imply that the canonical commutation relations for the quantum description of a rotation are given by,
\begin{equation}\label{3.36.1}
\left[\ \boldsymbol{n}_{(j)}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)\cdot\boldsymbol{L},\ \boldsymbol{e}^{k}\cdot{\boldsymbol{\omega}}\ \right] = -\,i\hbar\,\left(\boldsymbol{e}_{j}\cdot\boldsymbol{e}^{k}\right)\,.
\end{equation}
In order to avoid any confusion, we would like to emphasize that the canonical commutation relations~\eqref{3.36.1} involve the orientation operator rather than the phase operator. For a one-dimensional harmonic oscillator, it is well-known that the latter is not self-adjoint since it is defined in terms of the position and momentum operators obeying canonical commutation relations~\cite{Carruthers:1968,Alimov:1979}. On the contrary, since the orientation operator $\boldsymbol{\omega}$ is a real function of the position operators, it is a self-adjoint operator.
\section{Heisenberg inequalities}
The vibrational canonical commutation relation~\eqref{3.32.1} implies the existence of vibrational Heisenberg inequalities, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{3.37}
\Delta\,P_{\alpha}\,\Delta\,Q^{\beta} \geq \displaystyle{\frac{\hbar}{2}}\,\delta_{\alpha}^{\beta}\,.
\end{equation}
Similarly, the electronic canonical commutation relation~\eqref{3.32.1} implies the existence of electronic Heisenberg inequalities, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{3.40}
\Delta\left(\boldsymbol{e}_{j}\cdot\boldsymbol{p}_{(\nu)}\right)\,\Delta\left(\boldsymbol{e}^{k}\cdot\boldsymbol{q}_{(\nu^{\prime})}\right) \geq \displaystyle{\frac{\hbar}{2}}\,\delta_{\nu\nu^{\prime}}\,\left(\boldsymbol{e}_{j}\cdot\boldsymbol{e}^{k}\right)\,.
\end{equation}
Finally, the rotational canonical commutation relation~\eqref{3.36.1} implies the existence of rotational Heisenberg inequalities, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{3.41}
\Delta\left(\boldsymbol{n}_{(j)}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)\cdot\boldsymbol{L}\right)\,\Delta\left(\boldsymbol{e}^{k}\cdot\boldsymbol{\omega}\right) \geq \displaystyle{\frac{\hbar}{2}}\,\left(\boldsymbol{e}_{j}\cdot\boldsymbol{e}^{k}\right)\,.
\end{equation}
In order to compute explicitly the dispersions in the rotational Heisenberg inequalities~\eqref{3.41}, cyclic boundary conditions have to be taken carefully into account~\cite{Holevo:2011}.
The orbital angular momentum $\boldsymbol{L}$ and the corresponding dispersion $\Delta\left(\boldsymbol{n}_{(j)}\left(\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)\cdot\boldsymbol{L}\right)$ can be measured using a circularly polarised light beam scattered by the spinning molecules~\cite{Allen:1992} based on a recent technique involving a rotational Doppler shift~\cite{Lavery:2013}. The shift in frequency of circularly polarized light due to the scattering is proportional the angular velocity of the molecule $\boldsymbol{\Omega}$ and to the sum of the orbital angular momentum of the molecule $\boldsymbol{L}$ and the angular momentum of the light beam.
The molecular orientation axis $\boldsymbol{\omega}$ and the corresponding dispersion $\Delta\left(\boldsymbol{e}^{k}\cdot\boldsymbol{\omega}\right)$ can be measured using a strong laser pulse~\cite{Stapelfeldt:2003,Viftrup:2007}. The pulse induces an electric dipole along the direction of highest polarisability of the molecules. In order to minimise the electric dipolar energy, the dipoles align with the electric field of the laser pulse thus orienting the molecules.
\section{Conclusion}
In order to obtain the Rotational Heisenberg Inequalities, we establish the quantum dynamics of an isolated molecular system where all the physical degrees of freedom are described by operators, including the rotational degrees of freedom that are defined by the Lie algebra of the rotation group.
Since there exists no rest frame in a quantum description of a molecular system, we used algebraic relations between the position and momentum observables associated to the nuclei and electrons in order to determine the position and momentum ``rest'' observables defined with respect to the rotating molecule. Recasting the ``rest'' observables in terms of internal observables accounting for the vibrational rotational and electronic degrees of freedom leads to one canonical commutation relation for each degree of freedom. These commutation relations yield vibrational electronic and rotational Heisenberg inequalities.
The Rotational Heisenberg Inequalities~\eqref{3.41} are the product of the molecular orbital angular momentum dispersion and the molecular orientation dispersion.
|
\section{Introduction}
\begin{figure*}
\onefigure[width=6.6in]{Fig1.ps}
\caption{(Color online) MBE growth of LiFeAs film.
(a) The tetragonal structure of LiFeAs. (b) RHEED pattern of (001) surface of SrTiO$_3$ substrate, which shows the 2$\times$2 reconstruction.
The arrows indicate the 1$\times$1 stripes. (c,d) RHEED patterns of LiFeAs thin film on SrTiO$_3$ substrate after 8 (c) and 60 (d) minutes deposition.
The weak spots marked by the arrows show the formation of small amount of Li$_3$As clusters on the surface during growth.
(e,f) STM topographic images of SrTiO$_3$(001) (e) and 25 QL LiFeAs film (f). Image size: 500~nm$\times$250~nm, sample bias $1.0$~V,
tunneling current $100$~pA. (g) Atomically resolved STM topography image on the surface of a 25~QL LiFeAs film
(10~nm$\times$10~nm, $8.0$~mV, $2.0$~nA). (h) The evolution of the in-plane lattice constant $a_{\text{in-plane}}$ determined by RHEED
as a function of the film thickness. (i) The $dI/dV$ spectrum on the surface of a 13~QL LiFeAs film.
}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure*}
LiFeAs is a ``111'' type iron-based superconductor (Fe-SC)
and has attracted much attention recently due to its unusual properties compared to other superconducting iron pnictides.
Without chemical doping, the stoichiometric LiFeAs already shows a superconducting transition at 18~K under the ambient pressure \cite{jin08,chu08,pitcher08}.
More interestingly, the magnetic structure driven by the Fermi surface nesting between electron-like and hole-like pockets,
an essential ingredient for the parent compound of iron pnictide superconductors, is absent in LiFeAs \cite{buechner10,takahashi12,felner09,buechner12}.
Both $s_{\pm}$-wave singlet and $p$-wave triplet pairing have been proposed for LiFeAs \cite{platt11,brydon11}.
LiFeAs has a layered tetragonal structure $(p4/nmm)$.
As shown in fig.~\ref{fig1}(a), an edge-sharing FeAs$_4$-tetrahedra layer in LiFeAs consists of one layer of Fe sandwiched between two layers of As.
Compared with the square lattice formed by the Fe atoms, the lattice of As atoms rotates by 45$^\circ$ and enlarges by a factor of $\sqrt{2}$ \cite{jin08,chu08,pitcher08}.
Two layers of Li atoms are intercalated between FeAs and form the neutral cleaving plane without surface reconstruction.
Therefore, the surface sensitive probes, such as scanning tunneling microscope (STM) and angle resolved photoelectron spectroscopy (ARPES),
have been successfully applied to capture the intrinsic properties of LiFeAs \cite{davis12,pennec12,hess12,hanaguri12,buechner10,takahashi12}.
Synthesis of high quality single-crystal is critical for a comprehensive study of LiFeAs.
Similar to some other iron pnictides, LiFeAs was first synthesized by the high pressure method \cite{jin08,chu08,pitcher08}.
The flux and self-flux methods have also been introduced to produce larger size single crystal up to millimeter \cite{kwon10,buechner10b}. There has been no LiFeAs film grown by MBE, a powerful method to grow single crystal thin films up to centimeter scale, till now.
Although several other iron arsenide superconductors have been grown by MBE \cite{agatsuma10,ueda11,ueda12,takeda12}, those films were all thicker than 100~nm and the interfacial behavior has never been studied. In order to achieve thickness control with atomic precision, we performed epitaxial growth of LiFeAs single crystal thin films on SrTiO$_3$(001) surface.
The superconductivity in LiFeAs film is then characterized by STM and transport measurement.
\begin{figure*}
\onefigure[width=6.6in]{Fig2.ps}
\caption{(Color online)
Evolution of topography and RHEED pattern with different Li flux and substrate temperature.
(a-f) STM images and RHEED of LiFeAs films grown at 345~$^\circ$C substrate temperature with the same Fe flux.
The Li source temperatures are 374~$^\circ$C (a,b), 390~$^\circ$C (c,d) and 400~$^\circ$C (e.f), respectively.
The arrow in (e) indicates a triangular Li$_3$As island. (g,h) STM image and RHEED of a sample
grown at 450~$^\circ$C substrate temperature. All the fluxes are the same as (e).
Image conditions for all STM images: $3.0$~V and $30$~pA.
}
\label{fig2}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}
\onefigure[width=3.25in]{Fig3.ps}
\caption{(Color online)
STM topography of LiFeAs films with various thicknesses.
The temperature of substrate was fixed at 450~$^\circ$C during growth.
(a) 1.5~QL (500~nm $\times$~500 nm, $3.0$~V, $30$~pA).
(b) Detailed features of the film in (a) (100~nm $\times$~100 nm, $2.0$~V, $50$~pA). Inset, the atom resolved image obtained from a 2QL island (8~nm $\times$~8 nm, $50$~mV, $100$~pA).
(c) 4.5~QL (300~nm $\times$~300 nm, $3.0$~V, $30$~pA).
(d) Detailed features of the film in (c) (100~nm $\times$~100 nm, $1.0$~V, $80$~pA).
(e) 7.5~QL (500~nm $\times$~500 nm, $3.5$~V, $25$~pA). (f) 13~QL (500~nm $\times$ 500~nm, $4.0$~V, $30$~pA).
}
\label{fig3}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\onefigure[width=3.25in]{Fig4.ps}
\caption{(Color online)
Defects in LiFeAs film. (a) Image showing Li and As vacancies. $5.0$~mV, $1.0$~nA.
(b) A Li vacancy. $5.0$~mV, $1.0$~nA.
(c) An As vacancy. $8.0$~mV, $0.4$~nA.
The lattice model of LiFeAs is superposed on the images.
White, red and grey balls stand for the topmost Li, As and Fe atoms, respectively.
The vacancy is indicated by a cross.
}
\label{fig4}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\onefigure[width=3.25in]{Fig5.ps}
\caption{(Color online)
Thickness dependence of the $dI/dV$ spectra. (a) from $-0.1$~V to 0.1~V and (b) from $-20$~mV to 20~mV. The spectra are vertically shifted for clarity.
Superconducting gap begins to emerge when thickness is 4~QL. The dashed line in (a) indicates the kink at 36~meV,
which was also seen in the cleaved LiFeAs single crystals.
The dashed lines in (b) label the coherence peaks.
}
\label{fig5}
\end{figure}
\section{Experimental method}
The experiment was carried out on a Unisoku low-temperature STM combined with MBE.
The base pressure is lower than $1\times10^{-10}$ Torr. The LiFeAs films were grown in the MBE chamber
and immediately transferred into the STM at a temperature of 4.7~K without taking out of the ultra-high vacuum (UHV) environment.
A PtIr alloy tip was used in STM for topography and spectroscopy measurement.
The Nb-doped SrTiO$_3$(001) substrate was cleaned in UHV by direct current heating up to 1200~$^\circ$C for several times.
Each time the heating lasted for 5 minutes.
The temperature of substrate was monitored by an infrared pyrometer. Li and Fe were evaporated from two standard Knudsen cells (K-cell).
The evaporation temperatures were around 400~$^\circ$C and 1100~$^\circ$C, respectively.
In the conventional MBE growth of arsenide, As flux is obtained by directly heating solid As, producing As$_2$ and As$_4$ molecules with low reactivity.
In order to obtain the more reactive atomic As, we used FeAs compound with high purity as the source for As.
FeAs compound was heated to $\sim400~^\circ$C in K-cell and decomposed into atomic Fe and As.
Due to the huge vapor pressure difference between As ($10^{-4}$ Torr at 200~$^\circ$C) and Fe ($10^{-4}$ Torr at 1220~$^\circ$C),
the flux consists of nearly pure As atoms, which was confirmed by quadruple mass spectrometer.
During the epitaxial growth, the flux of As was much higher than that of Fe (flux ratio $>$ 20:1).
The flux ratio between Fe and Li was finely tuned to prevent the formation of Li$_3$As or FeAs, which shows additional spots in the RHEED pattern.
A Sigma Q-pod crystal oscillator measured the flux of Fe.
The growth rate of LiFeAs films is approximately 0.2$\sim$0.4 quintuple-layer (QL, one LiFeAs unit cell) per minute, depending on the temperature of Fe source.
The transport measurements were carried out {\it ex situ} on a Quantum Design PPMS system, where the lowest temperature is 1.8~K and the highest magnetic field is 9~T.
To avoid the degrading of LiFeAs film in the ambient atmosphere, several nanometer thick Ag protection layer was deposited on the top of the LiFeAs epitaxial film before taking out of UHV.
\section{Results and discussion}
The sharp patterns and Kikuchi lines of reflection high energy electron diffraction (RHEED) in fig.~\ref{fig1}(b) show the cleanness and flatness
of the SrTiO$_{3}$ substrate
after high temperature treatment in UHV. Besides the 1$\times$1 pattern for the (001) surface along the $\langle010\rangle$ direction
[indicated by the arrows in fig.~\ref{fig1}(b)], the lines between the 1$\times$1 streaks show the 2$\times$2 reconstruction of the surface.
450~$^\circ$C is the optimal substrate temperature to achieve layer-by-layer growth of LiFeAs on SrTiO$_{3}$.
Upon growth, the RHEED pattern of substrate disappeared quickly and then much more broadened 1$\times$1 pattern [fig.~\ref{fig1}(c)]
appeared with the same orientation as the substrate, indicating the coherent epitaxial nature of the growth.
As the deposition time increases, the RHEED pattern becomes shaper. No RHEED intensity oscillation has been observed.
Figure 1(d) shows the 1$\times$1 RHEED pattern of a 25~QL LiFeAs.
The single-crystalline nature of the thin film was further verified by the RHEED patterns with different substrate azimuth.
The very weak spots marked by the arrows in fig.~\ref{fig1}(d) are attributed to a small amount of Li$_{3}$As clusters on the surface of the film,
which is introduced by slightly excessive Li flux. The superconductivity of LiFeAs films is not significantly influenced by these Li$_{3}$As clusters
(however excessive Fe flux does severely suppress superconductivity). With careful tuning of the Li flux, the extra spots can be completely removed.
In the STM image of the substrate [fig.~\ref{fig1}(e)], the average terrace width is up to several hundred nanometers.
The step height of 3.9~{\AA} corresponds to one unit cell of SrTiO$_{3}$.
The image in fig.~\ref{fig1}(f) reveals the atomically flat surface of an epitaxial 25~QL LiFeAs film on SrTiO$_3$ and the flat area size can be up to 100~nm.
The atomic step height 6.3~{\AA}, measured from the STM image, corresponds to one QL of LiFeAs.
In addition, rectangular islands and screw dislocations are visible on the terraces.
Atomically resolved image [fig.~\ref{fig1}(g)] shows the square lattice with an atomic spacing of 3.8~{\AA},
which is consistent with the lattice constant of LiFeAs(001) \cite{davis12, pennec12, hess12, hanaguri12}.
Similar to the cleaved (001) surface, no surface reconstruction has been observed on the epitaxial LiFeAs thin film.
We believe that the surface is terminated by Li instead of As since the As-terminated surface normally has reconstruction for iron pnictide superconductor \cite{davis10}.
The thickness dependence of the lattice constant is estimated from RHEED pattern and shown in fig.~\ref{fig1}(h).
The in-plane lattice constant of LiFeAs thin film continuously decreases from 3.91~{\AA}, the lattice constant of SrTiO$_{3}$ substrate, to 3.77~{\AA}, that of the LiFeAs bulk material.
The curve in fig.~\ref{fig1}(h) shows that the lattice of the first few epitaxial layers expands due to the lattice mismatch between LiFeAs and SrTiO$_3$ substrate.
The lattice of the film relaxes to that of the bulk material within 15~QL.
Well-defined superconducting gap with sharp coherence peaks is revealed by scanning tunneling spectroscopy (STS) on a film thicker than 13~QL [fig.~\ref{fig1}(i)].
The gap size $\Delta\sim7$~meV is consistent with the previous reports on bulk materials \cite{davis12,pennec12,hanaguri12}.
Li/Fe flux ratio is essential for LiFeAs film growth. Figures 2(a) to 2(f) illustrate three samples grown under
the same Fe flux and substrate temperature (345~$^\circ$C), but with different Li flux.
The nominal thickness of the samples is 3~QL. When Li is insufficient,
small islands of several nanometers appear [fig.~\ref{fig2}(a)] and the RHEED pattern [fig.~\ref{fig2}(b)] exhibits dim spots.
If the Li flux is increased to a certain value, continuous film [fig.~\ref{fig2}(c)] with high density of screw dislocations is formed.
The RHEED pattern [fig.~\ref{fig2}(d)] shows stripes corresponding to the LiFeAs lattice constant 3.8~{\AA}.
Further increase of Li flux leads to triangular islands on the film [fig.~\ref{fig2}(e)].
In the RHEED pattern [fig.~\ref{fig2}(f)], a set of sharp spots superposes on the LiFeAs stripe.
Analysis shows that the spots correspond to these triangular Li$_3$As islands on the surface.
Besides the Li/Fe flux ratio, substrate temperature is another important factor to determine the film topography.
In particular, the effective Li flux changes with the substrate temperature because of the desorption of Li atoms,
which is more pronounced when the Li source temperature (usually 350$\sim$400~$^\circ$C) is close to that of the substrate.
For example, the sample in fig.~\ref{fig2}(g) was grown under the same flux of Li, Fe and As as that in fig.~\ref{fig2}(e), but with
the substrate temperature raised to 450~$^\circ$C. There is no longer Li$_3$As islands on the film
and the RHEED shows similar pattern as that in fig.~\ref{fig2}(d) without the sharp spots.
Therefore, the Li source temperature has to be adjusted
for each substrate temperature to maintain effectively the same Li/Fe flux ratio.
By adjusting the Li/Fe flux ratio at the optimal substrate temperature (450~$^\circ$C),
we can obtain atomically flat film as thin as $\sim$3~QL.
Below 3~QL, LiFeAs islands with several tens of nanometer lateral size are formed [figs. 3(a) and 3(b)]. The atom resolved image on a 2QL island shows the square lattice constant of 3.85~\AA, in consistent with the RHEED data [fig. 3(b), inset].
The $dI/dV$ spectra measured off the islands are identical to that of the SrTiO$_3$ substrate,
confirming the island thickness assignment.
On SrTiO$_3$, it is difficult to follow the layer-by-layer growth mode, mainly because Li tends to form clusters on the substrate.
Thicker film becomes flatter and more uniform [fig.~\ref{fig3}(c)]. Screw dislocations appear on the surface, probably originating from
the merging of islands.
We note that the density of screw dislocation in the film grown at 450~$^\circ$C is much lower than that grown at 350~$^\circ$C.
The surface corrugation of a 4~QL film [fig.~\ref{fig3}(d)] is about 2~{\AA},
which may be attributed to the unreleased strain induced by the substrate.
When the film thickness increases to 7.5~QL, single QL islands appear on the surface [fig.~\ref{fig3}(e)].
Above 13~QL [fig.~\ref{fig3}(f)], there are very few screw dislocations and very low surface corrugation,
implying that the strain has been sufficiently released.
The stain relief is also indicated by the lattice constant measured from RHEED patterns [fig.~\ref{fig1}(h)].
Two types of defects are visible on the surface [fig.~\ref{fig4}(a)]. The Li vacancy [fig.~\ref{fig4}(b)] appears as a hole in the topmost layer.
The eight neighboring Li atoms are brighter in the STM image. The larger defect [fig.~\ref{fig4}(c)] can be ascribed to the As vacancy in the second layer.
An As atom sits in the center of four Li atoms, and both the nearest and the next-to-nearest Li atoms in the topmost layer
are influenced by the absence of an As atom.
Interestingly, the Fe vacancies with 2-fold symmetry, which are frequently seen in the cleaved bulk materials \cite{pennec12b},
are seldom seen in the MBE film. In MBE growth, relatively low substrate temperature prevents the generation of Fe vacancies.
For comparison, the synthesis temperature for LiFeAs single crystal is usually as high as 800$^\circ$C \cite{jin08}.
We performed STS measurements on the films with different thicknesses [fig.~\ref{fig5}].
A superconducting gap at the Fermi level begins to emerge when the thickness is 4~QL. The 13~QL film shows a gap with pronounced coherence peaks.
The peak-to-peak distance is $2\Delta\sim14$~meV. The $dI/dV$ spectra of the film is consistent with that of the bulk materials \cite{hanaguri12},
including the kink at 36~meV [fig.~\ref{fig5}(a), indicated by dashed line].
Superconductivity is absent in a film thinner than 4~QL at liquid helium temperature, even after long time annealing.
Our result is similar with the FeSe film grown on the SiC(0001) substrate covered by epitaxial graphene \cite{songcl11}, in which superconductivity only exists in the films thicker than 2 triple-layers (TL), and $T_c$ changes gradually from 3.7~K to the bulk value with the increase of thickness. This is a normal behavior in superconductors and can be interpreted by adding a surface-energy term in the Ginzburg-Landau free energy \cite{simonin86}. The lateral finite size effect is excluded for the islands thicker than 2~QL, because the island size is much larger than the in-plane coherence length \cite{kurita11}. The tensile strain in the first few QLs of our LiFeAs film is less likely to be responsible to the absence of superconductivity because multiple high-pressure experiments proved that decreasing the lattice constant would suppress superconductivity \cite{gooch09,zhang09,mito09}.
It is interesting to compare our LiFeAs film with the FeSe film epitaxially grown on SrTiO$_3$(001) substrate. Although as grown 1~TL FeSe film is not superconducting, it shows superconducting $T_c$ as high as $\sim$50~K after proper annealing procedure \cite{wangqy12}. However, the second layer of FeSe is always insulating. ARPES experiments ascribed the superconductivity in 1~TL FeSe to the higher level of charge transfer from the substrate \cite{hesl13,liux14}. In our LiFeAs film, Li atomic layer is believed to be the interfacial layer with SrTiO$_3$ substrate due to the charge neutral consideration. Different from 1~TL FeSe, the electrons have to cross the Li layer to diffuse into FeAs layer, which decreases the transfer efficiency. Besides, part of the intercalated Li atoms are evaporated during the annealing process, further lowering the doping level. The island size of 1~QL LiFeAs, which is comparable with the coherence length, is another possible reason to the absence of superconductivity.
Furthermore, we measured the transport properties of the LiFeAs thin film.
Since LiFeAs degrades in the ambient atmosphere, several nanometer thick silver was deposited on top of LiFeAs
as the protection layer before the sample was taken out of UHV for transport measurement.
Figure 6(a) shows the temperature dependence of resistance for a 100~QL LiFeAs film with silver capping layer.
The sharp superconducting transition occurs at 16~K, which is close to the bulk value of 18~K \cite{jin08,chu08,pitcher08}.
Figure 6(b) shows the magnetoresistance with magnetic field perpendicular to the sample.
The superconducting transition shifts to lower temperature as the magnetic field increases from 0~T to 9~T.
At the same time the normal state resistance increases. The magnetic field dependence of $T_{c}$ [fig.~\ref{fig6}(c)]
is almost linear between 0~T and 9~T. A linear fitting gives the slope $\mu_0dH_{c2}/dT=-1.17$~T/K. Calculating from the Werthamer-Helfand-Hohenberg formula $\mu_0H_{c2}(0)=-0.693\frac{\mu_0dH_{c2}(T)}{dT}|_{T_c}T_c$ \cite{WHH66},
the upper critical field at zero temperature is 13.0~T, slightly lower than the bulk value 17 T \cite{cho11}.
For LiFeAs film thinner than $\sim$50~QL, it is difficult to detect the superconducting transition
since the film is unstable in atmosphere even with the silver capping layer.
\begin{figure*}
\onefigure[width=6.6in]{Fig6.ps}
\caption{(Color online)
(a) Temperature dependence of resistivity of $\sim$100~QL LiFeAs film with silver capping layer under zero magnetic field. It shows superconducting transition temperature $T_c=16$~K. (b) Magnetoresistance measured under the field perpendicular to the film from 0~T to 9~T. (c) Magnetic field dependence of the superconducting transition temperature $T_c$. The linear fitting gives the slope $dH_{c2}/dT=-1.17$~T/K, corresponding to critical field $H_{c2}=13.0$~T at zero temperature.
}
\label{fig6}
\end{figure*}
\section{Conclusion}
We have realized the molecular beam epitaxial growth of LiFeAs thin film with high quality on SrTiO$_{3}$(001) substrate.
The MBE film makes it possible to study the intrinsic properties of LiFeAs.
At 4.7~K, the superconducting gap is revealed in ultra-thin film thicker than 4~QL.
The gap size of 13~QL film is as large as 7~meV, which is close to the bulk value.
The 100~QL film shows sharp superconducting transition at 16~K in transport measurement.
The upper critical field $H_{c2}$ is estimated to be 13.0~T from the magnetoresistance measurement.
The current growth approach can be applied to other materials consisting of highly reactive alkaline elements,
such as NaFeAs and KFe$_2$As$_2$.
Our work paves the way for further studies on the intrinsic properties of LiFeAs,
which can be disturbed by the impurities introduced in the bulk growth methods.
\acknowledgments
The authors thank C. Q. Jin for synthesizing the FeAs compound.
The work was financially supported by Ministry of Science and Technology of China under grant number 2013CB934600, National Science Foundation and Ministry of Education of China.
|
\section{Proof of Theorem 1} \label{Appendix}
\setlength{\parskip}{0pt}
The proof consists of three steps. In the first step, we show by induction that all pseudo-observations converge sufficiently fast to the true observations. In the second step, we establish pointwise consistency of the feasible pair-copula density estimators $\widehat c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}$ and conditional distribution function estimators $\widehat F_{j_e|D_e}$ and $\widehat F_{k_e|D_e}$. In the last step, we combine these results to establish the consistency of $\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}$.
\subsubsection*{Step 1: Convergence of pseudo-observations}
We will show by induction that for all $e \in E_1, \dots, E_{d-1}$, $i = 1, \dots, n$,
\begin{align} \label{Theory:Uproof_eq}
\begin{aligned}
\widehat U_{j_e|D_e}^{(i)} - U_{j_e|D_e}^{(i)} = o_{a.s.}(n^{-r}) , \quad \widehat U_{k_e|D_e}^{(i)} - U_{k_e|D_e}^{(i)} = o_{a.s.}(n^{-r}).
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
Let $e \in E_1$ (the conditioning set $D_e$ is empty). Because of \hyperref[Theory:f_ass]{\ref*{Theory:f_ass}b} we have,
\begin{align*}
\bigl\vert \widehat U_{j_e}^{(i)} - U_{j_e}^{(i)} \bigr\vert &= \bigl\vert \widehat F\bigl(X_{j_e}\bigr) - F\bigl(X_{j_e}\bigr) \bigl\vert \le \sup_{x_{j_e} \in \Omega_{X_{j_e}}} \bigl\vert \widehat F(x_{j_e}) - F(x_{j_e}) \bigl\vert = o_{a.s.}(n^{-r}),
\end{align*}
and the same argument applies to the second equality of \eqref{Theory:Uproof_eq}.
Now consider $e \in E_m$, $1 \le m \le d-2$, and assume that \eqref{Theory:Uproof_eq} holds for all $e \in E_{m}$. Recall that all pseudo-observations for $e^\prime \in E_{m+1}$ can be written as $\widehat U_{j_e | D_e \cup k_e}^{(i)}$ or $\widehat U_{k_e | D_e \cup j_e}^{(i)}$ for some $e \in E_m$. By the definition of the pseudo-observations and the triangle inequality,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\bigl\vert \widehat U_{j_e | D_e \cup k_e}^{(i)} - U_{j_e | D_e \cup k_e}^{(i)} \bigr\vert
&=& \bigl\vert \widehat h_{j_e | k_e; D_e}\bigl\{\widehat U_{j_e | D_e}^{(i)} | \widehat U_{k_e | D_e}^{(i)} \bigr\} - h_{j_e | k_e; D_e}\bigl\{U_{j_e | D_e}^{(i)} | U_{k_e | D_e}^{(i)} \bigr)\}\bigr\vert \\
&\le & \phantom{+ \;} \bigl\vert \widehat h_{j_e | k_e; D_e}\bigl\{\widehat U_{j_e | D_e}^{(i)} | \widehat U_{k_e | D_e}^{(i)} \bigr\} - \overline h_{j_e | k_e; D_e}\bigl\{\widehat U_{j_e | D_e}^{(i)} | \widehat U_{k_e | D_e}^{(i)} \bigr\} \bigr\vert \\
& &+ \; \bigl\vert \overline h_{j_e | k_e; D_e}\bigl\{\widehat U_{j_e | D_e}^{(i)} | \widehat U_{k_e | D_e}^{(i)} \bigr\} - h_{j_e | k_e; D_e}\bigl\{\widehat U_{j_e | D_e}^{(i)} | \widehat U_{k_e | D_e}^{(i)} \bigr\} \bigr\vert \\
& & + \; \bigl\vert h_{j_e | k_e; D_e}\bigl\{\widehat U_{j_e | D_e}^{(i)} | \widehat U_{k_e | D_e}^{(i)} \bigr\} - h_{j_e | k_e; D_e}\bigl\{U_{j_e | D_e}^{(i)} | U_{k_e | D_e}^{(i)} \bigr\} \bigr\vert \\
&=& H_{1,n} + H_{2, n} + H_{3, n}
\end{eqnarray*}
Note that, almost surely, each realization of $(U_{j_e | D_e}^{(i)}, U_{k_e | D_e}^{(i)})$ is contained in $[\delta_i, 1 - \delta_i]^2$ for $\delta_i := \min\bigl\{U_{j_e | D_e}^{(i)}, U_{k_e | D_e}^{(i)}, 1 - U_{j_e | D_e}^{(i)}, 1 - U_{k_e | D_e}^{(i)} \bigr\} >0$. And by invoking \eqref{Theory:Uproof_eq} we see that for sufficiently large $n$, also each realization of $(\widehat U_{j_e | D_e}^{(i)}, \widehat U_{k_e | D_e}^{(i)})$ is contained in $[\delta_i/2, 1 - \delta_i/2]^2$. Together with \hyperref[Theory:oracle_ass]{\ref*{Theory:oracle_ass}b} and \hyperref[Theory:bound_ass]{\ref*{Theory:bound_ass}b} this yields for large $n$,
\begin{align*}
H_{1, n} &\le \sup_{(u, v) \in [\delta_i/2, 1-\delta_i/2]^2} \bigl\vert \widehat h_{j_e|k_e;D_e}(u|v) - \overline h_{j_e|k_e;D_e}(u|v) \bigr\vert = O_{a.s.}(a_{e,n}), \\
H_{2, n} &\le \sup_{(u, v) \in [\delta_i/2, 1-\delta_i/2]^2} \bigl\vert \overline h_{j_e|k_e;D_e}(u|v) - h_{j_e|k_e;D_e}(u|v) \bigr\vert = o_{a.s.}(n^{-r}),
\end{align*}
and invoking \eqref{Theory:Uproof_eq},
\begin{align*}
a_{e,n} = \sup_{i = 1, \dots, n} \vert\widehat U_{j_e|D_e}^{(i)} - U_{j_e|D_e}^{(i)}\bigr\vert + \bigl\vert\widehat U_{k_e|D_e}^{(i)} - U_{k_e|D_e}^{(i)}\bigr\vert = o_{a.s.}(n^{-r}),
\end{align*}
which gives $H_{1,n} = o_{a.s.}(n^{-r})$. It remains to show that $H_{3,n} = o_{a.s.}(n^{-r})$. Let $\nabla h_{j_e | k_e; D_e}$ denote the gradient of $h_{j_e | k_e; D_e}$. A first-order Taylor approximation of $h_{j_e | k_e; D_e}\bigl(\widehat U_{j_e | D_e}^{(i)} | \widehat U_{k_e | D_e}^{(i)} \bigr)$ around $\bigl(U_{j_e | D_e}^{(i)}, U_{k_e | D_e}^{(i)}\bigr)$ yields
\begin{align*}
H_{3, n} &\le \biggl\vert \nabla^\top h_{j_e | k_e; D_e}\bigl(U_{j_e | D_e}^{(i)} | U_{k_e | D_e}^{(i)}\bigr) \begin{pmatrix}
\widehat U_{j_e | D_e}^{(i)} - U_{j_e | D_e}^{(i)} \\
\widehat U_{k_e | D_e}^{(i)} - U_{k_e | D_e}^{(i)}
\end{pmatrix} \biggr\vert + o_{a.s.}\begin{pmatrix}
\widehat U_{j_e | D_e}^{(i)} - U_{j_e | D_e}^{(i)} \\
\widehat U_{k_e | D_e}^{(i)} - U_{k_e | D_e}^{(i)}
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{align*}
Invoking \eqref{Theory:Uproof_eq}, we get $H_{3, n} = o_{a.s.}(n^{-r})$. This establishes the first equality of \eqref{Theory:Uproof_eq} for all $e \in E_{m+1}$. The second equality follows by symmetric arguments and the induction is complete.
\subsubsection*{Step 2: Consistency of conditional \emph{cdf} and pair-copula density estimators}
With arguments almost identical to those in Step 1, we can furthermore show that for all $e \in E_1, \dots, E_{d-1}$, and all $\bm x \in \Omega_{\bm X}$,
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}\label{Theory:Fproof_eq}
\widehat F_{j_e|D_e}\bigl(x_{j_e} | {\bm x}_{D_e}\bigr) - F_{j_e|D_e}\bigl(x_{j_e} | \bm x_{D_e}\bigr) &= o_p(n^{-r}), \\
\widehat F_{k_e|D_e}\bigl(x_{k_e} |{\bm x}_{D_e}\bigr)- F_{k_e|D_e}\bigl(x_{k_e} | \bm x_{D_e}\bigr) &= o_p(n^{-r}).
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
Next, we establish that for all $e \in E_1, \dots, E_{d-1}$, and all $(u, v) \in (0, 1)^2$,
\begin{align} \label{Theory:cproof_eq}
\widehat c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}\bigl(u, v\bigr) - c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}\bigl(u, v\bigr) = O_p(n^{-r}).
\end{align}
The triangle inequality gives
\begin{eqnarray*}
& & \bigl\vert \widehat c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}\bigl(u, v\bigr) - c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}\bigl(u, v\bigr)\bigr\vert \\
&\le & \bigl\vert \widehat c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}\bigl(u, v\bigr) - \overline c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}\bigl(u, v\bigr)\bigr\vert + \bigl\vert \overline c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}\bigl(u, v\bigr) - c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}\bigl(u, v\bigr)\bigr\vert \\
&=& R_{n,1} + R_{n, 2}.
\end{eqnarray*}
We have $R_{n, 1} = o_{a.s.}(n^{-r})$ by \hyperref[Theory:bound_ass]{\ref*{Theory:bound_ass}a} and \eqref{Theory:Uproof_eq}, whereas $R_{n, 2} = O_p(n^{-r})$ by \hyperref[Theory:oracle_ass]{\ref*{Theory:oracle_ass}a}.
\subsubsection*{Step 3: Consistency of the vine copula based density estimator}
The consistency of $\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}$ now follows from \eqref{Theory:cproof_eq} and \hyperref[Theory:f_ass]{\ref*{Theory:f_ass}a} (second equality) together with \eqref{Theory:Fproof_eq} and the fact that $c_{j_e, k_e; D_e}$ is continuously differentiable (third equality):
\begin{align*} \allowdisplaybreaks[1]
\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}(\bm x) &= \prod_{k=1}^{d-1} \prod_{e \in E_k} \widehat c_{j_e, k_e; D_e} \bigl\{\widehat F_{j_e|D_e}(x_{j_e}|{\bm x}_{D_e}), \, \widehat F_{k_e|D_e}(x_{k_e}|{\bm x}_{D_e})\bigr\} \times \prod_{j=1}^d \widehat f_j(x_j)\\
&= \prod_{k=1}^{d-1} \prod_{e \in E_k} \biggl[c_{j_e, k_e; D_e} \bigl\{\widehat F_{j_e|D_e}(x_{j_e}|{\bm x}_{D_e}), \, \widehat F_{k_e|D_e}(x_{k_e}|{\bm x}_{D_e})\bigr\} + O_p(n^{-r})\biggr] \\
& \phantom{=} \times \prod_{j=1}^d \bigl\{f_j(x_j) +O_p(r^{-r})\bigr\}\\
&= \prod_{k=1}^{d-1} \prod_{e \in E_k} \biggl[c_{j_e, k_e; D_e} \bigl\{ F_{j_e|D_e}(x_{j_e}|{\bm x}_{D_e}), \, F_{k_e|D_e}(x_{k_e}|{\bm x}_{D_e})\bigr\} + O_p(n^{-r}) + o_p(n^{-r})\biggr] \\
& \phantom{=} \times \prod_{j=1}^d \bigl\{f_j(x_j) +O_p(n^{-r})\bigr\}\\\
&= f(\bm x) + O_p(n^{-r}). \tag*{\qed}
\end{align*}
\section{Lemmas} \label{Appendix2}
\subsection{Notation} \label{sec:not}
To ease notation in the following proofs, we write
$(u,v) = (w_1, w_2) = \bigr(\Phi(z_1), \Phi(z_2)\bigl)$,
\begin{align} \label{not_obs_eq}
W_1^{(i)} := U_{j_e|D_e}^{(i)}, \; W_2^{(i)} := U_{k_e|D_e}^{(i)}, \; Z_1^{(i)} := \Phi^{-1}\bigl(U_{j_e|D_e}^{(i)}\bigr), \; Z_2^{(i)} := \Phi^{-1}\bigl(U_{k_e|D_e}^{(i)}\bigr).
\end{align}
In this notation, the (oracle) transformation pair-copula density estimator is
\begin{align*}
\overline c(u,v) = \overline c\bigl\{\Phi(z_1), \Phi(z_2)\bigr\} = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^{n} \frac{K_{b_n}\bigl(z_1 - Z_1^{(i)}\bigr) K_{b_n}\bigl(z_2 - Z_2^{(i)}\bigr)}{\phi(z_1)\phi(z_2)}.
\end{align*}
The corresponding (oracle) h-function estimator $\overline h$ is obtained by integration of $\overline c$:
\begin{align} \label{not_h_eq}
\overline h(u |v) = \overline h\bigl\{\Phi(z_1) | \Phi(z_2)\bigr\} &= \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^{n} \frac{J_{b_n}\bigl(z_1 - Z_1^{(i)}\bigr) K_{b_n}\bigl(z_2- Z_2^{(i)}\bigr)}{\phi(z_2)},
\end{align}
where $J_{b_n}(\cdot) = \int_{-\infty}^\cdot K_{b_n}(s) ds$. The feasible estimators $\widehat c$ and $\widehat h$ are obtained by replacing $W_j^{(i)}$ and $Z_j^{(i)}$ with pseudo-observations $\widehat W_j^{(i)}$ and $\widehat Z_j^{(i)} := \Phi^{-1}(\widehat W_j^{(i)})$. Finally, we write
\begin{align*}
a_{n} = \sup_{i \in \{1, \dots, n\}} \bigl\vert\widehat W_1^{(i)} - W_1^{(i)}\bigr\vert + \sup_{i \in \{1, \dots, n\}} \bigl\vert\widehat W_2^{(i)} - W_2^{(i)}\bigr\vert.
\end{align*}
\subsection{Results}
\
\begin{Lemma} \label{lem:c}
Under conditions \ref{K1}, \ref{K2}, \ref{C1}, and \ref{C2} it holds for all $(u,v) \in (0,1)^2$,
\begin{align*}
\widehat c(u,v) = \overline c(u, v) + O_{a.s}(a_n).
\end{align*}
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
By a first-order Taylor approximation of $\Phi^{-1}$, $j =1, 2$,
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned} \label{Z_eq}
\widehat Z_j^{(i)} - Z_j^{(i)} &= (\widehat W_j^{(i)} - W_j^{(i)})/ \phi(Z_j^{(i)}) + o_{a.s.}(\widehat W_j^{(i)} - W_j^{(i)}) \\
&= 1/\phi(Z_j^{(i)}) \times O_{a.s.}(a_n),
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
where the $O_{a.s.}(a_n)$ term does not depend on the index $i$ since the supremum was taken.
Denote $\nabla_{\bm z} = (\partial/\partial z_1, \partial/\partial z_2)^\top$. A first-order Taylor approximation of $K$ yields
\begin{align*}
&\phantom{=} \phi(z_1)\phi(z_2) \bigl\vert\widehat c \bigl\{\Phi(z_1), \Phi(z_2) \bigr\}- \overline c\bigl\{\Phi(z_1), \Phi(z_2) \bigr\}\bigr\vert \\
&= \biggl\vert \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i= 1}^n K_{b_n}\bigl(z_1 - \widehat Z_1^{(i)}\bigr) K_{b_n}\bigl(z_2 - \widehat Z_2^{(i)}\bigr) - \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i= 1}^n K_{b_n}\bigl(z_1 - Z_1^{(i)}\bigr) K_{b_n}\bigl(z_2 - Z_2^{(i)}\bigr) \biggr\vert\\
&= \biggl\vert \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i= 1}^n \nabla_{\bm z} \bigl\{K_{b_n}(z_1 -Z_1^{(i)}) K_{b_n}(z_2 - Z_2^{(i)})\bigr\} \begin{pmatrix}
\widehat Z_1^{(i)} - Z_1^{(i)} \\
\widehat Z_2^{(i)} - Z_2^{(i)}
\end{pmatrix} + o_{a.s.}\biggl\{\begin{pmatrix}
\widehat Z_1^{(i)} - Z_1^{(i)} \\
\widehat Z_2^{(i)} - Z_2^{(i)}
\end{pmatrix}\biggr\}\biggr\vert \\
&\le \biggl\vert \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i= 1}^n \nabla_{\bm z} \bigl\{K_{b_n}(z_1 - Z_1^{(i)}) K_{b_n}(z_2 - Z_2^{(i)})\bigr\} \begin{pmatrix}
1 / \phi\bigl(Z_1^{(i)}\bigr) \\
1 / \phi\bigl(Z_2^{(i)}\bigr)
\end{pmatrix} \biggr\vert \times O_{a.s.}(a_n),
\end{align*}
where the last inequality is due to \eqref{Z_eq}. Since $K_{b_n}$ is zero outside of $[-b_n, b_n]$, we can bound this further by
\begin{align} \label{displ}
\eta_n(\bm z) \times \biggl\vert \nabla_{\bm z} \biggl\{\frac{1}{n} \sum_{i= 1}^n K_{b_n}(z_1 - Z_1^{(i)}) K_{b_n}(z_2 - Z_2^{(i)})\biggr\} \biggr\vert \times O_{a.s.}(a_n),
\end{align}
where $\eta_n(\bm z) := \sup_{y \in [\min\{z_1,z_2\} - b_n, \max\{z_1, z_2\} + b_n]} 1 / \phi(y) = O(1)$ for all $\bm z \in \mathds{R}^2$. The second term is the absolute value of the gradient of a classical kernel density estimator. Since the derivatives of $\psi$ are continuous and bounded by \ref{C2}, it holds,
\begin{align*}
\biggl\vert \nabla_{\bm z} \biggl\{\frac{1}{n} \sum_{i= 1}^n K_{b_n}(z_1 - Z_1^{(i)}) K_{b_n}(z_2 - Z_2^{(i)})\biggr\} \biggr\vert = \bigl\vert \nabla_{\bm z} \psi(z_1,z_2)\bigr\vert + o_{a.s.}(1),
\end{align*}
see Theorem 9 in \citep{Hansen08}. Plugging this into \eqref{displ} proves our claim.
\end{proof}
\begin{Lemma} \label{lem:h1}
Under conditions \ref{K1}, \ref{K2}, \ref{C1}, and \ref{C2} it holds for all $(u,v) \in (0,1)^2$, $\delta \in (0, 0.5]$,
\begin{align*}
\sup_{(u, v) \in [\delta, 1- \delta]^2} \bigl\vert \overline h(u|v) - h(u|v) \bigl\vert = O_{a.s.}\bigl(b_n^2 + \sqrt{\ln n / (nb_n)}\bigr).
\end{align*}
\end{Lemma} \noindent
\begin{proof}
Equations 40 and 41 in \citep{Hansen04} yield
\begin{align*}
\mathrm{E}\bigl\{\overline h(u | v)\bigr\} - h\bigr(u | v \bigl) = b_n^2 \beta(u, v) + o(b_n^2),
\end{align*}
for some bias term $\beta(u, v)$ involving $h$ and $\phi$ as well as their first- and second order derivatives. Since all parts are continuous on $[\delta, 1- \delta]^2$ by \ref{C1} for all $\delta \in (0, 0.5]$, it holds
\begin{align*}
\sup_{(u, v) \in [\delta, 1 - \delta]^2} \bigl\vert \mathrm{E}\bigl\{\overline h(u | v)\bigr\} - h\bigr(u | v) \bigr\vert = O_{a.s.}\bigl(b_n^2\bigr).
\end{align*}
On the other hand, Lemma 2.2 of \citep{Haerdle88} ensures that
\begin{align*}
\sup_{(u, v) \in [\delta, 1 - \delta]^2} \bigl\vert \overline h(u | v) - \mathrm{E}\bigl\{\overline h(u | v)\bigr\} \bigr\vert = O_{a.s.}\bigl(\sqrt{\ln n / (nb_n)}\bigr).
\end{align*}
Combining the previous two equations concludes the proof.
\end{proof} \noindent
\begin{Lemma} \label{lem:h2}
Under conditions \ref{K1}, \ref{K2}, \ref{C1}, and \ref{C2} it holds for all $(u,v) \in (0,1)^2$, $\delta \in (0, 0.5]$,
\begin{align*}
\sup_{(u, v) \in [\delta, 1- \delta]^2} \bigl\vert \widehat h(u|v) - \overline h(u|v) \bigl\vert = O_{a.s.}\bigl(a_{n}\bigr).
\end{align*}
\end{Lemma}
\begin{proof}
With arguments similar to the proof of \autoref{lem:c}, we can show
\begin{align*}
&\sup_{(u, v) \in [\delta, 1- \delta]^2} \bigl\vert \widehat h(u|v) - \overline h(u|v) \bigl\vert \\
&\sup_{\bm z \in [\Phi^{-1}(\delta), \Phi^{-1}(1- \delta)]^2} \bigl\vert \widehat h\bigl\{\Phi(z_1)| \Phi(z_2) \bigr\} - \overline h\bigl\{\Phi(z_1)| \Phi(z_2) \bigr\} \bigr\vert \\
\le &\sup_{\bm z \in [\Phi^{-1}(\delta), \Phi^{-1}(1- \delta)]^2} \biggl\vert \frac{\eta_n(\bm z)}{\phi(z_2)} \times \nabla_{\bm z} h\bigl\{\Phi(z_1)| \Phi(z_2) \bigr\} \biggr\vert \times O_{a.s.}(a_n),
\end{align*}
where $\eta_n(\bm z) = \sup_{y \in [\min\{z_1,z_2\} - b_n, \max\{z_1, z_2\} + b_n]} 1 / \phi(y)$ and the $O_{a.s}$ term is independent of $\bm z$. The supremum on the right hand side is $O(1)$ because all functions are continuous in $\bm z$ on every compact subset of $\mathds{R}^2$. As a result, the right can be bounded by a constant times the $O_{a.s.}(a_n)$ term. This establishes our claim.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Proposition 5} \label{Appendix3}
From \autoref{prop:fhat} and condition (v) in \autoref{prop:an} we get for all $\ell = 1, \dots, d,$ and $x \in \mathds{R}$, that $\widehat f_\ell(x) = f_\ell(x) + o_p\{b_{n,c}^2 + (nb_{n,c}^2)^{-1/2}\}$. This implies $(nb_{n,c}^2)^{1/2}\bigl\{\widehat f_\ell(x) - f_\ell(x)\bigr\} = o_p(1)$ and we have established that the first $d$ components of \eqref{joint_an} converge to zero in probability. Hence, the first $d$ components of ${\bm \mu}_{\bm x}$ as well as the first $d$ rows and columns of $\Sigma_{\bm x}$ will be zero and we only have to deal with the remaining components in \eqref{joint_an}.
From \eqref{Theory:cproof_eq} and \eqref{Theory:Fproof_eq} in the proof of \autoref{Theory:rate_thm} and \autoref{prop:chat} we furthermore know that $\widehat c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}(u,v) = \overline c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}(u,v) + o_p\{b_{n,c}^2 + (nb_{n,c}^2)^{-1/2}\}$ as well as $\widehat F_{j_e|D_e}(x_{j_e}|\bm x_{D_e}) = F_{j_e|D_e}(x_{j_e}|\bm x_{D_e}) + o_p\{b_{n,c}^2 + (nb_{n,c}^2)^{-1/2}\}$. Similar to \autoref{lem:h2}, we can now show that
\begin{align*}
&\overline c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}\bigl\{\widehat F_{j_e|D_e}(x_{j_e}|\bm x_{D_e}), \widehat F_{k_e|D_e}(x_{k_e}|\bm x_{D_e})\bigr\}\\
=\;& \overline c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}\bigl\{F_{j_e|D_e}(x_{j_e}|\bm x_{D_e}), F_{k_e|D_e}(x_{k_e}|\bm x_{D_e})\bigr\} + o_p\{b_{n,c}^2 + (nb_{n,c}^2)^{-1/2}\}.
\end{align*}
Hence, for \eqref{joint_an} to hold it suffices to show that
\begin{align} \label{joint_an_c}
(nb_{n, c}^2)^{1/2}\bigl\{\overline{\bm c}^*(\bm x) - b_{n,c}^2 \tilde{\bm\mu}_{\bm x} - {\bm c}^*(\bm x)\bigr\} \stackrel{d}{\to} \mathcal{N}\bigl(0, \tilde \Sigma_{\bm x}\bigr),
\end{align}
where
$$\overline{\bm c}^*(\bm x) = \bigl(\overline c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}\{F_{j_e|D_e}(x_{j_e}|\bm x_{D_e}), F_{k_e|D_e}(x_{k_e}|\bm x_{D_e})\}\bigr)_{e \in E_1, \dots, E_{d-1}},$$
and ${\bm c}^*(\bm x)$ is defined similarly, but replacing $\overline c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}$ with $c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}$.
Define $Z_{j_e|D_e}^{(i)} := \Phi^{-1}(U_{j_e|D_e}^{(i)} )$, $Z_{k_e|D_e}^{(i)} := \Phi^{-1}(U_{k_e|D_e}^{(i)})$, $z_{j_e|D_e} := \Phi^{-1}\bigl\{F_{j_e|D_e}(x_{j_e}|\bm x_{D_e})\bigr\}$, $z_{k_e|D_e} := \Phi^{-1}\bigl\{F_{k_e|D_e}(x_{k_e}|\bm x_{D_e})\bigr\}$. Let $\bm Y_{n,i} := (Y_{n,i,e})_{e \in E_1, \dots, E_{d-1}}$, be a vector with entries
\begin{align*}
Y_{n,i,e} :=(nb_{n,c}^2)^{-1/2} \frac{K\biggl(\frac{Z_{j_e|D_e}^{(i)} - z_{j_e|D_e}}{b_n}\biggr) K\biggl(\frac{Z_{k_e|D_e}^{(i)} - z_{k_e|D_e}}{b_n}\biggr)}{ \phi(z_{j_e|D_e})\phi(z_{k_e|D_e})}.
\end{align*}
Then, $\sum_{i=1}^n \bm Y_{n,i} = (nb_{n,c}^2)^{1/2} \overline{\bm c}^*(\bm x)$.
By the multivariate Lindeberg-Feller central limit theorem (Proposition 2.27 in \citep{vanderVaart98}), \eqref{joint_an_c} holds when
\begin{align}
&\sum_{i=1}^n \mathrm{E}\bigl(\bm Y_{n, i}\bigr) = (nb_{n,c}^2)^{1/2}\bigl\{\bm c^*(\bm x) + b_{n,c}^2\tilde{\bm \mu}_{\bm x} + o(b_{n,c}^2)\bigr\}, \label{LF1} \\
&\sum_{i=1}^n {\mathrm{cov}}(\bm Y_{n,i}) \to \tilde \Sigma_{\bm x}, \label{LF2} \\
&\sum_{i=1}^n \mathrm{E}\bigl\{\| \bm Y_{n,i} \|^2 \mathds{1}\bigl(\| \bm Y_{n,i} \| > \varepsilon\bigr) \bigr\} \to 0, \quad \mbox{for all } \varepsilon > 0. \label{LF3}
\end{align}
Since $\bm Y_{n,i}$ are independent for $i = 1, \dots, n$, it holds
\begin{align*}
\sum_{i=1}^n \mathrm{E}\bigl(\bm Y_{n, i}\bigr) = n \mathrm{E}\bigl(\bm Y_{n, i}\bigr), \qquad \sum_{i=1}^n {\mathrm{cov}}(\bm Y_{n,i}) = n {\mathrm{cov}}(\bm Y_{n,i}).
\end{align*}
Denote further $u_{j_e|D_e} := F_{j_e|D_e}(x_{j_e}|\bm x_{D_e})$, $u_{k_e|D_e} := F_{k_e|D_e}(x_{k_e}|\bm x_{D_e})$. Corollary 3.4 in \citep{Nagler14} gives
\begin{align} \label{bias_calc}
n\mathrm{E}\bigl(Y_{n,i,e}\bigr) = (nb_{n,c}^2)^{1/2} \bigl\{c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}(u_{j_e|D_e}, u_{k_e|D_e}) + b_{n,c}^2 \tilde{\mu}_{\bm x, e} + o(b_{n,c}^2)\bigr\},
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
\tilde{\mu}_{\bm x, e} &:= \biggl\{\frac{\partial^2c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}\bigl(u_{j_e|D_e},u_{k_e|D_e}\bigr)}{\partial u_{j_e|D_e}^2} \phi^2(z_{j_e|D_e}) + \frac{\partial^2 c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}\bigl(u_{j_e|D_e}, u_{k_e|D_e}\bigr)}{\partial u_{k_e|D_e}^2} \phi^2(z_{k_e|D_e}) \notag \\
\begin{split}
&\phantom{:=\biggl[}- \frac{3 \partial c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}\bigl(u_{j_e|D_e},u_{k_e|D_e}\bigr)}{\partial u_{j_e|D_e}} \phi(z_{j_e|D_e})z_{j_e|D_e} \\
&\phantom{:=\biggl[} - \frac{3 \partial c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}\bigl(u_{j_e|D_e},u_{k_e|D_e}\bigr)}{\partial u_{k_e|D_e}} \phi(z_{k_e|D_e})z_{k_e|D_e}
\end{split} \label{el_mu} \\
&\phantom{:=\biggl[} + c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}\bigl(u_{j_e|D_e}, u_{k_e|D_e}\bigr) \times \bigl(z_{j_e|D_e}^2 + z_{k_e|D_e}^2-2\bigr) \biggr\} \frac {\sigma_K^2}{2}, \notag
\end{align}
and $\sigma_K^2 := \int_{[-1, 1]}x^2K(x)dx$. This validates \eqref{LF1}. By the change of variable $s_1 = (z_1 - z_{j_e|D_e})/b_{n,c}$, $s_2 = (z_2 - z_{k_e|D_e})/b_{n,c}$, and a Taylor approximation of $\psi_{j_e, k_e;D_e}$ (as defined in \ref{C2}), we get
\begin{align}
& n\mathrm{E}\bigl(Y_{n,i,e}^2\bigr) \phi^2(z_{j_e|D_e})\phi^2(z_{k_e|D_e}) \notag \\
=\; & n\mathrm{E}\biggl\{\frac{1}{nb_{n,c}^2} K^2\biggl(\frac{Z_{j_e|D_e}^{(i)} - z_{j_e|D_e}}{b_{n,c}}\biggr) K^2\biggl(\frac{Z_{k_e|D_e}^{(i)} - z_{k_e|D_e}}{b_{n,c}}\biggr) \biggr\} \notag \\
=\; & \int_\mathds{R} \int_\mathds{R} K^2(s_1)K^2(s_2)\psi_{j_e, k_e;D_e}(z_{j_e|D_e} - b_{n,c} s_1, z_{k_e|D_e} - b_{n,c} s_2) ds_1 ds_2 \notag \\
= \;& \nu_K^2 \psi_{j_e, k_e;D_e}(z_{j_e|D_e}, z_{k_e|D_e}) + o(1), \label{var_calc}
\end{align}
where $\nu_{K} := \int_\mathds{R} K^2(s)ds$. Using \eqref{var_calc} and \eqref{bias_calc}, we obtain
\begin{align} \label{el_sig}
n{\mathrm{var}}(Y_{n, i, e})
\to \nu_K^2 \frac{c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}\bigl(u_{j_e|D_e},u_{k_e|D_e}\bigr)}{\phi(z_{j_e|D_e})\phi(z_{k_e|D_e})} =: \tilde \sigma_{\bm x, e}.
\end{align}
Arguments similar to \eqref{var_calc} show that for any two edges $e \neq e^\prime$, it holds $n\mathrm{E}(Y_{n,i,e}Y_{n,i,e^\prime}) = O(b_{n,c})$; and with \eqref{bias_calc}, $n {\mathrm{cov}}(Y_{n,i,e}, Y_{n,i,e^\prime}) \to 0$. We have shown that \eqref{LF2} holds with $\tilde \Sigma_{\bm x}$ being a diagonal matrix with diagonal entries $\tilde \sigma_{\bm x, e}$ given in \eqref{el_sig}.
Instead of checking the remaining condition \eqref{LF3} directly, we will verify the stronger Lyapunov-type condition $\sum_{i=1}^n \mathrm{E}(\| \bm Y_{n,i} \|^3 ) \to 0$. By Jensen's inequality we get
\begin{align*}
n\mathrm{E}\bigl(\| \bm Y_{n,1} \|^3 \bigr) = nE\biggl\{\biggl(\sum_{m = 1}^{d - 1}\sum_{e \in E_m} Y_{n,1,e}^2 \biggr)^{3/2}\biggr\}
&\le n\sqrt{d(d-1)/2} \sum_{m = 1}^{d - 1}\sum_{e \in E_m} \mathrm{E}\bigl( Y_{n,1,k}^3 \bigr),
\end{align*}
where $d(d-1)/2$ is the number of terms in the double sum. Hence, it suffices to show $n\mathrm{E}( Y_{n,1,e}^3) \to 0$ for any $e \in E_1, \dots, E_{d-1}$. Similar to \eqref{var_calc}, we get $n\mathrm{E}( Y_{n,1,k}^3) = O\{1/(nb_n^2)^{1/2}\}$ which is $o(1)$. $\qed$
\section{Application} \label{Application}
We revisit a classification problem from astrophysics which has previously been investigated in \citep{Bock04}.
In their study, the authors consider synthetic data imitating measurements taken on images from the \emph{MAGIC (Major Atmospheric Gamma-ray Imaging Cherenkov) Telescopes} located on the Canary islands. The goal is to identify primary gamma rays (the signal) amongst a large amount of hadron showers (background noise). The authors of the study evaluate the performance of several classification methods and judge the kernel density based Bayes classifier as one of the most convincing. We aim to augment their results and investigate how the vine copula based kernel density estimator performs on this problem.
The data set is available from the \emph{UCI Machine Learning Repository} web page (url: \url{https://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/MAGIC+Gamma+Telescope}) and consists of $n=19\,020$ observations on $d=10$ variables. $n_G = 12\,332$ of the observations are classified as gamma (signal) and $n_H=6\,688$ as hadron (background). For more information on the astrophysical background and a more thorough description of the data we refer the reader to \citep{Bock04} and the UCI web page.
Bayes classifiers follow the idea of maximizing the posterior probability of a class given the data. Let $G$ (for gamma) and $H$ (for hadron) be the two classes and $\widehat f_G$ and $\widehat f_H$ be two estimates fitted separately in each class. Assume further we have knowledge of the class prior probabilities $\pi_G, \pi_H$. With a straightforward application of Bayes' theorem, we can estimate the posterior probability that the class is $G$ as
\begin{align}
\widehat \mathrm{Pr}(\mbox{Class} = G | \bm X = \bm x) = \frac{\pi_G \widehat f_G(\bm x)}{\pi_G \widehat f_G(\bm x) + \pi_H \widehat f_H(\bm x)}, \label{Application:Bayes_eq}
\end{align}
where $\bm x$ is a realization of the random vector $\bm X$. In the most general case, we classify an observation as $G$ whenever the estimated posterior probability is greater than $\alpha = 0.5$. However, by changing the threshold $\alpha$ we can furthermore control how many observations get classified as $G$, and thereby influence key quantities such as the \emph{false positive rate (FPR)} or \emph{true positive rate (TPR)}. The FPR is defined as the ratio of the number of false positives (here: hadron events that were misclassified as gamma) and the number of all negative (hadron) events. The TPR is defined as the ratio of the number of correctly classified positive (gamma) events and the number of all positive events. In general, it is desirable to have a low FPR and a high TPR. But usually, there is a tradeoff between the two quantities: If we increase the threshold level $\alpha$, a higher posterior probability is required for an observation to get classified as gamma event. As a result, less observations will be classified as gamma event, which in turn reduces \emph{both} FPR and TPR.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.85\linewidth]{ROC.pdf}
\caption{ROC curves for Bayes classifiers based on the vine copula based estimator (solid line) and classical multivariate kernel density estimator (dashed line).}
\label{Application:ROC_fig}
\end{figure}
We repeat the experiment of \citep{Bock04} with the vine copula based and classical kernel estimators. The implementations are similar to our simulation study (see \autoref{Simulation:Implementation}). As is common in applications, we induce sparsity of the estimated model by adding an independence test to the structure selection algorithm; see Section 4 in \citep{Dissmann13}. We also found it necessary to multiply the marginal bandwidth parameters of $\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}$ by 2 to stabilize the classification boundary in low-density regions. The experiment's setup is the following: First, the densities for each class are estimated on the first 2/3 of the data which is used as training set. These estimates are used in combination with \eqref{Application:Bayes_eq} to obtain class predictions for the remaining 1/3. For simplicity, the prior probabilities are set to $\pi_G=\pi_H=0.5$. The predictions are then compared to the actual class of the observations which allows to asses the quality of the predictions.
\autoref{Application:ROC_fig} shows the \emph{receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve} which displays the TPR as a function of the FPR. It was noted in \citep{Bock04} that in this application the focus is on low FPR level; in particular the 0.01, 0.02, 0.05, 0.1 and 0.2 levels. The TPR values of the ROC curves at these levels are additionally displayed in \autoref{Application:TPR_tab}.
The ROC curve of the vine copula based estimator lies above the curve of the classical multivariate kernel density estimator almost everywhere. This means that for a target FPR level, the vine copula based classifier is able to identify more observations correctly as signal events than the classical multivariate kernel density estimator. The results confirm what we could expect from our simulation study where, for $d=10$ and several thousand observations, the vine copula based approach delivered much more accurate estimates.
\begin{table}[t]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{r|ccccc}
FPR & 0.01 & 0.02 & 0.05 & 0.1 & 0.2 \\ \hline
vine & 0.335 & 0.428 & 0.652 & 0.780 & 0.918 \\
mvkde & 0.335 & 0.408 & 0.567 & 0.730 & 0.868
\end{tabular}
\caption{True positive rates for the two estimators (second and third row) for given target levels of the false positive rate (first row).}
\label{Application:TPR_tab}
\end{table}
But also in comparison with other classification algorithms, the classifier based on $\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}$ performs extraordinary well. A total of 14 algorithms were surveyed in \citep{Bock04}, including variants of classification trees and neural networks, as well as the popular nearest-neighbor method and support vector machine. Two of the main performance measures used in their study are the average of the TPR at the 0.01, 0.02 and 0.05 FPR levels (termed \emph{loacc}), and the average of the TPR at the 0.1 and 0.2 FPR levels (termed \emph{highacc}). From \autoref{Application:TPR_tab} we calculate $loacc = 0.472$ and $highacc = 0.849$. None of the 14 algorithms was able to produce a better \emph{loacc} value than our approach. And only one method, random forests, delivered a slightly higher \emph{highacc} of $0.852$. This is particularly remarkable when we consider that the parameterization of our estimator was not tuned with respect to classification accuracy (unlike other classification algorithms). It might well be that the performance can be further improved by bandwidth and structure selection strategies that aim for classification rather than estimation accuracy.
\section{Further discussion} \label{Conclusion}
In this paper, we discuss a vine copula approach to nonparametric density estimation. By assuming that the target density belongs to the class of simplified vine densities, we can divide the estimation of a $d$-dimensional density into several one- and two-dimensional tasks. This allows us to achieve faster convergence rates than classical nonparameteric estimators when $d>3$. In particular, the speed of convergence is independent of dimension. The advantages of this approach become more and more striking as dimension increases. It shows that a simplified vine model for the dependence between variables is an appealing structure for nonparametric problems. For example, we can expect that similar results can be obtained for copula-based regression models \citep{Noh13, Kraus15}.
The crunchpoint in our approach is the simplifying assumption. If the simplifying assumption is not satisfied, the proposed estimator is not consistent --- but can nevertheless outperform its competitor in most practicable situations. However, the latter finding may not be true if the simplifying assumption is violated in an extreme fashion and dimension is small. We guess that this is a rather unlikely situation to encounter in real data. However, appropriate tests for a formal empirical assessment have yet to be developed. From a theoretical point of view, this answer is highly unsatisfying and several urging questions arise:
\begin{itemize}
\item How dense does the set of simplified densities lie in the set of all densities? Put differently: how far off can we be by assuming a simplified model?
\item How can we interpret the components of an estimated simplified model when the assumption does not hold?
\end{itemize}
Owing to the infancy of vine copula models, these questions remain open to this day. But several recent works have advanced the understanding of the simplifying assumption. A discussion of its appropriateness can be found in \citep{Haff10}. Copula classes where the simplifying assumption is satisfied are given in \citep{Stoeber13}. In \citep{Gijbels15}, a general estimator of the copula was proposed for the case where a covariate affects only the marginal distributions (i.e., when the simplifying assumption does hold). Semiparametric estimation of three-dimensional non-simplified PCCs was tackled in \citep{Acar12}; a test for the simplifying assumption was proposed in \citep{Acar13} under a semiparametric model. The empirical pair-copula, an extension of the empirical copula to simplified vine copulas, was analyzed in \citep{Haff15}. The authors conjecture that this estimator converges at the parametric rate --- even when pseudo-observations are used. The situation is different from ours since empirical copulas do not suffer the curse of dimensionality.
The notion of \emph{partial vine copula approximations (PVCA)}, i.e., the limit of a step-wise estimator under a simplified model, was introduced in \citep{Spanhel15}. The authors show that the PVCA is not necessarily the best simplified approximation to the true density. They further illustrate in an example that spurious dependence patterns can appear in trees $T_m, m \ge 3,$ when the simplifying assumptions has falsely been assumed in previous trees $T_{m'}, 2 \le m' \le m$. This property may not matter much in terms of estimation accuracy, but can corrupt the interpretability of an estimated PVCA. The estimator proposed in this paper is in fact an estimator of the PVCA. Our results suggest that the PVCA is a useful inferential object in any case:
\begin{itemize}
\item Any $d$-dimensional PVCA can be consistently estimated at a rate that is equivalent to a two-dimensional problem.
\item If the simplifying assumption does hold, the PVCA coincides with the true density.
\item If the simplifying assumption does not hold, inference of the PVCA is still less difficult than inference of the actual density. This led to the following observation: On finite samples, a consistent estimate of the PVCA can be much closer to the true density than a consistent estimate of density itself (see Scenario 2 in \autoref{Simulations}).
\end{itemize}
A related perspective on the phenomenon is that the simplifying assumption allows us to achieve more accurate estimates by model shrinkage. We incorporate the additional `information' that the simplifying assumption is at least approximately true. This allows us to reduce the set of possible solutions and thereby make the estimation problem `less difficult'. The most well known example of a shrinkage estimator is the sample variance. When dividing by $n$ instead of $n-1$ we give up unbiasedness of the estimator in order to achieve a smaller error. The same holds true for the vine copula based density estimator: if we make the simplifying assumption although it is not satisfied, we introduce additional bias. In fact, we even give up consistency of the estimator in order to achieve better finite-sample accuracy.
The main advantage of the vine copula based approach is striking: Classical multivariate nonparametric density estimators converge very slowly to the true density when more than a few variables enter the model. Hence, one was unable to benefit from the increasing number of observations in modern data. A vine copula based estimator, on the other hand, converges at a high speed, no matter how many variables are involved. This makes it particularly appealing in the age of big data.
\subsection*{Acknowledgements}
The first author acknowledges financial support by a research stipend of the Technische Universit{\"a}t M{\"u}nchen. The second author is supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG grant CZ 86/4-1). The authors thank two anonymous referees whose remarks led to a considerably improved contribution.
\section{Introduction}
Density estimation is one of the most important problems in nonparametric statistics. Most commonly, nonparametric density estimators are used for exploratory data analysis, but find many further applications in fields such as astrophysics, forensics, or biology \citep{Bock04, Aitken2004, Kie2010}. Many of these applications involve the estimation of multivariate densities. However, most applications so far focus on two- or three-dimensional problems. Furthermore, the persistent interest amongst practitioners is contrasted by a falling tide of methodological contributions in the last two decades.
A probable reason is the prevalence of the \emph{curse of dimensionality}: due to sparseness of the data, nonparametric density estimators converge more slowly to the true density as dimension increases. Put differently, the number of observations required for sufficiently accurate estimates grows excessively with the dimension. As a result, there is very little benefit from the ever-growing sample sizes in modern data. Section 7.2 in \citep{Scott08} illustrates this phenomenon for a kernel density estimator when the standard Gaussian is the target density: to achieve an accuracy comparable to $n=50$ observations in one dimension, more then $n=10^6$ observations are required in ten dimensions.
In general, this issue cannot be solved: \citet{Stone80} proved that any estimator $\widehat f$ that is consistent for the class of $p$ times continuously differentiable $d$-dimensional density functions converges at a rate of at most $n^{-p/(2p + d)}$. More precisely,
\begin{align*}
\widehat f(\bm x) = f(\bm x) + O_p(n^{-r}),
\end{align*}
for all densities $f$ of this class and some $r>0$, implies that $r \le p/(2p + d)$. The curse of dimensionality manifests itself in the $d$ in the denominator. It implies that the optimal convergence rate necessarily decreases in higher dimensions. Thus, to evade the curse of dimensionality, all we can hope for is to find subclasses of densities for which the optimal convergence rate does not depend on $d$. One such subclass is the density functions corresponding to independent variables, which can be estimated as a simple product of univariate density estimates. But the independence assumption is very restrictive. We also want the subclass to be rich and flexible. We will show that simplified vine densities are such a class and provide a useful approximation even when the simplifying assumption is severely violated.
\subsection{Nonparametric density estimation based on simplified vine copulas}
We introduce a nonparametric density estimator whose convergence speed is independent of the dimension. The estimator is build on the foundation of a simplified vine copula model, where the joint density is decomposed into a product of marginal densities and bivariate copula densities, see, e.g., \citep{Czado10} and Section 3.9 in \citep{Joe14}.
First, we separate the marginal densities and the copula density (which captures the dependence between variables). Let $(X_1, \dots, X_d) \in \mathds{R}^d$ be a random vector with joint distribution $F$ and marginal distributions $F_1, \dots F_d$. Provided densities exist, Sklar's Theorem \citep{Sklar59} allows us to rewrite the joint density $f$ as the product of a copula density $c$ and the marginal densities $f_1, \dots, f_d$: for all $\bm x \in \mathds{R}^d$,
\begin{align*}
f(\bm x) = c\bigl\{F_1(x_1), \dots, F_d(x_d)\bigr\} \times f_1(x_1) \times \dots \times f_d(x_d),
\end{align*}
where $c$ is the density of the random vector $\bigl(F_1(X_1), \dots, F_d(X_d)\bigr) \in [0,1]^d$. In order to estimate the joint density $f$, we can therefore obtain estimates of the marginal densities $f_1, \dots, f_d$ and the copula density $c$ separately, and then plug them into the above formula. With respect to the curse of dimensionality, nothing is gained (so far) since estimation of the copula density is still a $d$-dimensional problem.
A crucial insight is that any $d$-dimensional copula density can be decomposed into a product of $d(d-1)/2$ bivariate (conditional) copula densities \citep{Bedford01}. Equivalently, one can build arbitrary $d$-dimensional copula densities by using $d(d-1)/2$ building blocks (so-called \emph{pair-copulas}). Following this idea, the flexible class of \emph{vine copula} models --- also known as \emph{pair-copula-constructions (PCCs)} --- were introduced in \citep{Aas09} and have seen rapidly increasing interest in recent years. For instance, a three-dimensional joint density can be decomposed as
\begin{align*}
f(x_1, x_2, x_3) &= c_{1,2}\bigl\{F_1(x_1), F_2(x_2)\bigr\}\times c_{2,3}\bigl\{F_2(x_2), F_3(x_3)\bigr\} \\
&\phantom{=} \times c_{1,3 ;2}\bigl\{F_{1|2}(x_1|x_2), F_{3|2}(x_3|x_2) \, ; \, x_2\bigr\} \\
&\phantom{=} \times f_1(x_1) \times f_2(x_2) \times f_3(x_3),
\end{align*}
where $c_{1,3;2}\{F_{1|2}(x_1|x_2), F_{3|2}(x_3|x_2) \, ; \, x_2\}$ is the joint density corresponding to the conditional random vector $\bigl(F_{1|2}(X_1|X_2), F_{3|2}(X_3|X_2)\bigr) \big| X_2 = x_2$. Note that the copula of the vector depends on the value $x_2$ of the conditioning variable $X_2$. To reduce the complexity of the model, it is usually assumed that the influence of the conditioning variable on the copula can be ignored. In this case, the conditional density $c_{1,3;2}$ collapses to an unconditional --- and most importantly, two-dimensional --- object, and one speaks of the \emph{simplifying assumption} or a simplified vine copula model/PCC. For general dimension $d$, a similar decomposition into the product of $d$ marginal densities and $d(d-1)/2$ pair-copula densities holds.
Some copula classes where the simplifying assumption is satisfied are given in \citep{Stoeber13}. An important special case is the Gaussian copula. It is the dependence structure underlying a multivariate Gaussian distribution and can be fully characterized by $d(d-1)/2$ partial correlations. Note that under a multivariate Gaussian model, conditional correlations and partial correlations coincide. This property is in direct correspondence to the simplifying assumption which states that all conditional copulas collapse to partial copulas. When the Gaussian copula is represented as a vine copula, it consists of $d(d-1)/2$ Gaussian pair-copulas where the copula parameter of each pair corresponds to the associated partial correlation. In a general simplified vine copula model, we replace each Gaussian pair-copula by an arbitrary bivariate copula. Such models are extremely flexible and encompass a wide range of dependence structures. The class of simplified vine distributions is even more flexible, because it allows to couple a simplified vine copula model with arbitrary marginal distributions.
Under the simplifying assumption, a $d$-dimensional copula density can be decomposed into $d(d-1)/2$ unconditional bivariate densities. Consequently, the estimation of a $d$-dimensional copula density can subdivided into the estimation of $d(d-1)/2$ two-dimensional copula densities. Intuitively, we expect that the convergence rate of such an estimator will be equal to the rate of a two-dimensional estimator and, thus, there is no curse of dimensionality. This is formally established by our main result: \autoref{Theory:rate_thm}.
Nonparametric estimation of simplified vine copula densities has been discussed earlier using kernels \citep{Lopez13} and smoothing splines \citep{Kauermann14}. However, both contributions lack an analysis of the asymptotic behavior of the estimators. We treat the more general setting of densities with arbitrary support. \autoref{Theory:rate_thm} shows under high-level conditions that the convergence rate of a nonparametric estimator of a simplified vine density is independent of the dimension --- an extremely powerful property that has been overlooked so far.
\subsection{Organization}
The remainder is structured as follows: \autoref{Vines} gives a review of vine copulas and introduces notation. A general nonparametric estimator of simplified vine densities is described in detail in \autoref{RVineKDE}. In \autoref{Theory} we show under high-level assumptions that such an estimator is consistent and that the convergence rate is independent of the dimension. Hence, there is no curse of dimensionality. In \autoref{Practical} we discuss how the method can be implemented as a kernel estimator. For this particular implementation, we validate the high-level assumptions of \autoref{Theory:rate_thm} and establish asymptotic normality. We illustrate its advantages via simulations in the simplified as well as non-simplified setting (\autoref{Simulations}). The method is applied to a classification problem from astrophysics in \autoref{Application}. We conclude with a discussion of our results and provide links to the existing literature on the simplifying assumption in \autoref{Conclusion}.
\section{On an implementation as kernel estimator} \label{Practical}
So far we did not specify how the marginal densities, pair-copula densities, and h-functions should be estimated. In general, we can tap into the full potential of existing methods. In this section, we discuss a particular implementation as a kernel estimator. We give low-level conditions under which the assumptions of \autoref{Theory:rate_thm} can be verified. We present corresponding consistency results and establish asymptotic normality of $\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}$. Similar results could be obtained for other implementations. Another issue is that we assumed the structure of the vine to be known. Some heuristics to select an appropriate vine structure are discussed at the end of this section.
\subsection{Estimation of marginal densities and distribution functions} \label{UnivKDE}
Univariate kernel density and distribution function estimators have been extensively studied in the literature. To this day, they are most popular in their original form \citep{Rosenblatt56, Parzen62}: for all $x \in \mathds{R}$,
\begin{align} \label{def:fhat}
\widehat f_\ell(x) = \frac 1 {n b_n}\sum_{i=1}^{n} K\biggl(\frac{X_\ell^{(i)} - x}{b_n}\biggr),\quad \widehat F_\ell(x) = \frac 1 {n}\sum_{i=1}^{n} J\biggl(\frac{X_\ell^{(i)} - x}{b_n}\biggr),
\end{align}
where $b_n> 0$ is the bandwidth parameter, $K$ is a kernel function and $J(x) = \int_{-\infty}^x K(s)ds$ the integrated kernel. We impose the following assumptions on the kernel function, bandwidth sequence, and marginal distributions.
\begin{enumerate}[label=K\arabic*:,ref=K\arabic*]
\item The kernel function $K$ is a symmetric probability density function supported on $[-1,1]$ and has continuous first-order derivative. \label{K1}
\item The bandwidth sequence satisfies $b_n \to 0$ and $nb_n^4/\ln n \to \infty$. \label{K2}
\end{enumerate}
\begin{enumerate}[label=M\arabic*:,ref=M\arabic*]
\item For all $\ell = 1\, \dots, d$, $f_\ell$ is strictly positive on $\mathds{R}$ and has uniformly continuous second-order derivative. \label{M1}
\end{enumerate}
The following result gives the rate of strong uniform consistency for $\widehat f_\ell$.
\begin{Proposition}\label{prop:fhat}
Under conditions \ref{K1}, \ref{K2}, and \ref{M1}, the estimator \eqref{def:fhat} satisfies
\begin{align*}
\sup_{x \in \mathds{R}}\bigl\vert \widehat f_\ell(x) - f_\ell(x) \bigr\vert = O_{a.s.}\bigl(b_n^2 + \sqrt{\ln n / (nb_n)}\bigr).
\end{align*}
for all $\ell = 1\, \dots, d$.
\end{Proposition}\noindent
\begin{proof}
A standard result for kernel density estimation \citep[see, e.g.,][Section 6.2.1]{Scott08} is
\begin{align*}
\mathrm{E}\bigl\{\widehat f_\ell(x)\bigr\} - f_\ell(x) = \frac{1}{2} b_n^2 \sigma^2_K \frac{\partial^2}{\partial x^2} f_\ell(x) + o(b_n^2),
\end{align*}
where $\sigma_K^2 = \int_{[-1, 1]}x^2K(x)dx < \infty$ by \ref{K1} and $\partial^2/\partial x^2 f_\ell(x)$ is bounded by \ref{M1}. The claim then follows from Theorem 2.3 of \citep{Gine02} which states
\begin{align}
\sup_{x \in \mathds{R}} \bigl\vert \widehat f_\ell(x) - \mathrm{E}\bigl\{\widehat f_\ell(x)\bigr\} \bigr\vert = O_{a.s.}\bigl(\sqrt{\ln n / (nb_n)}\bigr). \tag*{\qedhere}
\end{align}
\end{proof}\noindent
\autoref{prop:fhat} implies pointwise weak consistency of $\widehat f_\ell$ as well as strong uniform consistency of $\widehat F_\ell$ with the same rate. In both cases the rate could be improved, but the result will be sufficient for our purposes. The mean-square optimal bandwidth for $\widehat f_\ell$ is $b_n = O(n^{-1/5})$ for which \autoref{prop:fhat} holds with rate $O_{a.s.}(n^{-2/5}\sqrt{\ln n})$.
Extensions of the above estimator comprise variable bandwidth methods \citep{Sain96}, transformation techniques for heavy-tailed distributions \citep{Bolance08}, and boundary kernel estimators that avoid bias and consistency issues on bounded support \citep{Bouezmarni10}.
\subsection{Estimation of pair-copula densities} \label{BiCopKDE}
Nonparametric estimation of copula densities requires caution because they are supported on the unit hypercube. An estimator that takes no account of this property will suffer from bias issues at the boundaries of the support. A few kernel estimators particularly suited for bivariate copula densities were proposed in the literature \citep{Gijbels90, Charpentier06, Geenens14a}. Other nonparametric estimators can be constructed based on Bernstein polynomials \citep{Sancetta04}, B-splines \citep{Kauermann13}, or wavelets \citep{Genest09}.
In this paper, we will use the transformation estimator of \citep{Charpentier06}. The idea is to transform the data to standard normal margins (and therefore unbounded support) where the transformed density gets estimated by a standard kernel estimator. Then, this estimate is transformed back to uniform margins. Denote $\Phi$, $\Phi^{-1}$, and $\phi$ as the standard Gaussian $cdf$, quantile and density functions. For $\bm s \in \mathds{R}^2$, let us write short $\bm K(\bm s) = K(s_1)K(s_2)$, and $\bm K_{B_n}(\bm s) = \bm K(B_n^{-1}\bm s) / \det(B_n)$ for some positive definite bandwidth matrix $B_n \in \mathds{R}^2$. The transformation estimator is defined via
\begin{align}
\overline c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}(u,v) = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^{n} \bm K_{B_n} \begin{pmatrix}
\Phi^{-1}(u) - \Phi^{-1}(U_{j_e|D_e}^{(i)}) \\
\Phi^{-1}(v) - \Phi^{-1}(V_{k_e|D_e}^{(i)})
\end{pmatrix}
/\bigl[\phi\bigl\{\Phi^{-1}(u)\bigr\}\phi\bigl\{\Phi^{-1}(v)\bigr\}\bigr]. \label{def:trafo}
\end{align}
In order to verify the high-level assumptions \hyperref[Theory:oracle_ass]{\ref*{Theory:oracle_ass}a} and \hyperref[Theory:bound_ass]{\ref*{Theory:bound_ass}a}, we need the following two conditions to hold for all $e \in E_1, \dots, E_{d-1}$:
\begin{enumerate}[label=C\arabic*:,ref=C\arabic*]
\item The true pair-copula densities $c_{j_e, k_e;D_e}$ are twice continuously differentiable on $(0, 1)^2$. \label{C1}
\item The transformed densities $\psi_{j_e, k_e;D_e}(x, y) = c_{j_e, k_e;D_e}\bigl\{\Phi(x), \Phi(v)\bigr\}\phi(x)\phi(y)$ have continuous and bounded first- and second-order derivatives on $\mathds{R}^2$. \label{C2}
\end{enumerate}
\ref{C1} is a smoothness condition that is very common in nonparametric estimation. \ref{C2} is less standard as it relates to the transformed density. Sufficient conditions for \ref{C2} are given in Lemma A.1 of \citep{Geenens14a} and can be verified for many parametric families, including the ones used in our simulation study.
To avoid unnecessary technicality, we will assume here that the bandwidth matrix is a multiple of the identity matrix: $B_n = b_n \times I_2$.
\begin{Proposition} \label{prop:chat}
Under conditions \ref{K1}, \ref{K2}, \ref{C1}, and \ref{C2}, the estimator \eqref{def:trafo} satisfies for all $(u,v) \in (0,1)^2$, $e \in E_1, \dots, E_m$,
\begin{align*}
\overline c_{j_e, k_e;D_e}(u,v) - c_{j_e, k_e;D_e}(u,v) &= O_p\bigl(b_n^2 + \sqrt{1 / (nb_n^2)}\bigr), \\
\widehat c_{j_e, k_e;D_e}(u,v) - \overline c_{j_e, k_e;D_e}(u, v) &= O_p(a_{e, n}).
\end{align*}
\end{Proposition}
\begin{proof}
For the first equality, see Section 3.4 in \citep{Nagler14}. For the second, see \autoref{lem:c} in \autoref{Appendix2}.
\end{proof}\noindent
When the mean-square optimal bandwidth $b_n = O(n^{-1/6})$ is used, the right hand side of the first equality is $O_p\bigl(n^{-1/3}\bigr)$.
\subsection{Estimation of h-functions} \label{BiCopKHE}
Recall that h-functions are actually conditional distribution functions:
\begin{align*}
h_{j_e| k_e;D_e}(u| v) = \Pr(U_{j_e|D_e} \le u | U_{k_e|D_e} = v) = \mathrm{E}\bigl\{\mathds{1}(U_{j_e|D_e} \le u) | U_{k_e|D_e} = v\bigr\}.
\end{align*}
The second equality relates the conditional $cdf$ to a regression problem. Hence, any nonparametric regression estimator is suitable for estimation of the h-functions. In our case, it is even simpler to integrate the density estimate to obtain an estimate of the corresponding h-function: for the oracle estimators,
\begin{align} \label{def:hfunc}
\overline h_{j_e| k_e;D_e}(u| v) := \int_0^u \overline c_{k_e, j_e;D_e}(s, v) ds, \quad \overline h_{k_e| j_e;D_e}(v| u) := \int_0^v \overline c_{j_e, k_e;D_e}(u, s) ds,
\end{align}
and the feasible estimators $\widehat h_{j_e| k_e;D_e}$ and $\widehat h_{k_e| j_e;D_e}$ are defined similarly.
Such estimators are closely related to the smoothed Nadaraya-Watson estimator of \citep{Hansen04}. In fact, they coincide when we choose diagonal $B_n$ in \eqref{def:trafo}. For an explicit formula, see \eqref{not_h_eq} in \autoref{Appendix2}. The following result puts this estimator in the context of \hyperref[Theory:oracle_ass]{\ref*{Theory:oracle_ass}b} and \hyperref[Theory:bound_ass]{\ref*{Theory:bound_ass}b}.
\begin{Proposition} \label{prop:hhat}
Under conditions \ref{K1}, \ref{K2}, \ref{C1}, and \ref{C2}, the estimator defined by \eqref{def:hfunc} and \eqref{def:trafo} satisfies for all $\delta \in (0, 0.5]$, and $e \in E_1, \dots, E_m$,
\begin{align*}
\sup_{(u, v) \in [\delta, 1- \delta]^2} \bigl\vert \overline h_{j_e| k_e;D_e}(u|v) - h_{j_e| k_e;D_e}(u|v) \bigl\vert &= O_{a.s.}\bigl(b_n^2 + \sqrt{\ln n / (nb_n)}\bigr), \\
\sup_{(u, v) \in [\delta, 1- \delta]^2} \bigl\vert \overline h_{k_e| j_e;D_e}(u|v) - h_{k_e| j_e;D_e}(u|v) \bigl\vert &= O_{a.s.}\bigl(b_n^2 + \sqrt{\ln n / (nb_n)}\bigr), \\
\sup_{(u, v) \in [\delta, 1- \delta]^2} \bigl\vert \widehat h_{j_e| k_e;D_e}(u|v) - \overline h_{j_e| k_e;D_e}(u|v) \bigl\vert &= O_{a.s.}\bigl(a_{e,n}\bigr), \\
\sup_{(u, v) \in [\delta, 1- \delta]^2} \bigl\vert \widehat h_{k_e| j_e;D_e}(u|v) - \overline h_{k_e| j_e;D_e}(u|v) \bigl\vert &= O_{a.s.}\bigl(a_{e,n}\bigr).
\end{align*}
\end{Proposition} \noindent
\begin{proof}
See \hyperref[lem:h1]{Lemmas \ref*{lem:h1}} and \ref{lem:h2} in \autoref{Appendix2}.
\end{proof}\noindent
The optimal rate of convergence in the first two equalities is $O_{a.s.}\bigl\{(\ln n / n)^{2/5}\bigr\}$ and attained for $b_n = O\bigl\{(\ln n / n)^{1/5}\bigr\}$.
\hyperref[Theory:oracle_ass]{Assumption \ref*{Theory:oracle_ass}b} requires that the error of estimating the h-function vanishes faster than the error of pair-copula density estimation. This is readily achieved by using the optimal bandwidth in each component. However, it may be more convenient to use the same bandwidth for pair-copula density as well as h-function estimation. It seems natural to use the optimal rate for pair-copula density estimation, $b_n = O(n^{-1/6})$. But this violates \autoref{Theory:oracle_ass}, because both estimators converge with the same rate: $n^{-1/3}$. To overcome this, we have to increase the speed of $b_n$ by a small amount, i.e., to undersmooth the pair-copula density estimate. When $b_n = \alpha_n n^{-1/6}$, $\alpha_n = o(1)$, the pair-copula density estimators converges with rate $\alpha_n^{-1}n^{-1/3}$ and the h-function estimator with rate $\alpha_n^{2} n^{-1/3} + \alpha_n^{-1/2}n^{-5/12} = o(\alpha_n^{-1}n^{-1/3})$. But the sequence $\alpha_n$ can converge arbitrarily slow. So we should not expect any problems with using the mean-square optimal rate $b_n = n^{-1/6}$ in practice. This was confirmed by preliminary numerical experiments.
\subsection{Asymptotic normality}
We now put all pieces together and show that the estimator $\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}$ composed of \eqref{def:fhat}, \eqref{def:trafo}, and \eqref{def:hfunc} is asymptotically normal. We start by establishing the joint asymptotic normality of all components. The proof is deferred to \autoref{Appendix3}.
\begin{Proposition} \label{prop:an}
Assume that
\begin{enumerate}
\item conditions \ref{K1}, \ref{M1}, \ref{C1}, and \ref{C2} hold,
\item $\widehat f_\ell$ and $\widehat F_\ell$ are defined by \eqref{def:fhat} with (marginal) bandwidth parameter $b_{n,m}$,
\item $\widehat c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}$ are defined by \eqref{def:trafo} with (copula) bandwidth parameter $b_{n,c}$,
\item $\widehat h_{j_e|k_e;D_e}$ and $\widehat h_{j_e|k_e;D_e}$ are defined by \eqref{def:hfunc} and \eqref{def:trafo} with (h-function) bandwidth parameter $b_{n,h}$,
\item it holds $b_{n,c} = O(n^{-1/6})$, and for sufficiently large $n$,
\begin{align*}
b_{n,c}^2 < b_{n,m} \le b_{n,h} \le \min\{b_{n, c}, n^{-1/6}/\log{n}\}.
\end{align*}
\end{enumerate}
Recall the definition of $\widehat{\bm f}^*(\bm x)$, ${\bm f}^*(\bm x)$, and $d^*$ from \autoref{sec:asdistr}. It holds for all $\bm x \in R^d$,
\begin{align} \label{joint_an}
(nb_{n, c}^2)^{1/2}\bigl\{\widehat{\bm f}^*(\bm x) - b_{n,c}^2 \bm \mu_{\bm x} - {\bm f}^*(\bm x)\bigr\} &\stackrel{d}{\to} \mathcal{N}_{d^*}\bigl(0, \Sigma_{\bm x}\bigr),
\end{align}
where ${\bm \mu}_{\bm x} = (\bm 0_d^\top, \tilde{\bm \mu}_{\bm x}^\top)^\top$, $\tilde{\bm \mu}_{\bm x} = (\tilde{\mu}_{\bm x, e})_{e \in E_1, \dots, E_{d-1}}$, and $\Sigma_{\bm x}$ is diagonal with first $d$ diagonal entries equal to 0 and remaining diagonal entries $(\tilde \sigma_{\bm x, e})_{e \in E_1, \dots, E_{d-1}}$. Explicit expressions for $\tilde{\mu}_{\bm x, e}$ and $\tilde \sigma_{\bm x, e}$ are given in \eqref{el_mu} and \eqref{el_sig} in \autoref{Appendix3}.
\end{Proposition} \noindent
The asymptotic normality of $\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}$ follows by an application of the delta method.
\begin{Corollary}
Under the assumptions of \autoref{prop:an} it holds for all $\bm x \in \mathds{R}^d$,
\begin{align*}
(nb_{n, c}^2)^{1/2}\bigl\{\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}(\bm x) - b_{n,c}^2 \bm \theta^\top \bm \mu_{\bm x} - f(\bm x)\bigr\} \stackrel{d}{\to} \mathcal{N}\bigl(0, \bm \theta^\top \Sigma_{\bm x} \bm \theta\bigr),
\end{align*}
where $\theta_k = \prod_{j \neq k} f^*_j(\bm x)$, $k = 1, \dots, d^*$, and $\bm \mu_{\bm x}$, $\Sigma_{\bm x}$ are as in \autoref{prop:an}.
\end{Corollary} \noindent
\subsection{Structure selection} \label{Structure}
Finding the optimal structure for vine copulas is extremely difficult. Because of the large number of possibilities, practical approaches are usually based on heuristics. In few situations, expert knowledge can be used to decide which pair-wise dependencies should be modeled explicitly. If there is no meaningful prior information, the structure selection algorithm of \citep{Dissmann13} can be adopted. Starting with the first tree, we select the tree that is a maximum (or minimum) spanning tree w.r.t.\ some weight function $w_e$ assigning a weight to each pair of pseudo-observations. The most popular weights are empirical estimates of $\tau_e$, the (unconditional) Kendall's $\tau$ corresponding to $c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}$. They can be estimated sequentially from the pseudo-observations defined in \autoref{RVineKDE:seqest_alg}. The idea is to choose a structure that captures most of the dependence in lower trees. Other possible weights are the AIC or goodness-of-fit $p$-values corresponding to a pair-copula estimate; see \citep{Czado13} for a discussion. By using kernel density estimators for the pair-copulas, we get a fully nonparametric structure selection algorithm.
\section{A nonparametric density estimator based on simplifed vine copulas} \label{RVineKDE}
We propose a multivariate nonparametric density estimation technique where a) we separate the estimation of marginal and copula densities, and b) the copula density is estimated as the product of sequentially estimated pair-copula densities. We suggest a general step-wise estimation algorithm without specifying exactly how the components are estimated. This more practical issue is deferred to \autoref{Practical}.
Let $\bm X = (X_1, \dots, X_d) \in \Omega_{\bm X}$ be a random vector with continuous joint distribution $F$ and marginal distributions $F_1, \dots, F_d$. The support of $X_\ell$ will be denoted as $\Omega_{X_\ell}$, $\ell = 1, \dots, d$. Let further $\bm X^{(i)} = (X_1^{(i)}, \dots, X_d^{(i)})$, $i=1, \dots, n$, be \emph{iid} copies of $\bm X$ (acting as observations). Assume that $F$ is a simplified vine distribution with structure $\mathcal{V} =(T_1, \dots, T_{d-1})$. Provided densities exist, we can use Sklar's theorem and \eqref{Vines:density_eq} to write the joint density $f$ for all $\bm x = (x_1, \dots, x_d) \in \Omega_{\bm X}$ as
\begin{align} \label{RVineKDE:Rvinedensity_eq}
f(\bm x) &= c\bigl\{F_1(x_1), \dots, F_d(x_d)\bigr\} \times \prod_{l=1}^d f_\ell(x_\ell) \notag \\
\begin{split}
&= \prod_{m=1}^{d-1} \prod_{e \in E_m} c_{j_e, k_e; D_e} \bigl\{F_{j_e|D_e}(x_{j_e}|\bm x_{D_e}), \, F_{k_e|D_e}(x_{k_e}|\bm x_{D_e}) \bigr\} \times \prod_{l=1}^d f_\ell(x_\ell).
\end{split}
\end{align}
The conditional distribution functions $F_{k_e|D_e}(x_{k_e}|\bm x_{D_e})$ can equivalently be expressed as $G_{k_e|D_e}(u_{k_e}|\bm u_{D_e})$, where $\bm u = (u_1, \dots, u_d) := (F_1(x_1), \dots, F_d(x_d))$. This allows us to decompose $F_{k_e|D_e}$ recursively into h-functions (see \autoref{Vines}).
The idea is now to estimate all functions in the above expression separately. We use a step-wise estimation procedure that is widely used in vine copula models, see, e.g., \citep{Aas09, Haff13}. It is summarized in \autoref{RVineKDE:seqest_alg}. Let us describe the reasoning behind the first few steps in a little more detail.
\begin{enumerate}[label=\arabic*.]
\item Based on the observations $(X_1^{(i)}, \dots, X_d^{(i)})$, $i =1, \dots, n,$ we obtain estimates $\widehat f_1, \dots, \widehat f_d, \widehat F_1, \dots, \widehat F_d$ of the marginal densities $f_1, \dots, f_d$ and distribution functions $F_1, \dots, F_d$.
\item The copula density $c$ is the density of the random vector $\bm U :=\bigl(F_1(X_1), \dots, F_d(X_d)\bigr)$. We do not have access to observations from this vector. However, we can define pseudo-observations $\bm U^{(i)} :=\bigl(\widehat U_1^{(i)}, \dots, \widehat U_d^{(i)}\bigr)$ by replacing $F_1, \dots, F_d$ with the estimators from the last step:
\begin{align}
\bigl(\widehat U_1^{(i)}, \dots, \widehat U_d^{(i)}\bigr) := \bigl(\widehat F_1(X_1^{(i)}), \dots, \widehat F_d(X_d^{(i)})\bigr), \qquad i = 1, \dots, n. \label{RVineKDE:pobs_eq}
\end{align}
Based on two-dimensional subvectors of the pseudo-observations \eqref{RVineKDE:pobs_eq}, we estimate all pair-copula densities and h-functions that correspond to edges of the first tree (the conditioning sets $D_e$ are empty). We use \eqref{Vines:hfuncdef_eq} to derive estimates of the $h$-functions, that is
\begin{align*}
\widehat h_{j_e|k_e} (u | v) := \int_{0}^{u} \widehat c_{j_e, k_e}(s , v) ds, \qquad \mbox{for } (u,v) \in (0,1)^2.
\end{align*}
Optionally, the h-functions can be estimated separately. However, this will typically lead to a density estimate that does not integrate to one.
\item Any pair-copula density $c_{j_e, k_e; D_e}$ corresponding to an edge in the second tree is the density of a random vector $\bigl(F_{j_e|D_e}(X_{j_e}| X_{D_e}), F_{k_e|D_e}(X_{k_e}| X_{D_e})\bigr)$, $e \in E_2$. They are not observable, but we can use pseudo-observations such as
\begin{align*}
\widehat U_{j_e|D_e }^{(i)} := \widehat F_{j_e|D_e}\bigl( X_{j_e}^{(i)}| X_{D_e}^{(i)}\bigr) = \widehat G_{j_e|D_e}\bigl(\widehat U_{j_e}^{(i)}| \widehat U_{D_e}^{(i)}\bigr)= \widehat h_{j_e|D_e}\bigl(\widehat U_{j_e}^{(i)}| \widehat U_{D_e}^{(i)}\bigr),
\end{align*}
$i=1,\dots, n,$ instead. This allows us to obtain estimates $\widehat c_{j_e, k_e; D_e}$, $\widehat h_{j_e| k_e; D_e}$, and $\widehat h_{k_e| j_e; D_e}$.
\item For estimation in the third tree, we need observations from random vectors such as
\begin{align}
U_{j_e|D_e }^{(i)} := F_{j_e|D_e}\bigl(X_{j_e}^{(i)}| {\bm{X}}_{D_e}^{(i)}\bigr), \label{RVineKDE:rvs3_eq}
\end{align}
$i=1,\dots, n$, $e \in E_3$. Recall from \autoref{Vines} that, by construction, we can find some edge $e^\prime \in E_2$ such that $j_{e^\prime} = j_e$ and $D_{e^\prime} \cup k_{e^\prime} = D_e$. Consequently, we can apply \eqref{Vines:h_recursive_eq} and approximate \eqref{RVineKDE:rvs3_eq} by the pseudo-observations
\begin{align*}
\begin{aligned}
\widehat U_{j_e|D_e}^{(i)} = \widehat U_{j(e^\prime)|D(e^\prime) \cup k(e^\prime)}^{(i)} &:= \widehat F_{j_{e^\prime}|D_{e^\prime} \cup k_{e^\prime}}\bigl(X_{j_{e^\prime}}^{(i)} \big| \bm X_{D_{e^\prime} \cup k_{e^\prime}}^{(i)} \bigr) \\
&\phantom{:}=\widehat G_{j_{e^\prime}|D_{e^\prime} \cup k_{e^\prime}}\bigl(\widehat U_{j_{e^\prime}}^{(i)} \big| \widehat{\bm U}_{D_{e^\prime} \cup k_{e^\prime}}^{(i)} \bigr) \\
&\phantom{:}= \widehat h_{j_{e^\prime}|k_{e^\prime} ; D_{e^\prime}} \bigl(\widehat U_{j_{e^\prime}|D_{e^\prime}}^{(i)}\big| \widehat{ U}_{k_{e^\prime} | D_{e^\prime}}^{(i)}\bigr),
\end{aligned}
\end{align*}
where the last equality is again derived from \eqref{Vines:h_recursive_eq}.
\item For higher trees, proceed as in step 4.\
\end{enumerate}
At the end of the procedure we have estimates for all marginal distributions/densities, bivariate copula densities, and all h-functions that are required to evaluate the R-vine density \eqref{RVineKDE:Rvinedensity_eq}. For all $\bm x \in \Omega_{\bm X}$ we now define an estimate of the simplified vine density $f$ as
\begin{align}
\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}(\bm x) &:= \prod_{m=1}^{d-1} \prod_{e \in E_m} \widehat c_{j_e, k_e; D_e} \bigl\{\widehat F_{j_e|D_e}( x_{j_e}|{\bm x}_{D_e}), \, \widehat F_{k_e|D_e}(x_{k_e}|{\bm x}_{D_e}) \bigr\} \times \prod_{\ell=1}^d \widehat f_\ell(x_\ell). \label{RVineKDE:estimator_eq}
\end{align}
\begin{algorithm}[t]
\caption{Sequential estimation of simplified vine densities}
\label{RVineKDE:seqest_alg}
{\bfseries Input:} Observations $(X_1^{(i)}, \dots, X_d^{(i)})$, $i=1, \dots, n$, structure $\mathcal{V}=(T_1, \dots, T_{d-1})$. \\
{\bfseries Output:} Estimates of all marginal densities and distributions, pair-copula densities, and h-functions required to evaluate the simplified vine density \eqref{RVineKDE:Rvinedensity_eq}.\\ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\\
{\bfseries for} $\ell=1, \dots, d$:\\
\hspace*{2em} Obtain estimates $\widehat f_\ell, \widehat F_\ell$ of the marginal density $f_\ell$ and distribution $F_\ell$.\\
\hspace*{2em} Set $\widehat U_\ell^{(i)} := \widehat F_\ell(X_\ell^{(i)}), i=1, \dots, n$.\\
{\bfseries end for}\\
{\bfseries for} $m=1, \dots, d-1$:\\
\hspace*{2em} {\bfseries for all} $e \in E_m$:\\[-12pt]
\hspace*{1em}
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.9\textwidth}
\begin{enumerate}
\item {\itshape Estimation step:} Based on $\bigl(\widehat U_{j_e|D_e}^{(i)}, \widehat U_{k_e|D_e}^{(i)}\bigr)_{i=1,\dots,n}$, obtain an estimate of the copula density $c_{j_e, k_e;D_e}$ which we denote as $\widehat c_{j_e, k_e;D_e}$, and corresponding h-function estimates $\widehat h_{j_e| k_e;D_e}$, $\widehat h_{k_e| j_e;D_e}$.
\item {\itshape Transformation step:} Set
\begin{align*}
\widehat U_{j_e|D_e \cup k_e}^{(i)} &:= \widehat h_{j_e|k_e ; D_e}\bigl(\widehat U_{j_e|D_e}^{(i)}\big| \widehat{ U}_{k_e | D_e}^{(i)}\bigr), \\
\widehat U_{k_e|D_e \cup j_e}^{(i)} &:= \widehat h_{k_e|j_e ; D_e}\bigl(\widehat U_{k_e|D_e}^{(i)}\big| \widehat{U}_{ j_e|D_e}^{(i)}\bigr), \quad i = 1, \dots, n.
\end{align*}
\end{enumerate}
\end{minipage}
\hspace*{2em} {\bfseries end for}\\
{\bfseries end for}
\end{algorithm}
\section{Simulations} \label{Simulations}
In this section, we study the finite sample behavior of a vine copula based kernel density estimator. We illustrate its advantages compared with the classical kernel density estimator in three scenarios that comprise one simplified and two non-simplified target densities.
\subsection{Implementation of estimators} \label{Simulation:Implementation}
The study was carried out in the statistical computing environment R \citep{R}. We use the implementation of $\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}$ introduced in the previous section:
\begin{description}
\item {\bfseries Marginal densities} are estimated by the standard kernel density estimator \eqref{def:fhat}. Bandwidths are selected by the plug-in method of \citep{Chacon10}, as implemented in the function \verb|hpi| of the \verb|ks| package \citep{ks}.
\item {\bfseries Marginal distributions} are estimated by integrating the estimates of the marginal densities.
\item {\bfseries Pair-copula densities} are estimated by the transformation estimator \eqref{def:trafo} with bandwidth matrix selected by the normal reference rule; see, e.g., Section 3.4 in \citep{Nagler14}.
\item {\bfseries The vine structure} is considered unknown and selected by the method of \citep{Dissmann13} using empirical estimates of $\tau_e$ as weight function (see \autoref{Structure}).
\end{description}
The estimator $\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}$ is implemented in the R package \texttt{kdevine} \citep{kdevine}. The package also includes estimators for marginals with bounded support as well as more sophisticated pair-copula estimators which further improve the performance. For the classical multivariate kernel density estimator ($\widehat f_{\mathrm{mvkde}}$ from here on) we use the function \verb|kde| provided by the \verb|ks| package \citep{ks}. It selects the bandwidths by the plug-in method of \citep{Chacon10}.
\subsection{Performance measurement}
We evaluated the performance of both estimators for three choices of the target density $f$. To gain insight on their convergence behavior under increasing dimension, we consider five different sample sizes $n = 200, 500, 1\,000, 2\, 500, 5\,000$, and three different dimensions $d=3, 5, 10$. For any fixed target density, sample size, and dimension, we measure the performance as follows:
\begin{enumerate}[label=\arabic*.]
\item Simulate $n_{sim} = 250$ samples of size $n$, from a $d$-dimensional target density $f$.
\item On each sample, estimate the density with estimators $\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}$ and $\widehat f_{\mathrm{mvkde}}$.
\item For each estimator $\widehat f \in \bigl\{\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}, \widehat f_{\mathrm{mvkde}}\bigr\}$ and sample, calculate the \emph{integrated absolute error (IAE)} as a performance measure:
\begin{align*}
\mathrm{IAE}\bigl(\widehat f\bigr) := \int_{\mathds{R}^d}\big\vert \widehat f(\bm x) - f(\bm x)\big\vert d\bm x.
\end{align*}
The integral is estimated by importance sampling Monte Carlo (e.g., Section 5.2 in \citep{Ripley87}), where we take the true density $f$ as the sampling distribution. The number of Monte Carlo samples was set to $1\, 000$. This gives an unbiased, low-variance estimate of the IAE.
\end{enumerate}
In the following section we will present the median IAE attained over 250 simulations. Additionally, we use Mood's median test \citep{Gibbons04} to check whether the difference in performance is statistically significant at the 1\% level. Significant results will be indicated by stars above sample size axes of \autoref{Simulations:fig}.
\subsection{Results}
In the following, we illustrate the main insights of our numerical experiments in three examples --- one where the simplifying assumption holds, and two where it does not. Since the simplifying assumption is a property of the copula, we focus on this part and set the marginal densities to standard Gaussian in all scenarios. For these margins, the two estimators $\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}$ and $\widehat f_{\mathrm{mvkde}}$ are asymptotically equivalent when $d=2$. But they become different as soon as the simplifying assumption becomes relevant, i.e., when $d > 2$. Hence, differences in the performance of the two estimators can be directly related to the fact that $\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}$ assumes a simplified model. Additional simulation results for common parametric copula families (both simplified and non-simplified) and varying strength of dependence are provided in the online supplement. \todo{Reference}
\subsubsection*{Scenario 1: Gaussian Copula}
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\subfloat[Gaussian copula]{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{gaussian-0_4.pdf} \label{Simulations:1_fig}} \\
\subfloat[Gumbel copula]{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{gumbel-0_4.pdf} \label{Simulations:2_fig}} \\
\subfloat[Non-simplifed Gaussian vine]{\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{ns-0_4.pdf} \label{Simulations:3_fig}} \\
\caption{Median integrated absolute error achieved for varying sample size $n$ and dimension $d$. The estimator $\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}$ is indicated by circles; $\widehat f_{\mathrm{mvkde}}$ by triangles. A star above the sample size means that the corresponding medians were found significantly different at the 1\% level by Mood's median test.} \label{Simulations:fig}
\end{figure}
The first scenario concerns the estimation of a $d$-dimensional Gaussian density. For simplicity, we choose the parameters such that all pair-wise Kendall's $\tau$ equal 0.4 (this corresponds to an association parameter of $\rho \approx 0.6$). Recall that the simplifying assumption is a property of the dependence, i.e.\ the copula. The copula underlying a multivariate Gaussian density is the Gaussian copula which belongs to the class of simplified vine distributions \citep{Stoeber13}. Consequently, the vine copula based estimator is consistent in this situation.
\autoref{Simulations:1_fig} shows the median IAE of $\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}$ (circles) and $\widehat f_{\mathrm{mvkde}}$ (triangles) for varying sample size $n$ and dimension $d$. The vine copula based estimator strictly outperforms the classical estimator by a considerable margin. The difference in IAEs is statistically significant for all dimensions and sample sizes. As predicted by \autoref{Theory:rate_thm}, we observe that --- in contrast to the classical kernel density estimator --- the vine copula based estimator converges at the same rate independent of dimension. Thus, the gap widens as dimension or sample size increase. For $d=5$, $\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}$ is almost two times as accurate; for $d=10$ almost three times as accurate. These numbers are remarkable considering how slowly $\widehat f_{\mathrm{mvkde}}$ can improve its accuracy when increasing sample size. The same conclusions can be drawn from the additional simulation results for simplified models provided in the online supplement. \todo{Reference}
\subsubsection*{Scenario 2: Gumbel copula}
Our second scenario, a Gumbel copula coupled with standard normal margins, violates the simplifying assumption; see Theorem 3.1 in \citep{Stoeber13}. Again, we choose the parameter of the Gumbel copula such that all pair-wise Kendall's $\tau$ equal 0.4 (this corresponds to a Gumbel copula parameter $\theta \approx 1.67$). In this case, $\widehat f_{\mathrm{mvkde}}$ is guaranteed to outperform $\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}$ as $n \to \infty$, because the latter is not consistent. On finite samples, however, the picture seems to be different.
The performance of the two estimators in this scenario is displayed in \autoref{Simulations:2_fig}. For $d=3$, $\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}$ is slightly worse than its competitor, but the difference is only significant for large sample sizes. For increasing dimension, the gap widens in favor of $\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}$ which performs significantly better for $d =5$ and $d= 10$. For $d=10$ and $n = 5\,000$, the vine copula based estimator is almost two times as accurate --- although it is not consistent. Since $\widehat f_{\mathrm{mvkde}}$ converges so slowly, an extremely large number of observations would be required until it becomes the better choice. But for commonly available sample sizes and $d>3$, the vine copula based estimator is preferable. The same findings hold for the additional simulation results for non-simplified models provided in the online supplement.
\subsubsection*{Scenario 3: Non-simplified Gaussian vine}
Lastly, we want to investigate how the vine copula based estimator behaves in a sort of `worst case scenario'. We set up a non-simplified vine copula with Gaussian pair-copulas and formulate their parameters as a regression on the conditioning variables implied by the vine. For each conditional pair-copula, the correlation parameter function $\rho_e\colon [0,1]^{|D_e|} \to [-1, 1]$ describes a linear hyperplane ranging from $-1$ to $1$:
\begin{align*}
\rho_e(\bm u_{D_e}) = 1 - \frac 2 {\vert D_e \vert} \sum_{j \in D_e} u_{j}, \qquad \mbox{for } e \in E_m,\, m \ge 2.
\end{align*}
Since $\int \rho_e(\bm u_{D_e}) d\bm u_{D_e} = 0$ for all $e \in E_2, \dots, E_{d-1}$, we also set $\rho_e \equiv 0$ for $e \in E_1$. This model is severely violating the simplifying assumption for each conditional pair in the vine.
The results for this scenario are shown in \autoref{Simulations:3_fig}. The vine copula based estimator performs significantly worse for $d=3, 5$. Remarkably, $\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}$ manages to significantly outperform the classical estimator for $d=10$. The severely non-simplified dependence structure appears to be too difficult to identify even for a nonparametric estimator that does not rely on the simplifying assumption. Extrapolating the curves, we can expect that to hold for sample sizes much larger than those considered in our study. Also, we can expect the advantage of $\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}$ to become even bigger in higher dimensions. We can conclude that even in this extremely unfavorable example, the estimator $\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}$ proves useful when more than a few variables are involved.
\section{Asymptotic theory} \label{Theory}
We now establish weak consistency of the simplified vine density estimator proposed in \autoref{RVineKDE}. We furthermore show that its probabilistic convergence rate does not increase with dimension and, hence, there is no curse of dimensionality.
\subsection{Consistency and rate of convergence} \label{Theory:rates}
The sequential nature of the proposed estimator complicates its analysis. Estimation errors will propagate from one tree to the next and affect the estimation in higher trees. We impose high-level assumptions on the uni- and bivariate estimators that allow us to establish our main result.
The first assumption considers the consistency of univariate density and distribution function estimators. Although estimators may converge at different rates, we will formulate all assumptions w.r.t.\ to the same rate $n^{-r}$, $r > 0$. This rate then has to be the slowest among all estimators involved --- typically the rate of the pair-copula density estimator.
\begin{Assumption} \label{Theory:f_ass}
For all $\ell = 1, \dots, d,$ and all $x_\ell \in \Omega_{X_\ell}$, it holds
\begin{align*}
(a) \quad \widehat f_\ell(x_\ell) - f_\ell(x_\ell) = O_p(n^{-r}), \qquad (b) \quad \sup_{x_\ell\in \Omega_{X_\ell}} \bigl\vert\widehat F_\ell(x_\ell) - F_\ell(x_\ell)\bigr\vert = o_{a.s.}(n^{-r}).
\end{align*}
\end{Assumption}\noindent
Next, assume we are in an ideal situation where, for each edge $e \in E_m, m = 1, \dots, d-1$, we have access to the true (but unobservable) pair-copula samples
\begin{align} \label{Theory:unobs_eq}
\begin{aligned}
U_{j_e|D_e}^{(i)} := F_{j_e|D_e} \bigl(X_{j_e}^{(i)}| \bm X_{D_e}^{(i)}\bigr), \qquad
U_{k_e|D_e}^{(i)} := F_{k_e|D_e}\bigl(X_{k_e}^{(i)}| \bm X_{D_e}^{(i)}\bigr),
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
$i=1, \dots,n,$. Recall that estimators are functions of the data, although this dependence is usually not made explicit in notation. Denote
\begin{align} \label{oracle_def}
\overline c_{j_e,k_e;D_e} (u,v) := \overline c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}\bigl(u, v, U_{j_e|D_e}^{(1)}, \dots, U_{k_e|D_e}^{(n)} \bigr)
\end{align}
as the oracle pair-copula density estimator that is based on the random samples \eqref{Theory:unobs_eq}. The h-function estimators corresponding to \eqref{oracle_def} are denoted $\overline h_{j_e|k_e;D_e}$ and $\overline h_{k_e|j_e;D_e}$. The second assumption requires the pair-copula density and h-function estimators to be consistent in this ideal world. For the h-functions we need strong uniform consistency on compact interior subsets of $[0,1]^2$. We further assume that the errors from h-function estimation vanish faster than $n^{-r}$.
\begin{Assumption} \label{Theory:oracle_ass}
For all $e \in E_m, m = 1, \dots, d-1$, it holds:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[$(a)$] for all $(u,v) \in (0, 1)^2$,
\begin{align*}
\overline c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}(u,v) - c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}(u,v) = O_p(n^{-r}),
\end{align*}
\item[$(b)$] for every $\delta \in (0, 0.5]$,
\begin{align*}
& \sup_{(u, v) \in [\delta, 1-\delta]^2} \bigl\vert \overline h_{j_e|k_e;D_e}(u|v) - h_{j_e|k_e;D_e}(u|v) \bigr\vert = o_{a.s.}(n^{-r}), \\
& \sup_{(u, v) \in [\delta, 1-\delta]^2} \bigl\vert \overline h_{k_e|j_e;D_e}(u|v) - h_{k_e|j_e;D_e}(u|v) \bigr\vert = o_{a.s.}(n^{-r}).
\end{align*}
\end{enumerate}
\end{Assumption}\noindent
In practice, one has to replace \eqref{Theory:unobs_eq} by pseudo-observations which have to be estimated. Thus, we only have access to perturbed versions of the random variables \eqref{Theory:unobs_eq}. Similar to a Lipschitz condition, the last assumption ensures that the pair-copula and h-function estimators are not overly sensitive to such perturbations. Denote
\begin{align} \label{feasible_def}
\widehat c_{j_e,k_e;D_e} (u,v) := \overline c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}\bigl(u, v, \widehat U_{j_e|D_e}^{(1)}, \dots, \widehat U_{k_e|D_e}^{(n)} \bigr)
\end{align}
as the estimator based on pseudo-observations $\widehat U_{j_e|D_e}^{(i)}, \widehat U_{k_e|D_e}^{(i)}$ (as defined in \autoref{RVineKDE:seqest_alg}). The h-function estimators corresponding to \eqref{feasible_def} are denoted $\widehat h_{j_e|k_e;D_e}$ and $\widehat h_{k_e|j_e;D_e}$.
\begin{Assumption} \label{Theory:bound_ass}
For all $e \in E_m, m = 1, \dots, d-1$, it holds:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[$(a)$] for all $(u,v) \in (0,1)^2$,
\begin{align*}
\widehat c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}(u, v) - \overline c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}(u, v) = O_p(a_{e, n}),
\end{align*}
\item[$(b)$] for every $\delta \in (0, 0.5]$,
\begin{align*}
& \sup_{(u, v) \in [\delta, 1-\delta]^2} \bigl\vert \widehat h_{j_e|k_e;D_e}(u|v) - \overline h_{j_e|k_e;D_e}(u|v) \bigr\vert = O_{a.s.}(a_{e,n}), \\
& \sup_{(u, v) \in [\delta, 1-\delta]^2} \bigl\vert \widehat h_{k_e|j_e;D_e}(u|v) - \overline h_{k_e|j_e;D_e}(u|v)\bigr\vert = O_{a.s.}(a_{e,n}),
\end{align*}
\end{enumerate}
where
\begin{align*}
a_{e, n} := \sup_{i = 1, \dots, n} \vert\widehat U_{j_e|D_e}^{(i)} - U_{j_e|D_e}^{(i)}\bigr\vert + \bigl\vert\widehat U_{k_e|D_e}^{(i)} - U_{k_e|D_e}^{(i)}\bigr\vert.
\end{align*}
\end{Assumption} \noindent
Finally, we require the true pair-copula densities to be smooth. Note that smoothness of pair-copula densities already guarantees smoothness of related h-functions by \eqref{Vines:hfuncdef_eq}.
\begin{Assumption} \label{Theory:smoothness_ass}
For all $e \in E_m$, $m = 1, \dots, d-1$, the pair-copula densities $c_{j_e,k_e;D_e}$ are continuously differentiable on $(0, 1)^2$.
\end{Assumption}\noindent
Now we can state our theorem. The proof is deferred to \autoref{Appendix}.
\begin{Theorem} \label{Theory:rate_thm}
Let $f$ be a $d$-dimensional density corresponding to a simplified vine distribution with structure $\mathcal{V}=(T_1, \dots, T_{d-1})$ and let $(X_1^{(i)}, \dots, X_d^{(i)}), i=1, \dots, n$, be $iid$ observations from this density. Denote further $\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}$ as the estimator resulting from \autoref{RVineKDE:seqest_alg} with $(X_1^{(i)}, \dots, X_d^{(i)})_{i = 1, \dots, n}$ and $\mathcal{V}$ as the input.
Under \hyperref[Theory:f_ass]{Assumptions \ref*{Theory:f_ass}}\hyperref[Theory:smoothness_ass]{--}\ref{Theory:smoothness_ass}, it holds for all $\bm x \in \Omega_{\bm X}$,
\begin{align*}
\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}(\bm x) - f(\bm x) = O_p(n^{-r}).
\end{align*}
\end{Theorem}\noindent
Usually, convergence of nonparametric density estimators slows down as dimension increases. This phenomenon is widely known as the curse of dimensionality and restricts the practical application of the estimators to very low-dimensional problems. By \hyperref[Theory:rate_thm]{Theorem \ref*{Theory:rate_thm}}, the proposed vine copula based kernel density estimator inherits the convergence rate of the bivariate copula density estimator. It does not depend on the dimension $d$ and, therefore, suffers no curse of dimensionality. This is a direct consequence of the simplifying assumption allowing us to subdivide the $d$-dimensional estimation problem into several one- and two-dimensional tasks.
Assuming that the pair-copula densities are $p$ times continuously differentiable, we can achieve convergence with $r = p/(2p + 2)$. Recalling from \citep{Stone80} that a general nonparametric density estimator has optimal rate $p/(2p + d)$, we see that the vine copula based estimator converges at a rate that is equivalent to the rate of a two-dimensional classical estimator. As this property is independent of dimension, we can expect large benefits of the vine copula approach especially in higher dimensions. We emphasize that a necessary condition for \autoref{Theory:rate_thm} to hold with $r = p/(2p + 2)$ is that the density $f$ belongs to the class of simplified vine densities. If this is not the case, the estimator described in \autoref{RVineKDE} is not consistent, but converges towards a simplified vine density that is merely an approximation of the true density. More specifically, its limit is the \emph{partial vine copula approximation}, first defined in \citep{Spanhel15}. In \autoref{Simulations} we will illustrate that even in this situation an estimator based on simplified vine copulas can outperform the classical approach on finite samples.
\begin{Remark}
\autoref{Theory:rate_thm} allows for densities $f$ with arbitrary support. Their support, $\Omega_{\bm X}$, only relates to the marginal distributions; copulas are always supported on $[0,1]^d$. If some of the $X_\ell$ have bounded support, we just have to use estimators for $\widehat f_\ell$ that takes this into account. This underlines how flexible the vine copula based approach is.
\end{Remark}
\begin{Remark}
It is straightforward to extend \autoref{Theory:rate_thm} to non-simplified vine densities by extending the pair-copula densities to functions of more than two variables. Besides that, the proof given in \autoref{Appendix} does not make use of the simplifying assumption at all. However, the simplifying assumption is necessary for $r = p/(2p + 2)$ to be feasible. More generally, if we assume that the pair-copulas depend on at most $d^\prime$ conditioning variables, the optimal rate is $p/(2p + 2 + d^\prime)$.
\end{Remark}
\begin{Remark}
\autoref{Theory:rate_thm} can be extended to
\begin{align*}
\sup_{\bm x \in \Omega_{\bm X}} \bigl\vert \widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}(\bm x) - f(\bm x) \bigr\vert = O_p\bigl\{(\ln n/n)^r\bigr\},
\end{align*}
provided that the rate $n^{-r}$ in our assumptions is replaced by $(\ln n/n)^r$ and holds uniformly on $\Omega_{X_\ell}$ and $[0, 1]^2$ respectively. But this requires that the pair-copula densities are bounded which is unusual. For example, it does not hold when $f$ is a multivariate Gaussian density with non-diagonal covariance matrix. If the assumptions are met, $\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}$ is able to achieve the optimal uniform rate of a two-dimensional nonparametric density estimator which is attained at $r = p/(2p + 2)$ \citep[see,][]{Stone83}.
\end{Remark}
\hyperref[Theory:f_ass]{Assumptions \ref*{Theory:f_ass}}\hyperref[Theory:bound_ass]{--}\ref{Theory:bound_ass} are very general and hold for a large class of estimators under mild regularity conditions. In \autoref{Practical} we validate them for a particular implementation which will be used in the simulations (\autoref{Simulations}).
\subsection{A note on the asymptotic distribution} \label{sec:asdistr}
We also want to give a brief and general account of the asymptotic distribution of the estimator. Let $d^* = d + d(d-1)/2$ and $\widehat{\bm f}^*(\bm x) \in \mathds{R}^{d^*}$ be the stacked vector of all components of the product $\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}(\bm x)$ in Eq.\ \eqref{RVineKDE:estimator_eq}, i.e.,
\begin{align*}
\widehat{\bm f}^*(\bm x) := \bigl(\widehat f_1(x_1), \widehat f_2(x_2), \dots, \widehat c_{j_e,k_e|D_e}\bigl\{\widehat F_{j_e|D_e}(x_{j_e} | \bm x_{D_e}), \widehat F_{k_e|D_e}(x_{k_e} | \bm x_{D_e})\bigr\}, \dots\bigr),
\end{align*}
and similarly ${\bm f^*}(\bm x)$. Then $\prod_{k=1}^{d^*} \widehat f^*_k = \widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}(\bm x)$ and $\prod_{k=1}^{d^*} f^*_k = f(\bm x)$. The following result is a simple application of the multivariate delta method.
\begin{Proposition} \label{Theory:norm_prop}
If for some $\bm \mu_{\bm x} \in \mathds{R}^{d^*}$, $ \Sigma_{\bm x} \in \mathds{R}^{d^*\times d^*},$
\begin{align} \label{Theory:norm_eq}
n^{r}\bigl\{\widehat{\bm f}^*(\bm x) - {\bm f^*}(\bm x) \bigr\} \stackrel{d}{\to}\mathcal{N}_{d^*}\bigl(\bm \mu_{\bm x}, \Sigma_{\bm x}\bigr),
\end{align}
then for all $\bm x \in \mathds{R}^d$,
\begin{align*}
n^{r}\bigl\{\widehat f_{\mathrm{vine}}(\bm x) - f(\bm x)\bigr\} \stackrel{d}{\to} \mathcal{N}_d\bigl(\bm \theta^\top \bm \mu_{\bm x}, \bm \theta^\top \Sigma_{\bm x} \bm \theta\bigr),
\end{align*}
where $\theta_k = \prod_{j \neq k} f^*_j(\bm x)$, $k = 1, \dots, d^*$.
\end{Proposition}
The standard way to establish the joint normality assumption \eqref{Theory:norm_eq} is to check the conditions of the multivariate Lindeberg-Feller central limit theorem (see Proposition 2.27 of \citep{vanderVaart98}). We will do this for a particular implementation in \autoref{Practical} (see \autoref{prop:an}).
\section{Simplified vine copulas and distributions} \label{Vines}
We will briefly recall the most important facts about vine copulas and the closely related vine distributions. For a more extensive introduction we refer to \citep{Aas09, Czado10} and Chapter 3 of \citep{Joe14}.
Vine copula models follow the idea of \citet{Joe96} that any $d$-dimensional copula can be expressed in terms of $d(d-1)/2$ bivariate (conditional) copulas. Because such a decomposition is not unique, \citep{Bedford02} introduces a graphical method to organize the structure of a $d$-dimensional vine copula in terms of linked trees $T_m=(V_m, E_m)$, $m=1, \dots, d-1$.
A sequence $\mathcal{V}:= (T_1, \dots, T_{d-1})$ of trees is called a \emph{regular vine (R-vine) tree sequence} on $d$ elements if the following conditions are satisfied:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $T_1$ is a tree with nodes $V_1=\{1, \dots, d\}$ and edges $E_1$.
\item For $m\ge 2$, $T_m$ is a tree with nodes $V_m=E_{m-1}$ and edges $E_m$.
\item (\emph{Proximity condition}) Whenever two nodes in $T_{m+1}$ are joined by an edge, the corresponding edges in $T_m$ must share a common node.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{figure}
\tikzstyle{VineNode} = [ellipse, fill = white, draw = black, text = black, align = center, minimum height = 1cm, minimum width = 1cm]
\tikzstyle{DummyNode} = [draw = none, fill = none, text = white]
\tikzstyle{TreeLabels} = [draw = none, fill = none, text = black]
\newcommand{\labelsize}{\footnotesize}
\newcommand{\yshiftLabel}{-0.3cm}
\newcommand{\yshiftNodes}{-0.75cm}
\newcommand{\xshiftTree}{0.5cm}
\newcommand{\rotateLabels}{-57}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture} [every node/.style = VineNode, node distance =1.4cm]
\node (1){1}
node[DummyNode] (Dummy12) [right of = 1]{}
node (2) [right of = Dummy12] {2}
node (3) [below of = Dummy12, yshift = \yshiftNodes] {3}
node[DummyNode] (Dummy45) [below of = 3, yshift = \yshiftNodes]{}
node (4) [left of = Dummy45] {4}
node (5) [right of = Dummy45] {5}
node (12) [right of = 2, xshift = \xshiftTree] {1,2}
node[DummyNode] (Dummy12x) [right of = 12]{}
node (13) [below of = Dummy12x, yshift = \yshiftNodes] {1,3}
node[DummyNode] (Dummy45c3) [below of = 13, yshift = \yshiftNodes]{}
node (34) [left of = Dummy45c3] {3,4}
node (35) [right of = Dummy45c3] {3,5}
node (15c3) [right of = 35, xshift = \xshiftTree] {1,5;3}
node[DummyNode] (Dummy15c3x)[right of = 15c3]{}
node (14c3) [above of = Dummy15c3x, yshift = -\yshiftNodes] {1,4;3}
node[DummyNode] (Dummy23c1x)[above of = 14c3, yshift = -\yshiftNodes]{}
node (23c1) [left of = Dummy23c1x] {2,3;1}
node (24c13) [right of = Dummy23c1x, xshift = \xshiftTree] {2,4;1,3}
node (45c13) [right of = Dummy15c3x, xshift = \xshiftTree] {4,5;1,3}
node[TreeLabels] (T1) [above of = Dummy12] {$T_1$}
node[TreeLabels] (T2) [above of = Dummy12x] {$T_2$}
node[TreeLabels] (T3) [above of = 23c1] {\hspace{1.7cm}$T_3$}
node[TreeLabels] (T4) [above of = 24c13] {$T_4$}
;
\draw (1) to node[draw=none, fill = none, font = \labelsize,
above, yshift = \yshiftLabel] {1,2} (2);
\draw (1) to node[draw=none, fill = none, font = \labelsize,
rotate = \rotateLabels, above, yshift = \yshiftLabel] {1,3} (3);
\draw (3) to node[draw=none, fill = none, font = \labelsize,
rotate = \rotateLabels, above, yshift = \yshiftLabel] {3,5} (5);
\draw (3) to node[draw=none, fill = none, font = \labelsize,
rotate = -\rotateLabels, above, yshift = \yshiftLabel] {3,4} (4);
\draw (12) to node[draw=none, fill = none, font = \labelsize, above,
rotate = \rotateLabels, above, yshift = \yshiftLabel] {2,3;1} (13);
\draw (13) to node[draw=none, fill = none, font = \labelsize, above,
rotate = \rotateLabels, above, yshift = \yshiftLabel] {1,5;3} (35);
\draw (13) to node[draw=none, fill = none, font = \labelsize, above,
rotate = -\rotateLabels, above, yshift = \yshiftLabel] {1,4;3} (34);
\draw (23c1) to node[draw=none, fill = none, font = \labelsize, above,
rotate = \rotateLabels, above, yshift = \yshiftLabel] {2,4;1,3} (14c3);
\draw (14c3) to node[draw=none, fill = none, font = \labelsize, above,
rotate = -\rotateLabels, above, yshift = \yshiftLabel] {4,5;1,3} (15c3);
\draw (24c13) to node[draw=none, fill = none, font = \labelsize, above,
rotate = -90, above, yshift = \yshiftLabel] {2,5;1,3,4} (45c13);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Example of a regular vine tree sequence.}
\label{Vines:RVine_fig}
\end{figure}
The tree sequence is also called the \emph{structure} of the vine. An example of an R-vine tree sequence for $d=5$ is given in \autoref{Vines:RVine_fig}. For the annotation of the edges in each tree we follow \citep{Czado10}.
An \emph{R-vine copula} model identifies each edge of the trees with a bivariate copula (a so-called \emph{pair-copula}). Assume that each pair-copula admits a density and let $\mathcal{B}:=\{c_{j_e, k_e ; D_e} | e \in E_m, 1 \le m \le d-1\}$ be the set of copula densities associated with the edges in $\mathcal{V}$. Then, the R-vine copula density can be written as
\begin{align}
c(\bm u) = \prod_{m=1}^{d-1} \prod_{e \in E_m} c_{j_e, k_e; D_e} \bigl\{G_{j_e|D_e}(u_{j_e}|\bm u_{D_e}), \, G_{k_e|D_e}(u_{k_e}|\bm u_{D_e}) ; \, \bm u_{D_e} \bigr\}, \label{Vines:density_nonsimplified_eq}
\end{align}
where $\bm u_{D_e}:=(u_\ell)_{\ell \in D_e}$ is a subvector of $\bm u =(u_1, \dots, u_d) \in [0,1]^d$ and $G_{j_e|D_e}$ is the conditional distribution of $U_{j_e} | \bm U_{D_e} = \bm u_{D_e}$. The set $D_e$ is called \emph{conditioning set} and the indices $j_e, k_e$ form the \emph{conditioned set}. In the first tree the conditioning set $D_e$ is empty, and we define $G_{j_e}(u_{j_e}) := u_{j_e}, G_{k_e}(u_{k_e}) := u_{k_e}$ for notational consistency. For a given edge $e$, the function $c_{j_e, k_e ; D_e}$ is the copula density associated with the conditional random vector
\begin{align*}
\bigl(G_{j_e|D_e}(U_{j_e}|\bm U_{D_e}),G_{k_e|D_e}(U_{k_e}|\bm U_{D_e})\bigr)\bigl| \bm U_{D_e} = \bm u_{D_e}.
\end{align*}
Note that in \eqref{Vines:density_nonsimplified_eq}, the pair-copula density $c_{j_e, k_e; D_e}$ takes $\bm u_{D_e}$ as an argument and the functional form w.r.t.\ the arguments $u_{j_e}$,$u_{k_e}$ may be different for each value of $\bm u_{D_e}$. This conditional structure makes the model very complex and complicates estimation. To simplify matters, we assume that this dependence can be ignored and the copula is equal across all possible values of $\bm u_{D_e}$: we assume that the \emph{simplifying assumption} holds. In this case, \eqref{Vines:density_nonsimplified_eq} collapses to
\begin{align}
c(\bm u) = \prod_{m=1}^{d-1} \prod_{e \in E_m} c_{j_e, k_e; D_e} \bigl\{G_{j_e|D_e}(u_{j_e}|\bm u_{D_e}), \, G_{k_e|D_e}(u_{k_e}|\bm u_{D_e}) \bigr\}. \label{Vines:density_eq}
\end{align}
A distribution whose copula density can be represented this way is called a \emph{simplified vine distribution}.
\begin{Example} \label{Vines:vine_ex}
The density of a simplified R-vine copula corresponding to the tree sequence in \autoref{Vines:RVine_fig} is
\begin{align*}
c(u_1, \dots, u_5) &= c_{1,2}(u_1, u_2) \times c_{1,3}(u_1,u_3) \times c_{3,4}(u_3,u_4) \times c_{3,5}(u_3,u_5)\\
& \phantom{=} \times c_{2,3;1}(u_{2|1}, u_{3|1}) \times c_{1,4;3}(u_{1|3}, u_{4|3}) \times c_{1,5;3}(u_{1|3}, u_{5|3}) \\
& \phantom{=} \times c_{2,4;1,3}(u_{2|1,3}, u_{4|1,3}) \times c_{4,5;1,3}(u_{4|1,3}, u_{5|1,3}) \\
& \phantom{=} \times c_{2,5;1,3,4}(u_{2|1,3,4}, u_{5|1,3,4}),
\end{align*}
where we used the abbreviation $u_{j_e|D_e} := G_{j_e|D_e}(u_{j_e}|\bm u_{D_e})$.
\end{Example} \noindent
R-vine copula densities involve conditional distributions $G_{j_e|D_e}$. We can express them in terms of conditional distributions corresponding to bivariate copulas in $\mathcal{B}$ as follows: Let $\ell_e \in D_e$ be another index such that $c_{j_e, \ell_e; D_e \setminus \ell_e} \in \mathcal{B}$ and define $D'_e:= D _e \setminus \ell_e$. Then, we can write
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}
& \; G_{j_e|D_e}(u_{j_e}|\bm u_{D_e}) = h_{j_e|\ell_e;D'_e }\bigl\{G_{j_e|D'_e}(u_{j_e}|\bm u_{D'_e})\, \big| \, G_{\ell_e|D'_e}(u_{\ell_e}|\bm u_{D'_e})\bigr\},
\end{aligned}
\label{Vines:h_recursive_eq}
\end{align}
where the \emph{h-function} is defined as
\begin{align}
h_{j_e|\ell_e;D'_e} (u | v) := \int_{0}^{u} c_{j_e, \ell_e;D'_e}(s , v) ds, \qquad \mbox{for } (u,v) \in [0,1]^2. \label{Vines:hfuncdef_eq}
\end{align}
By definition, h-functions are conditional distribution functions for pairs of marginally uniformly distributed random variables with joint density $c_{j_e, \ell_e;D'_e}$. The arguments $G_{j_e|D'_e}(u_{j_e}|\bm u_{D'_e})$ and $G_{\ell_e|D'_e}(u_{\ell_e}|\bm u_{D'_e})$ of the h-function in \eqref{Vines:h_recursive_eq} can be rewritten in the same manner. In each step of this recursion the conditioning set $D_e$ is reduced by one element. Note also that, by construction, the copula density on the right hand side of \eqref{Vines:hfuncdef_eq} always belongs to the set $\mathcal{B}$. Eventually, this allows us to write any of the conditional distributions $G_{j_e|D_e}$ as a recursion over h-functions that are directly linked to the pair-copula densities. Later, we will use this fact to derive estimates of such conditional distributions from estimates of the pair-copula densities in lower trees.
\begin{Example}
Consider an R-vine copula corresponding to the R-vine tree sequence given in \autoref{Vines:RVine_fig}. We have
\begin{align*}
G_{3|1,2}(u_3| u_1, u_2) &= h_{3|2;1}\bigl\{h_{3|1}(u_3|u_1) \big| h_{2|1}(u_2|u_1) \bigr\},
\end{align*}
where $h_{3|2;1}(u_{3|1}|u_{2|1}) = \int_{0}^{u_{3|1}} c_{2,3;1}(u_{2|1}, s) ds$, $h_{3|1}(u_3|u_1) = \int_{0}^{u_3} c_{1,3}(u_1, s) ds$, and $h_{2|1}(u_2|u_1) = \int_0^{u_2} c_{1,2}(u_1, s) ds$.
\end{Example} \noindent
Altogether, we can express any vine copula density in terms of bivariate copula densities and corresponding h-functions. |
\section{Introduction}
The India-based Neutrino Observatory (INO) \cite{Athar:2006yb} is the
proposed underground facility that will house a magnetized Iron
CALorimeter detector (ICAL) designed to study neutrino oscillations
with atmospheric muon neutrinos. In particular, ICAL will focus on
measuring precisely the neutrino oscillation parameters including the
sign of the 2--3 mass-squared difference $\Delta
m_{32}^{2}$ ($= m_3^2 - m_2^2$) and hence help to determine the neutrino
mass hierarchy through matter effects. Oscillation signatures
for neutrinos and anti-neutrinos are different in the presence of
matter effects which become important in the few GeV energy region.
These parameters are sensitive to the momentum $P$ and the zenith angle
$\cos\theta$ (through path length travelled) of neutrinos. Reconstruction
of these parameters further depends on the energy and direction of muons
and hadrons \cite{hadronresponse} produced in charge-current interactions of the neutrinos
in the detector; hence studies of muon energy and direction resolutions
are crucial.
Since ICAL is designed to be mostly sensitive to muons, the main
physics issues that ICAL will probe will be through studies of charged
current (CC) muon neutrino (anti-neutrino) interactions with muons
(anti-muons) produced in the final state. Two types of interactions
are relevant: in the first, the neutrino enters the detector,
interacting with (dominantly) nucleons in the iron nucleus. These
events are identified by vertices which are inside the detector
(tracks begin inside the detector). In the second type of interaction,
the neutrino interacts with rock around the detector and the produced muons lose energy while propagating through the rock (these are the so-called rock muons or upward-going muons). These events have vertices outside the detector with their tracks starting at an edge of the detector. The first type of interaction dominantly gives low energy (few GeV) muons due to the rapidly falling atmospheric neutrino flux. While in the case of rock muons, most of the lower energy muons are stopped in the rock itself, so that the fraction of higher energy ($>$ 10 GeV) muons is higher in this sample. In addition, cosmic ray muons also enter the detector from above.
In an earlier paper \cite{central}, the response of ICAL to few-GeV
muons with respect to both momentum magnitude and direction
reconstruction was studied through simulations for muons generated in
the central region of ICAL where the magnetic field is largely uniform
both in direction and magnitude. Here we present for the first time a
GEANT4-based simulations study of the muon response in the peripheral
region of ICAL, where the magnetic field is not only highly
non-uniform in both magnitude and direction, but there are significant
edge effects as most of the tracks will be partially contained.
Note that a substantial fraction of rock muon events
traverses such regions in the detector; hence it is important to
understand the muon response in these regions for such physics studies.
The inclusion of muon response in the peripheral region of the detector can significantly change the oscillation and mass hierarchy results since it contains resolutions and efficiencies in the energy range 1--50 GeV. The first set of simulations results for precision measurement of neutrino oscillation parameters and the mass hierarchy were produced using only the central region resolutions of about 9--14\% and efficiency of about 80\% (see Ref.~\cite{physics}, \cite{physics1} for more details) in the energy range 1--20 GeV.
The paper is organised as follows: in Section 2 we briefly discuss some
relevant details about the GEANT4-based simulation of the detector
geometry and magnetic field, as well as the methodology of hit and
track generation and track reconstruction. In Section 3, we discuss
the general features of muon propagation in the different regions
of ICAL. In Section 4, we discuss the selection criteria used. We
then present in Section 5 the results, with these selection criteria,
for the muon efficiencies and resolutions in the peripheral region of
ICAL. A comparison of the response in all the regions of ICAL (central and peripheral) is given in Section 6. We conclude in Section 7,
with discussions.
\section{The ICAL Detector Simulation Framework}
Details of the ICAL detector can be found elsewhere \cite{central}. Here
we briefly review the relevant simulation inputs for the geometry and
magnetic field. The ICAL detector geometry is simulated \cite{central}
using GEANT4 software \cite{geant}. It comprises of three identical
modules of dimension 16 m $\times$ 16 m $\times$ 14.45 m. The direction along which the modules are placed is chosen to be the $x$-direction (and is
labelled with the azimuthal angle $\phi=0$) and the direction perpendicular to the $x$-axis in the horizontal plane is the $y$-direction. The vertical direction is the $z$-direction with the $z$-axis pointing upwards (so the polar angle is also the zenith angle). Each module comprises a stack of 151 layers of 5.6 cm thick magnetized iron, separated by a 4 cm air gap in which the active detector elements, the RPCs are placed. The $y$-direction is in the plane of the iron plates, parallel to the slots of the magnet coil, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:magfield}, with the origin of the coordinate system being the centre of the central module.
Apart from coil slots (thin 8 m long slots centred around $y=0$ at $x=
x_0 \pm 4$ m, where $x_0$ is the central $x$-coordinate of each module),
there are vertical steel support structures which are placed at every 2
m along the whole detector in both $x$ and $y$ directions, to maintain
the air gap between plates. These are dead spaces that affect the muon
reconstruction. In addition, the magnetic field is also not uniform
everywhere and so the quality of reconstruction depends on the region
where the event is located.
\subsection{The Magnetic Field}
The magnetic field has been simulated in a single iron plate using the
MAGNET6 software \cite{magnetcode}. The magnetic field map is generated
at the centre ($z=0$) of the plate and is assumed uniform over the entire thickness of the plate. The magnetic field lines in a single iron plate
in the central module are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:magfield}. The field is generated by current circulating in copper coils that pass through slots in the magnetized plates. The slots can be seen as thin white vertical lines at $x=\pm 4$ m in the figure. The direction and length of arrows
denote the direction and magnitude of the magnetic field.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}
\begin{center}\includegraphics[width=0.55\textwidth]{mg_new.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Magnetic field map as generated by the MAGNET6 \cite{magnetcode}
software in the central iron layer of the central module. Points A =
$(0, -650, 0)$ cm, B = $(300, -650, 0)$ cm, C = $(-2270, 0, 0)$ cm (in
the $1^{st}$ module of ICAL), are defined for later use. Notice that C
is actually in the left-most module of the detector and is simply marked
here for convenience.}
\label{fig:magfield}
\end{figure}
The ``central region'' is defined as the volume contained within
the region $\vert x \vert \le 4$ m, $\vert y \vert \le 4$ m with $z$
unconstrained, that is, the region within the coils slots in each
module. The central region has the highest magnetic field that is
uniform in both magnitude and direction ($B_y$) while the region labelled
``peripheral region'' (outside the central region in the $y$ direction,
$\vert y \vert > 4$ m) has the maximally changing magnetic field in both
direction and magnitude, with the field falling to zero at the corners
of the module.
In an earlier paper \cite{central}, the muon response was studied in
the central region; here we study the peripheral region where, apart
from the changing magnetic field, the reconstruction is also affected by
edge effects. In addition, there are two small regions outside the coil
slots in the $x$ direction ($\vert x \vert > 4$ m), labelled as the
``side region'' in Fig.~\ref{fig:magfield} where the magnetic field
is about 15\% smaller than in the central region and in the opposite
direction. The side regions in the central module are contiguous with the
side regions in the adjacent modules and the quality of reconstruction
here is expected to be similar to that in the central region. However
the left (right) side region of the left (right)-most module will suffer
from edge effects and we shall consider them separately in the study.
\subsection{Event Reconstruction}
In each analysis, 10,000 muons are propagated in the detector with
fixed momenta and direction and with the starting point of the muons
in either the peripheral or side regions. In contrast to the
earlier study in the central region \cite{central}, here the muon
momenta vary from 1--50 GeV/c, with the higher energies being of
interest for rock muon studies. The muon tracks are reconstructed
based on a Kalman filter \cite{kalman} algorithm. The RPCs that signal
the passage of muons through them have a position sensitivity of about
$\pm 1$ cm in the $x$- and $y$-directions (the RPC strip width is 1.96
cm) and about $\pm 1$ mm in the $z$-direction (the gas gap in the RPCs
being 2 mm). In addition, ``hits'' or signals can be generated in
adjoining RPC strips as well, and further that the RPC efficiency and time resolution are about 95 \% and 1 ns respectively \cite{rpc_char}. For more details regarding the generation of hits, tracks and their reconstruction, see
Ref.~\cite{central}.
\section{General Feature of Muon Response in the Peripheral and Side Regions}
We first discuss the general expectations, based on the detector geometry
and the orientation of the magnetic field.
The Lorentz force equations are $\vec{F} = q (\vec{v} \times \vec{B})$,
where $\vec{B}$ is the magnetic field that is confined to the $x$-$y$
plane, $q$ is the charge of the particle with momentum $\vec{P}$
and energy $E$ so that its velocity $\vec{v}$ is directed along the
momentum with magnitude $v = Pc^2/E$. Since $q = -1$ for $\mu^{-}$,
the components of force in the peripheral region for an upward-going muon,
momentarily ignoring energy loss, are,
\begin{eqnarray} \nonumber
F_{x} & = & v_{z} B_{y}~; \nonumber \\
F_{y} & = & - v_{z} B_{x}~; \nonumber \\
F_{z} & = & v_{y} B_{x} - v_{x} B_{y}~,
\label{eq:periforce}
\end{eqnarray}
whereas the analogous components of force in the side region are given as:
\begin{eqnarray} \nonumber
F_{x} & = & - v_{z} B_{y}~; \nonumber \\
F_{y} & = & 0~; \nonumber \\
F_{z} & = & v_{x} B_{y}~.
\label{eq:sideforce}
\end{eqnarray}
It is seen that in both regions, $F_{x}$ and $F_{y}$ are independent
of $\phi$ (that is, independent of the momentum components in the plane
of the field) and depend on $P_{z}$ (i.e., on the zenith angle $\theta$
alone) while $F_z$ depends on both $\theta$ and $\phi$. Depending on the
components of magnetic field $B_{x}$ and $B_{y}$, Eqs.~\ref{eq:periforce}
and \ref{eq:sideforce} give the net force in the different regions of
ICAL. Consider the in-plane ($x$, $y$ components) forces in the regions
denoted as 1--10 in Fig.~\ref{fig:map}. It can be seen that in regions
$1,2,7,8$, $F_{y}$ is such that it causes an upward-going muon
($\cos\theta>0$) to be bent in a direction going
out of the detector, thus lowering the reconstruction efficiency. The
effect is just the opposite in regions $3,4,5,6$. If $F_{z} > 0$ as well,
the already upward-going muon traverses more iron layers as
discussed in Ref.~\cite{central} and hence gives good resolution; hence,
$F_y$ affects the reconstruction efficiency while $F_z$ determines
the quality of reconstruction. Since $F_z$ depends on both $(\theta,
\phi)$ as well as the magnetic field, the sign of $F_z$ is shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:map} inside a circle of $\phi$ in each of regions $1,2,3,4$
(for negatively charged upward-going muons), for $\vert B_x \vert \sim
\vert B_y \vert$ with purple (cyan) regions denoting $F_z > (<) 0$.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}
\begin{center}\includegraphics[width=0.55 \textwidth]{map_detail.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Magnetic field map with the net force directions in the
peripheral and side region. The thick black arrows indicate the direction
of the magnetic field with labels $B(i,j), i=+,-,$ that denote the sign
of the $B_x$, $B_y$ components in each region. The brown arrows indicate
the direction of $F_x$ or $F_y$ force components that will act on a
negatively charged upward-going muon. The small coloured circles
indicate the direction of $F_z$ in each region, with purple (cyan)
denoting $F_z > 0 (< 0)$. (Note that side regions 9 and 10
are in the $1^{st}$ and $3^{rd}$ modules of the detector respectively
and are shown together in the same module for convenience.)}
\label{fig:map}
\end{figure}
Hence the magnetic field that determines the quality of reconstruction
breaks the azimuthal symmetry, so muons in different $\phi$ directions
(for the same momenta and polar angle $\cos\theta$) have different
detector response. This was discussed in detail in Ref.~\cite{central}. Going by the force equations, we therefore analyse the muon response in
the peripheral region in four different set of $\phi$ bins as shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:phi_choice}: bin I: $\vert \phi \vert \le \pi/4$, bin II:
$\pi/4 \le \phi < 3\pi/4$, bin III: $-3\pi/4 \le \phi < -\pi/4$, and
bin IV: $3\pi/4 < \vert \phi \vert \le \pi$.
\begin{figure}[btp]
\renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{phi_peripheral.eps}
\hspace{0.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{phi_centre.eps}
\caption{The choice of $\phi$ bins in the peripheral (left) and side (right) regions.}
\label{fig:phi_choice}
\end{figure}
For muons with starting point in the negative $y$ peripheral region (regions marked
$1,2,3,4$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:map}), this implies that most of the muons
with momenta such that $\phi$ lies in bin III (but otherwise having
same magnitude and $\cos\theta$) are prone to exit the detector from
the side; however, there will be marked differences in the quality of
reconstruction between regions $(1,2)$ and $(3,4)$ due to the different
$F_y$ force that turns the track back into the detector in regions
$3,4$. Hence the average detector response in this region is an average
over these two different behaviours. In addition, $F_z > 0~(< 0)$ for
bin II muons in regions $1,2$ $(3, 4)$ and this helps to improve the
reconstruction in regions $1,2$, so that bin II muons can be expected to
have the best quality of reconstruction of the regions 1--4.
A similar analysis can be done for muons which begin in the positive $y$ peripheral region (regions marked $5,6,7,8$). Of course, tracks at the edge of a
region or of high energy muons may move from one region to another where
a different magnetic field applies; however, we simply bin the events
according to the region in which the muon originates.
In the side region 9, $F_{x}$ causes the particle to go out of the
detector but $F_{z} > 0$ and so this region has good resolution but worse
efficiency. The results are opposite in side region 10 since $B_{y}$
$<$ 0. We therefore define the same $\phi$ bins for the side region as
were used for the central region, viz., bin I: $\vert \phi \vert \le
\pi/4$, bin II: $\pi/4 < \vert \phi \vert \le \pi/2$, bin III: $\pi/2 <
\vert \phi \vert \le 3\pi/4$, and bin IV: $3\pi/4 < \vert \phi \vert \le
\pi$. The difference is in the definition of the second and third bins,
see Fig.~\ref{fig:phi_choice}, and is more appropriate from the point of
view of the geometrical configuration in this region. Region 9 (10)
will have the worst reconstruction in $\phi$ bin IV (I). However, in
region 10, the direction of the $F_x$ force is expected to improve the
results just as in the case of regions $3,4$.
The results will be the same for downward-coming $\mu^+$ (with $\cos\theta <
0$) while that for downward-coming muons or upward-going anti-muons can be
obtained by symmetry. In our analysis, therefore, we study the muon
response in the peripheral regions 1--4 and the side region 9.
It is important to keep in mind that the support structures and coil gaps
also break this azimuthal symmetry in a non-trivial way and the effects of
the geometry may alter the trends of the distributions as discussed above.
The net effect of the nature of the detector geometry and magnetic field
can be seen in the muon resolutions and efficiencies and we will now
discuss these.
As discussed above, we study the response in the following peripheral
and side regions.
\paragraph{In the Peripheral Region}:
Here, 10,000 muons ($\mu^-$) were propagated with fixed input momenta
$P_{\rm in}$ and direction $\cos\theta$ (and smeared over the entire
azimuthal angle $\phi$), with their starting point uniformly smeared over the region
centred at $(0, -600, 0)$ cm and extending upto $\pm$ $(2400, 200,
720)$ cm from it; this comprises the whole peripheral region along the
three modules of the detector in the {\em negative $y$ region} where
the magnetic field is non-uniform.
\paragraph{In the Side Region}: In the side region, muons ($\mu^-$) were
propagated with the same procedure as above but with point of origin smeared in
a region centred around $(-2200, 0, 0)$ cm and $(2200, 0, 0)$ cm (which
are in the $1^{st}$ and $3^{rd}$ modules of the detector respectively)
and smeared uniformly in $\pm$ $(200, 400, 720)$ cm around these.
\section{Selection Criteria Used}
All tracks which satisfy the loose selection criterion $\chi^2/\hbox{ndf}
\le 10$, are used in the analysis, where $\chi^2$ is the standard
$\chi$-squared of the fit and ndf are the number of degrees of freedom,
$\hbox{ndf} = 2 \times N_{hits} - 5$, where $N_{hits}$ are the
number of hits in the event, $N_{hits} \ge 5$ and the Kalman filter involves the fitting of 5 parameters.
Further selection criteria are used to get reasonable fits and hence
resolutions. Two major constraints have been applied in both the
peripheral and side regions to remove low energy tails. The first is
similar to that applied when analysing tracks in the central region
\cite{central}: the Kalman filter algorithm may generate more than one
track. While this may be correct and useful in the case of genuine
neutrino CC interactions, where one or more hadrons accompany the muon,
this is a problem for single muon analysis and arises because of
detector dead spaces (for instance, two portions of a track on either
side of a support structure may be reconstructed as two different tracks). This problem will be mitigated by the identification of a vertex
in a genuine neutrino interaction, here, we place a constraint and
analyse only those events for which exactly one track is reconstructed,
leading to a consequent loss in reconstruction efficiency. The second
selection criterion is specific to the peripheral and side regions and is
described below.
Initially, events were generated at fixed points of origin to understand the
effect of the magnetic field. In the peripheral region, the starting point was
chosen to be either at point A (in a region of nearly zero magnetic
field) or B (large magnetic field with both $x$- and $y$-components
non-zero), while in the side region, a generic point C was studied (see
Fig.~\ref{fig:magfield}). Results of this study clearly indicated that a
large fraction of events whose tracks were truncated because the particle
exited the detector (so-called partially contained events) were relatively
poorly reconstructed. These could not be eliminated by tightening the
constraint on $\chi^2$ of the fits; however, they could largely be
removed by demanding that the track contain a minimum number of hits,
such that either $N_{hits} > n_0$ or $N_{hits}/\cos\theta > n_0$ (note that
there may be multiple hits per layer), where $n_0$ needed to be carefully
optimised. It was found that for a given momentum and direction of
the muon, $n_0$ needed to be larger (smaller) in regions where the
magnetic field strength is small (large). Where the muon does not leave
the detector, so that the entire track is contained in the detector
(fully contained events), no constraint on $N_{hits}$ is needed. With
this understanding, the generic peripheral and side region response was studied.
\subsection{Effect of Selection Criteria}
The effect of $N_{hits} > n_0$ or $N_{hits}/\cos\theta > n_0$ can be seen from
Fig.~\ref{fig:fixedcuts-per} for the peripheral region. If the event is
fully contained, there is no constraint on $N_{hits}$; the effect of $n_0
= 15$ is shown in the left-hand side of Fig.~\ref{fig:fixedcuts-per} for
$(P_{in}, \cos\theta) = (5 \hbox{ GeV/c}, 0.65)$ and $(9 \hbox{ GeV/c},
0.85)$ where the histogram in the magnitude of the reconstructed momentum
$P_{rec}$ is plotted. For $P_{in} = 5$ GeV/c, it is noticed that the
$N_{hits}$ constraint does not affect the $P_{rec}$ momentum distribution
much, as most of the events are fully contained. But it gives a better
(more symmetrical) shape to the distribution by reducing the low-energy
tail. On the other hand, the effect for $P_{in} = 9$ GeV/c is stronger, with the hump at lower $P_{rec}$ being eliminated with the
$N_{hits}$ selection criteria.
Fig.~\ref{fig:nhitsdist-per} shows the effect of $N_{hits} >
n_0$ or $N_{hits}/\cos\theta > n_0$ on $N_{hits}$ distributions in
the peripheral region. In all cases, the few events surviving below the
constraint are from totally contained events, on which no constraint is
placed. These cause the histograms to remain non-zero in the region $N_{hits} \le n_{0}$ or $N_{hits}/\cos\theta \le n_{0}$ as seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:nhitsdist-per}. However, these events are relatively few in number, being less than 2\% (3\%) of the total reconstructed events for $n_{0}$ = 15 (20) in Fig.~\ref{fig:nhitsdist-per}. The constraint $N_{hits}/\cos\theta > 15$ is the most conservative one, with a loss of only about 10\% of the reconstructed events and is found to be more optimal than $N_{hits} > n_0$.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{E5_cth65_nhits15cut.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{E5_cth65_nhits20cut.eps}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{E9_cth85_nhits15cut.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{E9_cth85_nhits20cut.eps}
\caption{Top (bottom) figures show the reconstructed momenta
$P_{rec}$ using selection criteria $N_{hits}>n_0$ for partially contained events
in the peripheral region with ($P_{in}$, $\cos\theta$) = (5 GeV/c, 0.65)
(top) and (9 GeV/c, 0.85) (bottom) with $n_0 = 15~(20)$ in the left
(right) figure. Fully contained events have no $N_{hits}$ constraint. In
each figure, the black curve is without constraints on $N_{hits}$, red is
with $N_{hits}/\cos\theta > n_0$ and blue is for $N_{hits} > n_0$.}
\label{fig:fixedcuts-per}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htp]
\renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{dist_nhits15_E5cth65_per.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{dist_nhits20_E5cth65_per.eps}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{dist_nhits15_E9cth85_per.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{dist_nhits20_E9cth85_per.eps}
\caption{Top (bottom) figures show the $N_{hits}$ distributions using selection criteria $N_{hits}>n_0$ for partially contained events
in the peripheral region with ($P_{in}$, $\cos\theta$) = (5 GeV/c, 0.65)
(top) and (9 GeV/c, 0.85) (bottom) with $n_0 = 15~(20)$ in the left
(right) figure. Fully contained events have no $N_{hits}$ constraint. In
each figure, the black curve is without constraints on $N_{hits}$, red is
with $N_{hits}/\cos\theta > n_0$ and blue is for $N_{hits} > n_0$.}
\label{fig:nhitsdist-per}
\end{figure}
Different choices of $n_0$ can be used. We have shown the effect of
(a) no constraint, (b) $N_{hits} > 15$, and (c) $N_{hits}/\cos\theta > 15$
in the left-hand side of Fig.~\ref{fig:fixedcuts-per}. The last choice
is motivated by the fact that a slant-moving muon (in the absence of
magnetic field) would move a distance $d/\cos\theta$ in comparison to a
vertically upward-going muon of the same momentum that would traverse
a distance $d$. Similar figures on the right use the choice $n_0 =
20$, with the more stringent requirement giving distributions with
correspondingly smaller root-mean-square or square root of the variance
(RMS widths) by about 7--8\%, but showing a decrease in the total number
of reconstructed events by 10--15\%. Note also that increasing $n_0$
eventually leads to removal of well-reconstructed events, as visible
from the loss of events in the peak apart from just trimming the tails
for the lower momentum $P_{in} = 5$ GeV/c for $n_0 = 20$.
Similarly, the effect of the selection criteria on the reconstruction in
the side regions is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:fixedcuts-side}. Here the
constraint on the partially contained events is not as strongly marked
as in the peripheral region: while there is certainly a decrease in the
RMS width of the distribution and in the number of selected events when
the constraint is applied, a larger fraction of events are lost due to
the constraint, with a number of ``good'' events being lost from
the peak of the distribution as well, unlike in the peripheral region.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{E5_cth65_nhits15cut_side9.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{E5_cth65_nhits15_side10.eps}
\caption{The figures show the reconstructed momenta $P_{\rm rec}$ using the selection criteria $N_{hits}>n_0$ for partially contained events in
the side regions 9 (left) and 10 (right) for ($P_{\rm in}$, $\cos\theta$) =
(5 GeV/c, 0.65) with $n_0 = 15$.
Fully contained events have no $N_{hits}$ constraint. In each figure,
the black curve is without constraints on $N_{hits}$, red is with
$N_{hits}/\cos\theta > n_0$ and blue is for $N_{hits} > n_0$.}
\label{fig:fixedcuts-side}
\end{figure}
The final choice of selection criteria will be guided by the physics
study. In case the requirement is good momentum resolution, then the
choice $n_0=20$ may be appropriate (that is, either $N_{hits}>20$ or
$N_{hits}/\cos\theta>20$). However, since the shape of the distribution is
already reasonable for $n_0=15$, this choice may be used when the focus
is not so much on precision reconstruction but on higher event
reconstruction rates. In the rest of this paper, we shall apply the
constraint $N_{hits}/\cos\theta > 15$ as being appropriate and sufficient.
This choice also improves the reconstruction efficiency of large angle
(small $\cos\theta$) events whose tracks naturally contain fewer hits
and are harder to reconstruct.
In the next section, we present the results on muon resolution and
efficiencies in the peripheral and side region using these selection
criteria.
\section{Muon Response in the Peripheral and Side Regions}
\subsection{Momentum Reconstruction Efficiency}
The reconstruction efficiency is defined as the ratio
of the number of reconstructed events $n_{\rm rec}$ (irrespective of
charge) to the total number of events, $N_{total}$. We have
\begin{eqnarray}
\epsilon_{\rm rec} & = & \frac{n_{\rm rec} }{N_{\rm
total}}~, \\ \nonumber
\hbox{with error } \delta \epsilon_{\rm rec} & = &
\sqrt{\epsilon_{\rm rec}(1-\epsilon_{\rm rec})/N_{\rm total}}~~.
\end{eqnarray}
Fig.~\ref{fig:recoeff-avrg} shows the reconstruction efficiency averaged
over $\phi$ as a function of input momentum for different $\cos\theta$
values in the peripheral and side regions.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{per_reco_eff15.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{recoeff-side15.eps}
\caption{Reconstruction efficiency averaged over all $\phi$ bins as a
function of the input momentum $P_{in}$ (GeV/c) for different zenith
angles $\cos\theta$ in the peripheral (left) and side 9 (right) regions. For a
discussion of the selection criteria see the text.}
\label{fig:recoeff-avrg}
\end{figure}
The reconstruction efficiency increases for all angles, from $P_{in}
= 1$ GeV/c since the number of hits increases as the particle crosses
more layers. Since there are fewer hits for more slant-angled
muons, the efficiency at a given momentum is better for larger values
of $\cos\theta$. Also, the reconstruction efficiency is very similar
for all the peripheral and side regions.
In all cases, the slight worsening of the efficiency for $\cos\theta
= 0.85$ at higher momenta is spurious and is due to the selection
criterion that the event should reconstruct exactly one track. At large
angles, it is more likely that two portions of a track on either side
of a dead space such as a support structure are reconstructed as two
separate tracks. Efforts are on to retrieve such events by improving
the reconstruction code \cite{Kolahal}. When these tracks are correctly
reconstructed, the efficiency is expected to saturate rather than fall
off at these momentum values. Again, such tracks are not expected to be
troublesome in genuine neutrino events, as discussed earlier.
\subsection{Relative Charge Identification Efficiency}
The charge identification (cid) of the particle is critical in many studies since it distinguishes events initiated by neutrinos and anti-neutrinos;
these have different matter effects as they propagate through the
Earth and hence give the required sensitivity to the neutrino mass
hierarchy. The charge of the particle is determined from the direction
of curvature of the track in the magnetic field. Relative charge
identification efficiency is defined as the ratio of the number of events
with correct charge identification, $n_{\rm cid}$, to the total number of
reconstructed events, $n_{\rm rec}$, i.e.,
\begin{eqnarray} \epsilon_{\rm
cid} & = & \frac{n_{\rm cid} } {n_{\rm rec}}~,
\end{eqnarray}
\hbox{where
the errors in $n_{\rm cid}$ and $n_{\rm rec}$ are correlated so that
the error in the ratio is calculated as:}
\begin{eqnarray}
\delta \epsilon_{\rm cid} & = &
\sqrt{\epsilon_{\rm
cid}(1-\epsilon_{\rm
cid})/n_{\rm rec}}~. \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Fig.~\ref{fig:cideff-avrg} shows the relative charge identification
efficiency as a function of input momentum for different $\cos\theta$
values in the peripheral and side region 9. (Similar results apply for
side region 10). The muon undergoes multiple scattering while propagating
in the detector; for small momentum, since the number of layers traversed
is small, this may lead to an incorrectly reconstructed direction
of bending, resulting in the wrong charge identification. Hence the
charge identification efficiency is relatively poor at lower energies
but as the energy increases cid efficiency also improves. At very high
input momenta, bending due to the magnetic field is less. For partially
contained events, only the initial relatively straight portion of the track
is contained within the detector; this leads to large momentum
uncertainty as well as mis-identification of charge. Overall the
relative charge identification efficiency is marginally smaller than in
the central region because of the smaller magnetic field.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{per_cid_eff15.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{cideff-side15.eps}
\caption{Charge identification (cid) efficiency averaged over all $\phi$ bins as a function of the input momentum $P_{in}$ (GeV/c) for different zenith
angles $\cos\theta$ in the peripheral (left) and side 9 (right) regions. For a
discussion of the selection criteria see the text.}
\label{fig:cideff-avrg}
\end{figure}
\subsection {Direction (up/down) Reconstruction}
The reconstructed zenith angle distributions for $P_{in}$ = 1 GeV/c
at $\cos\theta$ = 0.35 and $\cos\theta$ = 0.85 in the peripheral
and side region 9 are shown in Figs.~\ref{fig:direction_per} and
\ref{fig:direction_side9} respectively.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{theta_per_1_cth35.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{theta_per_1_cth85.eps}
\caption{Reconstructed zenith angle distributions for $P_{in}$ = 1 GeV/c at $\cos\theta$ = 0.35 (left) and 0.85 (right) respectively, in the peripheral region. Note that the y-axis scales are different for the two plots.}
\label{fig:direction_per}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htp]
\renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{theta_side9_1_cth35.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{theta_side9_1_cth85.eps}
\caption{Reconstructed zenith angle distributions for $P_{in}$ = 1 GeV/c at $\cos\theta$ = 0.35 (left) and 0.85 (right) respectively, in the side region 9. Note that the y-axis scales are different for the two plots.}
\label{fig:direction_side9}
\end{figure}
From Fig.~\ref{fig:direction_per}, it is noticed that there are few
events reconstructed in the downward direction (wrong direction) with $\theta_{rec} > \pi/2$. For $P_{in}$ = 1 GeV/c with $\cos\theta$ = 0.35 (0.85), this fraction is about 0.48 (0.89)\% and it drops to a negligible value at higher energies for all $\cos\theta$. Similar results are obtained for the side region 9
as can be seen from Fig.~\ref{fig:direction_side9}. This small fraction
also contributes to wrong cid since the relative bending in the magnetic
field is measured w.r.t the muon momentum direction.
The direction determination depends on the time resolution while the
charge identification depends also on the strength of the magnetic
field. A 1 GeV/c muon with $\cos\theta \sim 1$ traverses about 12 layers;
this corresponds to a time difference between first and last hit of about
4 ns. Since the RPCs have a time resolution of 1 ns, this explains why
the fraction of muons whose direction is wrongly determined is small.
\subsection{Zenith Angle Resolution}
Those events which are successfully reconstructed (for all $\phi$) are
analysed for their zenith angle resolution. The events distribution as
a function of the reconstructed zenith angle $\theta_{rec}$ is shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:theta_histo} for a sample input $(P_{\rm in}, \cos\theta) =
(5\hbox{ GeV/c}, 0.65)$ for the peripheral and side region 9 respectively.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth,height=0.33\textwidth]{theta_rec_per_deg.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth,height=0.33\textwidth]{theta_rec_side9_deg.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Reconstructed distribution $\theta_{rec}$ for input $(P_{\rm
in}, \cos\theta) = (5\hbox{ GeV/c}, 0.65)$ in the peripheral region (left)
and side region 9 (right). The selection criteria are the same as before.}
\label{fig:theta_histo}
\end{figure}
The angular resolution is good in both the regions and is in fact better
than about a degree for input momentum greater than a few GeV, as seen
in Fig.~\ref{fig:theta}, with the resolution being marginally better in
the side region. Similar results are obtained in side region 10 as well.
In addition, the fraction of events reconstructed in the wrong direction
(wrong quadrant of $\cos\theta$) is negligibly small, being less than
0.5\% for $P_{\rm in} \ge 2$ GeV/c.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth,height=0.33\textwidth]{theta_resol15_deg.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth,height=0.33\textwidth]{theta_resol15_side9_deg.eps}
\end{center}
\caption{Resolution, $\sigma_\theta$, of reconstructed angle
$\theta_{rec}$ as a function of the input momentum $P_{\rm in}$ (GeV/c)
for different values of input $\cos\theta$ in the peripheral region (left)
and side region 9 (right). The selection criteria are the same as before.}
\label{fig:theta}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Muon Momentum Response}
While the cid efficiency and zenith angle resolution are insensitive to
the azimuthal angle $\phi$, due to the reasons given above, we analyse
the muon momentum response in different $\phi$ bins. The response is shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:f5_65_4phi_nhit15_per} for the peripheral region with the
constraint $N_{hits}/\cos\theta > 15$ being applied as usual to the partially
contained events, for sample input values of $(P_{in}, \cos\theta) =
(5 \hbox{ GeV/c}, 0.65)$.
The histograms in $P_{rec}$ have been fitted with Gaussian
functions. The width of each distribution of the four sets differs while the mean remains similar. As expected, $\phi$ bin III
(with most muons exiting the detector from the side) has the smallest number of reconstructed events and the worst resolution.
Bin II has the best resolution, while bins I and IV have a similar
response.
This is in contrast to the response in the central region
\cite{central} where the reconstruction efficiencies were roughly equal
in all $\phi$ bins.
\begin{figure}[bhp]
\renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.44\textwidth]{abstrkmmModMN150T65CT5GeVnhit15phi1.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.44\textwidth]{abstrkmmModMN150T65CT5GeVnhit15phi2.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.44\textwidth]{abstrkmmModMN150T65CT5GeVnhit15phi3.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.44\textwidth]{abstrkmmModMN150T65CT5GeVnhit15phi4.eps}
\caption{Gaussian fits to reconstructed momentum distributions $P_{rec}$
(GeV/c) for muons with fixed energy $(P_{in}, \cos\theta) = (5 \hbox{
GeV/c}, 0.65)$ in four different bins of azimuthal angle in the
peripheral region. See text for details on the bins and the selection
criteria used.}
\label{fig:f5_65_4phi_nhit15_per}
\end{figure}
Similar histograms are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:side9-f5_65_4phi} for side
region 9. As discussed earlier, $\phi$ bin IV has both the worst
reconstruction and the worst resolution, while bin I has the best ones. Unlike
the peripheral case where the bins I and IV had similar response, here
bins II and III are not similar because the side region is not symmetric
between these two bins: muons in bin III are more prone to exit the
detector and hence the detector response is worse in both efficiency and quality of reconstruction.
The results in region 10 are similar to region 9 with interchange of
bins I and IV, and bins II and III as can be easily understood from
Fig.~\ref{fig:map}. However, overall the quality of reconstruction is
better in region 10 by about 15\% due to the nature of the forces in this
region as discussed earlier; see Fig.~\ref{fig:map}. We shall show results
for side region 9 everywhere, as being the more conservative result and
simply remark on similarities/differences to be expected in region 10.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.44\textwidth]{abstrkmmModMN150T65CT5GeVnhit15side9phi1.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.44\textwidth]{abstrkmmModMN150T65CT5GeVnhit15side9phi2.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.44\textwidth]{abstrkmmModMN150T65CT5GeVnhit15side9phi3.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.44\textwidth]{abstrkmmModMN150T65CT5GeVnhit15side9phi4.eps}
\caption{Gaussian fits to reconstructed momentum distributions $P_{rec}$
(GeV/c) for muons with fixed energy $(P_{in}, \cos\theta) = (5 \hbox{
GeV/c}, 0.65)$ in four different bins of azimuthal angle in the
side region 9. See text for details on the bins and the selection
criteria used.}
\label{fig:side9-f5_65_4phi}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{fig:resol-nhits15-20} shows the momentum resolution as a function of $P_{in}$ in the peripheral region for the four $\phi$ bins using the selection criteria $N_{hits}/\cos\theta > n_{0}$ with $n_0$ = 15, 20, for $\cos\theta$ = 0.65.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{res_nhits15_per_cth65.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{res_nhits20_per_cth65.eps}
\caption{Muon resolution in the peripheral region as a function of input
momentum $P_{\rm in}$ (GeV/c) for $\cos\theta$ = 0.65
in different bins of $\phi$ with $N_{hits}/\cos\theta > n_0$ cut, where $n_0$ = 15 (20) left (right).}
\label{fig:resol-nhits15-20}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Momentum Resolution as a Function of $(\theta, \phi)$}
Gaussian fits to the reconstructed momentum distribution in these
regions give the reconstructed mean and RMS width $\sigma$. The momentum resolution ($R$) is
defined from these fits as,
\begin{eqnarray}
R & = & \sigma /P_{\rm in}, \\ \nonumber
\hbox{with error } \delta R & = & \delta\sigma/P_{\rm in}~.
\end{eqnarray}
Fig.~\ref{fig:per-resol-reg} shows the variation of resolution as a
function of $P_{in}$ from 1 to 50 GeV/c for different values of $\cos\theta$ from 0.35 to 0.85 in the different $\phi$ bins of the peripheral region. In all bins, the momentum resolution improves with the increase of energy
upto about $P_{in} \sim 6$ GeV/c as the number of hits increases, but
worsens at higher momenta since the particle then begins to exit the
detector. This effect is considerable in the $\phi$ bin III which
therefore has the worst resolution while $\phi$ bin II has the best
resolution, as expected from the earlier discussions. In general, the
resolution improves for more vertical angles (larger $\cos\theta$)
as the number of hits in a track increases.
Fig.~\ref{fig:side9-resol-reg} shows similar results for the side region
9. Again, it is observed that for all the angles and energies, $\phi$
bin I has the best response while the resolutions worsens in bins
III and IV. Results in region 10 are similar to those in region 9 with
interchange of response in $\phi$ bins (I, IV) and (II, III), but with a
few percent better resolution in all cases.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.44\textwidth,height=0.27\textwidth]{per_res15_phi1.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.44\textwidth,height=0.27\textwidth]{per_res15_phi2.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.44\textwidth,height=0.27\textwidth]{per_res15_phi3.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.44\textwidth,height=0.27\textwidth]{per_res15_phi4.eps}
\caption{Muon resolution in the peripheral region as a function of
input momentum $P_{\rm in}$ (GeV/c) for different values of $\cos\theta$
in different bins of $\phi$.}
\label{fig:per-resol-reg}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.44\textwidth,height=0.27\textwidth]{resolside15_phi1.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.44\textwidth,height=0.27\textwidth]{resolside15_phi2.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.44\textwidth,height=0.27\textwidth]{resolside15_phi3.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.44\textwidth,height=0.27\textwidth]{resolside15_phi4.eps}
\caption{Muon resolution in the side region 9 as a function of input
momentum $P_{\rm in}$ (GeV/c) for different values of $\cos\theta$ in different bins of $\phi$.}
\label{fig:side9-resol-reg}
\end{figure}
The resolution for a given $P_{in}$ is marginally better in the side
region than in the peripheral region due to the somewhat larger and
uniform magnetic field. A detailed comparison of the response in different
regions will be presented in the next section.
\section{Comparison of Muon Response in Different Regions of ICAL}
We compare the muon response in the peripheral and side regions with
that in the central region as presented in Ref.~\cite{central}.
For all choices of selection criteria, the reconstruction and cid
efficiencies in the central region are better than either the peripheral
or side region as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:comp-eff} for
$\cos\theta=0.65$; however, for input momenta upto $P_{in} \sim 8$
GeV/c, the central and side region cid efficiencies are comparable. Note
that applying more stringent selection criteria in order to improve
the momentum resolution in the peripheral and side regions (and hence
overall resolution of the detector) will further worsen the reconstruction
efficiencies in these regions.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{comparisonrecoeff15_cen_per_side_65.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{comparisoncideff15_cen_per_side_65.eps}
\caption{Comparison of reconstruction (left) and cid efficiency (right) of
central, peripheral and side regions as a function of $P_{in}$ (GeV/c) at
$\cos\theta = 0.65$. Note that the y-axis scales are different for the two plots.}
\label{fig:comp-eff}
\end{figure}
In addition, the angular resolutions are very similar between the
peripheral and side regions, as can be seen from Fig.~\ref{fig:theta} and
are in fact similar to those obtained earlier in the central region
\cite{central}.
The comparison of the $\phi$-averaged peripheral and side region
momentum resolutions as a function of input momentum $P_{in}$ from
1 to 15 GeV/c is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:comp} for $\cos\theta = 0.45,
0.65, 0.85$. We have also shown the $\phi$-averaged central region
results \cite{central} in the same plots. The criterion of a
single reconstructed track only was also applied to the central region, but no constraint was placed on $N_{hits}$. While the side region resolutions
are only marginally better than those in the peripheral region, the
central region gives the best resolution, as expected. However, we
note that the results are $\phi$ averaged and so the resolutions can
be much improved in the peripheral and side regions depending on the
$\phi$ bin chosen. The peripheral and side region resolutions can be
improved by changing the selection criteria at the cost of reconstruction
efficiency. The resolutions in all regions are comparable at low momenta,
$P_{\rm in} \le 3$ GeV/c, since almost all tracks are fully contained
in this case.
~\hspace{-0.5cm} \begin{figure}[htp]
\renewcommand{\figurename}{Fig.}
~\hspace{-0.5cm} \includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth,
height=0.33\textwidth]{comparisonresol15_cen_per_side_45.eps}
\hspace{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth,
height=0.33\textwidth]{comparisonresol15_cen_per_side_65.eps}
\hspace{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth, height=0.33\textwidth]{comparisonresol15_cen_per_side_85.eps}
\caption{Comparison of resolutions in peripheral and side region 9 as a
function of the input momentum $P_{in}$ (GeV/c) along with
earlier results in the central region \cite{central} for different
values of $\cos\theta = 0.45, 0.65, 0.85$.}
\label{fig:comp}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussions and Conclusion}
The goal of the proposed ICAL detector is to study neutrino oscillations
using atmospheric neutrinos. It is more sensitive to muons and hence
the physics will focus on charged current scattering of $\nu_\mu$
($\overline{\nu}_\mu$) in the detector. Hence a simulations study of
the response of ICAL to muons is crucial. The ICAL geometry was simulated
using GEANT4 software and the detector response was studied for muons with momenta from 1 to 50 GeV/c, polar angle $\cos\theta \ge 0.35$ and
smeared over all azimuthal angles, $-\pi \le \phi \le \pi$. In the current
study, muons were generated in the peripheral and side region of the
ICAL detector where the magnetic field is non-uniform in both magnitude
and direction and where edge effects are important. The study showed
that a crucial selection criterion on the number of hits
$N_{hits}/\cos\theta > n_0$ for partially contained tracks was necessary to achieve good detection efficiency. The magnetic field
and the detector geometry break the azimuthal symmetry; hence the muon
response was analysed in different $\phi$ bins.
Results using $N_{hits}/\cos\theta > 15$ show that the best momentum
resolutions of about 10--15\% are obtained in bin II ($\pi/4 \le
\phi < 3\pi/4$) at input momenta of $P_{\rm in} \ge 4$ GeV/c in the
peripheral region and in bins I and II ($\vert \phi \vert \le \pi/4$
and $\pi/4 < \vert \phi \vert \le \pi/2$) in Side region 9 (see
Figs.~\ref{fig:map} and \ref{fig:phi_choice} for definitions of these
regions).
Also, $\phi$-averaged results are obtained with $N_{hits}/\cos\theta > 15$
for the reconstruction efficiency, charge identification efficiency
and momentum resolution as shown in Figs.~\ref{fig:comp-eff} and
\ref{fig:comp} for the peripheral and side regions of the ICAL detector
in comparison with earlier results in the central region \cite{central}.
A reconstruction efficiency of about 60--70\% and a correct charge
identification of about 97\% of the reconstructed muons was obtained for
$P_{\rm in} \ge 4$ GeV/c and this decreased to about 90\% for higher
momenta $P_{\rm in} \sim 50$ GeV/c in both regions. Average (over
$\phi$) resolutions obtained are between 15--25\% over $P_{\rm in} =
1$--15 GeV/c in the peripheral region and marginally better in the side
region, with the central region response being the best. Note
that these responses are relevant for studies such as precision
measurement of neutrino oscillation parameters or the mass hierarchy
determination with ICAL. For the case of physics studies such as rock
muons or cosmic ray muons, the response in only certain $\phi$ bins are
relevant since the muons in these cases are always entering the detector
from outside; for this reason, the performance will be better than the
averages shown here.
In contrast, good angular resolution of better than a degree for $P_{\rm
in} \ge 4$ GeV/c is obtained in the peripheral and side regions, which
is comparable to that in the central region.
The simulations indicate that the detector has a good response to muons, with reconstruction of momentum with 15--24\% resolution, direction reconstruction of about a degree for muon energies greater than 4 GeV and charge identification of about 97\%. While fully contained events are reconstructed with the same
efficiency as in the central region, only those partially contained ones which have at least $N_{hits}/\cos\theta > n_0$ in their tracks, $n_0 \sim 15$, are well reconstructed in the simulations. This implies
a loss of reconstruction efficiency due to this criterion. However, the number of events reconstructed in these regions, which is expected to be about 50\% from naive considerations of detector geometry, is about 60--70\%, due to the effect of the magnetic field, which increases the recontruction efficiency in the peripheral region.
\paragraph{Acknowledgements}: We thank Naba K Mondal for suggestions
and support during this work. We also thank the INO simulations group
for their comments and suggestions on the results; Gobinda Majumder
and Asmita Redij for code-related discussions; and Shiba Behera for
discussions on the magnetic field map. R. Kanishka acknowledges UGC/DST
(Govt. of India) for financial support.
|
\section{Introduction}
AstroStat\footnote{http://voi.iucaa.ernet.in:8080/astrostat} is a powerful VO
compatible tool, developed by the Virtual
Observatory-India (VOI) project, for statistical analysis of data. It provides
a number of statistical tests, ranging from the simple to the more complex and
sophisticated, which are performed using a very simple to use graphical
interface. The analysis is carried out using the highly developed statistical
package R, which is available in the public domain. AstroStat uses in-built
graphics for easy visualisation of the data as well as the results of the tests
performed. It incorporates various VO standards, so that it can easily be
linked to a wide range of VO tools like the plotting and visualisation tools
VOPlot and TOPCAT and can use the Astronomical Data Query Language to obtain
data from VO compatible services for statistical analysis.
AstroStat has evolved from the statistical analysis tool VOStat, which was first
developed through a collaboration between groups from Caltech and Pennsylvania
State University and later through collaboration between these two groups and
VOI. VOStat is available as a web-service from the Centre for Astrostatistics at
Penn State\footnote{http://astrostatistics.psu.edu:8080/vostat/}. AstroStat
has been developed as an independent tool by VOI, in collaboration with a group
from Caltech, with important inputs from various astronomers, statisticians and
software engineers.
The AstroStat code is made of two parts - the main backbone code written in Java and the R snippets which are made available to the user when a test is run. Both these codes are being made available to the community under GNU GPL license agreement.\footnote{The source code can be obtained by mailing a request to <EMAIL>}
The present article is organized as follows. In
Section 2, we provide an overview of the tool and in Section 3, the details of R
as a statistical backend are discussed. In Section 4 and 5, we cover the inner
implementation details of AstroStat including descriptions of various VO
standards. In Section 6 we provide an illustrative application of AstroStat
and in Section 7 briefly discuss future directions.
\section{An Overview of AstroStat}
AstroStat comes in two flavors - an offline version\footnote{IMPORTANT: The AstroStat stand-alone or offline version is still in development. While the application can still be downloaded from http://voi.iucaa.ernet.in/$\sim$voi/AstroStat.html, it is not yet ready for the end user.} bundled in the form of an
executable Java Archive (.jar) and a web version which can be run in any standard
browser. The interface, which has been designed with ease-of-use in mind, has
been kept the same in both the versions. The primary interface comprises of three
ever-present sections - i) which enables the user to load data, ii) a collection
of tests categorized into Exploratory, Advanced and Expert, and iii) a help
section which presents a description of the currently selected test with
examples and any extra notes. A fourth section appears on selecting a test and
this provides options to select and transform columns, supply necessary
parameters to the test (eg. type of correlation when computing a correlation
matrix), choose the nature of output etc. \ref{fig:screenshot}.
The typical workflow, from the end user's perspective,
is shown in Figure \ref{fig:userflow}. The user first loads data into the
application, in the form of a file either on the local hard
drive or on a web server. Data can also be loaded using the Table Access
Protocol (TAP) \citep{tap} or through Simple Access Message Protocol (SAMP) \citep{samp}, as described in detail
in Section 5. It is
possible to load more than one file at a time and a list of all loaded files is available in the form a drop-down menu. As a next step, the
user selects one of the three categories of tests and a test within it. A
complete list of all tests available can be found in Appendix A. The Help
section updates itself to reflect the currently selected test and offers a quick
overview of what the test does, possible examples and special notes, if any.
When a test is selected, the fourth section appears where a user
inputs parameters required by the test. Once done, the user clicks \emph{Run
Test} and AstroStat performs the analysis and displays the output in a tabular
form with tooltips to aid interpretation.
Since all the four sections described above are always visible, the user can
easily run another test or the same test with modified input parameters, or
refer to
the help section for a quick reminder of say, what exactly the output means,
etc. The output is in a friendly and neatly formatted form and can be easily
saved. The plots can be saved into a single ZIP file while the tables and other
output data can be stored in a plain ASCII text format.
In addition to these features, AstroStat also offers other
functional features like
\begin{itemize}
\item A quick-look summary statistics pop-up for the currently
loaded data.
\item Ability to view both the tabular version and the original
file. This allows the user to ensure that the data have been loaded correctly.
\item The user can define new columns by performing common operations on
existing columns. (e.g. sum of two columns, square of a column, etc.)
\item One
click access to the VOPlot service \citep{voplot} for interactive plotting and
data
visualization.
\item Ability to view the R code used in the actual analysis so
that a user may build upon this code for further work. If the user wishes to modify the R code provided to perform further analysis, this will have to be done outside of AstroStat in a R shell. The R code is provided under the GNU GPL license. At the time of writing this article is being written, the R code provided by the web version to the user includes a lot of code which is especially needed for a seamless interaction between AstroStat and R. In a future release, we will clean the code being served to the user so it can become easier for the user to modify it.
\end{itemize}
In the subsequent sectons, we describe the detailed implementation and features
of the tool.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5 \columnwidth]{astrostat_basic3.png}
\caption{A flow chart illustrating the user perspective of the workflow in
AstroStat.}
\label{fig:userflow}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Statistical Backend}
The R language \citep{ihaka96} came into existence as a free
counterpart of the S statistical language from Bell Labs. Like S, R \citep{R} has all the
common tools needed for advanced statistics: linear and non-linear modeling,
various statistical tests, time series analysis, classification, clustering etc.
Ross Ihaka and Robert Gentleman developed R with user participation in mind
which has resulted in a very large number of contributions from the users. The
Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN)\footnote{http://cran.r-project.org/}
hosts the
user packages and has easy interfaces to download and install any of the
packages from geographically distributed mirror sites. In early 2014 the count
has crossed 5000 packages. As it is arguably the most versatile open-source
system for statistics we decided to use it as the backend for the
AstroStat service. The original collaboration for developing such a
service was between Caltech and Penn State with the coding to be done at Caltech
\citep{mahabal2002, graham2005}. Part of the undertaking was to provide users
with a
set of tools as well as broad and basic guidance about which tool to use under
specific conditions. This is important given that newer packages keep entering
CRAN everyday and it can be bewildering for new users to choose from competing
packages.
We have categorized the functionality of AstroStat into exploratory,
advanced, and expert. We provide an overview of the tests in this section, while
greater detail is provided in the Appendix. The exploratory set contains
descriptive statistics features such as plotting histograms of single variables,
making simple x-y plots of one parameter against another, pairs' plot to obtain
x-y
plots for several variables, box-plots, and obtaining basic statistics such as
mean and standard deviation. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and sample generation
are also included. The
advanced set contains line- and plane-fitting through simple- and multiple
linear regression analyis; correlation matrix, covariance analysis,
Kolmogrov-Smirnov test (both one- and two-sample) etc. The expert
set allows multivariate classification with Hierarchical clustering, K-means
partitioning and clustering, kernel smoothing, as well as tasks that can help
with censored data like survival analysis. The help files about the
tests have text and links explaining when specific tests can be used.
One of the difficulties in using R is that the syntax often does not parallel
that of other
languages that users typically encounter. By providing a Graphical User Interface (GUI) we remove the need
for the user to start coding in R. At the same time we provide the R code that
generated the analysis so that the user can learn from there. If the user is
already well-versed with R, then this code will allow her to further analyse
similar data independently. Another difficulty is that the same functionality
in
different types of figures uses different keywords, making the learning curve
steeper. By providing plots at the click of a button, we ensure that users do
not have to wrestle with those differences. In addition, instead of using the
base graphics which have the above problems, we have adopted the \emph{ggplot2}
\citep{ggplot2} library which is more uniform.
The ggplot2 library by Hadley Wickham\footnote{http://ggplot2.org} is based on
the
Grammar of Graphics \citep{wilkinson2005}. This is a layered approach to
graphics
which allows the user to trivially add and subtract different layers to the
plot. For example, if one wants to plot data from some part of the sky with
different magnitude ranges (e.g. from synoptic surveys such as Digital Access to
a Sky Century \@ Harvard - DASCH - at the bright end, intermediate Catalina
Real-Time Transient Survey - CRTS - at the intermediate range, and simulated
Large Synoptic Survey Telescope - LSST - at the deep end), one can make separate
layers for the three sets. The error-bars and fits/contours can be additional
layers, and any subset of these can be plotted. Since these exist as layers,
another subset can be equally easily plotted without having to go through the
entire process of reading files, assigning data etc. For any data set, this is
achieved by defining \textit{mappings} from \textit{data} to aesthetic
attributes of geometric objects, \textit{geoms}, like points and lines. These
can then be included in statistical transformations (\textit{stats}) in specific
coordinate systems. Further, \textit{faceting} (aka conditioning) allows easy
subsetting. Finally \textit{scale} and \textit{coord} allow it to be rendered on
to a plot exactly the way a user wants to. While the powerful statistical
techniques of R are used in the analysis, it is the versatile ggplot2 that
provides
visualization that is crucial, especially in the initial aspects of a project
when the workflow is still being crystalized. We also provide ggplot2 code when
plots are generated, allowing the users to learn advanced plotting through R on
the go as well. On account of appearance and associated aesthetics alone,
ggplot2
is superior, but programmers who would want to build further on the layered
approach will thus find it very rewarding. As a bonus, defaut figures generated by {\it ggplot2} are near-publication quaility and just a small number of tweaks make them fully so. Going in to those details is beyond the scope of this article but can be found at several places on the internet.
ggplot2 makes beautiful but static plots. As a result dynamically changing axis names, labels etc. is not possible. In the Appendix B, we provide a comparison of plots and the code needed to generate them using the default graphics library of R and the ggplot2 library being used by AstroStat. While ggplot2 does have a layered approach to graphics, we'd like to note that the AstroStat user does not have a direct access to these layers. The R code will, however, allow the user some level of access to the R users.
Finally, a note on the scalability issues concerning R. As bulk of the analysis in AstroStat is done by R, R largely determines the scalability of the application. It is not possible to quote a stringent limit on how big a data can be loaded in R. This will be a function of the resources available on the machine on which AstroStat is being run. Subject to community response, we can look into the possibility of making AstroStat compatible with variants of R specifically designed for use with large data in parallel computation environments.
\section{Implementation Details}
\subsection{Input}
AstroStat accepts data in
three file formats: VOTable, ASCII, and FITS (binary). As mentioned earlier,
files can be loaded in two ways, either from the local hard drive or from a web
server by specifying the URL. Data in VOTable (discussed in Section 5) and FITS
formats are loaded automatically since these store detailed metadata in an
unambigious way. However, when loading ASCII files (.csv, .tsv, etc.), a data
parser module is invoked which requests certain inputs from the user to enable
accurate loading of the data. The queries posed to the user are -
\begin{itemize}
\item Are column names, their data types, units, and/or
UCDs specified in the file? If yes, what are their respective line numbers?
\item From which line does the actual data begin?
\item Which character should
be interpreted as a comment character?
\item What is the delimiter which
separates individual entries in a single row?
\item Has the tool correctly
identified the data type of every column? If not, the user may specify the
correct types.
\end{itemize}
In most cases, the data parser module will be able to find the details on its
own and thus this step is more about the user confirming automatically
discovered parameters than supplying actual information. After loading a file,
the data can be viewed in a tabular format by clicking on the `View Data' option
in the toolbar. In the Data Input panel, a selection of statistics of every
column, including minimum, mean, median, variance, and maximum, can be quickly
viewed by hovering the mouse pointer over `Data Summary'.
There are two additional input methods available. The user can use an existing
VO compliant tool that supports the Simple Access Messaging Protocol (SAMP),
which enables control and data communication between two user applications, to
load data directly into AstroStat. Or a user may click the ``TAP" button on the
toolbar and use the Table Access Protocol (TAP) which allows the user to use the
Astronomical Data Query Language (ADQL) \citep{adql} to query data from a
compatible data
service and make it available directly to the application. A detailed discussion
on input via SAMP and TAP is deferred to Section 5.
As the next step, the user selects a test category and then a test and this
refreshes the Input Panel to display all relevant and possible inputs. As
mentioned before, the tests have been catalogorized into Exploratory, Advanced
and Expert. For every test, necessary and relevant inputs are sought to tailor
the analysis to the user's demands. At the same time, all these inputs have
default values for quick analysis. The inputs for every test have been
thoughtfully curated to maximize the flexibility as well as convenience for the
user.
\begin{figure*}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=15cm, keepaspectratio=true]{slr_input_panel.png}
\caption{A screenshot of the web version of AstroStat showing the toolbar at
the top and the four sections that comprise the primary interface. It also illustrates a feature which allows a user to select columns from multiple files.}
\label{fig:screenshot}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
To illustrate the features of the Input Panel, Figure
\ref{fig:screenshot} shows a snapshot of the panel for \emph{Simple Linear
Regression}. The user is first prompted to select columns which will act as $Y$
(dependent variable), $X$ (independent variable), $Y_{\rm{error}}$,
$X_{\rm{error}}$, etc in the analysis. Transformation of some or all variables
is possible by clicking on the appropriate radio button(s) adjacent to the
column names. Finally, choices are sought for the type(s) of regression analysis
to be performed, the format of output plots, and whether the user desires to
obtain bootstrap error estimates.
On clicking \emph{Run Test}, the generated output is displayed as a new tab (in
case of the Web version) or a new window (in case of the offline version), so
that all input parameters remain available for the user to cross-check or rerun
the test after tweaking the parameters. The main application window also has an
option to add a new column to the loaded table. On selecting this option, the
user is prompted with a dialog box using which a new column can be created by
combining the existing columns in any arbitrary mathematical expression. Such a
feature can be useful, for example, when computing residuals for the derived
best-fit line for further analysis.
\subsection{Output}
The output provided by any test in R, the statistical backend in
AstroStat, can appear cluttered and non-intuitive for a user unaccustomed to the
nuances of the language. Hence, under the hood, AstroStat performs intensive
processing and reformatting of this output to display the most relevant bits of
information. In general, the following tenets are followed when displaying the
output:
\begin{itemize}
\item Display output in a tabular format for ease of
understanding and clarity.
\item Separate the output window into two sections:
one for displaying the textual output and the other for showing plots associated
with the analysis.
\item Distinctly specify important input information like
data variables selected for analysis, sample size, function evaluated, etc.
\item Wherever applicable, provide supplementary information in a tabular format
for further analysis. For example, on performing principal component analysis,
the PCA scores are available for download in ASCII format for visualization in
VOPlot or any other plotting tool.
\item Every output table has a
\emph{?} symbol associated with it which reveals a tooltip that gives a quick
explanation of the parameters listed.
\end{itemize}
The output window also comes with a toolbar which offers the following features.
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{R Code}: View/Download the code used to perform the
analysis. The code can be used to subsequently perform more complex analysis
using R or as an aid for learning R.
\item \emph{Save}: Save tab-separated,
tabular output in an ASCII file.
\item \emph{Plots}: Save all plots (if any) in
a ZIP file.
\item \emph{Table}: Save output table (if any) in a
comma-separated, ASCII file.
\item \emph{VOPlot}: Send data used in the
analysis to VOPlot for (further) visualization.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Inner Workings}
\begin{figure*}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=15cm]{astrostat_advanced2.png}
\caption{A flowchart showing the inner workings of AstroStat.}
\end{center}
\label{fig:programmerflow}
\end{figure*}
From a user's perspective, the workflow described in Figure \ref{fig:userflow}
is sufficient. For someone wanting to understand the details of the inner
workings of AstroStat, Figure \ref{fig:programmerflow} gives a clearer
picture. The workflow is valid for both the web and the offline versions. A few
details of platforms and technologies used are described below.
The web version was largely programmed using Java Server Pages (JSP). Like PHP,
it allows creation of rich dynamic web pages but uses the Java programming
language. A large collection of tag libraries allows clear separation
between the model and controller parts of the code. As the controller part is
implemented in Java, there is a large number of robust libraries and frameworks
available which can be easily plugged in or adopted. Further, there is
support for multi-threading, concurrency and background processing. Although the
current implementation does not take advantage of these features they could well
be used if such performance demands are expected from the service by the
community.
While JSP has been used for the overall user interface design, the web version
also makes use of the Yahoo User Interface (YUI) libraries which enable a clean
and highly appealing display of the output in tabular form. The validation of
all information entered by the user is done using code written in Javascript.
The web server hosting AstroStat is located at IUCAA in Pune, India. Any
information entered by the user is transmitted to the Virtual Observatory India
(VOI) server which runs a Servlet that generates an appropriate R script. The
execution is then carried out by a Java system call and any output produced is
converted to XML format and sent to the user. A Javascript then parses this XML
output to generate the final formatted output which is displayed.
The stand-alone version is largely based on Java's Abstract Window Toolkit
(AWT). The AWT is a part of the Java Foundation classes and is frequently used
to design GUIs. The stand-alone version works in a
similar manner as that of the web version sans the client-server communication
mechanism. This version requires R to be installed on the local machine and any
output generated by the R script is directly formatted into the final form. The
output tables are also implemented using AWT. Keeping up with the spirit that a user
does not have to know R in order to use AstroStat, the application is able to
locate the R installation except in some cases where a user may be required to
provide the R installation path. Further, some of the tests use extra packages
available on CRAN. Again, the tool allows the user to download any missing
packages from CRAN directly. All dependencies can be installed in one go using
an option from the menu or on-demand, whenever a user tries to run a test that
requires a particular package.
\section{Implementation of VO Standards in AstroStat}
Being able to share astronomical data seamlessly across a variety of data
services and analysis tools is at the heart of the Virtual Observatory. The data
can be in the form of images, spectra and/or tables. Thus the International
Virtual Observatory Alliance (IVOA) has explored and adopted various standards
over the years to enable easy information sharing. The adoption of these
standards ensures that every data service in the world can "talk" to any other
such service effortlessly and share information. This allows individual
developers to create specialized tools that can perform specific types of
analyses. Since all tools support these standards, these tools together should
be able to serve most needs of an astronomer. The primary motivation in creating
AstroStat has been to provide a service capable of taking data from any VO
compatible data service or source and perform various statistical tests on them.
Thus some essential standards have been implemented in both the versions of
AstroStat.
\subsection{VOTable}
This is an XML based standard created for storage of
tabular data. A VOTable \citep{votable} can be viewed as an unordered collection
of rows, with
the description of each row contained in the metadata. Each row can be viewed as
a collection of cells, each containing one element of a primitive data type. The
VOTable was designed to be a very flexible format with astronomical tables in
mind. As it is XML based, one can take advantage of Extensible Stylesheet
Language Transformations (XLST) which allows for easy transformation of data from one
form to another.
The design philosophy of VOTable has been motivated by large data use cases and
distributed computing in mind. For example, it is possible for a VOTable to
contain only metadata with a link to the actual data stored on a web server. The
data part in turn can be in pure XML format (called TABLEDATA) generally used in
the case of a small number of rows, and FITS binary format. The metadata is
allowed to
be semantically rich through the use of standards such as Uniform Content
Descriptor (UCD) \citep{ucd}, Utype, Units and Space Time Coordinate (STC)
\citep{stc}.
AstroStat accepts VOTable input as a preferred or default input type and further
includes parser modules for processing FITS files and ASCII tables which are in
common use among astronomers.
\subsection{SAMP}
SAMP \citep{samp} stands for Simple Application Messaging Protocal. It was
developed as a standard way of allowing software tools to exchange both
control and data with each other. For example, one can imagine that while using
a tool such as VOPlot for visualizing data, some points of interest are noted in
the plot. It should be possible to select these points and enable another
completely different software application to, say, query and display specific
images of the corresponding astronomical object. SAMP, which is not specific to
the domain of VO or astronomy, provides a valuable binding layer between
user-centric applications. It is therefore possible for several independent
applications serving very specific purposes to work as an integrated whole.
AstroStat supports the SAMP protocol and thus any compatible tool can exchange
data with it. An in-built option in AstroStat loads the VOPlot service
and uses SAMP to have the current active data file loaded, thus allowing its use
for any kind of data visualization supported by VOPlot.
\subsection{TAP}
Table Access Protocol \citep{tap} allows astronomers to acquire tabular
data by writing queries as is done for data access from the Sloan Digital Sky
Survey (SDSS) or the UKIRT Infrared Deep Sky Survey (UKIDSS). The queries can be
written in Astronomy Data Query Language (ADQL) \citep{adql} which is a
standardized version
of the commonly used SQL. With AstroStat supporting TAP, it should be
straightforward to query a rich database supporting the TAP protocol from within
the application. The query will return a table which can be used in AstroStat
directly for analysis.
The option to use TAP can be invoked by clicking on ``TAP" tool button. The user
may either select an existing TAP compatible data service or search for one
based on keyword(s) or specify the URL of the service if available. Once a
compatible data server is selected, the user then selects a table and the
description of the metadata is presented. The metadata aids in the construction
of the desired ADQL query which, when submitted, returns a VOTable that either
can be saved locally or loaded into AstroStat. A few commonly used queries are
available in a dropdown list which can be used as starting points for building a
custom query.
TAP allows data querying and analysis to be integrated within a single
application. The intermediate steps of downloading, reloading and necessary
formatting of data are eliminated, thus making the workflow very fluid and
simple.
\section{Fundamental Plane - A Use Case}
In this section, we demonstrate a use case for AstroStat to study the
fundamental plane of elliptical galaxies, an important relation often discussed
in extragalactic astronomy. All calculations and plots in this section are made
using AstroStat.
The fundamental plane \citep{george87, dressler87} is a 3-dimensional linear
relation,
valid for elliptical galaxies and bulges of later type galaxies, which can be
written as
\begin{equation}
\log\ (\rm{r}_e) = A \left<\mu_e\right> +\ B\log\ \sigma_c + C
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\rm{r}_e$ is the bulge effective radius, $\left<\mu_e\right>$ is the average
surface brightness internal to $r_e$ and $\sigma_c$ is the central velocity
dispersion. The fundamental plane is important in practical terms because it
provides a technique for estimating distance to galaxies independent of their
redshift and theoretically because it provides insights into the dynamics of
galaxies.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{plane.pdf}
\caption{A plot between the left-hand-side vs the right-hand-side of the
Equation \ref{eqn:fp}, often referred to as the edge-on view of the plane.}
\label{fig:plane}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth, height=07cm]{pairs_plot.pdf}
\caption{A pairs plot generated by AstroStat. The plot on the bottom-left
corner is the Kormendy plot which relates effective radius of the galaxy with
its average surface brightness.}
\label{fig:pairs}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{regression_plot.pdf}
\caption{A plot showing the best-fit line between effective radius of the
galaxy and its average surface brightness i.e. the Kormendy plot.}
\label{fig:linefit}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
For the present illustration, we use a well known data set from \citet{jor96}
for 244 galaxies containing morphological parameters derived from images taken in the
Gunn r-band. \footnote{If the reader wishes to perform all the steps on his/her
own, detailed instructions can be found at
http://voi.iucaa.ernet.in:8080/exercises/astrostat/fundamentalplane/}. The data set contains three columns viz. $r_e$, $\log I_e$ and $\sigma_c$. Here, $\log I_e$ is the log of the mean intensity within effective radius, which is same as $\left<\mu_e\right>$ within a scaling factor. Given such a data set, it is easy to determine the fundamental plane by performing multiple linear regression (under \emph{Advanced Tests}). The equation thus obtained is
\begin{equation}
\log\rm{r}_e = 12.569 + 1.042 \log\ \sigma_c - 0.780 \log \rm{I}_e
\label{eqn:fp}
\end{equation}
\noindent The original equation obtained by \citet{jor96} is as follows.
\begin{equation}
\log\rm{r}_e = \rm{const.} + 1.240 (\pm 0.07) \log\ \sigma_c - 0.82 (\pm 0.02)
\log \rm{I}_e
\label{eqn:jor}
\end{equation}
\noindent The differences in the coefficients arise due to the different approaches used to determine the best-fit coefficients. \citet{jor96} minimize the deviations along the orthogonal direction to the plane while AstroStat's (and R's) multiple linear regression routine minimize the deviation along the direction of the dependent variable ($\log r_e$, in this case). We have verified, using an independent program, that the result for \citet{jor96} can be exactly reproduced if the minimization is carried out along the orthogonal direction.
The edge-on view of the fundamental plane can be plotted as a simple XY plot between the left and right hand side of the equation \ref{eqn:fp}. The column creation feature can be used for creating a new column which represents the right hand side of the equation and XY plot option can be used to generate the final plot. This is shown in Figure \ref{fig:plane}.
We have illustrated the determination of fundamental plane but this approach assumes prior knowledge of its existence. We now illustrate the process by which such a relation can be discovered \emph{ab initio} from the data.
To follow such a process, we start by making a \emph{pairs' plot}. This is a grid of plots which shows XY plots for different pairs of the variables present in the data. Since it is superfluous to plot a variable against itself, the plots along the diagonal are instead histograms of the variables. The plots in the upper diagonal half, to avoid reptition are filled with Pearson correlation coefficients for the correlation between each pair of variables. The Pearson correlation coefficient is a measure of the extent to which two variables are linearly correlated. The pairs' plot for the current data is shown in Figure \ref{fig:pairs}. Both visually as well as numerically, it can be seen that the correlation between $\log I_e$ and $\log r_e$ is the \emph{strongest} with a Pearson correlation coefficient of -0.8. The probability that such a correlation can arise by chance can be computed by determining the correlation matrix under \emph{Advanced Tests}. The output from this test also gives a matrix of p-values and for the pair of variables comprising the effective radius and the mean intensity within it, it is almost zero.
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
$X$ & $Y$ & Intercept & Slope & RMS Scatter & $r$ & $t$ & $p(>t)$ \\
\hline
$\left<\mu_e\right>$ & $\log \rm{r}_e$ & \specialcell{18.874\\ ($\pm0.024$)} & \specialcell{-0.9084\\ ($\pm0.044$)} & 0.205 & -0.800 & -20.722 & $< 2.2 \times 10^{-16}$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:linefit}
\caption{A table showing the output of Simple Linear Regression test in AstroStat. Here, $r$ refers to the Pearson's correlation coefficient, $t$ refers to the coefficient's test statistic, and $p(>t)$ refers to the p-value of the test statistic.}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
One can, at this point, fit a straight line to these two quantities. This can be done using \emph{Simple Linear Regression} test. The results for this test are summarized in Table 1 and the best-fit line is shown in Figure \ref{fig:linefit}. This is the well known Kormendy relation \citep{Kormendy77}. The root-mean-square (RMS) scatter in this correlation is 0.2. Can this scatter be explained using measurement errors? If the data also comprised of the error information, answering this question could be straight-foward but since no such information is available, we can use another approach to check whether the scatter is truly random. For this, we will define the deviation of the points from the best-fit line as ($y_i - a - bx_i$) and add this as a new column to our file. Once again, we make a Pairs' plot which results in a $4 \times 4$ grid of plots as shown in Figure \ref{fig:4plot}. This plot reveals a strong correlation between the deviations and $log \sigma_c$ with correlation coefficient of -0.773 and a p-value of 0 (as checked using the correlation matrix). This implies that the scatter in the Kormendy relation is not random but systematically arises from a third variable. This hints at a higher dimensional relationship which can be fitted using multiple linear regression as already shown above.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\columnwidth]{4pair.jpeg}
\caption{A plot between the left-hand-side vs the right-hand-side of the
Equation \ref{eqn:fp}, often referred to as the edge-on view of the plane.}
\label{fig:4plot}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Another approach to arrive at the Fundamental plane of elliptical galaxies is to use Principal Component Analysis (PCA). PCA is a very powerful tool that can be used to study the relationships between the variables. A common use of PCA is to reduce the overall dimensionality of the data set by constructing new synthetic variables. The PCA test can be run from under \emph{Advanced Tests} in AstroStat. The output comprises two pieces of information - the component loadings and the total variance accounted by each component. The principal components obtained are in order of decreasing variance.
The first principal component determined accounts for more than 80\% of the variance and is shown below.
\begin{equation}
\rm{PC1} = -0.651 \log(\rm{r}_e) -0.027 \log\ \sigma_c + 0.759 \log I_e
\label{eqn:pc1}
\end{equation}
\noindent The component loadings (coefficient of each term) indicate a strong correlation between $\log r_e$ and $\log I_e$ which is consistent with the above analysis. Now, the third principal component is the direction of minimal variance. If three quantities lie on a plane, the normal to the plane is the direction of minimal variance. Therefore, PC3 can be interpreted as a normal to the plane. We can further assume that the variance in the direction of PC3 is due to noise and thus the equation of plane can be written as
\begin{equation}
0.563 \log(\rm{r}_e) -0.687 \log\ \sigma_c + 0.459 \log I_e = \rm{constant}
\label{eqn:pc3}
\end{equation}
\noindent Rearranging the terms in Equation \ref{eqn:pc3}, we get,
\begin{equation}
\log(\rm{r}_e) = + 1.220 \log\ \sigma_c - 0.815 \left<\mu_e\right> + \rm{constant}
\label{eqn:pc3_2}
\end{equation}
\noindent As can be seen, this fundamental plane relation reasonably agrees with
Equation \ref{eqn:fp}. It can
also be seen that it agrees \emph{more} with the original equation derived by
\citet{jor96}. This is because the Principal Component Analysis, by
construction, will minimize variance in an orthogonal direction.
This example illustrates how a data set can be loaded in AstroStat and
subjected to various statistical tests allowing a user to gain insights about
the underlying correlations. That this data set need not sit on the user's
desktop but can be directly queried off Vizier or other services using the Table
Access Protocol tool makes it easy for astronomers to perform data querying and
analysis without leaving the web browser window. If the user wants to
dig deeper into the several options actually provided by R, or say, customize
the plots, the R code made avaiable can be used as a starting point.
\section{Future Work}
The development of AstroStat has been made as modular as possible to allow for easy
extensibility of the application's functions. If the
community of users requires inclusion of other commonly used analyses, for e.g.
those applicable to time series data, they can be easily added as additional
tests, perhaps even in a new test category, by the VOI development team. VOI is open to community feedback to drive the growth of AstroStat. Some evident future directions include modifying AstroStat to be compatible with the 'big data wave' and to present R code to the user in a fashion that it can be easily run and tweaked by the user on a local instance of R. A possible consideration for the future is to provide an interface by which the end-users will be able to add new R modules to AstroStat.
At the time of writing this article, support for the web SAMP module is being tested. This will enable data from tools such as TOPCAT or Vizier to directly transmit tabular data to AstroStat or transmit tables loaded in AstroStat to other VO compatible tools. This can, for example, overcome the limitation of static plots provided by \emph{ggplot2} by allowing users to link data with a tool that supports advanced plotting such as VOPlot or TOPCAT. The reader is encouraged to watch out for new developments as well as offer suggestions for further development of the tool.
The current web version was not designed with touch-based interface in mind and
may be inconvenient to use on such devices. This has motivated us to create a lightweight
version of the AstroStat web application with a touch-friendly interface that
can work effortlessly on devices with limited computing resources. The
development of such a service is currently being planned.
Finally, an Android app is also being developed to provide
a pedagogical interface to basic statistical analysis that can aid in
classroom teaching. The app will allow students to understand descriptive
statistics, correlation, straight-line
fitting, effects of outliers and visualize data using scatter plots, line
graphs and bar charts. Particular attention is being paid to make the app fully
compatible with \emph{Aakash} tablets which are low-cost devices being
widely distributed in schools and colleges in India by the Ministry of Human
Resource Development, of the Government of India.
\section*{ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS}
The authors would like to thank Kiran Jappanwar for help with the development of
the original TAP module; Somak Raichaudhary \& Peter Tino, whose ideas helped
shape the interface of the tool; and Sajeeth Philip \& Sudhanshu Barway who
helped test the tool on a large scale and provided valuable feedback.
Well before IUCAA took over the current development, the initial VOStat work was done at Caltech. AAM acknowledges the support of National Science Foundation (NSF)
grant DMS-0101360. SG Djorgovski and MJ Graham also contributed to the initial design.
The VO-India project is a collaboration between the Inter-University Centre for
Astronomy and Astrophysics and Persistent Systems Ltd., under which
AstroStat has been developed, is partially funded by
the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology of the Government of
India. Kaustubh acknowledges financial assistance provided by the Council of
Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), India.
\section*{References}
\bibliographystyle{model2-names}
|
\section{Introduction}
Type III radio bursts observed in the meter range were initially classified \citep{WildMccready1950} as an impulsive radio frequency signal that drifted from high to low frequencies with time. They were given the name `type III' because the rate they drift in frequency with time (or drift rate) was higher than `type I' and `type II' bursts. Type III bursts are one of the most frequently observed impulsive electromagnetic signals driven by the Sun and are produced by accelerated electrons beams travelling at near-relativistic energies through the plasma of the solar system \citep[see e.g.][for reviews]{1983SoPh...89..403G,SuzukiDulk1985,1985ARA&A..23..169D,1990SoPh..130....3M,1990SoPh..130..201M, ReidRatcliffe2014}. Understanding which properties of accelerated electron beams and the solar wind plasma give rise to certain features in type IIIs allows us to use these transient burst properties as a diagnostic tool.
The escaping radio emission responsible for type III bursts can be broadly described as two stage process \citep[first suggested by][]{GinzburgZhelezniakov1958}. The first stage is a two-stream instability between the electron beam and the background plasma that induces a high level of Langmuir waves. The second stage is wave-wave interactions between Langmuir waves and either ion-sound waves for fundamental emission or oppositely propagating Langmuir waves for harmonic emission. The current theory has been refined by many authors \citep[e.g.][]{ZheleznyakovZaitsev1970, 1970SoPh...15..202S,1972SoPh...24..444Z,1976SoPh...46..515S,1980SSRv...26....3M, 1983SoPh...89..403G,1985ARA&A..23..169D, 1987SoPh..111...89M,Kontar_etal1998,2003SoPh..212..111M,2004SoPh..222..299L} and continues to develop with the advent of numerical simulations \citep[e.g][]{1976SoPh...46..323T,MagelssenSmith1977,Grognard1985,1992SoPh..137..307R,Kontar2001b,Li_etal2008,KontarReid2009,2010SoPh..267..393T,2011PhPl...18e2903T,ReidKontar2013,Ratcliffe_etal2012,LiCairns2014,2014A&A...562A..57R}.
Type III bursts cover a wide range of frequencies. The starting frequency of type III bursts varies from hundreds of MHz, and rarely GHz, down to 1 MHz and below. The stopping frequency of type III bursts varies over a even wider frequency range from the 100's to 10's MHz for type III bursts that originate only in the corona, all the way down to 10's kHz for type III bursts from interplanetary space. The properties of an electron beam and the background heliospheric plasma govern at what frequencies the type III radio emission starts and stops being observed. Whilst recent studies have investigated what is important in determining the starting frequency of type III bursts \citep{Reid_etal2011,Reid_etal2014}, the processes affecting the stopping frequency of type III bursts has never been systematically investigated. Figure \ref{fig:obs1} shows an example of many type III bursts observed before and after a large flare. Although electron beams associated with the flare reached frequencies around $0.04$~MHz, the majority of other type III bursts stopped at higher frequencies. What plasma parameters dictate at what frequency a type III bursts stops is unclear.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.89\columnwidth]{20140216}
\caption{An example of many type III bursts on the 16th February 2014, detected by the WAVES instrument on the WIND spacecraft at 14 - 0.02 MHz \citep{Bougeret_etal1995} , the Nan\c{c}ay Decametre Array at 80 - 14 MHz \citep{Lecacheux_etal2000} and Phoenix 4 at 900 - 200 MHz \citep{Benz_etal2009}. The large type III burst at 09:30 was associated with a GOES M1 flare. We can observe type III bursts stopping at a variety of different frequencies. The periodicity observed below 1 MHz is an artefact.}
\label{fig:obs1}
\end{figure}
Previous observational studies on type III burst stopping frequencies by \citet{Leblanc_etal1995,Leblanc_etal1996} used radio data from the WAVES instrument onboard the WIND spacecraft and the URAP experiment on the Ulysses spacecraft \citep{Stone_etal1992}. They analysed type III bursts detected only by Ulysses between 1990 and 1994 \citep{Leblanc_etal1995} and by both WIND and Ulysses detected below 1~MHz between 1994 and 1995 \citep{Leblanc_etal1996}. Each type III burst was given a stopping frequency, estimated from the lowest observable frequency on the type III dynamic spectra. Repeating the process a number of times for the same type III bursts they estimated an error on their results of 12\%. Typical stopping frequencies for type III bursts were observed between 100-200~kHz for weak type III bursts and 20-50~kHz for strong type III bursts. Neither study observed type III bursts below 9~kHz despite the plasma frequency at Ulysses being as low as 3~kHz during observations. They found a connection between the intensity of the type III burst emission and the stopping frequency. The larger the intensity of the type III burst, the lower the stopping frequency tended to be.
There were three postulations by \citet{Leblanc_etal1995} for what influences the burst stopping frequency. In the first, the electron beam is diluted due to expansion of the guiding magnetic flux tube. The diluted electron beam becomes ineffective in forming the required magnitude of positive slope in velocity space required for generating Langmuir waves. In the second, the level of density fluctuations or ion-acoustic waves required to convert Langmuir waves into electromagnetic waves decreases as a function of distance from the Sun and throttles the production of radio emission (previously suggested by \citet{deGenouillacEscande1981}). In the third, the density fluctuations suppress the level of Langmuir waves excited by the electron beam \citep[e.g.][]{1976JPSJ...41.1757N} and thus cease the production of radio emission. That large scale density fluctuations suppress Langmuir wave growth has been discussed at length by many authors \citep[e.g.][]{SmithSime1979,Muschietti_etal1985,Kontar2001d,ReidKontar2010,Li_etal2011,Ratcliffe_etal2012}.
\citet{Dulk_etal1996} tested the hypothesis that radio wave prorogation governs the lowest type III frequencies and that the cut-offs are not intrinsic to the radiation mechanism. Using simultaneous WIND and Ulysses (which was behind the Sun) observations, they found a reasonable correlation coefficient of 0.51 but with a high degree of scatter. 28\% of bursts they observed had the same stopping frequency to within a factor of 1.12, whilst 50\% of the bursts had the same stopping frequency to within a factor of 1.4. At the extremes, the stopping frequency of type III bursts differed by a factor of 5.
The difference in cutoff frequencies suggests that some directivity or rather the blocking of radio emission between source and observer by density fluctuations can play a role in determining stopping frequency. However, it is not the dominant process because the stopping frequency of type III bursts can vary over many orders of magnitude in frequency. For example in the study by \citet{Dulk_etal1996} they recorded stopping frequencies from 300~kHz down to 20~kHz. The large spread suggests that the plasma processes involved with the production of type III bursts largely determine the stopping frequency.
A more recent study using the WAVES instrument \citep{Bougeret_etal2008} onboard the STEREO spacecraft was carried out by \citet{Krupar_etal2014} on 154 type III bursts occurred between 2007 and 2013. They found that the stopping frequency in 65\% to 75\% of events was at 125~kHz, the lowest frequency channel measured. It is also important to mention that the measured stopping frequency is dependent upon the sensitivity of the radio receiver and/or the level of ambient signal from the background plasma and the galactic background.
The necessary condition for a type III radio burst is a population of coronal accelerated electrons that are able to drive Langmuir waves with access to open magnetic field lines. If a population of accelerated electrons is able to drive Langmuir wave generation, what causes this Langmuir wave generation to cease and how does it vary with distance from the Sun?
To answer these questions, we have simulated the outward propagation of a solar electron beam injected in the low corona. We self-consistently modelled the wave-particle interactions that govern the production of Langmuir waves through the beam-plasma instability. We also modelled collisional effects, wave refraction
in an inhomogeneous background plasma, the expanding magnetic field lines of the solar corona and solar wind. The model and the initial condition of the injected electron beam are all described in Section \ref{sec:model_setup}. Using Langmuir wave energy density as a proxy for the level of radio emission generated by an electron beam, we considered a number of different effects that govern when the production of Langmuir waves will cease: the expansion of guiding magnetic flux tube in Section \ref{sec:normal}, the level of density fluctuations in Section \ref{sec:inhom}, and the initial beam parameters in Section \ref{sec:beam_params}. Our results are discussed in Section \ref{sec:conclusion}.
\section{Model equations, initial conditions and approximations}\label{sec:model_setup}
\subsection{Model} \label{sec:model}
To predict the evolution of an electron beam travelling through the heliosphere we will rely on the quasilinear approximation of wave-particle interactions \citep[e.g.][]{DrummondPines1962,Vedenov_etal1962}. This utilises the WKB approximation where we are treating waves as quasi-particles interacting resonantly $\omega_{pe}(r)=kv$, where $\omega_{pe}(r)$ is the background plasma angular frequency \citep{Bian_etal2014}. Using $f(v,r,t)$ as the electron distribution function and $W(v,r,t)$ as the Langmuir wave spectral energy density in the one dimension of propagation, we can describe the time evolution using
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\partial f}{\partial t} + \frac{v}{M(r)}\frac{\partial}{\partial r}M(r)f =
\frac{4\pi ^2e^2}{m_e^2}\frac{\partial }{\partial v}\left(\frac{W}{v}\frac{\partial f}{\partial v}\right)
\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\cr
+\frac{4\pi n_e e^4}{m_e^2}\ln\Lambda\frac{\partial}{\partial v}\frac{f}{v^2} + S(v,r,t)
\label{eqk1}
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\partial W}{\partial t} + \frac{\partial \omega_L}{\partial k}\frac{\partial W}{\partial r}
-\frac{\partial \omega _{pe}}{\partial r}\frac{\partial W}{\partial k}
= \frac{\pi \omega_{pe}}{n_e}v^2W\frac{\partial f}{\partial v}
\quad\quad\quad\quad\cr
- (\gamma_{L} +\gamma_c )W + e^2\omega_{pe}v f \ln{\frac{v}{v_{Te}}}.
\label{eqk2}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\omega_L\simeq \omega _{pe}+3k^2v_{Te}^2/(2\omega_{pe})$ is the Langmuir wave dispersion relation, $m_e$ is the electron mass, $e$ is the electron charge, $n_e(r)$ is the background plasma density (defined in Section \ref{sec:plasma}) and $\ln\Lambda$ is the Coulomb logarithm that is assumed constant and $=20$. $M(r)$ is the cross-sectional area of the magnetic flux tube (defined in Section \ref{sec:normal}. In this case where $M(r)\propto r^2$ it corresponds to spherically symmetric expansion of the flux tube \citep[e.g.][]{ReidKontar2013}. For the background electron thermal velocity we have $v_{Te}=\sqrt{k_bT_e/m_e}$ where $k_B$ is the Boltzmann constant. The background plasma frequency is defined as $\omega_{pe}(r)=\sqrt{4\pi n_e e^2 / m_e}$.
For the particles, the physical processes we are considering in order of terms from left to right in Equation (\ref{eqk1}) are: change in time of the distribution function, transport through space in an expanding magnetic field, resonant interaction with Langmuir waves, collisional damping from the background plasma, and a source term of electrons $S(v,r,t)$ is defined in Section \ref{sec:beam}.
For the Langmuir waves, the physical processes we are considering in order of terms from left to right in Equation \ref{eqk2} are: change in time of the Langmuir wave spectral energy density, propagation of waves through space\footnote{Since Langmuir waves do not propagate far before being re-absorbed, M(r) is not taken into account in Equation (\ref{eqk2})}, Langmuir wave refraction, resonant interaction with the high velocity electrons,
Landau damping from the background Maxwellian plasma $\gamma_L=\sqrt{\pi/2}\omega_{pe}\left(v/v_{Te}\right)^3\exp\left(-{v^2}/{2v_{Te}^2}\right)$, collisional damping from background ions $\gamma_c= {\pi n_e e^4}\ln\Lambda/(m_e^2 v_{Te}^3)$, and the spontaneous generation from the background plasma.
\subsection{Initial conditions}\label{sec:initial}
\subsubsection{Electron beam}\label{sec:beam}
We introduce a source of electrons into the simulations, where the source function takes the following form:
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:source}
S(v,r,t) = g(v)h(r)i(t).
\end{equation}
Each dimension of the source function is characterised by one parameter. The velocity distribution is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:velocity}
g(v) = A_v v^{-\alpha}\,,
\end{equation}
where $\alpha$ is the velocity spectral index. We have chosen $\alpha$ to be 7 that corresponds to 3.5 in energy space, and is indicative of injected electron beam spectral indices derived from X-ray observations during flares \citep[e.g.][]{1988SoPh..118...49D,Holman_etal2011}. The velocity normalisation constant is given by $A_v=n_{beam}(\alpha-1)/v_{min}^{(1-\alpha)}$. The parameter $n_{beam}$ is the total density of electrons injected at the centre of the injection site between the minimum and maximum velocities $v_{min}=2.6v_{Te}=1.43\times10^9~\rm{cm~s}^{-1}$ and $v_{max}=36v_{Te}=2\times10^{10}~\rm{cm~s}^{-1}$. We set $n_{beam}=2\times10^6~\rm{cm}^{-3}$.
The spatial distribution is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:distance}
h(r) = \exp\left(-\frac{r^2}{d^2}\right)\,,
\end{equation}
where the characteristic parameter in space is given by the spread of the electron beam $d$. We have chosen $d$ at $10^9$~cm which is a typical size of a flare acceleration region derived from simultaneous X-ray and radio observations \citep{Reid_etal2011,Reid_etal2014}. The centre of the injection, $r=0$ has an altitude of $r_{inj}=50$~Mm, consistent with the estimates from a number of flares \citep{Reid_etal2011,Reid_etal2014}. This altitude corresponds to a density of $2.14\times 10^9~\rm{cm}^{-3}$ and plasma frequency of $415$~MHz in our density model (Section \ref{sec:plasma}). Whilst we are injecting quite a large number of electrons into the simulation ($n_{beam}/n_e=10^{-3}$), we note that the large background density will cause the majority of the electrons to lose their energy before they can escape the corona \citep{ReidKontar2013}.
The temporal profile is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:time}
i(t) = A_t\exp\left(-\frac{(t-t_{inj})^2}{\tau^2}\right)
\end{equation}
where the characteristic parameter in time is given by the injection time $\tau$. We have chosen $\tau=0.001$~s, which is equivalent to an instantaneous injection of electrons in the corona. The time normalisation constant is given by $A_t=1/(\sqrt{\pi}\tau)$ such that $\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}i(t)dt = 1$. An instantaneous injection was chosen to minimise the influence of injection time on the starting height that Langmuir waves are induced by the electron beam \citep{ReidKontar2013,Ratcliffe_etal2014}. The constant $t_{inj}=4\tau$ is a delay time such that four characteristic times can occur before the injection maximum.
\subsubsection{Background plasma}\label{sec:plasma}
We introduce a population of thermal electrons as a background plasma. This background Maxwellian population is characterised by a background temperature $T_e=2$~MK that corresponds to a background thermal velocity of $v_{Te}=5.5\times10^8~\rm{cm~s}^{-1}$. The choice of $2$~MK is related to the higher Landau damping that is predicted from the strahl present in the heliosphere \citep[e.g.][]{Maksimovic_etal2005}.
For the background electron density $n_e(r)$, we use the density profile of the Parker model that solves the equations for a stationary spherical symmetric solution \citep{Parker1958} with normalisation factor found from satellites \citep{Mann_etal1999}.
\begin{equation}\label{sol1}
r^2n_e(r)v(r)= C= const
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{sol2}
\frac{v(r)^2}{v_c^2}-\mbox{ln}\left(\frac{v(r)^2}{v_c^2}\right)=
4\mbox{ln}\left(\frac{r}{r_c}\right)+4\frac{r_c}{r}-3
\end{equation}
where the critical velocity $v_c$ is defined such that $v_c\equiv (k_BT_{sw}/\tilde{\mu}m_p)^{1/2}$ and the critical radius is defined by $r_c(v_c) = GM_s/2v_c^2$ (both independent on $r$). $T_{sw}$ is the temperature of the solar wind,\footnote{$T_{sw}$ used in the density model is different from the electron temperature $T_e$ that defines $v_{Te}$} taken as 1 MK, $M_s$ is the mass of the Sun, $m_p$ is the proton mass and $\tilde{\mu}$ is the mean molecular weight. The constant appearing above is fixed by satellite measurements near the Earth's orbit (at $r = 1$~AU, $n =6.59$~cm$^{-3}$) and equates to $6.3\times 10^{34}$~s$^{-1}$. This model is static in time, set at the start of the simulations. We justify this because the electron beam is moving at least two orders of magnitude faster than the solar wind velocity.
We also consider a thermal level of Langmuir waves in the background plasma \citep[e.g.][]{Hannah_etal2009,Hannah_etal2013,ReidKontar2013} when wave collisions are weak. This takes the form
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:init_w}
W^{init}(v,r,t=0) = \frac{k_BT_e}{4\pi^2}\frac{\omega_{pe}^2}{v^2}\ln\left(\frac{v}{v_{Te}}\right),
\end{equation}
where $k_B$ is the Boltzmann constant.
\subsection{Langmuir wave energy density} \label{sec:beamplasma}
Using the model and the initial conditions described in Section \ref{sec:model} and Section \ref{sec:initial} respectively, we have simulated the propagation of an electron beam injected in the corona that can travel into interplanetary space. The electron beam resonantly interacts with Langmuir waves forming a beam-plasma structure \citep[e.g.][]{Melnik1995,Kontar_etal1998}. This structure consists of an electron beam inducing Langmuir waves at the front of the beam and absorbing Langmuir waves at the back of the beam. The constant generation and absorption of Langmuir waves allows the beam-plasma structure to travel large distances up to 1~AU and beyond without running out of energy. At any moment in time, the majority of energy is contained in the electron population and only a small fraction is contained in the Langmuir waves.
As a proxy for the type III radio bursts we use the energy density of Langmuir waves. This is justified because only a small fraction of the energy contained in Langmuir waves is actually converted to type III radio emission. As such, the bulk of the Langmuir wave energy is a good tracer of what times and what frequencies the electron beam will be radiating radio waves. Moreover, dealing only with the Langmuir waves makes the problem computationally tractable for the long simulated distances of 1~AU.. It has been found that the energy density of Langmuir waves is not an exact proxy for the level of radio emission \citep{2014A&A...562A..57R,Ratcliffe_etal2014} with fundamental and harmonic type III radio emission depending differently upon the spectral characteristics of the induced Langmuir waves. However, both branches of emission are dependent upon Langmuir waves; the absenece of enhanced Langmuir waves will stop both emission types. The radial distance that Langmuir waves cease will give a good indication of where the beam instability terminates. No Langmuir waves means no radio waves.
We calculated the energy density of Langmuir waves $E_w(r,t)$ (ergs cm$^{-3}$) at every point in time and space by integrating the spectral energy density $W(v,r,t)$ over $k$
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:LWenergy}
E_w(r,t) = \int_{k_{min}}^{k_{max}}{W(k,r,t)dk} = \int_{v_{min}}^{v_{max}}{\frac{\omega_{pe}}{v^2}W(v,r,t)dv}.
\end{equation}
To see the variation of Langmuir wave enhancement over thermal level as a function of distance, we normalised the level of $E_w(r,t)$ by the local thermal level of Langmuir wave energy density, found from Equation (\ref{eqn:init_w}) and (\ref{eqn:LWenergy}) as
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:LWenergy_init}
E_w^{init}(r) = \int_{v_{min}}^{v_{max}}{\frac{k_BT_e}{4\pi^2}\frac{\omega_{pe}^3}{v^4}\ln\left(\frac{v}{v_{Te}}\right)dv}.
\end{equation}
To obtain a stopping frequency for type III bursts, we must quantify at what point in space (and hence what frequency) the electron beam stops generating high levels of Langmuir waves, required to emit type III radio bursts. We do this by calculating the maximum level of Langmuir wave energy density $E_w^{max}$ for every point of space and time. Again we normalise this by the thermal level of Langmuir wave energy density $E_w^{init}$. By taking a fixed level for $E_w^{max}/E_w^{init}$ we are then able to estimate the lowest frequency an electron beam was able to induce this level of Langmuir wave energy density. We call this the stopping frequency.
\section{Radial expansion of the guiding magnetic flux tubes} \label{sec:normal}
When electrons propagate outwards from the Sun, they follow the lines of decreasing magnetic field. As the magnetic flux tubes expand, so too does the electron beam, causing the beam density to decrease. An example cartoon showing this behaviour is given by Figure \ref{fig:radial_cartoon} (left). We have modelled the expansion via the second term in Equation (\ref{eqk1}). We use $M(r)$ to model the cross-section of the expanding flux tube that the electrons are travelling along as a function of $r$ and it takes the form
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:expansion}
M(r) = M_0\left( 1 + \frac{r}{r_0}\right)^{\beta}.
\end{equation}
where $r_0$ is the characteristic length of the expansion of the magnetic flux tube.
The power-law index $\beta$ defines an expanding flux tube and the radial dependency of the magnetic field $B\propto M(r)^{-1} \propto r^{-\beta}$.
$M_0= \pi(d/2)^2~\rm{cm}^2 \simeq 80~\rm{Mm}^2$ is the cross-sectional area of the flux tube at the centre of the acceleration site, $r=0$.
For $r_0=3.4\times10^9$~cm, an expansion of $r^2$ gives a cone of angle 33 degrees, an angle that has been deduced from some in-situ observations of high energy electrons near the Earth \citep[e.g.][]{1974SSRv...16..189L,Steinberg_etal1985,Krucker_etal2007,Wang_etal2012}.
We have not changed the background density profile when changing the expansion of the magnetic flux tube. Whislt the magnetic field, solar wind speed and background electron density are all interdependent properties \citep[e.g. solving equations 12-14 in][]{Kontar2001c}, it is beyond the scope of the paper to simulate how all three change with radial distance together. We focus on the effects of the magnetic field.
\begin{figure*}\center
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{radial_weak}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{radial_critical}
\caption{A cartoon of an electron cloud (green) travelling upwards from an acceleration region through the corona, following the magnetic field. The density of the electron cloud is represented through the transparency. Left: an example of a constant radial expansion described by Equation (\ref{eqn:expansion}). Right: At a critical height $r_c$ the magnetic field lines begin to expand at an increased rate described by Equation (\ref{eqn:double_expansion}), causing the density of the electron cloud to decrease faster. }
\label{fig:radial_cartoon}
\end{figure*}
As the electron cloud propagates outwards along the expanding magnetic flux
tube (Figure \ref{fig:radial_cartoon}), the electron number density decreases
with the rate dependent on the flux tube expansion rate.
Whilst velocity dispersion also causes an increases in the derivative $\partial f/\partial v$ that grows with distance,
the decrease in beam density from the electrons following the expanding magnetic flux tube is greater.
These two processes are not the entire picture but it is clear that the expansion of the magnetic flux tube
is expected to be a major factor that governs when subsequent type III radio emission stops.
\subsection{Simulations}
To illustrate how the expansion of the magnetic flux tube can influence the propagation of an electron beam we numerically solved Equations (\ref{eqk1},\ref{eqk2}) with the parameters given in Section \ref{sec:model_setup} except that we change the rate of magnetic flux expansion. For this we varied $\beta$ in Equation (\ref{eqn:expansion}) such that $\beta = 2,~2.5,~3,~3.5$.
As described in Section \ref{sec:beamplasma} we used the Langmuir wave energy density as a proxy for the type III radio emission. We plot the Langmuir wave energy density variation as a function of time
and frequency (see e.g. Figure \ref{fig:radial1}), similar to what is normally produced for type III bursts using the flux density of radio waves as a function of time and frequency. To account for the decreasing Langmuir wave energy as a function of frequency, shown in Equation (\ref{eqn:LWenergy}), we normalised the energy density by the thermal level of Langmuir waves given by $E_w^{init}=E_w(t=0)=\int{W_{Th}dk}$.
Figure \ref{fig:radial1} shows how the energy density of Langmuir waves varies as a function of frequency and time for all four values of $\beta = 2,~2.5,~3,~3.5$. When $\beta=3.5$ (top left graph) the energy density in Langmuir waves is low, ceasing completely after only 0.8 mins and not reaching frequencies less than roughly 4 MHz. The magnetic flux tube expands very rapidly, causing the electron beam to decrease in density over a short distance and is consequently no longer able to drive the wave-particle interaction. When $\beta=3.0$ (top right graph) the magnetic flux tube expands less rapidly and Langmuir waves are induced by the electron beam over a longer time (2.5 mins) and at lower frequencies (1 MHz). This trend continues for $\beta=2.5$ (bottom left graph) and $\beta=2.0$ (bottom right graph) with the Langmuir wave energy density being significant over the thermal level at 0.1 MHz and 0.03 MHz respectively.
For different levels of magnetic flux tube expansion, Figure \ref{fig:radial2} (left) shows the minimum background plasma frequency the electron beam was able to excite a certain level of Langmuir wave energy, as described in Section \ref{sec:beam}. We note that the background plasma frequency relates to distance using the density model described in Section \ref{sec:plasma}. The different lines in Figure \ref{fig:radial2} illustrate different values of $E_w^{max}/E_w^{init}$, taken between $10^2$ and $10^3$.
\begin{figure*}\center
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth,trim=22 20 85 35,clip]{t3_1_3_5-eps-converted-to}
\includegraphics[width=0.52\textwidth,trim=22 20 25 35,clip]{t3_1_3_0-eps-converted-to}
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth,trim=22 20 85 35,clip]{t3_1_2_5-eps-converted-to}
\includegraphics[width=0.52\textwidth,trim=22 20 25 35,clip]{t3_1_2_0-eps-converted-to}
\caption{Langmuir wave energy density $E_w /E_w^{init}$ in plasma frequency - time plane. The same electron beam parameters are used
for all panels but with a magnetic flux tube expanding at different rates. The coefficient that models the expansion of the flux tubes is $\beta=3.5$ (top left), $\beta=3.0$ (top right), $\beta=2.5$ (bottom left), $\beta=2.0$ (bottom right). Note the different values of the frequency and time axis between each graph.}
\label{fig:radial1}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{single_expansion_normal-eps-converted-to}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{single_expansion_inhomogeneity-eps-converted-to}
\caption{ The minimum frequency (stopping frequency) where an electron beam is able to induce certain amount of Langmuir wave energy density (see color-coded lines). plotted against the different radial expansion exponents, $\beta$. The different coloured lines represent different levels of Langmuir wave energy (normalised by the thermal level) between 100 and 1000. The right graph includes density fluctuations in the background plasma.}
\label{fig:radial2}
\end{figure*}
We can see from Figure \ref{fig:radial2} that slow expansion (smaller $\beta$) leads to a significant energy of Langmuir waves at frequencies below $\sim 1$~MHz. The points representing different levels of maximum Langmuir wave energy density $E_w^{max}/E_w^{init}$ are closer together in minimum frequency for $\beta=2$ compared to $\beta=2.5$. As the electron beam propagates farther from the Sun, the plasma density profile becomes flatter,
($|\partial \omega_{pe}/\partial r|$ decreases) and hence the Langmuir wave energy decreases faster with frequency. The similarity between the simulations with $\beta=3.5$ and $\beta=3.0$ is because the electron beam density decreases very quickly in both simulations. In comparison to the the cases $\beta=2,~2.5$, only a small amount of energy is transferred to Langmuir waves before the wave generation is quenched.
When we consider weaker radial expansion (for instance $\beta=2$), we observe Langmuir waves being generated at distances much farther from the Sun and consequently at much smaller frequencies. We considered radial expansion with smaller $\beta$ values of $\beta=1.5,~1.0$ but they produced so much Langmuir wave energy that by 2~AU (the end of our simulation box) there was still a significant level of energy density in Langmuir waves, with $E_w^{max}/E_w^{init} > 10^3$. As shown in the next section, part of this result is related to not considering the density fluctuations in the background plasma. These results support the idea
\citep{Buttighoffer_etal1995,Buttighoffer1998}
that narrow flux tubes are encountered when electrons producing type III emission are observed with Ulysses at distances greater than 1~AU.
\subsection{Complex Radial Expansion} \label{sec:expansion}
In Equation (\ref{eqn:expansion}) the magnetic flux tube expands in the corona at the same rate as it expands in the heliosphere. Whilst this might be more relevant in areas of open field (for instance the coronal holes), solar active regions can be far from simplistic. It is possible that the magnetic field can be focussed in the corona through narrow flux tubes. From Section \ref{sec:normal} we know this will facilitate a higher level of Langmuir wave turbulence. However, it has been observed that type III bursts can occur at high frequencies and not at lower frequencies. One explanation for this behaviour is an increased expansion as electrons propagate out of the corona. Figure \ref{fig:radial_cartoon} (right) shows a cartoon of the geometry of the magnetic field in such a scenario, where the expansion of the magnetic field lines increase at a certain height $r_c$.
We model the magnetic field proposed in Figure \ref{fig:radial_cartoon} (right) by modifying magnetic flux tube cross-sectional area $M(r)$, so that
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:double_expansion}
M(r) = M_0 \begin{cases} \left( 1 + \frac{r}{r_0}\right)^{\beta} & \mbox{for } r<r_c \\ \left[ \left(1 + \frac{r}{r_0}\right)^{\beta} + Z_c \left( 1 - \frac{r}{r_c}\right)^{\beta}\right] & \mbox{for } r\geq r_c. \end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $r_c$ is a height above the photosphere where the expansion of the magnetic flux tube changes. Above this height the expansion is more rapid, with the severity of this increased expansion modelled through
the constant $Z_c$. Similar to Equation (\ref{eqn:expansion}), the constant $M_0=80~\rm{Mm}$ is the cross-sectional area of the flux tube at the centre of the acceleration site $r=0$.
In Figure \ref{fig:expansion2}, we set $\beta=3$ for the magnetic flux tube expansion, so that magnetic field decreases as $r^{-3}$. To simulate a reduced expansion in the corona we increased the value of $r_0=10^{10}$~cm. We set $r_c=2\times10^{10}$~cm and $r_c=4\times10^{10}$~cm to demonstrate expansion at two different heights above the photosphere that correspond roughly to 100~MHz and 50~MHz. For each height we have varied the constant $Z_c=10^1, 10^3, 10^5$ to show different rates of expansion.
\begin{figure*}\center
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth,trim=22 20 85 35,clip]{t3_7_2_1-eps-converted-to}
\includegraphics[width=0.52\textwidth,trim=22 20 25 35,clip]{t3_7_4_1-eps-converted-to}
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth,trim=22 20 85 35,clip]{t3_7_2_3-eps-converted-to}
\includegraphics[width=0.52\textwidth,trim=22 20 25 35,clip]{t3_7_4_3-eps-converted-to}
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth,trim=22 20 85 35,clip]{t3_7_2_5-eps-converted-to}
\includegraphics[width=0.52\textwidth,trim=22 20 25 35,clip]{t3_7_4_5-eps-converted-to}
\caption{Langmuir wave energy density $E_w /E_w^{init}$ in plasma frequency - time plane. Langmuir waves produced by the electron beam with parameters as in Figures \ref{fig:radial1}, \ref{fig:radial2} but with a magnetic flux tube that undergoes increased expansion at a critical height (\ref{eqn:double_expansion}). Left panels: The critical height is $r_c=2\times 10^{10}$~cm. The severity of the extra expansion increases from top to bottom. Right panels: The critical height is $r_c=4\times 10^{10}$~cm. The severity of the extra expansion increases from top to bottom as $Z_c=10^1, 10^3, 10^5$. }
\label{fig:expansion2}
\end{figure*}
Figure \ref{fig:expansion2} shows the Langmuir wave energy density for the six different cases described above. Langmuir wave energy density is clearly reduced after the electron beam reaches $r_c$ when the expansion is significant. The two different frequencies of 100 MHz corresponding to $r_c=2\times 10^{10}~\rm{cm}$ and 40 MHz corresponding to $r_c=4\times 10^{10}~\rm{cm}$ are evident in Figure \ref{fig:expansion2} when $Z_c=10^5$, whereas Langmuir waves continue to be induced after the electron beam reaches $r_c$ when $Z_c=10$ (Figure \ref{fig:expansion2}).
\section{Density fluctuations in the background plasma}\label{sec:inhom}
The expansion of the guiding magnetic flux tubes is not the only factor that determines the stopping distance of a type III burst. Density fluctuations in the background plasma are known to decrease the level of Langmuir waves induced by an electron beam \citep[e.g.][]{Ryutov1969,SmithSime1979,Melrose1980,Kontar2001,ReidKontar2010,Li_etal2012,Ratcliffe_etal2012,ReidKontar2013}. Langmuir waves are shifted out of resonance with the electron beam by the density fluctuations that results in a decreased level of Langmuir wave turbulence.
The power spectrum of density fluctuations near the Earth has been observed to obey a Kolmogorov-type power law with a spectral index of $-5/3$ \citep[e.g.][]{Celnikier_etal1983,Celnikier_etal1987,Chen_etal2013c}.
Following \citet{ReidKontar2010}, the spectrum of density fluctuations was modelled with spectral index $-5/3$ between the wavelengths of $10^7$ and $10^{10}$~cm, so that the new perturbed density profile is given by the following equation
\begin{equation}\label{fluc}
n_e(r) = n_0(r)\left[1 + C(r)\sum_{n=1}^N\lambda_n^{\mu/2}\sin(2\pi r/\lambda_n + \phi_n)\right]\,,
\end{equation}
where $N=1000$ is the number of perturbations, $n_0(r)$ is the initial unperturbed density (defined in Section \ref{sec:plasma}), $\lambda_n$ is the wavelength of $n$-th fluctuation, $\mu=5/3$ is the power-law spectral index in the power spectrum, and $\phi_n$ is the random phase of the individual fluctuations. $C(r)$ is the normalisation that defines the level of density fluctuations
\begin{equation}
C(r) = \sqrt{\frac{2\langle \Delta n(r)^2 \rangle}{\langle n(r) \rangle^2\sum_{n=1}^N\lambda_n^{\mu}}}
\end{equation}
where the r.m.s. deviation of the density $\sqrt{\langle \Delta n(r)^2 \rangle}$ is taken so that near the Earth at $r=1$~AU $\sqrt{\frac{\langle \Delta n(r=1 AU)^2 \rangle}{\langle n(r=1 AU) \rangle^2}}=0.1$. \citet{ReidKontar2010} used numerical simulations of electron beams travelling to the Earth to estimate $C(r)$. The best fit was a level of fluctuations that decreased as a function of distance using the formula
\begin{equation}\label{eqn:fluc_rad}
\frac{\Delta n}{n} = \sqrt{\frac{\langle \Delta n(r)^2 \rangle}{\langle n(r) \rangle^2}} = \left(\frac{n_0(1 AU)}{n_0(r)}\right)^{\Psi} \sqrt{\frac{\langle \Delta n(r=1 AU)^2 \rangle}{\langle n(r=1 AU) \rangle^2}}
\end{equation}
where $\Psi=0.25$. This results in a level of fluctuations (denoted now for simplicity as $\Delta n/n$) at the Sun that is roughly $1\%$ of the level at the Earth, or $\Delta n/n=10^{-3}$. The value increases as a function of distance to $\Delta n/n=10^{-1}$ at the Earth.
\subsection{Simulations}
Using the same beam and plasma parameters as Section \ref{sec:normal} we conducted the simulations with the inclusion of a fluctuating background plasma. We varied the expansion of the magnetic flux tubes using $\beta=2,~2.5,~3.0,~3.5$. The normalised spectral energy density of Langmuir waves $E_w^{max}/E_w^{init}$ are presented as a function of time and plasma frequency in Figure \ref{fig:inhom1}. The bursty nature of the Langmuir wave energy density is evident, especially comparing Figure \ref{fig:inhom1} to Figure \ref{fig:radial1}. The bursty nature of the Langmuir energy density in Figure \ref{fig:inhom1} is increased for lower frequencies because of the model that we used for density fluctuations. Equation (\ref{eqn:fluc_rad}) has a larger intensity of density fluctuations farther away from the Sun.
\begin{figure*}\center
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth,trim=22 20 85 35,clip]{t3_3_3_5-eps-converted-to}
\includegraphics[width=0.52\textwidth,trim=22 20 25 35,clip]{t3_3_3_0-eps-converted-to}
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth,trim=22 20 85 35,clip]{t3_3_2_5-eps-converted-to}
\includegraphics[width=0.52\textwidth,trim=22 20 25 35,clip]{t3_3_2_0-eps-converted-to}
\caption{Langmuir wave energy density $E_w /E_w^{init}$ in the plasma frequency - time plane. The electron beam initial parameters are as in Figures \ref{fig:radial1}, \ref{fig:radial2} except that the background plasma includes density fluctuations. Again, the coefficient that models the magnetic flux tube expansion is $\beta=3.5$ (top left), $\beta=3.0$ (top right), $\beta=2.5$ (bottom left), $\beta=2.0$ (bottom right). Note the different values of the frequency and time axis between each graph.}
\label{fig:inhom1}
\end{figure*}
Figure \ref{fig:radial2} (right) shows how the different levels of magnetic field expansion affects the minimum frequency of the background plasma that certain levels of Langmuir wave energy density are induced. A comparison with the case without fluctuations reveals that in general the inclusion of density fluctuations increases this minimum frequency. For instance at $\beta=2.0$ an increased Langmuir wave energy density was not observed below 0.08~MHz compared to the 0.02~MHz with density fluctuations were not included. Density fluctuations in the background plasma are therefore another important parameter in the background plasma that affects the stopping frequency of type III bursts. Increasing the r.m.s. deviation of the density $\Delta n/n$ given in Equation (\ref{eqn:fluc_rad}) increases the suppression of Langmuir waves induced by the electron beam density, and vice versa.
We also point out that for any single value of $\beta$, the points in Figure \ref{fig:radial2} are more closely spaced when you consider density fluctuations in the background plasma. Indeed, all points are almost on top of each other when $\beta=2.0$ or $\beta=2.5$. These points are due to the spikes in the spatial distribution of Langmuir wave energy that reached at least $10^3$ times that of the background level. The spikes are able to produce higher Langmuir wave energy density at lower background frequencies. For example a level around $10^3$ is only observed at 5~MHz without fluctuations but at 0.5~MHz with fluctuations. However, the total Langmuir wave energy is less when density fluctuations are considered.
å
\section{Role of initial electron beam parameters} \label{sec:beam_params}
In this section we explore how the different initial electron beam parameters can affect the stopping frequency of type III bursts. Specifically we look at the number of injected electrons and how they are distributed in energy space.
\subsection{Injected beam density} \label{sec:density}
Obviously, the number of electrons we inject into the simulations is important when determining the level of Langmuir waves that is induced and consequently at what frequency the beam stops wave generation.
As described in Section \ref{sec:beam_params}, the simulation parameter that dictates the number density of electrons injected into the simulation is $n_{beam}$\footnote{$n_{beam}$ is the time integrated beam density injected at the centre of the acceleration region. However, given the fast injection characteristic time of $10^{-3}$~s, we refer to it simply as the beam density.}. Our simulations are set up as described in Section \ref{sec:model_setup} with the guiding flux tube characterised using $\beta=2.5$. We have varied the beam density over one order of magnitude such that $n_{beam} = 5\times 10^6~\rm{cm}^{-3},~2\times 10^6~\rm{cm}^{-3},~1\times 10^6~\rm{cm}^{-3},~5\times 10^5~\rm{cm}^{-3}$.
Similar to the previous sections, we have plotted the normalised maximum Langmuir wave energy density $E_w^{max}/E_w^{init}$ as a function of frequency in Figure \ref{fig:dens_si}. As expected, the beams with higher initial densities are able to excite higher levels of Langmuir wave energy at lower plasma frequencies (or at distances farther away from the Sun). As the initial number of electrons in the beam is reduced, the beam is less and less able to generate Langmuir waves farther out. For beam density $5\times10^5~\rm{cm}^{-3}$ the beam is not able to excite $E_w^{max}/E_w^{init}>10^{2.4}$ other than when it initially became unstable at frequencies $>100$~MHz, similar to the beams that experience high magnetic flux tube expansion in Figure \ref{fig:expansion2}.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{single_expansion_density-eps-converted-to}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{single_expansion_spectralindex-eps-converted-to}
\caption{The minimum frequency (stopping frequency) where an electron beam is able to induce certain amount of Langmuir wave energy density (see color-coded lines). Left: plotted against beam density. Right: plotted against velocity spectral index. The different coloured lines represent different levels of Langmuir wave energy (normalised by the thermal level) between $10^2$ and $10^3$.}
\label{fig:dens_si}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Injected beam energy distribution} \label{sec:spectralindex}
The distribution of beam electrons as a function of energy is very important for the production of Langmuir waves. Exactly what distribution we inject into the simulation will have a very significant effect on the minimum frequency the beam can interact with Langmuir waves. The energy distribution is governed by the spectral index $\delta$ defined in Equation (\ref{eqn:velocity}). We demonstrate the importance by using simulations with the same parameters as Section \ref{sec:normal}, keeping the magnetic field expansion static using $\beta=2.5$, and varying the velocity spectral index $\delta=6,7,8$.
We plot the normalised maximum Langmuir wave energy density $E_w^{max}(r)/E_w^{init}(r)$ for these three initial spectral indices as a function of frequency in Figure \ref{fig:dens_si}. We can see the frequencies corresponding to a high peak level of Langmuir wave energy density dramatically decreases as we decrease the initial velocity spectral index. As we have normalised the number density of electrons injected, if we lower the spectral index, more high energies are injected. There are two reasons this leads to higher level of Langmuir wave turbulence:
\begin{itemize}
\item The injection altitude is relatively low in the corona ($f_{pe}=500$~MHz). The background density is $2\times10^9~\rm{cm}^{-3}$ where the collision rate is not negligible. Therefore the low energy electrons (e.g. $\lesssim 6$~keV) collisionally lose energy before the beam escapes to a lower density background plasma. As demonstrated in \citet{ReidKontar2013} the electrons with energy $1.5-6$~keV will lose 99\% of their energy after only 0.1~R$_{\odot}$ of travel. A lower spectral index (harder spectrum) means that the beam loses less energy in the low corona and retains more energy to transfer to Langmuir waves.
\item Since the growth rate of Langmuir waves at one point in space is proportional to $v^2 \partial f/\partial v$, the $v^2$ term means that a flatter initial electron spectrum will increase it.
\end{itemize}
\section{Discussion and conclusions} \label{sec:conclusion}
To analyse the stopping frequency of type III radio bursts the outward propagation of deka-keV electrons have been modelled from a flaring acceleration site through the solar corona and inner heliosphere. The wave-particle interaction between electrons and Langmuir waves, Coulomb collisions, Langmuir wave refraction, and the radial expansion of the guiding magnetic flux tubes have been included. We have investigated the lowest frequency that the beam causes enhanced levels of Langmuir waves, and hence radio waves, for different electron beam and background plasma properties.
The radial expansion of the guiding magnetic flux tube significantly affects the distances from the Sun that electrons can induce high levels of Langmuir wave turbulence (and hence characteristic type III burst frequencies). The electron beam follows the expanding magnetic flux tube and consequently decreases in density as a function of distance from the Sun. The decrease in density eventually quenches the instability that causes Langmuir wave generation. This scenario could be the cause of type III bursts that are observed only at high frequencies although it is not the only mechanism that can produce such type III bursts.
Background density fluctuations caused an electron beam to cease producing Langmuir waves at shorter distances from the Sun. However, their effect on stopping frequencies was not as significant as varying the rate of magnetic flux tube expansion. Due to the clumping of Langmuir waves in space, caused by the density fluctuations, we were able to observe high level of Langmuir waves at reasonably low frequencies but the overall level of Langmuir waves was reduced.
Varying the properties of the injected electron beam also affects the lowest frequency where Langmuir waves production is significant. Decreasing the density of the injected electron beam or increasing the spectral index of the injected electron beam reduces the distance the electron beam can travel before it stops producing high levels of Langmuir wave turbulence. We then expect that less dense electron beams or beams with high spectral indices will have higher type III stopping frequencies. It is possible that injection of electrons at high altitudes $\gtrsim 0.1~\rm{R}_{\odot}$ would be less sensitive to the spectral index of the beam in respect to the type III stopping frequency due to a reduced role of Coulomb collisions.
How do these finding relate to some of the hypothesised reasons in \citet{Leblanc_etal1995}? We find that all the different effects that govern the number of high energy electrons play some roles in the type III stopping frequency: the expansion of the guiding magnetic flux tubes, the injected beam density and the injected spectral index. We also found that large scale density fluctuations in the background electron density play a role, although a high level of density fluctuations may still cause irregular radio emission caused by the localised clumping of Langmuir waves. The hypothesis that we have not checked is how the other non-linear plasma processes required to convert Langmuir waves into radio waves affect the stopping frequency of type III bursts. What we have also explained is the prevalence for stronger type III bursts to have lower stopping frequencies, a result observed by \citet{Leblanc_etal1995,Leblanc_etal1996,Dulk_etal1996}. The beams with more deca-keV electrons produce in general higher levels of Langmuir waves, and consequently make brighter type IIIs and have lower stopping frequencies. The upcoming missions Solar Orbiter and Solar Probe Plus should help to observationally study the radial plasma properties with in-situ measurements.
Magnetic flux tubes have been observed to expand super-radially (rates faster than $r^2$) in the corona with type III radio emission following the magnetic flux tube expansion \citep[e.g.][]{Klein_etal2008}. Whilst this expansion can be large, it is very difficult to have a large expansion such that $B\propto r^{-3.5}$ and produce type III radio emission. The electron beam decreases in density too fast. To demonstrate this we injected an electron beam with the same characteristics described in Section \ref{sec:beam} but with a spectral index of $5$ in velocity space. Such a low spectral index is on the verge of what is inferred observationally from hard X-rays \citep[see e.g.][]{2005SoPh..232...63K}. Figure \ref{fig:silow} shows how the energy density of Langmuir waves varies as a function of time and frequency. We only observe a high level of Langmuir wave energy at the high frequencies and not at the low frequencies. A flare with such a low spectral index would almost certainly produce type III radio emission below $0.1$~MHz, similar to Figure \ref{fig:obs1}. We conclude that we would not observe type III bursts if the solar magnetic field ever expands at such a super-radial rate.
\begin{figure}\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth,trim=22 20 25 35,clip]{t3_8_5-eps-converted-to}
\caption{Langmuir wave energy density $E_w/E_{init}$ in plasma
frequency - time plane. The coefficient that models the magnetic flux tube expansion is $\beta=3.5$ and the velocity spectral index of injected electrons is $\alpha=5$.}
\label{fig:silow}
\end{figure}
From type III burst simulations \citep{Ratcliffe_etal2014}, it is evident that the spectrum of Langmuir wave energy density does not exactly reflect the spectrum of radio waves that are observed. The requirement for backscattered Langmuir waves to interact with forward propagating Langmuir waves in the production of harmonic emission means that spectral characteristics of Langmuir waves are important, not just the absolute energy density. However, the radial expansion of the magnetic flux tube reduces the Langmuir wave production. Therefore our conclusions on stopping frequency are expected to be mirrored in escaping radio emission, although a detailed study including the generation of radio emission can explore additional effects of wave-wave plasma processes on the type III stopping frequencies.
\begin{acknowledgements}
Hamish Reid acknowledges funding from a SUPA Advanced Fellowship. Eduard Kontar acknowledges funding from an STFC consolidated grant. Support from a Marie Curie International Research Staff Exchange Scheme Radiosun PEOPLE-2011-IRSES-295272 RadioSun project is greatly appreciated. This work benefited from the Royal Society grant RG130642.
\end{acknowledgements}
\bibliographystyle{aa}
|
\section{Introduction}
Chemical graphs are models of molecules in which atoms and chemical bonds are represented by vertices and edges of a graph, respectively. Chemical graph theory is a branch of mathematical chemistry concerning the study of chemical graph. A graph invariant (also known as molecular descriptor or topological index) is a function on a graph that does not depend on a labeling of its vertices. The chemical information derived through topological index has been found useful in chemical documentation, isomer discrimination, structure property correlations, etc \cite{ash}. Hundreds of graph invariants of molecular graphs are studied in chemical graph theory. Many of them are based on the graph distance, see \cite{xu2} and references therein, another large group is based on the vertex degree, see \cite{fur} and references therein. In addition, several graph invariants are based on both the vertex degree and the graph distance, see \cite{xu3} and the references therein. In this paper, we are interested in a distance-degree-based graph invariant which is called the reciprocal degree distance of a graph.
Let $G$ be a simple connected graph with vertex set $V(G)$ and edge set $E(G)$.
$d_G(v)$ denotes the degree of a vertex $v$ in $G$ and $d_G(u,v)$ denotes the distance between two vertices $u$ and $v$ in $G$.
For a connected graph $G$, one of the oldest and well-known distance-based graph invariants is Wiener index, denoted by $W(G)$, which is introduced by Wiener \cite{wie} in 1947 and defined as the sum of distance over all unordered vertex pairs in $G$, i.e., $$W(G)=\sum_{\{u,v\}\subseteq V(G)} d_G(u,v).$$
Another distance-based graph invariant is Harary index, denoted by $H(G)$, which is defined as the sum of reciprocals of distances between all pairs of vertices in $G$, i.e. $$H(G)=\sum_{\{u,v\}\subseteq V(G)} \frac{1}{d_G(u,v)}.$$
In 1994, a degree-weighted version of Wiener index called degree distance or Schultz molecular toplogical index was proposed by Dobrynin and Kochetova \cite{dob} and Gutman \cite{gut} independently, which is defined for a connected graph $G$ as $$DD(G)=\sum_{\{u,v\}\subseteq V(G)}(d_G(u)+d_G(v))d_G(u,v).$$
The interested readers may consult \cite{dob2,gut2,gut3,hua} for Wiener index, \cite{das,diu,feng,he} for Harary index and \cite{buc,dan,ili2,tom1,tom3,tom4,tom5} for degree distance.
Similarly, a degree-weighted version of Harary index called reciprocal degree distance was proposed by Alizadeh et al. \cite{ali} in 2013 and Hua and Zhang \cite{hua2} in 2012 independently, which is defined for a connected graph $G$ as $$RDD(G)=\sum_{\{u,v\}\subseteq V(G)}\frac{d_G(u)+d_G(v)}{d_G(u,v)}.$$
It was shown in \cite{ali} that this index can be used as an efficient measuring tool in the study of complex networks.
In general, for a given graph $G$, $RDD(G)$ is not always easily calculated. So it makes sense to determine the bounds of $RDD(G)$ or to characterize the graphs with extremal reciprocal degree distance among a given class of graphs. In \cite{hua2}, Hua and Zhang established various lower and upper bounds for the reciprocal degree distance among various given class of graphs including tree, unicyclic graph, cactus and given pendent vertices, independence number, chromatic number, vertex connectivity and edge connectivity. Li and Meng \cite{li1} characterized the extremal graphs among $n$ vertex trees with given some graphic parameters such as pendants, matching number, domination number, diameter, vertex bipartition, and determined some sharp upper bounds of trees. Li et al. \cite{li2} determined the maximum RDD-value among all the graphs of diameter $d$ and the connected bipartite graphs with given matching number (resp. vertex connectivity). However, to our best knowledge, the RDD-value of connected
graphs with cut vertices or cut edges has not been considered by other authors so
far. Motivated by the above results, we proceed with the study on the reciprocal degree distance. In this paper, we characterize the unique graph with the maximum RDD-value among all graphs with a given number of cut vertices or edges, and provide an upper bound of the reciprocal degree distance in terms of the number of cut edges.
\section{Preliminaries}
As usual, we begin with some notations and terminology. Let $G$ be a graph, $N_G(v)$ denotes the neighborhood of $v$ in $G$, so $|N_G(v)|=d_G(v)$. A vertex $v$ of $G$ is called pendent if $d_G(v)=1$, and the edge incident with $v$ is called a pendent edge of $G$. A pendent path at $v$ of $G$ is a path in which no vertex other than $v$ is incident with any edge of $G$ outside the path, where the degree of $v$ is at least three. A cut vertex (edge, respectively) of a graph is a vertex (an edge, respectively) whose removal increases the number of components of the graph. A block of a connected graph is defined to be a maximum connected subgraph without cut vertices. A block containing only one cut vertex is called a pendent block, and a block containing only an unique vertex is called trivial. Denote by $P_s=Pv_1v_2...v_s$ a path on vertices $v_1,v_2,...,v_s$ with edges $v_iv_{i+1}$ for $i=1,2,...,s-1$, and denote by $K_n$ a complete graph with order $n$. For simplicity, we denote by $\mathcal{G}_{n,k}$($\overline{\mathcal{G}}_{n,k}$, respectively) the set of connected graphs of order $n$ with $k$ cut vertices(edges, respectively), and denote by $G_{n,k}$ the graph obtained from the complete graph $K_{n-k}$ by adding $n-k$ paths of almost equal lengths to its vertices respectively, denote by $\overline{G}_{n,k}$ the graph obtained from the complete graph $K_{n-k}$ by attaching $k$ pendent vertices to one vertex.
For a subset $V_1\subset V(G)$, let $G-V_1$ be the subgraph of $G$ obtained by deleting the vertices of $V_1$ together with the edges incident with them. If $V_1=\{v\}$, we denote by $G-v$ for simplicity. Similarly, for a subset $E_1\subset E(G)$, let $G-E_1$ be the subgraph of $G$ obtained by deleting the edges of $E_1$. For a subset $E_2\subset E(\overline{G})$, let $G+E_2$ be the graph obtained from $G$ by adding the edges of $E_2$, where $\overline{G}$ is the complement of $G$. If $E_1=\{e\}$ ($E_2=\{e\}$, respectively), we denote by $G-e$ ($G+e$, respectively) for simplicity.
Note that in any disconnected graph $G$, the distance of any two vertices from two distinct components is infinite.
Therefore its reciprocal can be viewed as 0. Thus, we can define validly the reciprocals degree distance of disconnected graph $G$ as follows:
$$RDD(G)=\sum_{i=1}^k RDD(G_i),$$ where $G_1, G_2, \ldots , G_k$ are the components of $G$.
Let $D_G(u)=\sum\limits_{v \in V(G)\backslash \{u\}}\frac{1}{d_G(u,v)}.$ By direct calculation or from \cite{hua2}, we can get $$RDD(G)=\sum_{u \in V(G)}d_G(u)D_G(u).$$
Let $e=(u,v)$ be an edge of $G$. The removal of $e$ does not decrease distances, while it does increase at least one distance; the distance between $u$ and $v$ is 1 in $G$ and at least 2 in $G-e$. At the same time, the removal of $e$ does not increase vertices degree, while it does decrease the degree of $u$ and $v$. Similarly, adding a new edge $f=(s,t)$ to $G$ does not increase distances, while it does decrease at least one distance; the distance between $s$ and $t$ is at least 2 in $G$ and 1 in $G+f$. At the same time, the adding of $f$ does not decrease vertices degree, while it does increase the degree of $s$ and $t$.
By the analysis above, we have the following lemma immediately which presented in \cite{hua2} for a connected graph.
\begin{lemma}
Let $G$ be a graph with $u,v \in V(G)$. If $uv \in E(G)$, then $RDD(G) > RDD(G-uv)$; If $uv \notin E(G)$, then $RDD(G) < RDD(G+uv)$.
\end{lemma}
\section{Maximum reciprocal degree distance with given number of cut vertices}
In this section, we first introduced two edge-grafting transformations to study the mathematical properties of the reciprocal degree distance of $G$. Then using these mathematical properties, we characterize the extremal graphs with the maximum RRD-value among all the graphs of order $n$ with given cut vertices.
\begin{lemma}
Let $G_1,G_2,P_s$ be pairwise vertex-disjoint connected graphs, where $G_1$ contains an edge $uv$ such that $N_{G_1}(u)\backslash\{v\}= N_{G_1}(v)\backslash\{u\}=\{w_1,w_2,\ldots,w_k\}$ $(k\geq 1)$, $G_2$ contains a shortest path $Px_1 \ldots x_t$ from $x_1$ to $x_t$, $P_s=Pz_1z_2 \ldots z_s$, and $t\geq s+2$. Let $G$ be obtained from $G_1, G_2$ and $P_s$ by identifying $u$ with $x_1$ and $v$ with $z_1$, and let $H=G-\{z_1w_1,z_1w_2,\ldots,z_1w_k\}+\{x_2w_1,x_2w_2,\ldots,x_2w_k\}$, where $G$ and $H$ are shown in Fig. $3.1$. Then $$RDD(G)<RDD(H).$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{center}
\vspace{3mm}
\includegraphics[scale=.9]{1.eps}
\vspace{3mm}
{\small Fig. 3.1 \ \ The graphs $G$ and $H$ in Lemma 3.1}
\end{center}
Proof: Let $P$ be the path of $G$ obtained by connecting the path $Px_1 \ldots x_t, Puv$ and $Pz_1 \ldots z_s$, where $u=x_1$ and $v=z_1$. Partition the vertex set of $G$ as $V(G)=(V(G_1)\backslash \{u,v\})\cup (V(G_2)\backslash \{x_1,\ldots,x_t\}\cup V(P)=:S_1\cup S_2 \cup S_3$. Then from $G$ to $H$, the vertices which degrees changed only are $z_1$ and $x_2$: $d_G(z_1)=k+2$, while $d_H(z_1)=2$; and $d_G(x_2)+k=d_H(x_2)$. The vertex pairs which distance changed only are: the distance from any vertex of $S_1$ to any of $S_2$ is not increased; the distance from any vertex of $S_1$ to $z_i(i=1,2,\ldots,s)$ of $S_3$ is increased by $1$, and to $x_i(i=2,3,\ldots,t)$ is decreased by $1$.
$(1)$ Firstly, we consider the vertices of $S_1$. For any $x\in S_1$, from $G$ to $H$, the degree of $x$ is unchanged, the distance between $x$ and any other vertex of $S_1$ is unchanged, the distance between $x$ and any vertex of $S_2$ is not increased, the distance from $x$ to any of $z_i(i=1,2,\ldots,s)$ is increased by $1$, and to any of $x_i(i=2,3,\ldots,t)$ is decreased by $1$, and to the vertex $u$ is unchanged. By the analysis above and letting $d_G(x,u)=m$, we have
$$\begin{array}{lcl}
D_H(x)-D_G(x)
&\geq&(\sum_{i=0}^{t-2}\frac{1}{m+i}-\sum_{i=1}^{t-1}\frac{1}{m+i})+(\sum_{i=1}^{s}\frac{1}{m+i}-\sum_{i=0}^{s-1}\frac{1}{m+i}) \\
& = & \frac{1}{m}-\frac{1}{m+t-1}-\frac{1}{m}+\frac{1}{m+s}\\
& = & \frac{1}{m+s}-\frac{1}{m+t-1} \\
& > & 0. \\
\end{array} $$
So, $\sum\limits_{x\in S_1}d_H(x)D_H(x)> \sum\limits_{x\in S_1} d_G(x)D_G(x).$
$(2)$ Then we consider the vertices of $S_2$. For any $x\in S_2$, from $G$ to $H$, the degree of $x$ is unchanged, the distance between $x$ and any other vertex of $S_2$ is unchanged, the distance between $x$ and any vertex of $S_3$ is unchanged, while the distance between $x$ and any vertex of $S_1$ is not increased. By the analysis above, we have $D_H(x)-D_G(x)\geq 0.$ So, $\sum\limits_{x\in S_2}d_H(x)D_H(x)\geq \sum\limits_{x\in S_2} d_G(x)D_G(x).$
$(3)$ Finally, we consider the vertices of $S_3$.
From $G$ to $H$, the degree of vertex $u$ is unchanged, and the distance from $u$ to any other vertex in $G$ is unchanged. So $d_H(u)D_H(u)=d_G(u)D_G(u).$
From $G$ to $H$, the degrees of vertices $z_2,z_3,\ldots,z_s$ are unchanged, and for any $z_i(i=2,\ldots,s)$, the distance between $z_i$ and any vertex of $S_2\cup S_3$ is unchanged, while the distance between $z_i$ and any vertex of $S_1$ is increased by $1$. Then $D_H(z_i)-D_G(z_i)=\sum\limits_{x\in S_1}\frac{1}{d_G(z_i,x)+1}-\sum\limits_{x\in S_1}\frac{1}{d_G(z_i,x)}$. Hence, $d_G(z_i)D_G(z_i)>d_H(z_i)D_H(z_i)$.
From $G$ to $H$, the degrees of vertices $x_3,x_4,\ldots,x_t$ are unchanged, and for any $x_i(i=3,\ldots,t)$, the distance between $x_i$ and any vertex of $S_2\cup S_3$ is unchanged, while the distance between $x_i$ and any vertex of $S_1$ is decreased by $1$. Then $D_H(x_i)-D_G(x_i)=\sum\limits_{x\in S_1}\frac{1}{d_G(x_i,x)-1}-\sum\limits_{x\in S_1}\frac{1}{d_G(x_i,x)}$. Hence, $d_G(x_i)D_G(x_i)<d_H(x_i)D_H(x_i)$.
Next we compare the change of $z_2$ and $x_3$. For any vertex $y \in S_1$, assuming $d_G(u,y)=a$, we have $d_H(y,z_2)=a+2,d_G(y,z_2)=a+1,d_H(y,x_3)=a+1,d_G(y,x_3)=a+2$. Then $$\frac{1}{d_H(y,z_2)}-\frac{1}{d_G(y,z_2)}=\frac{1}{a+2}-\frac{1}{a+1}=\frac{-1}{(a+1)(a+2)},$$
$$\frac{1}{d_H(y,x_3)}-\frac{1}{d_G(y,x_3)}=\frac{1}{a+1}-\frac{1}{a+2}=\frac{1}{(a+1)(a+2)}.$$
Notice that $d_G(z_2)=d_H(z_2)=2,d_G(x_3)=d_H(x_3)\geq 2$, we get $d_H(z_2)D_H(z_2)+d_H(x_3)D_H(x_3)\geq d_G(z_2)D_G(z_2)+d_G(x_3)D_G(x_3).$
Similarly, we can get $d_H(z_i)D_H(z_i)+d_H(x_{i+1})D_H(x_{i+1})\geq d_G(z_i)D_G(z_i)+d_G(x_{i+1})D_G(x_{i+1})$ for $i=3,\ldots,s$.
Notice that $t\geq s+2$, so $$\sum_{i=2}^{s}d_H(z_i)D_H(z_i)+\sum_{i=3}^{t}d_H(x_i)D_H(x_i)>\sum_{i=2}^{s}d_G(z_i)D_G(z_i)+\sum_{i=3}^{t}d_G(x_i)D_G(x_i).$$
In the last step, we prove $$d_H(z_1)D_H(z_1)+d_H(x_2)D_H(x_2)>d_G(z_1)D_G(z_1)+d_G(x_2)D_G(x_2).$$
Assuming $d_{G_2}(x_2)=l+2$ ($l\geq 0$), then we have
$$\begin{array}{lcl}
&&(d_H(z_1)D_H(z_1)+d_H(x_2)D_H(x_2))-(d_G(z_1)D_G(z_1)+d_G(x_2)D_G(x_2))\\
&=&2(D_H(z_1)-D_G(z_1))+(2+l)(D_H(x_2)-D_G(x_2))+k(D_H(x_2)-D_G(z_1)) \\
&=&2(\sum\limits_{x\in S_1}\frac{1}{d_G(x,z_1)+1}-\sum\limits_{x\in S_1}\frac{1}{d_G(x,z_1)})+(2+l)(\sum\limits_{x\in S_1}\frac{1}{d_G(x,x_2)-1}-\sum\limits_{x\in S_1}\frac{1}{d_G(x,x_2)})+k(D_H(x_2)-D_G(z_1)) \\
\end{array} $$
For any $x\in S_1$, assuming $d_G(x,u)=a$, then $$\frac{1}{d_G(x,z_1)+1}-\frac{1}{d_G(x,z_1)}=\frac{1}{a+1}-\frac{1}{a}=\frac{-1}{a(a+1)},$$
$$\frac{1}{d_G(x,x_2)-1}-\frac{1}{d_G(x,x_2)}=\frac{1}{a}-\frac{1}{a+1}=\frac{1}{a(a+1)}.$$
Since $l\geq 0$, we have $$2(\sum\limits_{x\in S_1}\frac{1}{d_G(x,z_1)+1}-\sum_{x\in S_1}\frac{1}{d_G(x,z_1)})+(2+l)(\sum_{x\in S_1}\frac{1}{d_G(x,x_2)-1}-\sum_{x\in S_1}\frac{1}{d_G(x,x_2)})\geq 0$$.
For any $x\in S_1$, $d_H(x,x_2)=d_G(x,z_1)$;
For any $x\in S_2$, $d_H(x,x_2)\leq d_G(x,z_1)$, so $\frac{1}{d_H(x,x_2)}\geq \frac{1}{d_G(x,z_1)}$;
In addition,
$$\begin{array}{lcl}
\sum\limits_{y\in S_3}\frac{1}{d_H(y,x_2)} &=& 1+\frac{1}{2}+\ldots +\frac{1}{t-2}+1+\frac{1}{2}+\ldots+\frac{1}{s+1}\\
&>&1+\frac{1}{2}+\ldots+\frac{1}{s-1}+1+\frac{1}{2}+\ldots+\frac{1}{t}=\sum\limits_{y\in S_3}\frac{1}{d_G(y,z_1)} \\
\end{array} $$
So, we have $k(D_H(x_2)-D_G(z_1))>0.$
Thus, we proved that $$d_H(z_1)D_H(z_1)+d_H(x_2)D_H(x_2)>d_G(z_1)D_G(z_1)+d_G(x_2)D_G(x_2).$$
In view of $(1)-(3)$, we obtain $RDD(G)<RDD(H)$.
\hfill$\blacksquare$
\begin{rem}
The graphs $G$ and $H$ in Lemma $3.1$ possess the same number of cut vertices. Moreover, If taking $s=1$ in Lemma $3.1$, the edge $uv$ of $G$ will become a pendent edge of $H$.
\end{rem}
If taking $G_2=Px_1\ldots x_t$ in Lemma $3.1$, we will get the following result.
\begin{coro}
Let $G$ be a connected graph. $uv\in E(G)$ and $N_G(u)\backslash \{v\}=N_G(v)\backslash \{u\}\neq \phi$. Let $G_{s,t}$ be obtained from $G$ by attaching a path $P_t$ at $u$ and a path $P_s$ at $v$. If $t\geq s+2\geq 3$, then $RDD(G_{t,s})<RDD(G_{t-1,s+1})$.
\end{coro}
\begin{lemma}
Let $K_puK_q$ be the union of two complete graphs $K_p$ and $K_q$ sharing exactly one common vertex $u$, where $p\geq 3, q\geq 3.$ Let $G$ be obtained from $K_puK_q$ by attaching a path $P_t$ at some vertex $w_1\in V(K_p)\backslash\{u\}$ and a path $P_s$ at some vertex $v_1\in V(K_q)\backslash\{u\}$, and possibly attaching some connected graphs at other vertices of $V(K_puK_q)\backslash\{u,v_1,w_1\}$, where $t\geq s \geq 1$, and let $H$ be obtained from $G$ by deleting the edges of $K_q$ incident to $v_1$ except $v_1u$ and adding all possible edges between each of $V(K_q)\backslash \{v_1\}$ and each of $V(K_p)$, where $G$ and $H$ are shown in Fig. $3.2$. Then $RRD(G)<RRD(H)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{center}
\vspace{3mm}
\includegraphics[scale=.9]{2.eps}
\vspace{3mm}
{\small Fig. 3.2 \ \ The graphs $G$ and $H$ in Lemma 3.4}
\end{center}
{\it Proof:} If $t>s$, by Lemma $2.1$ and Lemma $3.1$, the result follows immediately. In the following, we discuss the case when $s=t$.
Let $S_1=\{v_1,v_2,\ldots,v_s\},S_2=\{w_1,w_2,\ldots,w_t\},S_3=\{u\},S_4=V(k_q)\backslash \{v_1,u\},S_5=V(k_p)\backslash \{w_1,u\}$, and let $S_6$ be the vertices set of the connected graphs which attached at the vertices of $V(K_q)\backslash \{u,v_1\}$, excluding the attachment points, $S_7$ be the vertices set of the connected graphs which attached at the vertices of $V(K_p)\backslash \{u,w_1\}$, excluding the attachment points. Then $V(G)$ can be partitioned as $V(G)=\cup_{i=1}^7S_i$. Observe the transformation from $G$ to $H$, the degree of $v_1$ changes from $q$ to $2$, the degree of $w_1$ changes from $p$ to $p+q-2$, the degree of any vertex in $S_4$ is increased by $p-2$, the degree of any vertex in $S_5$ is increased by $q-2$, while the degrees of any other vertex is unchanged; the distance between any vertex of $S_4\cup S_6$ and any of $S_1$ are increased by $1$, the distance between any vertex of $S_4\cup S_6$ and any of $S_2\cup S_5\cup S_7$ is decreased by $1$, while the distance between any other two vertices is not changed.
(1) Firstly, we consider the vertices $v_2$ and $w_2$.
$$\begin{array}{lcl}
&&d_H(v_2)D_H(v_2)-d_G(v_2)D_G(v_2)+d_H(w_2)D_H(w_2)-d_G(w_2)D_G(w_2)\\
&=&2(\sum_{x\in S_4\cup S_6}\frac{1}{d_H(v_2,x)}-\sum_{x\in S_4\cup S_6}\frac{1}{d_G(v_2,x)})+2(\sum_{x\in S_4\cup S_6}\frac{1}{d_H(w_2,x)}-\sum_{x\in S_4\cup S_6}\frac{1}{d_G(w_2,x)}) \\
&=&2(\sum_{x\in S_4\cup S_6}\frac{1}{d_G(v_2,x)+1}-\sum_{x\in S_4\cup S_6}\frac{1}{d_G(v_2,x)})+2(\sum_{x\in S_4\cup S_6}\frac{1}{d_G(w_2,x)-1}-\sum_{x\in S_4\cup S_6}\frac{1}{d_G(w_2,x)}) \\
\end{array} $$
For any vertex $x\in S_4\cup S_6$, let $d_G(w_2,x)=a$, then $d_G(v_2,x)=a-1$. So,
$$(\frac{1}{d_G(v_2,x)+1}-\frac{1}{d_G(v_2,x)})+(\frac{1}{d_G(w_2,x)-1}-\frac{1}{d_G(w_2,x)})=\frac{1}{a}-\frac{1}{a-1}+\frac{1}{a-1}-\frac{1}{a}=0.$$
Hence, $d_H(v_2)D_H(v_2)+d_H(w_2)D_H(w_2)-d_G(v_2)D_G(v_2)-d_G(w_2)D_G(w_2)=0.$
Similarly, for any $v_i$ and $w_i$,$i=3,\ldots,s$, $d_G(v_i)D_G(v_i)+d_G(w_i)D_G(w_i)=d_H(v_i)D_H(v_i)+d_H(w_i)D_H(w_i).$
(2) For the vertex $u$, $d_G(u)=d_H(u)$, and the distance from $u$ to any other vertex is unchanged, so $d_G(u)D_G(u)=d_H(u)D_H(u).$
(3) For any vertex $x\in S_4$, the degree of $x$ is increased by $p-2$, the distance from $x$ to any vertex of $S_1$ is increased by $1$, the distance from $x$ to any vertex of $S_2 \cup S_5 \cup S_7$ is decreased by $1$. For any $i=1,2,\ldots,s$, let $d_G(x,v_i)=a_i$, then $d_G(x,w_i)=a+1$, so $\frac{1}{d_H(x,v_i)}+\frac{1}{d_H(x,w_i)}-\frac{1}{d_G(x,v_i)}-\frac{1}{d_G(x,w_i)}=\frac{1}{a_i+1}+\frac{1}{a_i}-\frac{1}{a_i}-\frac{1}{a_i+1}=0.$ Hence, $d_G(x)D_G(x)<d_H(x)d_H(x)$.
(4) For any vertex $x\in S_5$, the degree of $x$ is increased by $q-2$, the distance from $x$ to any vertex of $S_4\cup S_6$ is decreased by $1$, and the distance from $x$ to any other vertex is unchanged. Hence, $d_G(x)D_G(x)<d_H(x)D_H(x).$
(5) For any vertex $x\in S_6$, the degree of $x$ is unchanged, the distance from $x$ to any vertex of $S_1$ is increased by $1$, the distance from $x$ to any vertex of $S_2 \cup S_5 \cup S_7$ is decreased by $1$. By similar discussion to the vertex of $S_4$, we can get $d_G(x)D_G(x)<d_H(x)d_H(x)$.
(6) For any vertex $x\in S_7$, the degree of $x$ is unchanged, the distance from $x$ to any vertex of $S_4\cup S_6$ is decreased by $1$, and the distance from $x$ to any other vertex is unchanged. Hence, $d_G(x)D_G(x)<d_H(x)D_H(x).$
(7) In the last step, we concentrate on the vertices $v_1$ and $w_1$. From $G$ to $H$, the degree of $v_1$ is changed from $q$ to $2$, the degree of $w_1$ is changed from $p$ to $p+q-2$, the distance from $v_1$ to any vertex of $S_4\cup S_6$ is increased by $1$, the distance from $v_1$ to any other vertex is unchanged, the distance from $w_1$ to any vertex of $S_4\cup S_6$ is decreased by $1$, the distance from $w_1$ to any other vertex is unchanged. For simplicity, let $A=S_4\cup S_6, B=V(G)-S_4\cup S_6$. Thus, we have
$$\begin{array}{lcl}
&&d_H(v_1)D_H(v_1)-d_G(v_1)D_G(v_1)+d_H(w_1)D_H(w_1)-d_G(w_1)D_G(w_1)\\
&=&2(\sum\limits_{x\in A}\frac{1}{d_H(v_1,x)}+\sum\limits_{x\in B-\{v_1\}}\frac{1}{d_H(v_1,x)})-q(\sum\limits_{x\in A}\frac{1}{d_G(v_1,x)}+\sum\limits_{x\in B-\{v_1\}}\frac{1}{d_G(v_1,x)})\\
&&+(p+q-2)(\sum\limits_{x\in A}\frac{1}{d_H(w_1,x)}+\sum\limits_{x\in B-\{w_1\}}\frac{1}{d_H(w_1,x)})-p(\sum\limits_{x\in A}\frac{1}{d_G(w_1,x)}+\sum\limits_{x\in B-\{w_1\}}\frac{1}{d_G(w_1,x)})\\
&=&2\sum\limits_{x\in A}\frac{1}{d_H(v_1,x)}-q\sum\limits_{x\in A}\frac{1}{d_G(v_1,x)}+(p+q-2)\sum\limits_{x\in A}\frac{1}{d_H(w_1,x)}-p\sum\limits_{x\in A}\frac{1}{d_G(w_1,x)}\\
&&+(2-q)\sum\limits_{x\in B-\{v_1\}}\frac{1}{d_G(v_1,x)}+(q-2)\sum\limits_{x\in B-\{w_1\}}\frac{1}{d_G(w_1,x)}\\
\end{array} $$
For any $x\in A$, let $d_G(v_1,x)=a$, then $d_G(w_1,x)=a+1,d_H(v_1,x)=a+1,d_H(w_1,x)=a$, thus,
$$\begin{array}{lcl}
2\frac{1}{d_H(v_1,x)}-q\frac{1}{d_G(v_1,x)}+(p+q-2)\frac{1}{d_H(w_1,x)}-p\frac{1}{d_G(w_1,x)}&=&2\frac{1}{a+1}-q\frac{1}{a}+(p+q-2)\frac{1}{a}-p\frac{1}{a+1}\\
&=&(2-p)\frac{1}{a+1}+(p-2)\frac{1}{a}\\
&=&(p-2)(\frac{1}{a}-\frac{1}{a+1})\\
&>&0.\\
\end{array} $$
Hence, $$2\sum\limits_{x\in A}\frac{1}{d_H(v_1,x)}-q\sum\limits_{x\in A}\frac{1}{d_G(v_1,x)}+(p+q-2)\sum\limits_{x\in A}\frac{1}{d_H(w_1,x)}-p\sum\limits_{x\in A}\frac{1}{d_G(w_1,x)}>0.$$
In addition, for any vertex pairs $v_i$ and $w_i$, $(i=2,3,\ldots,s)$, $\frac{1}{d_G(w_1,v_i)}+\frac{1}{d_G(w_1,w_i)}=\frac{1}{d_G(v_1,v_i)}+\frac{1}{d_G(v_1,w_i)}$; for the vertex $u$, $d_G(w_1,u)=d_G(v_1,u)$; while for any vertex $x\in S_5\cup S_7$, $d_G(w_1,x)<d_G(v_1,x)$. Thus
$$\begin{array}{lcl}
&&(2-q)\sum\limits_{x\in B-\{v_1\}}\frac{1}{d_G(v_1,x)}+(q-2)\sum\limits_{x\in B-\{w_1\}}\frac{1}{d_G(w_1,x)}\\
&=&(2-q)(\sum\limits_{x\in B-\{v_1,w_1\}}\frac{1}{d_G(v_1,x)}+\frac{1}{d_G(v_1,w_1)})+(q-2)(\sum\limits_{x\in B-\{w_1,v_1\}}\frac{1}{d_G(w_1,x)}+\frac{1}{d_G(w_1,v_1)})\\
&=&(q-2)(\sum\limits_{x\in B-\{w_1,v_1\}}\frac{1}{d_G(w_1,x)}-\sum\limits_{x\in B-\{w_1,v_1\}}\frac{1}{d_G(v_1,x)})\\
&=&(q-2)(\sum\limits_{x\in S_5\cup S_7}\frac{1}{d_G(w_1,x)}-\sum\limits_{x\in B_5 \cup B_7}\frac{1}{d_G(v_1,x)})\\
&>&0.
\end{array} $$
Therefore, $$d_H(v_1)D_H(v_1)-d_G(v_1)D_G(v_1)+d_H(w_1)D_H(w_1)-d_G(w_1)D_G(w_1)>0$$.
Combining $(1)-(7)$, the result follows.
\hfill$\blacksquare$
\begin{rem} The graphs $G$ and $H$ in Lemma $3.4$ possess the same number of cut vertices. Moreover, if taking $s=1$, the edge $uv_1$ of $G$ becomes a pendent edge of $H$.
\end{rem}
\begin{theorem} For any $G\in \mathcal{G}_{n,k}$, where $0\leq k \leq n-2$, $$RDD(G)\leq RDD(G_{n,k}),$$ with equality holds if and only if $G\cong G_{n,k}$.
\end{theorem}
{\it Proof:} Let $G_0$ be a graph with the maximal reciprocal degree distance among all the graphs with $n$ vertices and $k$ cut vertices. If $k=0$, then by Lemma 2.1, $G_0\cong K_n \cong G_{n,0}$. Suppose in the following that $1\leq k \leq n-2$.
Claim 1: $G_0$ is connected.
If $G_0$ is disconnected, then $G_0$ has at least two components. Let $z$ be a cut vertex of $G_0$. Then $z$ is also a cut vertex of some component, say $H_1$, of $G_0$. Let $H_2$ be another component of $G_0$. If there is a cut vertex, say $z'$, in $H_2$, then $G_0+{zz'}$ possesses $k$ cut vertices, and by Lemma 2.1, $RDD(G_0)<RDD(G_0+{zz'})$, a contradiction. If there is no cut vertex in $H_2$, then denote by $G_0'$ the graph obtained from $G_0$ by adding the edges between $z$ and all vertices of $H_2$. Thus $G_0'$ also possesses $k$ cut vertices, and by Lemma 2.1, $RDD(G_0)<RDD(G_0')$, a contradiction again. Hence $G_0$ is connected.
By Lemma 2.1, each block of $G_0$ is complete, and each cut vertex of $G_0$ is contained exactly in two blocks.
If each block of $G_0$ has exactly two vertices, i.e., each block is a single edge, then $G_0$ is a tree with maximum degree two, i.e., $G_0\cong P_n\cong G_{n,n-2}$. Suppose in the following that there is at least one block of $G_0$ with at least three vertices.
Claim 2: If $G_0\neq G_{n,1}$, then each pendent block of $G_0$ is an edge.
If $B_1$ is a pendent block of $G_0$ and $|V(B_1)|>2$, we assume $u$ is a vertex different from the unique cut vertex, say $w$, of $B_1$. Denote by $B_2$ the block adjacent to $B_1$. By deleting the edges between $u$ and $V(B_1)-\{u,w\}$, and adding all the edges between $V(B_1)-\{u,w\}$ and $V(B_2)-w$, we obtain a new graph $G_0'$. Notice that the number of cut vertices of $G_0'$ is also $k$, and by remark $3.2$ (if $|V(B_2)|=2$) and remark $3.5$ (if $|V(B_2)|>2$), we have $RDD(G_0)<RDD(G_0')$, a contradiction.
Choose a pendent path, say $P_s$ at $v$, with minimal length in $G_0$. Obviously, $v$ lies in some block, say $B$, of $G_0$ with at least three vertices. Note that $v$ is not a cut vertex of $G_0$ if $s=1$.
Claim 3: The component attached at any vertex of $B$ is a path(possibly being trivial).
For $x\in V(B)$, let $H^{(x)}$ be the component of $G-E(B)$ containing $x$. Obviously, $H^{(v)}\cong P_s$. Suppose $u$ is an arbitrary vertex of $B$ and $u \neq v$. Obviously, $N_B(v)\backslash \{u\}=N_B(u)\backslash \{v\}$. Let $G^*$ be the component of $G-((E(H^{(u)})\cup E(P_s))$ containing $u$, which surely contains the block $B$.
Suppose that $H^{(u)}$ is not a (possibly trivial) path. Then $H^{(u)}$ contains a block with at least three vertices. By the proof of Claim 2, $H^{(u)}$ must contain a nontrivial pendant path $P_t$ attached at some nontrivial block $B_0$ of $H^{u}$, where $s\geq t$. Therefore $H^{u}$ contains a shortest path $P_r$ from $u$ to the pendent vertex of $P_t$, where $r\geq t+1\geq s+1$. If $s=1$, then by Remark $3.2$, we may get another graph with $n$ vertex and $k$ cut vertices, which has a larger reciprocal degree distance, a contradiction. If $s>1$ and $r\geq s+2$, then by Lemma $3.1$, we also get a contradiction. So in the following we only need to consider the case:$s>1$ and $r=s+1$. In this case, $B_0$ share with $B$ the common vertex $u$, and $H^{(u})$ is obtained from $B_0$ by attaching $P_s$ at each of its vertices except $u$. Applying Lemma $3.4$, we can get another graph of order $n$ with $k$ cut vertices, which has a larger reciprocal degree distance, a contradiction. Therefore $H^{(u)}$ is a pendent path attached at $u$ which contains at least $s$ vertices.
Claim 4: All paths attached at the vertices of $B$ have almost equal lengths.
Obviously, $t\geq s$. If $t \geq s+2$, then by Corollary $3.3$, we may get another graph with $n$ vertices and $k$ cut vertices, which has a larger reciprocal degree distance, a contradiction. So $H^{(u)}\cong P_s$ or $P_{s+1}$.
To sum up, we get $G\cong \mathbf{G}_{n,k}$.
\hfill$\blacksquare$
\section{Maximum reciprocal degree distance with given number of cut edges}
Similar to section 3, we first introduced two edge-grafting transformations to study the mathematical properties of the reciprocal degree distance of $G$. Then using these mathematical properties, we characterize the extremal graphs with the maximum RRD-value among all the graphs of order $n$ with given cut edges. In addition, we also provide an upper bounds on the reciprocal degree distance in terms of the number of cut edges. The following lemma is a special case of Theorem $2.1$ in \cite{li1}.
\begin{lemma}
Let $w_1w_2\in E(G)$ be a cut edge in $G$, and $G-w_1w_2=G_1\cup G_2$ where $G_i$ is nontrivial and $w_i\in V(G_i)$ for $i=1,2$. Assume that $H$ is a graph obtained from $G$ by identifying $w_1$ with $w_2$ (the new vertex is labeled as $w$) and attaching at $w$ a pendent vertex $w_0$. $G$ and $H$ are shown in Fig. $4.1$. Then $RDD(G)<RDD(H)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{center}
\vspace{3mm}
\includegraphics[scale=.9]{3.eps}
\vspace{3mm}
{\small Fig. 4.1 \ \ The graphs $G$ and $H$ in Lemma 4.1}
\end{center}
\begin{lemma}
Let $G_0,G_1,G_2$ be pairwise vertex-disjoint connected graphs and $u,v \in V(G_0)$ such that $N_{G_0}(u)\backslash \{v\}=N_{G_0}(v)\backslash \{u\}$, $w_1\in V(G_1)$, $w_2\in V(G_2)$. Let $H$ be the graph obtained from $G_0,G_1,G_2$ by identifying $u$ with $w_1$ and $v$ with $w_2$, respectively. Let $H_1$ be the graph obtained from $G_0,G_1,G_2$ by identifying three vertices $u,w_1,w_2$, and let $H_2$ be the graph obtained from $G_0,G_1,G_2$ by identifying three vertices $v,w_1,w_2$. $H,H_1$ and $H_2$ are shown in Fig. $4.2$. Then we have $RDD(H_i)> RDD(H)$ for $i=1,2$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{center}
\vspace{3mm}
\includegraphics[scale=.9]{4.eps}
\vspace{3mm}
{\small Fig. 4.2 \ \ The graphs $H,H_1$ and $H_2$ in Lemma 4.2}
\end{center}
{\it Proof:} For simplicity, we denote $G_0-\{u,v\}$ by $G_0^*$, $G_1-w_1$ by $G_1^*$ and $G_2-w_2$ by $G_2^*$. Then $V(H)=V(H_1)=V(H_2)=V(G_0^*)\cup V(G_1^*)\cup V(G_2^*)\cup \{u,v\}$. Obviously, $V(G_0^*),V(G_1^*),V(G_2^*)$ and$\{u,v\}$ are four vertex sets disjoint in pair. Since $N_{G_0}(u)\backslash \{v\}=N_{G_0}(v)\backslash \{u\}$, we have $d_{G_0}(u)=d_{G_0}(v)$ and for any $x\in V(G_0^*)$, $d_{G_0}(u,x)=d_{G_0}(v,x)$. Note that from $H$ to $H_i(i=1,2)$, the vertices which degree changed only are $u$ and $v$. Since in $H, H_1$ or $H_2$, $u$ and $v$ have the same distance. For simplicity, we denote by $d(u,v)$ the distance between $u$ and $v$ in $H, H_1$ or $H_2$. Similarly, $d(x,u)$ ($d(x,v)$, respectively) denotes the distance between $x$ and $u$ ($v$, respectively) for any $x\in V(G_0^*)$, $d(w_1,y)$ denotes the distance between $w_1$ and $y$ for any $y\in V(G_1^*)$, and $d(w_2,z)$ denotes the distance between $w_2$ and $z$ for any $z\in V(G_2^*)$. Therefore,
$$\begin{array}{lcl}
RDD(H_1)-RDD(H)\\
=\sum\limits_{x\in V(G_0^*)}[d(x)\sum\limits_{z\in V(G_2^*)}(\frac{1}{d_{H_1}(x,z)}-\frac{1}{d_{H}(x,z)})]+\sum\limits_{y\in V(G_1^*)}[d(y)\sum\limits_{z\in V(G_2^*)}(\frac{1}{d_{H_1}(y,z)}-\frac{1}{d_{H}(y,z)})]\\
+\sum\limits_{z\in V(G_2^*)}[d(z)(\sum\limits_{x\in V(G_0^*)}(\frac{1}{d_{H_1}(x,z)}-\frac{1}{d_{H}(x,z)})+\sum\limits_{y\in V(G_1^*)}(\frac{1}{d_{H_1}(y,z)}-\frac{1}{d_{H}(y,z)})+\frac{1}{d_{H_1}(z,u)}-\frac{1}{d_{H}(z,u)}+\frac{1}{d_{H_1}(z,v)}-\frac{1}{d_{H}(z,v)})]\\
+d_{H_1}(u)(\sum\limits_{x\in V(G_0^*)}\frac{1}{d(x,u)}+\sum\limits_{y\in V(G_1^*)}\frac{1}{d(w_1,y)}+\sum\limits_{z\in V(G_2^*)}\frac{1}{d(w_2,z)}+\frac{1}{d(u,v)})\\
-d_{H}(u)(\sum\limits_{x\in V(G_0^*)}\frac{1}{d(x,u)}+\sum\limits_{y\in V(G_1^*)}\frac{1}{d(w_1,y)}+\sum\limits_{z\in V(G_2^*)}\frac{1}{d(u,v)+d(w_2,z)}+\frac{1}{d(u,v)})\\
+d_{H_1}(v)(\sum\limits_{x\in V(G_0^*)}\frac{1}{d(x,v)}+\sum\limits_{y\in V(G_1^*)}\frac{1}{d(w_1,y)+d(u,v)}+\sum\limits_{z\in V(G_2^*)}\frac{1}{d(w_2,z)+d(u,v)}+\frac{1}{d(u,v)})\\
-d_{H}(v)(\sum\limits_{x\in V(G_0^*)}\frac{1}{d(x,v)}+\sum\limits_{y\in V(G_1^*)}\frac{1}{d(w_1,y)+d(u,v)}+\sum\limits_{z\in V(G_2^*)}\frac{1}{d(w_2,z)}+\frac{1}{d(u,v)})\\
>(d_{G_0}(u)+d_{G_1}(w_1)-d_{G_0}(v))\sum\limits_{z\in V(G_2^*)}(\frac{1}{d(w_2,z)}-\frac{1}{d(u,v)+d(w_2,z)})
+d_{G_2}(w_2)\sum\limits_{x\in V(G_0^*)}(\frac{1}{d(x,u)}-\frac{1}{d(x,v)})\\
+\sum\limits_{x\in V(G_0^*)}\sum\limits_{z\in V(G_2^*)}(d(x)+d(z))(\frac{1}{d(x,u)+d(w_2,z)}-\frac{1}{d(x,v)+d(w_2,z)})\\
=d_{G_1}(w_1)\sum\limits_{z\in V(G_2^*)}(\frac{1}{d(w_2,z)}-\frac{1}{d(u,v)+d(w_2,z)})\\
>0\\
\end{array} $$
Similarly, we have
$$\begin{array}{lcl}
RDD(H_2)-RDD(H)\\
>(d_{G_0}(v)+d_{G_2}(w_2)-d_{G_0}(u))\sum\limits_{y\in V(G_1^*)}(\frac{1}{d(w_1,y)}-\frac{1}{d(u,v)+d(w_1,y)})
+d_{G_1}(w_1)\sum\limits_{x\in V(G_0^*)}(\frac{1}{d(x,v)}-\frac{1}{d(x,u)})\\
+\sum\limits_{x\in V(G_0^*)}\sum\limits_{y\in V(G_1^*)}(d(x)+d(y))(\frac{1}{d(x,v)+d(w_1,y)}-\frac{1}{d(x,u)+d(w_1,y)})\\
=d_{G_2}(w_2)\sum\limits_{y\in V(G_1^*)}(\frac{1}{d(w_1,y)}-\frac{1}{d(u,v)+d(w_1,y)})\\
>0\\
\end{array} $$
The result follows.
\hfill$\blacksquare$
\begin{theorem}
For any $G\in \overline{\mathcal{G}}_{n,k}$, $$RDD(G)\leq n^3-(\frac{5}{2}k+2)n^2+(2k^2+\frac{11}{2}k+1)n-(\frac{1}{2}k^3+2k^2+\frac{5}{2}k),$$ with equality holds if and only if $G\cong \overline{G}_{n,k}$.
\end{theorem}
{\it Proof:} Let $G_0$ be a graph with the minimum reciprocal degree distance in $\overline{\mathcal{G}}_{n,k}$ and $E_1=\{e_1,e_2,\ldots,e_k\}$ be the set of cut edges of $G_0$. Firstly, by Lemma $2.1$, we can get each component of $G_0-E_1$ is a clique. In addition, by Lemma $4.1$, $e_1,e_2,\ldots,e_k$ must be the pendent edges in $G_0$. Hence, $G_0$ must be the graph obtain from $K_{n-k}$ by attaching $k$ pendent edges to some vertices. Finally, by Lemma $4.2$, all these pendent edges in $G_0$ must be attached to one common vertex. Thus $G_0\cong \overline{G}_{n,k}$.
In the following we only need to calculate $RRD(\overline{G}_{n,k})$.
By the structure of $\overline{G}_{n,k}$, we can get
$$\begin{array}{lcl}
RDD(\overline{G}_{n,k})&=&k(1+\frac{n-2}{2})+(n-1)^2+(n-k-1)[(n-k-1)(n-k-1+\frac{k}{2})]\\
&=&n^3-(\frac{5}{2}k+2)n^2+(2k^2+\frac{11}{2}k+1)n-(\frac{1}{2}k^3+2k^2+\frac{5}{2}k).\\
\end{array} $$
This completes the proof.
\hfill$\blacksquare$
\small
|
\section{Introduction}
Block coordinate descent methods are being thrust into the optimization spotlight because of a dramatic increase in the size of real world problems, and because of the ``Big data'' phenomenon. It is little wonder, when these seemingly simple methods, with low iteration costs and low memory requirements, can solve problems where the dimension is more than one billion, in a matter of hours \cite{Richtarik12a}.
There is an abundance of coordinate descent variants arising in the literature including: \cite{FR:SPCDM,
jaggi2014communication,li2009coordinate,liu2013asynchronous,ma2015adding,necoara2013distributed,
necoara2012efficiency,richtarik2012efficient,
RT:NSync,Saha10,schmidtcoordinate,takac2013mini,
Tao12,TRG:Inexact,Tseng01,Tseng09,Wright12,wrightcoordinate,Wu08}.
The main differences between these methods is the way in which the block of coordinates to update is chosen, and also how the subproblem to determine the update to apply a block of variables is to be solved. The current, state-of-the-art block coordinate descent method is the Parallel (block) Coordinate Descent Method (PCDM) of Richt\'{a}rik and Tak\'a\v{c}~\cite{Richtarik12a}. This method selects the coordinates to update \emph{randomly} and the update is determined by \emph{minimizing an overapproximation of the objective function} at the current point (see Section \ref{S_PCDM} for a detailed description). PCDM can be applied to a problem with a general convex composite objective, it is supported by strong iteration complexity results to guarantee the method's convergence, and it has been tested numerically on a wide range of problems to demonstrate its practical capabilities.
In this work we are interested in the following convex composite/regularized optimization problem
\begin{equation}
\label{D_F}
\min_{x\in \R^N} F(x) = f(x) + \Psi(x),
\end{equation}
where we assume that $f(x)$ is a continuously differentiable convex function, and $\Psi(x)$ is assumed to be a (possibly nonsmooth) block separable convex regularizer.
The Expected Separable Overapproximation (ESO) assumption introduced in \cite{Richtarik12a} enabled the development of a unified theoretical framework that guarantees convergence of a serial \cite{Richtarik12}, parallel \cite{Richtarik12a} and even distributed \cite{fercoq2014fast,marecek2014distributed,richtarik2013distributed} version of PCDM.
To benefit from the ESO abstraction, we derive all the results in this paper
based on the assumption that $f$ admits an ESO with respect to a uniform block sampling $\hat{S}$. This concept will be precisely defined in
Section \ref{sec:ESOInAlg}.
For now it is enough to say that updating a random set of $\tau$ coordinates (selected uniformly at random) is one particular uniform sampling and the ESO enables us to overapproximate the expected value of the function at the next iteration by a separable function, which is easy to minimize in parallel.
\subsection{Brief literature review}
Nesterov \cite{Nesterov12} provided some of the earliest
iteration complexity results for a serial Randomized Coordinate Descent Method (RCDM) for problems of the form \eqref{D_F}, where $\Psi\equiv 0$, or is the indicator function for simple bound constraints. Later, this work was generalized to optimization problems with a composite objective of the form \eqref{D_F}, where the function $\Psi$ is any (possibly nonsmooth) convex (block) separable function \cite{Richtarik12,Richtarik12a}.
One of the main advantages of randomized coordinate descent methods is that each iteration is extremely cheap, and can require as little as a few multiplications in some cases \cite{richtarik2012efficient}. However, a large number of iterations may be required to obtain a sufficiently accurate solution, and for this reason, parallelization of coordinate descent methods is essential.
The SHOTGUN algorithm presented in \cite{Bradley} represents a na\"ive way of parallelizing RCDM, applied to functions of the form \eqref{D_F} where $\Psi \equiv \|\cdot\|_1$. They also present theoretical results to show that parallelization can lead to algorithm speedup. Unfortunately, their results show that only a small number of coordinates should be updated in parallel at each iteration, otherwise there is no guarantee of algorithm speedup.
The first true complexity analysis of Parallel RCDM (PCDM) was provided in \cite{Richtarik12a} after the authors developed the concept of an Expected Separable Overapproximation (ESO) assumption, which was central to their convergence analysis. The ESO gives an upper bound on the expected value of the objective function after a parallel update of PCDM has been performed, and depends on both the objective function, and the particular `sampling' (way that the coordinates are chosen) that was used. Moreover, several distributed PCDMs were considered in \cite{fercoq2014fast,marecek2014distributed,richtarik2013distributed} and their convergence was proved simply by deriving the ESO parameters for particular distributed samplings.
In \cite{Fercoq:accelerated,lin2014accelerated} the accelerated PCDM was presented and its efficient distributed implementation was considered in
\cite{fercoq2014fast}. Recently, there has also been a focus on PCDMs that use an arbitrary sampling of coordinates \cite{alpha1, alpha2,quartz,RT:NSync}.
\subsection{Summary of contributions}
In this section we summarize the main contributions of this paper (not in order of significance).
\begin{enumerate}
\item
\textbf{No need to enforce ``monotonicity''.}
PCDM in \cite{Richtarik12a} was analyzed (for a general convex composite function of the form \eqref{D_F}) under a monotonicity assumption; if, at any iteration of PCDM, an update was computed that would lead to a higher objective value than the objective value at the current point, then that update is rejected. Hence, PCDM presented in \cite{Richtarik12a} included a step to force monotonicity of the function values at each iteration. In this paper we confirm that the monotonicity test is redundant, and can be removed from the algorithm.
\item \textbf{First high-probability results for PCDM without levelset information.}
Currently, the high probability iteration complexity results for coordinate descent type methods require the levelset to be bounded. In this paper we derive the first high-probability result which \emph{does not rely on the size of the levelset}. In particular, the analysis of PCDM in \cite{Richtarik12a} assumes that the levelset $\{x \in \R^N: F(x) \leq F(x_0)\}$ is bounded for the initial point $x_0$, and under this assumption, convergence is guaranteed. However, in this paper we show that PCDM will converge, in expectation, to the optimal solution even if the levelset is unbounded (see Section~\ref{S_iterationcomplexity}).
\item \textbf{Sharper iteration complexity results.} In this work we obtain sharper iteration complexity results for PCDM than that those presented in \cite{Richtarik12a} and Table \ref{Table_Comparison_Complexity} summarizes our findings. A thorough discussion of the results can be found in Section \ref{S_Discussion_complexity}. We briefly describe the variables used in the table (all will be properly defined in later sections.) Variable $c$ is a constant, $k$ is the iteration counter, $\alpha\in [0,1]$ is the expected proportion of coordinates updated at each iteration, $\xi_0 = F(x_0)-F_*$, and $v$ is a (vector) parameter of the method. Also, $\mu_f$ and $\mu_\Psi$ are the (strong) convexity constants of $f$ and $\Psi$ respectively (both with respect to $\|\cdot\|_v$ for some $v$) and $\epsilon$ and $\rho$ are the desired accuracy and confidence level respectively. (C=Convex, SC=Strongly Convex).
\begin{table}[h!]\centering
{\begin{tabular}{| c| c| c| c|}
\hline
$F$ & Richt\'{a}rik and Tak\'{a}\v{c} \cite{Richtarik12a} & This paper & Theorem \\
\hline
& & & \\[-0.5em]
C & $\displaystyle\frac{2c}{\alpha \epsilon}\left( 1+\log\left(\frac{1}{\rho} \right)\right) + 2 - \frac{2c}{\alpha\xi_0}$ &
$\displaystyle\frac{2 c}{\alpha \epsilon}\left(1 + \log\left(\frac{\frac12
\|x_0 - x^*\|^2_v
+ \xi_0}{2c\rho} \right) \right) + 2 - \frac{1}{\alpha}$ & \ref{T_Complexity}(i)\\
& & & \\[-0.5em]
\hline
& & & \\[-0.5em]
SC & $\displaystyle\frac{1 + \mu_\Psi}{\alpha(\mu_f + \mu_\Psi)}\log \left(\frac{\xi_0}{\epsilon \rho} \right)$
& $\displaystyle\frac{1 + \mu_f + 2\mu_\Psi}{2\alpha(\mu_f+\mu_\Psi)}\log\left(\frac{\frac{1+\mu_\Psi}{2}
\|x_0 - x^*\|^2_v
+\xi_0}{\epsilon \rho}\right)$ & \ref{T_Complexity}(ii)\\[1.5em]
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\caption{Comparison of the iteration complexity results for PCDM obtained in \cite{Richtarik12a} and in this paper. The analysis used in this paper provides a sharper iteration complexity result in both the convex and strongly convex cases when $\epsilon$ and/or $\rho$ are small.}
\label{Table_Comparison_Complexity}
\end{table}
\item \textbf{Improved convergence rates for PCDM.} In this work we show that PCDM converges at a faster rate than that given in \cite{Richtarik12a}, in both the convex and strongly convex cases. Table \ref{Table_Comparison_Rates} provides a summary of our results and a thorough discussion can be found in Section \ref{S_comparisonrate}.
\begin{table}[h!]\centering
{\begin{tabular}{| c| c| c| c|}
\hline
$F$ & Richt\'{a}rik and Tak\'{a}\v{c} \cite{Richtarik12a} & This paper & Theorem \\
\hline
& & &\\[-0.5em]
C & $\displaystyle \frac{2c\xi_0}{2c + \alpha k \xi_0}$ & $\displaystyle\frac{1}{1+\alpha k} \left(\frac12 \|x_0-x^*\|_v^2 + \xi_0 \right)$ & \ref{T_convergence_rate}(i)\\
& & &\\[-0.5em]
\hline
& & &\\[-0.5em]
SC & $\displaystyle\left( 1 - \alpha \frac{\mu_f + \mu_\Psi}{1 + \mu_\Psi} \right)^k\xi_0$
& $\displaystyle\left(1 - \frac{2\alpha (\mu_f + \mu_\Psi)}{1+\mu_f + 2\mu_\Psi}\right)^k \left(\frac{1+\mu_\Psi}{2}
\|x_0 - x^*\|^2_v
+ \xi_0 \right)$ & \ref{T_convergence_rate}(ii)\\[1.5em]
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\caption{Comparison of the convergence rates for PCDM obtained in \cite{Richtarik12a} and in this paper. (C=Convex, SC=Strongly Convex). The analysis used in this paper provides a better rate of of convergence in both the convex and strongly convex cases when $\epsilon$ and/or $\rho$ are small.}
\label{Table_Comparison_Rates}
\end{table}
\end{enumerate}
\subsection{Paper outline}
The remainder of this paper is structured as follows. In Section \ref{Section_Preliminaries} we introduce the notation and assumptions that will be used throughout the paper. Section \ref{S_PCDM} describes PCDM of Richt\'arik and Tak\'a\v c \cite{Richtarik12a} in detail. We also present a new convergence rate result for PCDM, which is sharper than that presented in \cite{Richtarik12a}. The proof of the result is given in Section \ref{sec:proof} along with several necessary technical lemmas.
In Section \ref{S_iterationcomplexity} we present several iteration complexity results, which show that PCDM will converge to an $\epsilon$-optimal solution with high probability. In Section \ref{sec:HPR:Case1} we provide the first iteration complexity result for PCDM that does not require the assumption of a bounded levelset. The results shows that PCDM requires $\mathcal{O}(\frac{1}{\rho})$ iterations, so we have devised a `multiple run strategy' that achieves the classical $\mathcal{O}(\log \frac{1}{\rho})$ result. Moreover, in Section \ref{sec:HPR:Case1} we present a high probability iteration complexity result for PCDM, that assumes boundedness of the levelset, which is sharper than the result given in \cite{Richtarik12a}.
In Section \ref{sec:discusion} we give a comparison of the results derived in this work, with the results given in \cite{Richtarik12a}. Then, we present several numerical experiments in Section~\ref{sec:numerical} to highlight the practical capabilities of PCDM under different ESO assumptions. The ESO assumptions are given in Appendix \ref{sec:ESO}, where we also provide a new ESO for doubly uniform samplings (see Theorem \ref{thm:NewESOforDUS}).
\section{Notation and assumptions}
\label{Section_Preliminaries}
In this section we introduce block structure and associated objects such as norms and projections. The parallel (block) coordinate descent method will operate on blocks instead of coordinates.
\subsection{Block structure}
\label{S_Block_structure}
The problem under consideration is assumed to have block structure and this is modelled by decomposing the space $\R^N$ into $n$ subspaces as follows. Let $U \in \R^{N \times N}$ be a column permutation of the $N \times N$ identity matrix and further let $U = [U_1,U_2,\dots,U_n]$ be a decomposition of $U$ into $n$ submatrices, where $U_i$ is $N \times N_i$ and $\sum_{i=1}^n N_i = N$. Note that $U_i^TU_j = I_{N_i}$ when $i = j$ and $U_i^TU_j = \mathbf{0}$ (where $\mathbf{0}$ is the $N_i \times N_j$ matrix of all zeros) when $i \neq j$. Subsequently, any vector $x \in \R^N$ can be written uniquely as
\begin{equation}
\label{D_xdecomp}
x = \sum_{i=1}^n U_ix^{(i)}
\end{equation}
where $x^{(i)} = U_i^Tx \in \R^{N_i}$. For simplicity we will write $x = (x^{(1)},x^{(2)},\dots,x^{(n)})^T$.
In what follows let $\langle \cdot,\cdot \rangle$ denote the standard Euclidean inner product. Then we have
\begin{equation}
\label{D_innerprod}
\langle x,y \rangle = \left\langle \sum_{i=1}^nU_ix\ii,\sum_{j=1}^nU_jy\jj \right\rangle = \sum_{i=1}^n\sum_{j=1}^n\langle U_j^TU_ix\ii,y\jj \rangle \equiv \sum_{i=1}^n\langle x\ii,y\ii \rangle.
\end{equation}
\paragraph{Norms.}
Further we equip $\R^{N_i}$ with a pair of conjugate Euclidean norms:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{D_norm_Bi}
\|h\|_{(i)} \eqdef \langle B_ih,h \rangle^{\frac{1}{2}}, \qquad \|h\|_{(i)}^* = \langle B_i^{-1}h,h \rangle^{\frac{1}{2}}, \qquad h \in \R^{N_i},
\end{eqnarray}
where $B_i \in \R^{N_i \times N_i}$ is a positive definite matrix. For fixed positive scalars $v_1,v_2,\dots,v_n$, let $v = (v_1,\dots,v_n)^T$ and define a pair of conjugate norms in $\R^N$ by
\begin{equation}
\label{D_norm_v}
\|x\|_v^2 \eqdef \sum_{i=1}^n v_i \|x^{(i)}\|^2_{(i)}, \quad (\|y\|_v^*)^2 \eqdef \max_{\|x\|_v \leq 1} \langle y,x \rangle ^2 = \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{1}{v_i} (\|y^{(i)}\|^*_{(i)})^2.
\end{equation}
\paragraph{Projection onto a set of blocks.}
Let $\emptyset \neq S \subseteq \{1,2,\dots,n\}$. Then for $x \in \R^N$ we write
\begin{equation}
\vsubset{x}{S} \eqdef \sum_{i \in S}U_i \xbi,
\end{equation}
and we define $x_{[\emptyset]} \equiv 0$. That is, given $x \in \R^N$, $\vsubset{x}{S}$ is the vector in $\R^N$ whose blocks $i\in S$ are identical to those of $x$, but whose other blocks are zeroed out.
\subsection{Assumptions and strong convexity}
Throughout this paper we make the following assumption regarding the block separability of the function $\Psi$.
\begin{assumption}[Block separability]
\label{SS_separability}
The nonsmooth function $\Psi:\R^N \to \R\cup \{+\infty\}$ is assumed to be block separable, i.e., it can be decomposed as:
\begin{equation}
\label{D_Psi_sep}
\Psi(x) = \sum_{i=1}^n \Psi_i (x\ii),
\end{equation}
where the functions $\Psi_i: \R^{N_i} \to \R\cup \{+\infty\}$ are
proper, closed and convex.
\end{assumption}
In some of the results presented in this work we assume that $F$ is strongly convex and we denote the (strong) convexity parameter of $F$, with respect to the norm $\| \cdot \|_v$ for some $v\in \R^n_{++}$, by $\mu_F >0$. A function $\phi: \R^N \to \R \cup \{+ \infty\}$ is strongly convex with respect to the norm $\| \cdot \|_v$ with convexity parameter $\mu_{\phi} \geq 0$ if for all $x,y \in \dom \phi$,
\begin{equation}
\label{strongly_convex_1}
\phi(y) \geq \phi(x) + \langle \phi^{\prime}(x),y-x \rangle + \frac{\mu_{\phi} }{2}\|y-x\|_v^2,
\end{equation}
where $\phi^{\prime}$ is any subgradient of $\phi$ at $x$. The case with $\mu_{\phi}= 0$ reduces to convexity.
Strong convexity of $F$ may come from $f$ or $\Psi$ or both and we will write $\mu_f$ (resp. $\mu_{\Psi}$) for the strong convexity parameter of $f$ (resp. $\Psi$). Following from \eqref{strongly_convex_1}
\begin{equation}
\label{strongly_convex_4}
\mu_F \geq \mu_f + \mu_\Psi.
\end{equation}
From the first order optimality conditions for \eqref{D_F} we obtain $\langle F^{\prime}(x_*),x-x_* \rangle \geq 0$ for all $x \in$ dom$F$. Combining this with \eqref{strongly_convex_1} used with $y = x$ and $x = x_*$, yields the standard inequality
\begin{equation}
\label{strongly_convex_2}
F(x) - F_* \geq \frac{\mu_F }{2} \|x-x_*\|_{v}^2, \qquad x \in \rm{dom} F.
\end{equation}
\section{Parallel coordinate descent method}
\label{S_PCDM}
In this section we describe the Parallel Coordinate Descent Method (Algorithm \ref{PCDM}) of Richt\'arik and Tak\'a\v c \cite{Richtarik12a}. We now present the algorithm, and a detailed discussion will follow.
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{PCDM: Parallel Coordinate Descent Method \cite{Richtarik12a} }\label{PCDM}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\State choose initial point $x_0 \in\R^N$
\For{$k = 0,1,2,\dots$}
\State randomly choose set of blocks $S_k \subseteq \{1,\dots,n\}$
\label{alg:line:sampling}
\For{$i \in S_k$ ({\bf in parallel})}
\State compute
$\vc{h(x_k)}{i} = \arg \min_{t \in \R^{N_i}} \Big\{\langle \vc{(\nabla f(x_k))}{i},t \rangle + \frac{ v_i}{2} \|t\|_{(i)}^2 + \Psi_i(\vc{x_k}{i}+t)\Big\}
\label{alg:line:stepsize}
\EndFor
\State apply the update: $x_{k+1} \gets x_k + \sum_{i\in S_k} U_i \vc{h(x_k)}{i}$
\EndFor
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
The algorithm can be described as follows. At iteration $k$ of Algorithm \ref{PCDM}, a set of blocks $S_k$ is chosen, corresponding to the (blocks of) coordinates that are to be updated. The set of blocks is selected via a \emph{sampling}, which is described in detail in Section \ref{S_sampling}. Then, in Steps 4--6, the updates $h(x_k)\ii$, for all $i \in S_k$, are computed \emph{in parallel}, via a small/low dimensional minimization subproblem. (In Section \ref{sec:ESOInAlg}, we describe the origin of this subproblem via an ESO.) Finally, in Step 7, the updates $h(x_k)\ii$ are applied to the current point $x_k$, to give the new point $x_{k+1}$. Notice that Algorithm \ref{PCDM} \emph{does not require knowledge of objective function values.}
We now describe the key steps of Algorithm \ref{PCDM} (Steps 3 and 4--6) in more detail.
\subsection{Step \ref{alg:line:sampling}: Sampling}
\label{S_sampling}
At the $k$th iteration of Algorithm \ref{PCDM}, a set of indices $S_k\subseteq \{1,\dots,n\}$ (corresponding to the blocks of $x_k$ to be updated) is selected.
Here we briefly explain several schemes for choosing the set of indices $S_k$; a thorough description can be found in \cite{Richtarik12a}. Formally, $S_k$ is a realisation of a \emph{random set-valued mapping} $\hatS$ with values in $2^{\{1,\dots,n\}}$. Richt\'arik and Tak\'a\v c \cite{Richtarik12a} have coined the term \emph{sampling} in reference to $\hatS$.
In what follows, we will assume that all samplings are \emph{proper}. That is, we assume that $p_i>0$ for all blocks $i$, where $p_i$ is the probability that the $i$th block of $x$ is updated.
We state several sampling schemes now.
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textbf{Uniform:} A sampling $\hatS$ is uniform if all blocks have the same probability of being updated.
\item \textbf{Doubly uniform:} A doubly uniform sampling is one that generates all sets of equal cardinality with equal probability. That is $\Prob(S') = \Prob(S'')$ whenever $|S'|=|S''|$.
\item \textbf{Nonoverlapping uniform:} A nonoverlapping uniform sampling is one that is uniform and assigns positive probabilities only to sets forming a partition of $\{1,\dots,n\}$.
\end{enumerate}
In fact, doubly uniform and nonoverlapping uniform samplings are special cases of uniform samplings, so in this work all results are proved for uniform samplings. Other samplings, which are also special cases of uniform samplings, are presented in \cite{Richtarik12a}, but we omit details of all, except a $\tau$-nice sampling, for brevity.
We say that a sampling $\hatS$ is $\tau$-nice, if for any $S \subseteq \{1,2,\dots,n\}$ we have
\begin{equation}
\Prob(\hatS = S)=\begin{cases}
0, &\mbox{if} \ |S|\neq\tau,\\
\frac{\tau! (n-\tau)!}{n!}
,&\mbox{otherwise}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Step
\ref{alg:line:stepsize}: Computing the step-length} \label{sec:ESOInAlg}
The block update $h(x_k)\ii$ is chosen in such a way that an upper bound on the expected function value at the next iterate is minimized, with respect to the particular sampling $\hatS$ that is used.
The construction of the expected upper bound should be (block) separable to ensure efficient parallelizability.
Before we focus on how to construct the expected upper-bound on $F$ we
will state a definition of ESO.
\begin{definition}[Expected Separable Overapproximation; Definition~5 in \cite{Richtarik12a}]\label{Def_ESO}
Let $v\in \R_{++}^n$
and $\hatS$ be a proper uniform sampling. We say that $f:\R^N \to \R$ admits an ESO with respect to the sampling $\hatS$ with parameter $v$, if, for all $x, h \in \R^N$ the following inequality holds:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ESOdef}
\Exp[f(x+\vsubset{h}{\hatS}) ] \leq f(x) + \frac{\Exp[|\hatS|]}{n} \left(\lng \nabla f(x),h\rng + \frac{1}{2}\|h\|_v^2\right).
\end{equation}
We say that the ESO is \emph{monotonic} if $\forall S \in \hatS$ such that $ \Prob(S=\hatS) > 0$ the following holds:
\begin{equation*}
f(x+\vsubset{h}{S}) \leq f(x).
\end{equation*}
\end{definition}
In Appendix \ref{sec:ESO}, a review of different smoothness assumptions on $f$ and corresponding ESO parameters $v$ for a doubly uniform sampling, is given. In all that follows, we assume that $f$ admits an ESO, and that $v$ is the ESO parameter and $\hatS$ is a proper uniform sampling. Then
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\Exp[F(x+\vsubset{h}{\hatS})]
\overset{\eqref{D_F}}{=}&
\Exp[f(x+\vsubset{h}{\hatS})
]
+
\Exp[\Psi(x+\vsubset{h}{\hatS})
]
\\
\overset{\eqref{eq:ESOdef}
\eqref{eq:L_blockseparable}
}{\leq}&
f(x) + \tfrac{\Exp[|\hatS|]}{n} \left(\lng \nabla f(x),h\rng + \tfrac{1}{2}\|h\|_v^2\right)
+
\left(1-\tfrac{\Exp[|\hatS|]}{n}\right) \Psi(x)
+
\tfrac{\Exp[|\hatS|]}{n} \Psi(x+h),
\label{eq:safvfeavfwafcwa}
\end{align}
where we have used that fact that $\Psi$ is block separable and that $\hatS$ is a proper uniform sampling (see \cite[Theorem~4]{Richtarik12a}).
Now, it is easy to see that minimizing the right hand side of \eqref{eq:safvfeavfwafcwa} in $h$ is the same as minimizing the function $\fH$ in $h$, where $\fH$ is defined to be
\begin{equation}
\label{Def_H}
\fH(x,h) \eqdef f(x) + \langle \nabla f(x),h \rangle + \frac{1}{2} \|h\|_v^2 + \Psi(x+h).
\end{equation}
In view of \eqref{D_xdecomp}, \eqref{D_norm_v}, and \eqref{D_Psi_sep}, we can write
\begin{equation*}
\fH(x,h) \eqdef f(x) + \sum_{i=1}^n\Big\{\langle \gfi,\h \rangle + \frac{v_i}{2} \|\h\|_{(i)}^2 + \Psi_i(\xbi+\h)\Big\}.
\end{equation*}
Further, we define
\begin{equation}\label{E_argminhi}
h(x) \eqdef \arg \min_{h \in \R^N} \fH(x,h),
\end{equation}
which is the update used in Algorithm \ref{PCDM}. Notice that the algorithm \emph{never evaluates function values.}
\subsection{Complexity of PCDM}
We are now ready to present one of our main results, which is a generalization of Theorem~1 in \cite{Lu13}. The result shows that PCDM converges in expectation and provides an sharper convergence rate than that given in \cite{Richtarik12a}. The proof is provided in Section~\ref{sec:proof}. Let us mention that a similar result was given independently\footnote{A preliminary version of this paper was ready in August 2013.} in \cite{necoara2013distributed}, but that result \emph{only holds for the particular ESO described in Theorem~\ref{thm:IonESO}}. However, even for that ESO, our result (Theorem \ref{T_convergence_rate}) is still much better because it depends on $\|x_0-x_*\|_v$ and not on the size of the initial levelset (which could even be unbounded). We state our result now.
\begin{theorem}
\label{T_convergence_rate}
Let $F^*$ be the optimal value of problem \eqref{D_F}, and let $\{x_k\}_{k\geq 0}$ be the sequence of iterates generated by PCDM using a uniform sampling $\hat{S}$. Let $\alpha = \tfrac{\Exp[|\hat{S}|]}{n}$
and suppose that $f$ admits an ESO with respect to the sampling $\hatS$ with parameter $v$. Then for any $k \geq 0$,
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] the iterate $x_k$ satisfies
\begin{equation}
\label{T_complexityC}
\Exp[F(x_{k})-F_*] \leq \frac{1}{1+\alpha k} \left(\frac{1}{2}\|x_0-x_*\|_v^2 + F(x_{0}) - F_* \right),
\end{equation}
\item[(ii)] if $\mu_f + \mu_\Psi >0$, then the iterate $x_k$ satisfies
\begin{equation}
\label{T_complexitySC}
\Exp[F(x_k) - F_*] \leq \left(1-\frac{2\alpha (\mu_f + \mu_\Psi )}{1+\mu_f + 2\mu_\Psi }\right)^k \left(\frac{1 +\mu_\Psi }{2} \|x_0-x_*\|_v^2 + F(x_{0}) - F_* \right).
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
Notice that Theorem \ref{T_convergence_rate} is a \emph{general} result, in the sense that \emph{any ESO can be used for PCDM} and the result holds.
\end{remark}
\section{Proof of the main result}
\label{sec:proof}
In this section we provide a proof of our main convergence rate result, Theorem \ref{T_convergence_rate}. However, first we will present several preliminary results, including the idea of a composite gradient mapping, and other technical lemmas.
\subsection{Block composite gradient mapping}
We now define the concept of a \emph{block composite gradient mapping} \cite{nesterov2007gradient, Lu13}.
By the first-order optimality conditions for problem \eqref{E_argminhi}, there exists a subgradient $s\ii \in \partial \Psi_i(x\ii + \hix)$ (where $\partial \Psi_i(\cdot)$ denotes the subdifferential of $\Psi_i(\cdot)$) such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:sjd7d9d}
\gfi + v_i B_i \hix + s\ii = 0.
\end{equation}
We define the block composite gradient mappings as
\begin{equation}
\label{D_gi}
\gix \eqdef -v_i B_i \hix, \qquad i = 1,\dots,n.
\end{equation}
From \eqref{eq:sjd7d9d} and \eqref{D_gi} we obtain
\begin{equation} \label{eq:shdud9d9}
-\gfi + \gix \in \partial \Psi_i(\xbi + \hix),\qquad i = 1,\dots,n.
\end{equation}
If we let
$\displaystyle
g(x) \eqdef \sum_{i=1}^n U_i \gix$ (compare \eqref{D_xdecomp} and \eqref{D_gi}),
then since $\Psi$ is separable, \eqref{eq:shdud9d9} can be written as
\begin{equation}
\label{E_subgradfg}
-\gfx + g(x) \in \partial \Psi(x + h(x)).
\end{equation}
Moreover
\begin{equation}
\label{E_hgnorm_equiv}
\|h(x)\|_v^2 \overset{\eqref{D_norm_v}}{=} \sum_{i=1}^n v_i \|\hix\|_{(i)}^2 \overset{\eqref{D_gi}}{=} \sum_{i=1}^n \frac{1}{v_i} \|B_i^{-1}\gix\|_{(i)}^2 \overset{\eqref{D_norm_Bi}+\eqref{D_norm_v}}{=} (\|g(x)\|_v^*)^2,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{E_CS}
\lng g(x),h(x)\rng \overset{\eqref{D_innerprod}+\eqref{D_gi}}{=} - \|h(x)\|_v^2 \overset{\eqref{E_hgnorm_equiv}}{=} - (\|g(x)\|_v^*)^2.
\end{equation}
Finally, note that using \eqref{D_norm_Bi}, \eqref{D_norm_v}, \eqref{D_gi} and \eqref{E_hgnorm_equiv}, we get
\begin{equation}\label{eq:sjasujdks}
\| x+ h(x) -y \|_v^2 \; \; = \;\; \|x-y\|_v^2 + 2\langle g(x), y-x \rangle + \left( \|g(x)\|_v^* \right)^2.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Main technical lemmas}
The following result concerns the expected value of a block-separable function when a random subset of coordinates is updated.
\begin{lemma}[Theorem 4 in \cite{Richtarik12a}]
\label{L_blockseparable}
Suppose that $\Psi(x) = \sum_{i=1}^n \Psi_i(x\ii)$. For any $x,h \in \R^N$, if we choose a uniform sampling $\hatS$, then letting $\alpha = \frac{\Exp[|\hatS|]}{n}$, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:L_blockseparable}
\Exp[\Psi(x+\hshx)] = \alpha \Psi(x+h(x)) + (1-\alpha)\Psi(x).
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
The following technical lemma plays a central role in our analysis. The result can be viewed as a generalization of Lemma 3 in \cite{Lu13}, which considers the serial case ($\alpha=1$), to the parallel setting.
\begin{lemma}
\label{L_3}
Let $x \in \dom F$ and $x_+ = x + (h(x))_{[\hat{S}]}$, where $\hat{S}$ is any uniform sampling. Then for any $y \in \dom F$,
\begin{eqnarray}
\Exp\left [F(x_+) + \tfrac{\mu_{\Psi} +1}{2}\|x_+ - y \|_v^2\right] &\leq & F(x) + \tfrac{\mu_{\Psi} +1}{2}\|x-y\|_v^2 \notag \\
&& \; - \alpha \left(F(x)-F(y) + \tfrac{\mu_f +\mu_\Psi }{2}\|x-y\|_v^2\right).\label{eq:sjs8sjs8}
\end{eqnarray}
Moreover,
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)]
\begin{equation}
\label{C_monodecrease}
\Exp\left[F(x_+)\right] \leq F(x) - \frac{\alpha}{2} (\mu_\Psi + 1)\|h(x)\|_v^2 = F(x)- \frac{\alpha}{2 } (\mu_\Psi + 1)(\|g(x)\|_v^*)^2,
\end{equation}
\item[(ii)]
\begin{eqnarray}
\Exp\left [F(x_+) + \tfrac{1}{2}\|x_+ - y \|_v^2\right] &\leq & F(x) + \tfrac{1}{2}\|x-y\|_v^2 - \alpha \left(F(x)-F(y)\right).\label{C_trivial}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We first note that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:iuweiuhd00}
\Exp\left[\|x_+ - y\|_v^2\right] \;\; = \;\; \alpha \|x+h(x)-y\|_v^2 + (1-\alpha)\|x-y\|_v^2.
\end{equation}
This is a special case of the identity $\Exp[\psi(u+h_{[\hat{S}]})] = \alpha \psi(u+h) + (1-\alpha)\psi(u)$ (see Lemma \ref{L_blockseparable}, which holds for block separable functions $\psi$), with $\psi(u) = \|u\|_v^2$, $u=x-y$ and $h=h(x)$.
Further, for any $h$ for which $x+h \in \dom \Psi$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:jdyugsd87ds}
\Exp[F(x + \vsubset{h}{\hatS} )]
\overset{\eqref{eq:L_blockseparable}
}{\leq} (1-\alpha)F(x) + \alpha \fH(x,h).
\end{equation}
This was established in \cite[Section 5]{Richtarik12a}. The claim now follows by combining \eqref{eq:jdyugsd87ds}, used with $h=h(x)$, and the following estimate of $\fH(x,h(x))$:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\fH(x,h(x)) &\overset{\eqref{Def_H}}{=}& f(x) + \langle \nabla f(x),h(x) \rangle + \tfrac{1}{2} \|h(x)\|_v^2 + \Psi(x+h(x))
\\
&\overset{\eqref{strongly_convex_1}+\eqref{E_subgradfg}}{\leq}& f(y) + \lng \nabla f(x), x-y\rng - \tfrac{\mu_f }{2}\|y-x\|_v^2+ \langle \nabla f(x),h(x) \rangle + \tfrac{1}{2} \|h(x)\|_v^2
\\
&\phantom{\leq}& + \;\Psi(y) + \lng -\nabla f(x) + g(x),x+h(x)-y \rng - \tfrac{\mu_\Psi}{2}\|x+h(x)-y\|_v^2\\
&=& F(y) + \lng g(x) ,x-y\rng + \lng g(x),h(x)\rng - \tfrac{\mu_f}{2}\|y-x\|_v^2\\
&\phantom{\leq}& - \tfrac{\mu_\Psi}{2}\|x+h(x)-y\|_v^2 + \;\tfrac{1}{2} \|h(x)\|_v^2\\
&\overset{\eqref{E_CS}}{=}& F(y) + \lng g(x) ,x-y\rng - \tfrac{\mu_f}{2}\|y-x\|_v^2 - \tfrac{\mu_\Psi}{2}\|x+h(x)-y\|_v^2 - \tfrac{1}{2} (\|g(x)\|_v^*)^2\\
&\overset{\eqref{eq:sjasujdks}}{=}&
F(y) + \tfrac{1-\mu_f}{2}\|y-x\|_v^2 - \tfrac{\mu_\Psi+1}{2}\|x+h(x)-y\|_v^2\\
&\overset{\eqref{eq:iuweiuhd00}}{=}&
F(y) + \tfrac{1-\mu_f}{2}\|y-x\|_v^2 - \tfrac{\mu_\Psi+1}{2\alpha}\left(\Exp\left[\|x_+ - y\|_v^2 \right] - (1-\alpha)\|x-y\|_v^2\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
Part (i) follows by letting $x=y$ and using \eqref{eq:iuweiuhd00} and \eqref{E_CS}. Part (ii) follows as a special case by choosing $\mu_f=\mu_\Psi=0$.
\end{proof}
Property (i) means that function values $F(x_k)$ of PCDM are monotonically decreasing in expectation when conditioned on the previous iteration.
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{T_convergence_rate}}
\begin{proof}
Let $x_*$ be an arbitrary optimal solution of \eqref{D_F}. Let $r_k^2 = \|x_k - x_*\|_v^2$, $g_k = g(x_k)$, $h_k = h(x_k)$ and $F_k = F(x_k)$. Notice that $x_{k+1} = x_{k} + (h_k)_{[S_{k}]}$. By subtracting $F_*$ from both sides of \eqref{C_trivial}, we get
\begin{equation*}
\Exp\Big[\tfrac{1}{2}r_{k+1}^2 + F_{k+1} - F_*\;|\;x_k\Big] \leq \left(\tfrac{1}{2}r_k^2 + F_k -F_*\right) -\alpha(F_k - F_*),
\end{equation*}
and taking expectations with respect to the whole history of realizations of $S_l, l\leq k$ gives us
\begin{equation*}
\Exp\Big[\tfrac{1}{2}r_{k+1}^2 + F_{k+1} - F_*\Big] \leq \Exp\Big[\tfrac{1}{2}r_k^2 + F_k -F_*\Big] -\alpha \Exp\big[F_k - F_*\Big].
\end{equation*}
Applying this inequality recursively and using the fact that $\Exp[F_j]$ is monotonically decreasing for $j=0,1,\dots,k+1$ \eqref{C_monodecrease}, we obtain
\begin{align*}
\Exp[F_{k+1}-F_*] &\leq \Exp\Big[\tfrac{1}{2}r_{k+1}^2 + F_{k+1} - F_* \Big] \leq \tfrac{1}{2}r_{0}^2 + F_0 - F_* - \alpha \sum_{j=0}^k (\Exp[F_j]-F_*)\\
&\leq \tfrac{1}{2}r_{0}^2 + F_0 - F_* - \alpha (k+1) (\Exp[F_{k+1}]-F_*),
\end{align*}
which leads to \eqref{T_complexityC}.
We now prove \eqref{T_complexitySC} under the strong convexity assumption $\mu_f+\mu_\Psi >0$. From \eqref{eq:sjs8sjs8} we get
\begin{eqnarray}
\Exp\Big[\tfrac{1 + \mu_\Psi}{2}r_{k+1}^2 + F_{k+1} - F_* \;|\; x_k\Big] &\leq& \left(\tfrac{1 + \mu_\Psi}{2}r_k^2 + F_k - F_* \right) - \alpha \left(\tfrac{\mu_f + \mu_\Psi}{2}r_k^2 + F_k - F_* \right).
\label{E_1}
\end{eqnarray}
Notice that for any $0 \leq \gamma \leq 1$ we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\tfrac{\mu_f + \mu_\Psi}{2}r_k^2 + F_k - F_*
&=&
\gamma (\tfrac{\mu_f + \mu_\Psi}{2}r_k^2 + F_k - F_*)
+(1-\gamma) (\tfrac{\mu_f + \mu_\Psi}{2}r_k^2 + F_k - F_*)
\\
&\overset{\eqref{strongly_convex_4}+\eqref{strongly_convex_2}}{\geq}& \gamma\left(\tfrac{\mu_f + \mu_\Psi}{2}r_k^2 + F_k - F_* \right) + (1-\gamma)(\mu_f + \mu_\Psi)r_k^2.
\end{eqnarray*}
Choosing \begin{equation}\label{D_gamma}
\gamma^* \eqdef \frac{2(\mu_f +\mu_\Psi )}{1 + \mu_f + 2\mu_\Psi } \in [0,1]
\end{equation}
we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
\tfrac{\mu_f + \mu_\Psi}{2}r_k^2 + F_k - F_*
&\overset{\eqref{D_gamma}}{\geq}& \gamma^* \left(\tfrac{1 + \mu_\Psi}{2}r_k^2 + F_k - F_*\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
Combining the inequality above with \eqref{E_1} gives
\begin{equation}
\label{E_rkxik_recursion}
\Exp\Big[\tfrac{1 + \mu_\Psi}{2}r_{k+1}^2 + F_{k+1} - F_* \;|\; x_k\Big] \leq(1-\gamma^*\alpha) \left(\tfrac{1 + \mu_\Psi}{2}r_k^2 + F_k -F_*\right).
\end{equation}
It now only remains to take expectation in $x_k$ on both sides of \eqref{E_rkxik_recursion}, and \eqref{T_complexitySC} follows.
\end{proof}
\section{High Probability Convergence Result}
\label{S_iterationcomplexity}
Theorem~\ref{T_convergence_rate}
showed that the Algorithm \ref{PCDM} converges to the optimal solution in expectation.
In this section we derive
iteration complexity bounds for PCDM
for obtaining an $\epsilon$-optimal solution with high probability.
Let us mentioned that all
existing \cite{Nesterov12,Richtarik12,
Richtarik12a,Lu13}
high-probability results for serial or parallel CDM require a bounded levelset, i.e. they assume that
\begin{equation}
\label{eg:def:levelset}
\mathcal{L}(x_0)
=\{ x\in \R^N: F(x) \leq F(x_0) \}
\end{equation}
is bounded.
In Section \ref{sec:HPR:Case1}
we present the first high probability result in the case when the levelset can be unbounded (Corollary \ref{thm:FHPR} and Corollary \ref{thm:RR}).
Then in Section \ref{sec:HPR:Case2}
we derive a sharper high-probability result for PCDM of \cite{Richtarik12a} if a bounded levelset is assumed (i.e.
$\mathcal{L}(x_0)$ is bounded).
\subsection{Case 1: Possibly unbounded levelset}
\label{sec:HPR:Case1}
We begin by presenting Lemma \ref{lemma:1overRho}, which will allow us to state \emph{the first high-probability result} (Corollary \ref{thm:FHPR}) for a PCDM applied to a convex function that \emph{does not require} the assumption of a \emph{bounded} levelset.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:1overRho}
Let $x_0$ be fixed and $\{x_k\}_{k=0}^\infty$ be a sequence of random vectors in $\R^N$ such that the conditional distribution of
$x_{k+1}$ on $x_k$ is the same as conditional distribution of $x_{k+1}$ on the whole history $\{x_i\}_{i=0}^\infty$ (hence we have Markov sequence).
Let us define $r_k = \phi_r(x_k)$ and $\xi_k = \phi_\xi(x_k)$
where $\phi_r, \phi_\xi: \R^N \to \R$
are non-negative functions.
Further, let us assume that following two inequalities holds for
any $k$
\begin{align}\label{eq:asfoifojwavfwaefsadfa}
\Exp\left[ \tfrac12r_{k+1} + \xi_{k+1} | x_k \right] &\leq \tfrac12r_k + (1-\zeta) \xi_k,
\\
\Exp[\xi_{k+1}]&\leq \xi_k \label{eq:asjdoiwjfwefa}
\end{align}
with some known $\zeta\in(0,1)$.
Then if
\begin{equation}\label{eq:safvjapowjvgowvgfewa}
K \geq \frac1\zeta \left( \frac{\tfrac12r_0 +\xi_0}{\rho \epsilon }-1\right)
\end{equation}
then
$$
\Prob( \xi_K < \epsilon) \geq 1-\rho.
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Using \eqref{eq:asfoifojwavfwaefsadfa}
we have
$$
\Exp[\xi_k] \leq \Exp\left[\tfrac12r_k +\xi_k\right]
\leq \tfrac12r_0 +\xi_0 - \zeta \sum_{j=0}^{k-1} \Exp[\xi_j]
\overset{\eqref{eq:asjdoiwjfwefa}}{\leq}
\tfrac12r_0 +\xi_0 - k\zeta \Exp[\xi_k].
$$
Hence
\begin{equation}\label{eq:asjvvvvewvfw}
\Exp[\xi_k] \leq \frac{\tfrac12r_0 +\xi_0}{1 + k\zeta}.
\end{equation}
Now, from the Markov inequality we have
\begin{align*}
\Prob( \xi_K \geq \epsilon ) &\leq \frac{\Exp[\xi_K]}{\epsilon}
\overset{
\eqref{eq:asjvvvvewvfw}}{\leq}
\frac{1}{\epsilon} \frac{\tfrac12r_0 +\xi_0}{1
+ K\zeta}
\overset{\eqref{eq:safvjapowjvgowvgfewa}}{\leq} \rho. \qedhere
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
Naturally, the result $\mathcal{O}(\frac{1}{\epsilon \rho})$ is very pessimistic
and hence one may be concerned about tightness of the lemma.
The following example, indeed, shows that Lemma \ref{lemma:1overRho} is tight, i.e. the bound on $K$ cannot be improved much. (We construct an example that, under the assumptions \eqref{eq:asfoifojwavfwaefsadfa} and \eqref{eq:asjdoiwjfwefa} (i.e., using the analysis of \cite{Lu13}), requires $\mathcal{O}(\frac1{\epsilon\rho})$ iterations.)
\begin{example}[Tightness of Lemma \ref{lemma:1overRho}]\label{Ex_TightUnbounded}
Let us fix some small value of $\rho \in (0,1)$
and assume that $(r_1,\xi_1)$ have following distribution:
\begin{equation*}
(r_1,\xi_1)
=
\begin{cases}
(0, 0),&\mbox{with probability}\ 1-\rho\\
(2\vartheta, \epsilon),&\mbox{otherwise},
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
where $\vartheta$ is chosen in such a way that \eqref{eq:asfoifojwavfwaefsadfa}
is satisfied. Then, we can chose it as follows
\begin{equation*}
\rho (\vartheta +\epsilon ) = \frac12 r_0+(1-\zeta) \xi_0
\quad
\Rightarrow
\quad
\vartheta = \frac{\frac12 r_0+(1-\zeta) \xi_0}{\rho} - \epsilon.
\end{equation*}
Now we define, for $k=1,2,3, \dots$
\begin{equation*}
(r_{k+1},\xi_{k+1})
=
\begin{cases}
(r_k - 2 \zeta \epsilon , \epsilon ),&\mbox{if}\ r_k \geq 2 \zeta \epsilon\\
(0, 0),&\mbox{otherwise}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
Now it is easy to verify that for
$$
K \eqdef \left\lfloor\frac{ \vartheta}{\zeta \epsilon}
\right\rfloor
=\frac1{\zeta} \left\lfloor \frac{\tfrac12 r_0+(1-\zeta) \xi_0}{\rho \epsilon }
-1 \right\rfloor
$$
we have that $\Prob( \xi_{K} \geq \epsilon) \geq \rho$.
\end{example}
\begin{corollary}[High probability result without bounded levelset]
\label{thm:FHPR}
If we use Lemma \ref{lemma:1overRho} with $\tfrac12r_k =\phi_r(x_k) = \frac12 \|x_k-x_*\|^2_v$, $\xi_k=\phi_\xi(x_k)=F(x_k)-F_*$ and $\zeta=\alpha=\frac{\Exp|\hatS|}{n}$ then
we obtain that
$$\forall K \geq \frac{n}{\Exp|\hatS|} \left( \frac{\frac12 \|x_0-x_*\|_v^2 +F(x_0)-F_*}{\rho \epsilon }-1\right)$$ we have
$\Prob(F(x_K)-F_* <\epsilon) \geq 1-\rho$.
\end{corollary}
The negative aspect of Corollary \ref{thm:FHPR} is the fact that one needs
$\mathcal{O}(\frac1{\rho})$ iterations, whereas classical results under the bounded levelset assumption require only $\mathcal{O}(\log\frac1\rho)$ iterations.
\paragraph{Multiple run strategy.}
Now we present a restarting strategy
\cite{Richtarik12} trick which will give us high probability result
$\mathcal{O}(\log\frac1\rho)$.
\begin{lemma}
Let
$\{x_k\}_{k=0}^\infty$,
$\{r_k\}_{k=0}^\infty$ and $\{\xi_k\}_{k=0}^\infty$
be the same as in Lemma
\ref{lemma:1overRho}.
Assume that we
observe $r = \lceil \log \frac 1{\rho}
\rceil$ different random and independent realisations
of this sequence always starting from $x_0$, i.e. for any $k$ we have
observed $x_k^1, x_k^2, \dots, x_k^r$.
Then if
$$
K \geq
\frac1\zeta \left( \frac{\frac12 r_0 +\xi_0}{ \epsilon (1/e) }-1\right)
$$
then
$$
\Prob\left(
\min_{l \in \{1,2,\dots, r\}}
\xi_K^l < \epsilon\right)
\geq 1-\rho.
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Because the realisation are independent
then for
any $l \in \{1,2,\dots,r\}$
we have
from Lemma~\ref{lemma:1overRho}
that
$\Prob( \xi_K^l \geq \epsilon) \leq \frac 1e$.
Hence
\begin{align*}
\Prob\left(
\min_{l \in \{1,2,\dots, r\}}
\xi_K^l \geq \epsilon\right)
&=
\Prob\left(
\xi_K^1 \geq \epsilon
,
\xi_K^2 \geq \epsilon,
\dots,
\xi_K^r \geq \epsilon
\right)
=
\prod_{l \in \{1,2,\dots, r\}}
\Prob\left(
\xi_K^l \geq \epsilon\right)
\leq
\left(\frac1e\right)^r
\leq \rho. \qedhere
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}
\label{thm:RR}
If we run PCDM $r=\lceil \log \frac 1{\rho}
\rceil$ many times for $K\geq \frac{n}{\Exp[|\hatS|]} \left( \frac{\frac12\|x_0-x_*\|_v^2 +F(x_0)-F_*}{ \epsilon (1/e) }-1\right)$
each, then
the best solution we get, indexed $l\in \{1,2,\dots,r\}$, satisfies
$\Prob( F(x_K^l)-F_* < \epsilon)\geq 1-\rho$.
Hence, in total we need
$\left\lceil
\frac{n}{\Exp[|\hatS|]} \left( \frac{\frac12\|x_0-x_*\|_v^2 +F(x_0)-F_*}{ \epsilon (1/e) }-1\right)
\right\rceil
\lceil \log \frac1\rho \rceil
\sim \mathcal{O}\left(\log \frac1\rho\right)
$
iterations of PCDM.
\end{corollary}
\subsection{Case 2: Bounded levelset}
\label{sec:HPR:Case2}
The next result, Theorem \ref{T_Complexity}, obtains the rate $\mathcal{O}(\log\frac1\rho)$, under the assumption that the levelset is bounded.
However, some results will hold only for a modified version of Algorithm \ref{PCDM}. In particular, we now present Algorithm \ref{PCDM-Monotinic}.
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{PCDM-M: Parallel Coordinate Descent Method \cite{Richtarik12a} }\label{PCDM-Monotinic}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\State choose initial point $x_0 \in\R^N$
\For{$k = 0,1,2,\dots$}
\State randomly choose set of blocks $S_k \subseteq \{1,\dots,n\}$
\label{alg:line:sampling}
\For{$i \in S_k$ ({\bf in parallel})}
\State compute
$\vc{h(x_k)}{i} = \arg \min_{t \in \R^{N_i}} \Big\{\langle \vc{(\nabla f(x_k))}{i},t \rangle + \frac{ v_i}{2} \|t\|_{(i)}^2 + \Psi_i(\vc{x_k}{i}+t)\Big\}
\label{alg:line:stepsize}
\EndFor
\If{$F(x_k + \sum_{i\in S_k} U_i \vc{h(x_k)}{i} ) \leq F(x_0)$}
\State apply the update: $x_{k+1} \gets x_k + \sum_{i\in S_k} U_i \vc{h(x_k)}{i}$
\Else
\State set $x_{k+1} \gets x_k$
\EndIf
\EndFor
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
Notice that the first 6 steps of Algorithm~\ref{PCDM-Monotinic} are exactly the same as those of Algorithm~\ref{PCDM}. However, Algorithm \ref{PCDM-Monotinic} forces the iterates to stay in $\mathcal{L}(x_0)$ (steps 7--11).
\paragraph{Distance to the optimal solution set.}
In some of the results derived in this Section we need the distance to the optimal solution set, inside the levelset, to be finite, i.e.
\begin{equation}
\label{D_barR}
\mathcal{R}_{v,0}\eqdef \max_{x\in\mathcal{L}(x_0)} \Big\{\max_{x_* \in X^*}\|x-x_*\|_v\Big\} < \infty.
\end{equation}
Note that for any $x_* \in X^*$ (where $X^*$ is a set of optimal solutions) it
trivially holds that $\|x_0 - x_*\|_v \leq \mathcal{R}_{v,0}$. Moreover, for some problems the levelset can be unbounded, in which case $\mathcal{R}_{v,0}$ is infinite, whereas if $X^* \neq \emptyset$ then $\|x_0 - x_*\|$ is \emph{always finite}.
\begin{theorem}
\label{T_Complexity}
Let $\{x_k\}_{k \geq 0}$ be a sequence of iterates generated by
\begin{itemize}
\item PCDM (Algorithm \ref{PCDM}), if $F$ is strongly convex with $\mu_f(w) + \mu_\Psi(w) >0$ or $F$ is convex and a monotonic ESO is used,
\item PCDM-M (Algorithm \ref{PCDM-Monotinic}), if $F$ is convex and a non-monotonic ESO is used.
\end{itemize}
Let $0 < \epsilon < F(x_0) - F_*$ and $\rho \in (0,1)$ be chosen arbitrarily. Define $\alpha = \frac{\Exp[|\hatS|]}{n}$, and let
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{D_c}
c &\eqdef& \max\{ \mathcal{R}_{v,0}^2,F(x_0)-F_*\}.
\end{eqnarray}
Then
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] if $F$ is convex and we choose
\begin{equation}
\label{D_Kconvex}
K \geq \frac{2 c}{\alpha \epsilon}\left(1 + \log\left(\frac{\frac{1}{2} \|x_0-x_*\|_v^2 + F(x_0) - F_*}{2c\rho} \right) \right) + 2 - \frac{1}{\alpha},
\end{equation}
\item[(ii)] or if $F$ is strongly convex with $\mu_f + \mu_\Psi >0$ and we choose
\begin{equation}
\label{D_Kstronglyconvex}
K \geq \frac{1 + \mu_f + 2\mu_\Psi }{2\alpha(\mu_f +\mu_\Psi )}\log\left(\frac{\frac{1+\mu_\Psi }{2}\|x_0-x_*\|_v^2+F(x_0)-F_*}{\epsilon \rho}\right)
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
then
\begin{equation}
\label{E_highprob}
\mathbf{P}(F(x_K) - F_* < \epsilon) \geq 1-\rho.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The proof proceeds as in \cite[Theorem~1]{Richtarik12}. For convenience, let $\xi_k\eqdef F(x_k)-F_*$ and define
\begin{equation*}
\xi_k^\epsilon =
\begin{cases}
\xi_k, & \text{if } \xi_k \geq \epsilon,\\
0, & \text{otherwise.}
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
Notice that $\xi_k^\epsilon < \epsilon \Leftrightarrow \xi_k < \epsilon, k \geq 0$. Using the Markov inequality,
\begin{equation}
\label{E_Markov}
\Prob(F(x_k) - F_* \geq \epsilon) = \Prob(\xi_k \geq \epsilon) = \Prob(\xi_k^\epsilon \geq \epsilon) \leq \tfrac{1}{\epsilon}\Exp[\xi_{k}^\epsilon],
\end{equation}
so it suffices to find $K$ such that
\begin{equation}
\label{D_highprob}
\Exp[\xi_{K}^\epsilon] \leq \epsilon \rho.
\end{equation}
Using an ESO and Lemma 17 in \cite{Richtarik12a}
will give us
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:asdfjoiwajfcaw}
\Exp[\xi_{k+1} | x_k]
\leq \left(1-
\frac{\alpha \xi_k}{2c} \right) \xi_k.
\end{equation}
It is easy to verify that
\eqref{eq:asdfjoiwajfcaw}
and the definition of $\xi_k^\epsilon$
lead to (see the proof of \cite[Theorem~1]{Richtarik12})
\begin{equation*}
\Exp[\xi_{k+1}^\epsilon|x_k] \leq \left(1 - \frac{\alpha \epsilon }{2 c} \right)\xi_{k}^\epsilon, \qquad \forall k \geq 0.
\end{equation*}
Taking expectation with respect to $x_{k}$ on both sides of the above we get
\begin{equation}
\label{E_exp}
\Exp[\xi_{k+1}^\epsilon] \leq \left(1 - \frac{\alpha \epsilon }{2 c} \right)\Exp[\xi_{k}^\epsilon], \qquad \forall k \geq 0.
\end{equation}
In addition, using \eqref{T_complexityC} and the relation $\xi_{k}^\epsilon\leq \xi_{k}$, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{E_xike}
\Exp[\xi_{k}^\epsilon] \leq\frac{1}{1+\alpha k} \left(\frac{1}{2}\|x_0-x_*\|_v^2 + \xi_0 \right), \qquad \forall k \geq 0.
\end{equation}
Now for any $t>0$, let
\begin{equation}
K_1 = \left\lceil \frac{1}{\alpha}\left(\frac{1}{ t \epsilon} \left( \frac{1}{2} \|x_0-x_*\|_v^2 + \xi_k \right) -1\right) \right\rceil, \qquad K_2 = \left\lceil \frac{2 c}{\alpha\epsilon}\log\left(\frac{t}{\rho}\right)\right\rceil.
\end{equation}
It follows from \eqref{E_xike} that $\Exp[\xi_{K_1}^\epsilon] \leq t \epsilon$, which together with \eqref{E_exp} implies that
\begin{equation}
\Exp[\xi_{K_1+K_2}^\epsilon|x_{K_1}] \leq \left(1 - \frac{\alpha \epsilon}{2 c}\right)^{K_2} \Exp[\xi_{K_1}^\epsilon ] \leq \left(1 - \frac{\alpha \epsilon}{2 c}\right)^{K_2}t\epsilon \leq \rho\epsilon.
\end{equation}
Notice that, by \eqref{E_exp}, the sequence $\Exp[\xi_{k}^\epsilon]$ is decreasing. Hence, we have
\begin{equation}
\Exp[\xi_{k}^\epsilon ] \leq \rho \epsilon, \qquad \forall k \geq K(t),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
K(t) \eqdef \frac{1}{\alpha}\left(\frac{1}{t \epsilon}\left(\frac{1}{2}\|x_0-x_*\|_v^2 + F(x_k) - F_* \right) -1\right) + \frac{2 c}{\alpha\epsilon}\log\left(\frac{t}{\rho}\right) + 2.
\end{equation}
It is easy to verify that
\begin{equation}
t_* (= \arg \min_{t>0} K(t) ) \eqdef \frac{1}{2c} \left(\frac{1}{2}\|x_0-x_*\|_v^2 + F(x_{0}) - F_* \right),
\end{equation}
Because $K \geq K(t_*)$, we see that \eqref{D_highprob} holds and the proof of (i) is complete.
Now we prove (ii). For convenience, set $\mu_\Psi \equiv \mu_\Psi(w)$. Then from \eqref{T_complexitySC}, we have
\begin{equation}
\Exp[\xi_{k+1}|x_k] \leq \left(1 - \alpha\gamma \right) \left(\frac{1+\mu_\Psi}{2}\|x_0-x_*\|_v^2 + \xi_k \right),
\end{equation}
where $0 <\gamma \leq 1$ is defined in \eqref{D_gamma}. Taking expectation in $x_k$ (and using recursion) gives $\Exp[\xi_{k+1}] \leq \left(1 - \alpha\gamma \right)^k \left(\frac{1+\mu_\Psi}{2}\|x_0-x_*\|_v^2 + \xi_0 \right)$. Finally, using the Markov inequality \eqref{E_Markov}, and $K$ given in \eqref{D_Kstronglyconvex}, we have
\begin{equation}
\Prob(\xi_K \geq \epsilon) \leq \frac{1}{\epsilon}\Exp[\xi_K]\leq \frac{1}{\epsilon}(1 - \alpha\gamma)^K \left(\frac{1+\mu_\Psi}{2}\|x_0-x_*\|_v^2 + \xi_0 \right)\leq \rho,
\end{equation}
and the result follows.
\end{proof}
In this Section we have presented three new convergence results for PCDM. The first result shows that, using the analysis in \cite{Lu13}, PCDM obtains a $O(\frac1\rho)$ rate when the levelset is unbounded for a single run strategy. The second result shows that PCDM obtains a $O(\log \frac1\rho)$ rate for a restarting strategy.
On the other hand, if the levelset is bounded, we have shown that PCDM achieves a rate of $O(\log \frac1\rho)$. It is still an open problem to determine whether PCDM can achieve a rate of $O(\log \frac1\rho)$ for a single run strategy when the levelset is unbounded.
\section{Discussion}
\label{sec:discusion}
\subsection{Comparison of the convergence rate results}
\label{S_comparisonrate}
We have the following remarks on comparing the results in Theorem \ref{T_convergence_rate} with those in \cite{Richtarik12a}.
\subsubsection{Comparison in the convex case}
For problem \eqref{D_F}, an expected-value type of convergence rate is not presented explicitly in \cite{Richtarik12}, although it can be derived from the following relation (that is stated in \cite{Richtarik12a} and proved in \cite[Theorem~1]{Richtarik12}):
\begin{equation}\label{exp1}
\E[F(x_{k+1})-F^*|x_k] \leq (F(x_k)-F^*) - \alpha\frac{(F(x_k)-F^*)^2}{2c}, \qquad \forall k \geq 0,
\end{equation}
where $c$ is defined in \eqref{D_c}. Taking expectation on both sides of \eqref{exp1} and using a similar argument as that in \cite{Nesterov12}, gives
\begin{equation}\label{exp2}
\E[F(x_k)-F^*|x_{k-1}] \leq \frac{2c(F(x_0)-F^*)}{2c + \alpha k (F(x_0)-F^*)}, \qquad \forall k \geq 0.
\end{equation}
Let $a$ and $b$ denote the right hand side of \eqref{T_complexityC} and \eqref{exp2} respectively. By the definition of $c$ and the relation $\|x_0 - x_*\|_v \leq \mathcal{R}_{v,0}$, we see that when $k$ is sufficiently large,
\begin{equation}
\frac{b}{a} \approx \frac{4c}{ \|x_0 - x_*\|_v^2 + 2(F(x_0) - F^*)} \geq \frac{4}{3}.
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Comparison in the strongly convex case}
For the special case of \eqref{D_F} where at least one of $f$ and $\Psi$ is strongly convex (i.e., $\mu_f+\mu_\Psi > 0$), Richtarik and Takac \cite{Richtarik12a} showed that for all $k \geq 0$, there holds
\begin{equation}
\E[F(x_k)-F^*|x_{k-1}] \leq \left( 1 - \alpha \frac{\mu_f + \mu_\Psi}{1 + \mu_\Psi} \right)(F(x_0)-F^*).
\end{equation}
It is not hard to observe that
\begin{equation}
\frac{2(\mu_f+\mu_\Psi)}{1 + \mu_f + 2\mu_\Psi} > \frac{\mu_f + \mu_\Psi}{1 + \mu_\Psi}.
\end{equation}
Recall that $\gamma$ is defined in \eqref{D_gamma}. Then it follows that for sufficiently large $k$ one has
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left(1 - \alpha \gamma \right)^k\left(\frac{1+\mu_\Psi}{2}R_0^2 + F(x_0)-F^*\right)
&\overset{\eqref{strongly_convex_4}}{\leq}& \left(1 - \alpha \gamma \right)^k\left(\frac{1+\mu_f+\mu_\Psi}{\mu_f+\mu_\Psi}\right) (F(x_0)-F^*).
\end{eqnarray*}
\subsection{Comparison of the iteration complexity results}\label{S_Discussion_complexity}
Here we compare the results in Theorem \ref{T_Complexity} with those in \cite{Richtarik12a}.
\paragraph{Comparison in the convex case.}
For any $0<\epsilon<F(x_0)-F_*$ and $\rho \in (0,1)$, Richt\'arik and Tak\'a\v{c} \cite{Richtarik12a} showed that \eqref{E_highprob} holds for all $k \geq \tilde{K}$ where
\begin{equation}
\tilde{K}\eqdef \frac{2c}{\alpha \epsilon}\left( 1+\log\left(\frac{1}{\rho}\right)\right) + 2- \frac{2c}{\alpha(F(x_0) -F_*)}.
\end{equation}
Using the definition of $c$ and the fact that $\|x_0 - x_*\|_v \leq\mathcal{R}_{v,0}$ we observe that
\begin{equation}
\tau \eqdef \frac{\|x_0 - x_*\|_v^2 + 2\xi_0}{4 c}\leq \frac{3}{4}.
\end{equation}
By the definitions of $K$ and $\tilde{K}$ we have that for sufficiently small $\epsilon >0$,
\begin{equation}
K - \tilde{K}\approx \frac{2 c \log \tau}{\alpha \epsilon} \leq -\frac{2 c \log(4/3)}{\alpha \epsilon}.
\end{equation}
In addition, $\|x_0 - x_*\|_v$ can be much smaller than $\mathcal{R}_{v,0}$ and thus $\tau$ can be very small. It follows from the above that $K$ can be significantly smaller than $\tilde{K}$.
\paragraph{Comparison in the strongly convex case.}
In the strongly convex case (i.e., $\mu_f(w)+\mu_\Psi(w) >0$), Richt\'arik and Tak\'a\v c showed that \eqref{E_highprob} holds for all $k \geq \hat{K} $ where
\begin{equation*}
\hat{K} \eqdef \frac{1}{\alpha}\frac{1 + \mu_\Psi(w)}{\mu_f(w) + \mu_\Psi(w)}\log \left(\frac{F(x_0)-F_*}{\epsilon \rho} \right).
\end{equation*}
We can see that for $\rho$ or $\epsilon$ sufficiently small we have
\begin{equation}
\frac{K}{\hat{K}} \leq \frac{1 + \mu_f(w) + \mu_\Psi(w) }{2(1+\mu_\Psi(w))}\leq 1,
\end{equation}
because $\mu_f \leq 1$, which demonstrates that $K$ is smaller than $\hat{K}$.
\section{Numerical experiments}\label{sec:numerical}
In this Section we present preliminary computational results. The purpose of these experiments is to provide a numerical comparison of the performance of PCDM, under the different ESOs summarized in Appendix \ref{sec:asdfoijwofwaefwa}.
\paragraph{Least squares.}
Consider the following convex optimization problem
$ \displaystyle
\min_{x \in \R^N} \frac12 \|Ax-b\|_2^2,
$
where $A\in \R^{8\cdot 10^3 \times 2 \cdot 10^3}$.
Each row has between $1$ and $\omega=20$ nonzero elements (uniformly at random). For simplicity, we normalize (in $\ell_2$ norm) all the columns of $A$.
The value of $\sigma=\lambda_{\max}(A^TA) = 10.48$.
We have compared 5 different approaches which are given in Table~\ref{tab:leastSquareESOS}.
\begin{table}[htp]
\caption{Approaches used in the numerical experiments.}
\label{tab:leastSquareESOS}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l|c|p{8cm}}
\multicolumn{1}{c|}{Name} & $v $ & \multicolumn{1}{|c}{Note} \\ \hline\hline
BKBG & $v_{BKBG}=L$ & This is na\"ive approach, which was proposed in
\cite{Bradley} and \cite{richtarik2012efficient}.
Note that this is not ESO.
\\
\hline
RT-P
&$v_{RT-P}=(1+\frac{(\omega-1)(\tau-1)}{\max\{1,n-1\}}) L$
& Theorem \ref{thm:niceESO}, originally derived in \cite{Richtarik12a}.
\\\hline
RT-D
& $v_{RT-D}=(1+\frac{(\sigma-1)(\tau-1)}{\max\{1,n-1\}})L$
& Derived in \cite{richtarik2013distributed} as a special case for $C=1$.
\\\hline
FR & $v_{FR}=\hat L$& Theorem \ref{thm:niceNewESO}, proposed in \cite{Fercoq:accelerated} and {\bf generalized in this paper} (Theorem \ref{thm:NewESOforDUS}).
\\\hline
NC & $v_{NC} = \tilde L$& Theorem \ref{thm:IonESO}, proposed in \cite{necoara2013distributed}.\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
Parameter $\tau=512$ and hence $1+\frac{(\omega-1)(\tau-1)}{\max\{1,n-1\}}=5.856$ for RT-P and $1+\frac{(\sigma-1)(\tau-1)}{\max\{1,n-1\}}=3.424$ for RT-D approach.
The distribution of vectors $v$ can be found in Figure \ref{fig:LS} (right). Figure \ref{fig:LS} shows the evolution of $F(x_k)-F^*$
for all 5 methods. Note that the BKBK did not converge.
The speed of RT-P, RT-D and FR is quite similar and NC is approximately 3 times worse because $v_{NC} \approx 3.22 v_{FR}$.
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3in]{LS_evolution.eps}
\includegraphics[width=3in]{LS_dis.eps}
\caption{Evolution of $F(x_k)-F^*$ for 5 different methods (left) and distribution of $v$ (right).}
\label{fig:LS}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{SVM dual.}
\begin{figure}[htp]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c||cc}
\smash{\raisebox{100pt}{\rot{$\tau=32$}}} &
\includegraphics[width=3in]{SVM_32_evolution.eps} &
\includegraphics[width=3in]{SVM_32dis.eps}
\\ \hline
\smash{\raisebox{100pt}{\rot{$\tau=256$}}} &
\includegraphics[width=3in]{SVM_256_evolution.eps} &
\includegraphics[width=3in]{SVM_256dis.eps}
\end{tabular}
\caption{Comparison of evolution of $G(x_k)$ for various methods and the distribution of $v$.}
\label{fig:SVM}
\end{figure}
In this experiment we compare 4 methods from Table \ref{tab:leastSquareESOS} (we have excluded the na\"ive approach because it usually diverges for large $\tau$)
on a real-world dataset \emph{astro-ph}, which consists of data from papers in physics \cite{pegasos}.
This dataset has $29,882$ training samples and a total of $99,757$ features.
This dataset is very sparse. Indeed, each sample uses on average only $77.317$ features and each sample belongs to one of two classes. Hence,
one might be interested in finding a hyperplane that separates the samples into their corresponding classes.
The optimization problem can be formulated as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:SVM_P}
\min_{w} P(w)\eqdef \frac{\lambda}{2} \|w\|_2^2 + \frac1n \sum_{i=1}^N \max\{0, 1-\vc{y}{i} a_{(i)}^T w\},
\end{equation}
where $\vc{y}{i} \in \{-1,1\}$ is the label of the class to which sample $a_{(i)}\in\R^m$ belongs.
While problem formulation \eqref{eq:SVM_P} does not fit our framework (the nonsmooth part is nonseparable) the dual formulation (see \cite{hsieh2008dual,ShalevShawartzZhang,takac2013mini}) does:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:SVM_D}
\max_{x \in[0,1]^N} D(x)\eqdef \frac1N {\bf 1}^T x - \frac{1}{2\lambda N^2} x^T Q x,
\end{equation}
where $Q\in \R^{N\times N}, Q_{i,j} = \vc{y}{i} \vc{y}{j} \langle a_{(i)}, a_{(j)}\rangle$. In particular, problem formulation \eqref{eq:SVM_D} is the sum of a smooth term, and the restriction $x \in[0,1]^N$ can be formulated as a (block separable) indicator function.
In this dataset, each sample is normalized, hence $L=(1,\dots,1)^T$.
For any dual feasible point $x$ we can obtain a primal feasible point $w(x) = \frac1{\lambda n} \sum_{i=1}^N \vc{x}{i} \vc{y}{i} a_{(i)}$. Moreover, from strong duality we know that if $x^*$ is an optimal solution of \eqref{eq:SVM_D}, then $w^* = w(x^*)$ is optimal for problem \eqref{eq:SVM_P}.
Therefore, we can associate a gap $G(x)=P(w(x))-D(x)$ to each feasible point $x$, which measures the distance of the objective value from optimality. Clearly $G(x^*)=0$.
Figure \ref{fig:SVM} (left) shows the evolution of $G(x_k)$ as the iterates progress, and the distribution of ESO parameter $v$ for different choice of $\tau\in \{32, 256\}$.
Naturally, as $\tau$ increases, the distribution of $v, \hat v$ shifts to the right, whereas the distribution of $\tilde v$ is not influenced by changing $\tau$.
The value of important parameters for other methods are
$\sigma=287.273$ and $\omega=29881$.
For $\tau=32$ we have $1+\frac{(\omega-1)(\tau-1)}{\max\{1,n-1\}}=31.998$ for RT-P and $1+\frac{(\sigma-1)(\tau-1)}{\max\{1,n-1\}}=1.296$ for RT-D approach
and
for
$\tau=256$ we have $1+\frac{(\omega-1)(\tau-1)}{\max\{1,n-1\}}= 255.991$ for RT-P and $1+\frac{(\sigma-1)(\tau-1)}{\max\{1,n-1\}}=3.443$ for RT-D approach.
Again the best performance is given by RT-D which requires knowledge of $\sigma$.
If we do not want to estimate parameter $\sigma$ then we should use FR.
If was shown in \cite{Fercoq:accelerated} that for quadratic objective function FR is always better than RT-P.
\small
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
Let
$$A = \{a_0 < a_1 < \cdots < a_k\}$$
be a set of $k+1$ non-negative integers,
and
$$
2A := \{a + a' : a,a' \in A\}
$$ its {\it sumset}. If $2A$ contains the consecutive integers $[0,n]
:= \{0,1,\ldots,n\}$, but $n+1 \notin 2A$, then $A$ is an (additive)
{\it basis} of length $k$ and range $n_2(A) = n$. Note that the
smallest element must be $a_0 = 0$ (otherwise the sumset would not
contain $0$).
An additive basis $A$ is {\em admissible} if $n_2(A) \ge a_k$, and
{\em restricted} if $n_2(A) = 2a_k$. Restricted bases are admissible
by definition. Also, $A$ is restricted if and only if $2A =
[0,2a_k]$.
\begin{example} If $A=\{0,1,3,4\}$, then $2A=[0,8]$, and $A$ is
a restricted basis with range $n_2(A) = 8 = 2a_k$.
\end{example}
\begin{example} If $A=\{0,1,2,4\}$, then $2A = [0,6] \cup \{8\}$,
and $A$ is an admissible (but not restricted) basis with range $n_2(A)
= 6 < 2a_k$.
\end{example}
The maximum range among {\em all} bases of length $k$ is denoted by
$n_2(k)$, and the maximum among {\em restricted} bases is $n_2^*(k)$.
The bases that attain these maxima are called {\it extremal bases} and
{\it extremal restricted bases}, respectively
\cite{riddell1978,wagstaff1979}. Searching for extremal bases is
known in the literature as the {\em postage stamp problem}. Searching
for extremal restricted bases could then be called the {\em restricted
postage stamp problem}.
Restricted bases have important properties that facilitate efficient
searching: mirroring and lower bounds. Using them, we have previously
presented a ``meet-in-the-middle'' algorithm, and enumerated all
extremal restricted bases up to length $k=41$
\cite{kohonen2014b,sloane}. Here we improve the algorithm by a more
careful use of the properties, and enumerate all extremal restricted
bases up to $k=47$.
\section{Properties of restricted bases}
Let us revisit some properties of restricted bases
\cite{kohonen2014b}. The mirroring property
\cite[Theorem~5]{kohonen2014b} is based on a reasoning similar to
Rohrbach's theorem for symmetric bases \cite[Satz~1]{rohrbach1937},
but holds for asymmetric restricted bases as well.
\begin{theorem}[Mirroring] If $A$ is a restricted basis with
range~$n$, then its {\em mirror image}
$$B = a_k - A = \{a_k - a : a \in A\}$$ is also a restricted basis
with the same range.
\label{thm:mirror}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
\begin{align*}
2B &= \{b+b' : b,b' \in B\} = \{(a_k-a)+(a_k-a') : a,a' \in A\} \\
&= 2a_k - 2A = n - [0,n] = [0,n]. \qedhere
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
\begin{example} Let $A=\{0,1,2,3,7,11,15,17,20,21,22\}$. This is
a restricted basis with range~$44$. Its mirror image $B = 22-A =
\{0,1,2,5,7,11,15,19,20,21,22\}$ is another restricted basis with the
same range.
\end{example}
If $A_k = \{a_0 < a_1 < \cdots < a_k\}$, we define its $j$-{\em
prefix} as $A_j = \{a_0, \ldots, a_j\}$, for any $0 \le j \le k$.
The following upper bounds hold for all admissible bases (including
all restricted bases). For restricted bases, the upper bounds can be
mirrored to obtain lower bounds as well.
\begin{lemma}
If $A_k$ is an admissible basis, and $1 \le j \le k$, then $a_j \le
n_2(A_{j-1})+1$.
\label{thm:admissible}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Represent $A_k$ as a disjoint union $A_k = A_{j-1} \cup R$, where $r
\ge a_j$ for all $r \in R$. Now $2A_k = (2A_{j-1}) \cup (R+A_k)$.
All elements of $(R+A_k)$ are greater or equal to $a_j$, thus
$2A_{j-1}$ must cover the interval $[0,a_j-1]$. In other words
$n_2(A_{j-1}) \ge a_j-1$.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}[Element-wise upper bound]
If $A_k$ is an admissible basis, and $1 \le j \le k$, then $a_j \le
n_2(j-1)+1$.
\label{thm:upper}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Follows from Lemma~\ref{thm:admissible} because $n_2(A_{j-1}) \le
n_2(j-1)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}[Element-wise lower bound]
If $A_k$ is a restricted basis, and $0 \le j \le
k-1$, then $a_j \ge a_k - n_2(k-j-1) - 1$.
\label{thm:lower}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $B_k = a_k - A_k$. By Theorem~\ref{thm:mirror}, $B_k$ is a
restricted basis, and thus admissible. Let $i=k-j$. By
Theorem~\ref{thm:upper} we have $b_i \le n_2(i-1) + 1$, thus
\begin{equation*}
a_j = a_k - b_i \ge a_k - n_2(k-j-1) - 1. \qedhere
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary}[Range lower bound]
If $A_k$ is a restricted basis, and $0 \le j \le k-2$, then
$n_2(A_j) \ge a_k - n_2(k-j-2) - 2$.
\label{thm:lowerrange}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Follows from the previous theorem since $a_{j+1} \le n_2(A_j)+1$.
\end{proof}
\section{Searching for restricted bases}
\label{sec:search}
\begin{figure}[bt]
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figmime30}
\vspace{0.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{figmime45}
\caption{Element-wise bounds for restricted bases. Top: $k=30$ and
$n=316$. Bottom: $k=45$ and $n=674$. Thick blue line: a
restricted basis. Thin red lines: ten randomly generated
admissible prefixes.}
\label{fig:bounds}
\end{figure}
The bounds are easily calculated if the corresponding $n_2$ is known
(sequence \seqnum{A001212} in Sloane's OEIS \cite{sloane}). The
element-wise bounds are quite narrow near the middle of a basis, as
seen in Figure~\ref{fig:bounds}. In the vast majority of admissible
prefixes, the middle elements are far below the lower bound
(illustrated with random admissible prefixes in the figure).
\begin{example}
Search for a restricted basis of length $k=30$ and range $n=316$
(thus $a_k = n/2 = 158$). From Theorem~\ref{thm:lower} we have
$a_{15} \ge 77$. While there are $9\;041\;908\;204$ admissible
$15$-prefixes (\seqnum{A167809}), only $201$ of them meet the lower
bound for $a_{15}$, and are possible prefixes for the restricted
basis.
\end{example}
Alternatively, we could use the {\em range} bound at midpoint
($j=\lfloor k/2 \rfloor$): from Corollary~\ref{thm:lowerrange} we
obtain $n_2(A_{15}) \ge 84$. Our previously presented algorithm
\cite[Algorithm~1]{kohonen2014b} was built upon this idea. Challis's
algorithm \cite{challis1993} was used to enumerate the admissible
$j$-prefixes that meet the range bound.
However, if prefixes are being built progressively (adding one element
at a time), many proposed prefixes can be rejected much {\em before}
the midpoint (see Figure~\ref{fig:bounds}, top). It is
straightforward to modify Challis's algorithm to check for the lower
bounds at each element, and to reject a prefix as soon as any element
violates the lower bound. This approach prunes the search tree and
speeds up the search tremendously.
\begin{example}
Searching for a restricted basis with $k=30$ and $n=316$,
Algorithm~1 uses only the range bound $n_2(A_{15}) \ge 84$. During
the search it visits about $4.0 \times 10^8$ prefixes, taking about
30 CPU seconds on our system. It generates $791$ possible
$15$-prefixes.
For elements $a_{10},a_{11},\ldots,a_{15}$ we have the lower bounds
$17,29,41,53,65,$ and $77$, respectively. The modified search,
which exploits these bounds, visits only about $1.9 \times 10^6$
prefixes ($200$ times fewer than Algorithm~1), runs in about $0.1$
CPU seconds, and generates only $16$ possible $15$-prefixes.
\end{example}
With large values of $k$, a further complication is that $n_2$ is
known only up to length $24$ \cite{kohonen2014}. For example, if
$k=45$, the element-wise lower bounds are known for $j \ge 20$ (see
Figure~\ref{fig:bounds}, bottom). In order to use
Theorem~\ref{thm:lower} for $j=19$, we would need $n_2(k-19-1) =
n_2(25)$, which is not known. This is a serious limitation: in the
search for possible prefixes, the known element-wise bounds kick in at
$j=20$. If the bounds were known, it seems plausible that most
prefixes could be rejected earlier, perhaps around $j=17$.
What we can do, with large $k$, is to use the range bound as early as
possible. For $k=45$, $n=674$, Corollary~\ref{thm:lowerrange} gives
the bound $n_2(A_{19}) \ge 123$. Using this as the target range in
Challis's algorithm, we can first enumerate the possible $19$-prefixes
and then extend them by continuing the algorithm (checking for
element-wise bounds at every step). With the range bound, the
so-called {\em gaps test} in Challis's algorithm rejects many prefixes
even before $j=19$.
\section{Results}
With the method described in the previous section, we computed all
extremal restricted bases of lengths $k=42,\ldots,47$. The prefix
computations are illustrated in Table~\ref{table:time}. Extending the
prefixes and joining them with suffixes (as in our previous algorithm
\cite[Algorithm~1]{kohonen2014b}) into complete bases was then a
matter of a few seconds or minutes at most. Since $n_2^*$ is {\em a
priori} unknown, we started with the range $n$ set to its upper
bound \cite[Corollary~8]{kohonen2014b} and decreased in steps of 2,
until a restricted basis was found.
Previously, with Algorithm~1, we used 120 CPU hours to find extremal
restricted bases for $k=41$, which illustrates the strong effect of
using the early lower bounds for pruning.
\begin{table}[htb]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|l|l|c|r}
$k$ & $n$ & range bound & work & CPU hours & prefixes generated \\
\hline
42 & 588 & $n_2(A_{16})\ge 80$ & $9.6\times 10^{9}$ & $0.7$ & $28\;026\;041$ \\
43 & 614 & $n_2(A_{17})\ge 93$ & $7.2\times 10^{10}$ & $2.0$ & $4\;375\;029$ \\
44 & 644 & $n_2(A_{18})\ge 108$ & $3.8\times 10^{11}$ & $8.9$ & $317\;752$ \\
45 & 674 & $n_2(A_{19})\ge 123$ & $1.5\times 10^{12}$ & $35$ & $44\;187$ \\
46 & 704 & $n_2(A_{20})\ge 138$ & $6.4\times 10^{12}$ & $157$ & $11\;448$ \\
47 & 734 & $n_2(A_{21})\ge 153$ & $3.2\times 10^{13}$ & $812$ & $4\;020$
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Computing possible prefixes for restricted bases of lengths
$k=42,\ldots,47$. {\em Range bound} is from
Corollary~\ref{thm:lowerrange}, with $j$ as small as possible.
{\em Work} is the number of prefixes visited during the search.
{\em Prefixes generated} is the number of prefixes that meet the
range bound.}
\label{table:time}
\end{table}
The complete bases are listed in Table~\ref{table:bases}. They are
all symmetric (that is, $A_k = a_k - A_k$), which was not known nor
enforced {\em a~priori}. The bases are exactly those proposed by
Challis and Robinson's preamble-amble construction \cite[Table
2]{challis2010}. The result of our computation here is that (1)
these are indeed {\em extremal} restricted bases, and that (2) this is
the {\em complete} listing of extremal restricted bases of these
lengths.
\section{Discussion}
As mentioned in Section~\ref{sec:search}, efficient searching for {\em
restricted} additive bases with our method depends crucially on the
availability of element-wise lower bounds, which in turn depends on the
knowledge of extremal {\em unrestricted} ranges $n_2$
(\seqnum{A001212}). Roughly speaking, if $n_2$ is known up to length
$k$ (currently 24), then it provides lower bounds that are useful
for computing of $n_2^*$ up to about length $2k$.
To extend our knowledge of extremal restricted bases further, an
obvious way would be to compute first the unrestricted $n_2(k)$ for
greater lengths, say, $k=25$, and use them to provide improved lower
bounds for the restricted case.
A more interesting question is, can any connection be established
between $n_2(k)$ and $n_2^*(k)$ (\seqnum{A001212} and
\seqnum{A006638})? For example, can it be shown that $n_2(k)-n_2^*(k)
\le d$ with some small value $d$? For lengths $k \le 24$, where both
quantities are currently known, the difference is always zero or two
(the latter only with $k=10$, where $n_2(10)=46$ and $n_2^*(10)=44$).
If the difference could be bounded to be small, then $n_2^*(k)+d$
could be used as an upper bound for $n_2(k)$, providing in turn the
lower bounds for computing $n_2^*$ for greater lengths.
|
\section{Introduction}
Graphene, in all its allotropic forms, is a material with exceptional mechanical, electronic and thermal properties. Its discovery led to one of the most active fields in material science and condensed matter research during the last decade. Graphene monolayer, usually referred simply as graphene, and multilayers have different properties due to a subtle difference in their band structure.
It is now well established that in graphene monolayers, the electronic excitations with crystal momentum close to the $K$ or $K^{\prime}$ points of the Brillouin zone (BZ), are chiral quasiparticles behaving as massless Dirac fermions. These excitations dominate the low temperature physics leading to a number of remarkable phenomena in clean samples.\cite{CastroNeto-review,DasSarma2011,Beenakker2008} Impurities, adatoms and structural defects change these properties and there has been a considerable effort to study and characterize the different types of defects and disorder in graphene \cite{Evers2008,Chan2008,Wehling2009,Wehling2010,Wehling2010b,Sofo2012,Roche2012,Matis2012,Guillemette2013,Hong2011} as well as the effect of doping on them\cite{Sofo2011,Chan2011,Guzman2014}.
The problem of disorder and electron localization has attracted the attention of many groups for Dirac fermions tend to elude localization in systems with Anderson-type disorder.\cite{Aleiner2006,Ostrovsky2006,Ostrovsky2007,Mirlin2010,Konig2012,Gattenloehner2013,Cresti2013,Usaj2014} Impurities leading to short range disorder at the atomic scale generate inter-valley mixing and break the symplectic symmetry opening the route to strong localization.
Bilayer graphene (BLG) presents some fundamental differences due to its crystallographic structure. It consist of a stacking of two graphene layers and in the most common structure, known as the Bernal stacking, only one of the two non-equivalent sites $(A,B)$ of the honeycomb lattice of the top layer lies on top of a site of the bottom layer. The resulting structure, shown in Fig. \ref{fig1}, induces a weak coupling of the two layers. The unit cell has four carbon atoms leading to four $\pi$-bands, two of them having a parabolic dispersion relation around the $K$ and $K^{\prime}$ points of the BZ and that touch each other at the Fermi energy
\cite{Nilsson2008,Castro2010,McCann2013}.
In most of the experimental setups, BLG lies on top of a substrate and the impurities are adsorbed on the top layer only. When atoms like hydrogen or fluorine are adsorbed they are bounded to a single C atom.
One of the most interesting aspects of this system is that its electronic structure can be controlled with an electric field applied perpendicular to the layers
\cite{Castro2007, McCann2006, Min2007,Taychatanapat2010}. In biased BLG a gap opens at the Fermi level and impurities may induce a bound state in the gap \cite{Dahal2008,Mkhitaryan2013}. As noted in Ref. [\onlinecite{Mkhitaryan2013}], the impurity spectral density and the existence of the bound states may depend on the polarity of the field. A finite impurity concentration generates a gate dependent impurity band creating new and encouraging alternatives to control the transport properties. However, in contrast to the important activity in the study of disordered graphene, the problem of BLG with a diluted concentration of adatoms inducing short range potentials has not been investigated in detail.
In this work we study the problem of a low concentration of impurities in biased and unbiased BLG.
We present a model that aims to describe fluorinated BLG, an extension of the model of Ref. [\onlinecite{Usaj2014}] used to discuss the experiments of Ref. [\onlinecite{Hong2011}].
In section II we present the model and revisit the single impurity problem. In section III we describe the numerical methods and present results for the local density of states (LDOS) at the different sites. Section IV includes a discussion of localization and a summary and conclusions are presented in section V.
\section{The Model}
The Hamiltonian of the system is $H=H_{\mathrm{BLG}}+H_{\mathrm{imp}}+H_{\mathrm{hyb}}$ where the first term describes the electronic structure of the BLG, the second one is the impurities' Hamiltonian and the last one includes the hybridization between each impurity orbital and the p$_{z}$ orbital of the underlying C atom. In the tight-binding approximation the BLG Hamiltonian reads
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber
H_{\mathrm{BLG}}&=&-\sum_{i,\bm{k},\sigma}V(-1)^{i}\left(a^{\dagger}_{i\bm{k}\sigma}a_{i\bm{k}\sigma}^{}+b^{\dagger}_{i\bm{k}\sigma}b_{i\bm{k}\sigma}^{}\right)\\
\nonumber
&&+\sum_{i,\bm{k},\sigma}t\left(\phi({\bm{k}})\,a^{\dagger}_{i\bm{k}\sigma}b_{i\bm{k}\sigma}^{}+\phi^{*}({\bm{k}})\,b^{\dagger}_{i\bm{k}\sigma}a_{i\bm{k}\sigma}^{}\right)\\
&&-\sum_{\bm{k},\sigma}t_{\perp}\left(a^{\dagger}_{1\bm{k}\sigma}b_{2\bm{k}\sigma}^{}+b^{\dagger}_{2\bm{k}\sigma}a_{1\bm{k}\sigma}^{}\right)\,.
\end{eqnarray}
Here, $a_{i\bm{k}\sigma}$ and $b_{i\bm{k}\sigma}$ destroy electrons with wavevector $\bm{k}$ and spin $\sigma$ in sub-lattices $A$ and $B$, respectively, and the subindex $i=1$($2$) refers to the top (bottom) plane. $V$ is the bias voltage, $t$ and $t_{\perp}$ are the intra-plane and inter-plane hoppings, respectively, and $\phi(\bm{k})=\sum_{\bm{\delta}}e^{i\bm{k}\cdot\bm{ \delta}}$ where $\{\bm{\delta}\}$ are the three vectors connecting one site with its neighbors in the same plane.
In our notation, the $C$ atoms of the top layer in the $A$ sublattice, referred as the $A_{1}$ sublattice, lie on top of the $C$ atoms in the $B$ sublattice of the bottom layer ($B_{2}$ sublattice), see Fig. \ref{fig1}.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{Fig1.jpg}
\caption{(a) Bernal structure of bilayer graphene. Panels (b) and (c) show the low energy band structure for the unbiased and biased BLG, respectively. In (d) the LDOS for the unbiased case, continuous line corresponds to the $B_{1}$ and $A_{2}$ sites, dashed line to the $A_{1}$ and $B_{2}$ sites. (e) LDOS for a positive ($V>0$) bias voltage. Continuous (dashed) line corresponds to the $B_{1}$ ($A_{1}$) sublattice. For a negative voltage the LDOS can be obtained from the ones with positive $V$ by replacing $\omega$ by $-\omega$.}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
We describe non-magnetic impurities as single orbital impurities where the electron-electron interactions are not explicitly included,
\begin{equation}
H_{\mathrm{imp}}=\sum_{l,\sigma}\varepsilon_0 f^{\dagger}_{l\sigma}f_{l\sigma}^{}\,,
\end{equation}
where $f^{\dagger}_{l\sigma}$ creates an electron on the impurity orbital at site $l$ and energy $\varepsilon_0$ and the sum runs over the sites of
carbon lattice having an adsorbed impurity on top. The last term of the
Hamiltonian describes the hybridization of the impurity and
the graphene orbitals of the top layer
\begin{equation}
H_{\mathrm{hyb}}=\gamma\sum_{l\in A_{1},\sigma} (f^{\dagger}_{l\sigma}a_{1l\sigma}^{}+a^{\dagger}_{1l\sigma}f_{l\sigma}^{})+ \gamma\sum_{l\in B_{1},\sigma} (f^{\dagger}_{l\sigma}b_{1l\sigma}^{}+b^{\dagger}_{1l\sigma}f_{l\sigma}^{})\,,\\
\end{equation}
with the sum taken over all the sites with an impurity on top, $a_{1l\sigma}^{}=N^{-\frac{1}{2}}\sum_{\bm{k}}e^{i{\bm{k}}\cdot{\bm{R}}_{l}}a_{1\bm{k}\sigma}^{}$ where ${\bm{R}}_{l}$ is the coordinate of site $l$---a similar expression holds for $b_{1l\sigma}^{}$. Typical values of the microscopic parameters are $t=2.8$ eV and $t_{\perp} = 0.1t$, while the bias voltage $V$ is taken in the range $|V|\le 0.3$ eV and with any loss of generality we take $\varepsilon_0 \ge 0$. With our one electron Hamiltonian, the case $\varepsilon_0 \le 0$ can be obtained from the previous one by an electron-hole transformation, $\it{i.e.}$ by replacing $\omega$ by $-\omega$ and $V$ by $-V$. In what follows we take $\varepsilon_{0}=0.3$ eV and $\gamma=5.6$ eV.
Figure \ref{fig1} illustrates the BLG lattice and its band structure.
As we will not consider spin dependent effects, we drop the spin index in what follows.
It is instructive to review some aspects of the single impurity problem before presenting the many impurities case\cite{Dahal2008,Mkhitaryan2013}.
For one impurity, the retarded impurity propagator ${\mathcal{G}}_{ll}= \langle\langle f_{l}^{},f_{l}^{\dag }\rangle\rangle$ takes the form
\begin{equation}
{\mathcal{G}}_{ll}=\frac{1}{\omega+\ci0^+-\varepsilon _{0}-\Sigma (\omega,V)}\,,
\end{equation}
where $\Sigma (\omega,V)= \gamma^{2}\tilde{g}(\omega,V)$ is the impurity's self-energy and $\tilde{g}(\omega,V)$ is the local propagator of electrons in the C orbital hybridized with the impurity. The carbon-carbon propagator can be evaluated in the continuous limit. Color maps of the impurity spectral densities for impurities on $A_{1}$ and on $B_{1}$ sites are shown in Fig. \ref{fig2}.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{Fig2.jpg}
\caption{Color maps (in logarithmic scale) of the impurity spectral densities in the $[\omega, V]$ plane. (a) and (b) correspond to one impurity on the $A_{1}$ and $B_{1}$ sublattice, respectively. Dark areas indicate the electric field induced gap in the pristine sample. Lower panels show the impurity spectral density for the unbiased (dashed lines) and biased (continuous lines) cases: left and right columns correspond to impurities on the $A_{1}$ and $B_{1}$ sublattices, respectively, and different polarities (as indicated in the insets)}
\label{fig2}
\end{figure}
Let us consider first the case of an impurity adsorbed on top of an $A_{1}$ site (left panels of Fig. \ref{fig2}). For $V=0$ the impurity spectral density $\rho_{\mathrm{imp}}(\omega)=-1/\pi\, \mathrm{Im}\mathcal{G}_{ll}$ has the characteristic structure of a resonant state, the real part of the self-energy shifts the maximum from $\varepsilon_{0}\ge 0$ towards the Dirac point generating a narrow resonance at the renormalized energy $\bar{\varepsilon}_0=\varepsilon_0+\mathrm{Re}\Sigma(\bar{\varepsilon}_0,0)$. For the impurity parameters used in this calculation, the renormalized energy is an order of magnitude smaller than the bare energy ($\bar{\varepsilon}_0\ll\varepsilon_0$). Close to the Dirac point the impurity spectral density shows the characteristic $|\omega|$ behavior of the LDOS of the $A_{1}$ sites. For $V\ne 0$ a gap opens at the Dirac point and the impurity spectral density $\rho_{\mathrm{imp}}(\omega)$ may show a bound state within the gap. An important effect of the polarity of the field $V$ is apparent from the figure: a {\it negative} voltage $V$ leads to a bound state within the energy gap close to the top of the valence band while for a {\it positive} $V$ the bound state energy---if observed---lies exponentially close to the conduction band edge. This is due to the structure of the LDOS at the $A_{1}$ sublattice: for positive $V$ the LDOS at the edge of the conduction band $E_{c}$ behaves as $\omega-E_{c}$, as in the 4D electron gas where a strong coupling to the impurity is required to split a bound state out of the band (see Fig. \ref{fig1}e)).
For impurities on the $B_{1}$ sites (right panels of Fig. 2) the results are somewhat different. For $V=0$ the width of the impurity resonance is much broader due to the larger LDOS of the underlying C atom. For small and {\it positive} $V$ the bound state lies close to the gap centre while for small {\it negative} $V$ no bound state occurs. This effect can be understand by looking at the LDOS at the $B_{1}$ sites in the biased BLG (see Fig 1e)). There, the LDOS of the conduction band for small and positive $V$ presents a 1D-like van Hove singularity leading always to a bound state, while for $V<0$ a 3D-like singularity at the edge of the conduction band requires a minimum value of the parameters to split a state out of the band. However, this effect, discussed in Ref. [\onlinecite{Mkhitaryan2013}], is observed only for extremely small values of the bias voltage. For physically relevant values of the gap, bound states occur for both polarities although their position depends on the sign of $V$.
These asymmetries illustrate the importance of the polarity of the electric field on the electronic structure of the impurity doped system. The variation of the impurity energy $\varepsilon_{0}$ with $V$ depends on the way the electric field is induced in the system and on the characteristic of the impurity. To minimize the number of parameters in the model we present results with constant, $V$ independent, $\varepsilon_{0}$.
Having in mind the one impurity problem results, summarized in Fig. \ref{fig2}, the more relevant case of many impurities can be easily interpreted.
\section{Numerical Results for the Many Impurities Case}
Here we present results for the case of a small concentration of adatoms on the top layer. Calculations using Density Functional Theory show that, in the case of fluorine atoms, the adsorption energies on the two non-equivalent sites, $A_{1}$ and $B_{1}$, are almost equal. Some estimations, however, suggest that there could be a tiny energy gain for adatoms on the $B_{1}$ sites \cite{GySPrivComm}.
Interestingly, in other carbon based systems like monolayer graphene with substitutional nitrogen impurities, it has been observed that as the nitrogen concentration increases, impurities tend to be absorbed preferentially in one of the two equivalent sublattices \cite{Zabet2014}. These self-organized structures of the nitrogen doped graphene are stabilized by the impurity-impurity interaction that favors impurities on the same sublattice, an effect that scales quickly with the impurity concentration \cite{Lawlor2014}.
For the case of diluted fluorine adatoms on BLG there are no evidences of clustering on one sublattice. Moreover, the interaction between impurities on graphene is known to depend crucially on the type of impurity and on the adsorption geometry \cite{Gorman2013}. Based on these facts, in what follows we consider different impurity distributions, going from $50\%$ of the impurities in each sublattice to $100\%$ of them on the $B_{1}$ sites.
We start with a detailed analysis of the LDOS at the impurity and at the different sites of the BLG.
\subsection{Spectral densities}
To calculate $\rho_{\mathrm{imp}}(\omega)$ in the many impurities case we first use the Chebyshev polynomials method which has proven to be very efficient to deal with realistic impurity concentrations \cite{Weisse2006,Covaci2010,Yuan2010,Usaj2014}. The average impurity spectral density is then given by
\begin{equation}
\rho_{\mathrm{imp}}(\omega)=-\frac{1}{\pi}\langle\mathrm{Im}{\mathcal{G}_{ll}}\rangle_\mathrm{avg}\,,
\end{equation}
where $\langle\dots\rangle_\mathrm{avg}$ indicates the configurational average over the impurities.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{Fig3.jpg}
\caption{Impurity spectral densities for different bias voltages and different impurity distributions. Top [(a), (b), (c)], central [(d), (e), (f)] and bottom [(g), (h), (i)] panels correspond to $100$\%, $75\%$ and $50\%$ of the impurities on the $B_{1}$ sublattice respectively. Left [(a), (d), (g)], central [(b), (e), (h)] and right [(c), (f), (i)] columns correspond to $V=0$, $V=0.1$ eV and $V= -0.1$eV, respectively. Vertical dashed lines indicate the gap corresponding to the pristine BLG.}
\label{fig3}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig3} shows $\rho_{\mathrm{imp}}(\omega)$ for a system with an impurity concentration $n_i=1/1800$ in a cluster with $8000$ impurities, different values of the parameter $V$ and different percentage of impurities on each sublattice.
We consider first the less realistic, but simpler, case where all impurities are adsorbed on the $B_{1}$ sites, top panels of Fig. \ref{fig3}. For $V=0$, as in the one impurity case, we obtain a broad peak in $\rho_{\mathrm{imp}}(\omega)$ located near the renormalized energy $\bar{\varepsilon}_0$. A remarkable detail is the emergence of a small gap for $\omega<0$. This gap is reminiscent of the gap that occurs in graphene monolayers for a finite concentration of impurities lying on the same sublattice \cite{Pereira2008,Cheianov2010,Abanin2010,Santos2014}. The effect is due to a global inversion symmetry breaking due to the different structure of the $A$ and $B$ sublattices.
In the thermodynamic limit, disordered systems would not present real gaps but energy windows with exponentially small DOS and it would be more appropriate to talk about pseudo-gaps rather than about real gaps.
For a gated system with positive $V=0.1$ eV the gap induced in the pristine BLG is partially filled by impurity states. Within this gap, the impurities generate a band that extends from the bottom of the conduction band towards the centre of the gap and is separated by a pseudo-gap from the valence band. Conversely, for $V=-0.1$ eV there is a narrower impurity band close to the centre of the BLG gap separated by pseudo-gaps from the conduction and valence bands. These structures can be understood straightforwardly from the shape of the bound states of the one impurity case.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{Fig4.jpg}
\caption{Average LDOS of the four non equivalent C atoms (indicated in the figures) in a biased BLG with impurities distributed at $50$\%. The thin (red) lines are the corresponding LDOS of the pristine system. Upper and lower panels have $V=0.1$ eV and $V= -0.1$ eV, respectively. }
\label{fig4}
\end{figure}
The results are different if the impurities are distributed with the same probability on the two sublattices of the top layer, bottom panels of Fig. \ref{fig3}. For $V=0$ there is no pseudo-gap on top of the valence band. For positive $V$ an impurity band is formed within the BLG gap and a narrow resonance appears close to the bottom of the conduction band. The former is due to the impurities adsorbed on the $B_{1}$ sites while the later is due to the narrow resonance of the impurities on the $A_{1}$ sites (see Fig. \ref{fig2}c). Interestingly, for negative $V$ two separated and narrow impurity bands are formed within the BLG gap. Again, these bands are due to the impurities adsorbed on different sublattices, the lower energy one is narrower and comes from impurities on the $A_{1}$ sublattice.
Other impurity distributions, like the one shown at the central panel of Fig. \ref{fig3} where $2/3$ of the impurities are on the $B_{1}$ sublattice, can be viewed in a first approximation as an interpolation between the two previous cases where the spectral weight of the $A_{1}$ and $B_{1}$ impurities change according to their concentration.
As we show below, in gated BLG, the impurity bands formed within the gap of the pristine sample are bands of strongly localized states.
In order to better characterize the effect of impurities on the electronic structure of the system we evaluate the average LDOS on the four non-equivalent sites of the BLG, $\rho_{Ai}$ ($\rho_{Bi}$). The results are presented in Fig. \ref{fig4}.
Notably, in some cases, for $\varepsilon_{0} >0$ and $V\ne 0$, the LDOS of the valence band of the host BLG is almost unaffected by the impurities. In particular, the narrow van Hove singularity of the $A_{2}$ sites is essentially insensitive to the presence of the adsorbate. This suggests that at least in the valence band no strong localization effects occur with this type of impurity doping. As we show in next section, in gated samples, clear evidence of strong localization are observed for states within the gap and close to the impurity resonances occurring in the conduction band.
\subsection{Localization and transport properties}
To estimate the localization length
$\xi (\omega )$ we evaluate the two-point correlation function $|\mathcal{G}_{ij}(\omega)|^2$,
where ${\mathcal{G}}_{ij}(\omega)=\langle\langle f_{i}^{},f_{j}^{\dag }\rangle\rangle$ is the retarded propagator
from the impurity orbital at site $i$ to the one at site $j$. In the localized regime this quantity decreases exponentially when the distance $R_{ij}$ between impurities increases.\cite{Evers2008} For large $R_{ij}$ ($R_{ij}\gtrsim\xi$), the configurational average of its logarithm is well described by the following expression \cite{Li1989}
\begin{equation}
\label{lnG}
\langle\ln{|\mathcal{G}_{ij}(\omega)|^2}\rangle_\mathrm{avg}=\beta-2R_{ij}/\xi (\omega)-\alpha \ln{R_{ij}}\,,
\end{equation}
where $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are fitting parameters. An estimation of the localization length $\xi(\omega)$ then requires the evaluation of the impurity propagator $\mathcal{G}_{ij}(\omega )$ at large distances $R_{ij}$. As discussed in Ref. [\onlinecite{Usaj2014}], the Chebyshev polynomials method becomes numerically inefficient to this end. However, for long distances and low energy, the propagators of the pristine BLG can be evaluates analytically using the continuous approximation. Defining the impurity propagator matrix $\bm{\mathcal{G}}$ with matrix elements $\mathcal{G}_{ij}(\omega)$ the Dyson equation reads
\begin{equation}
\left[(\omega+\ci0^+-\varepsilon _{0})\bm{I}-\gamma^{2}\tilde{\bm{g}}\right]\bm{\mathcal{G}}=\bm{I}\,,
\label{Dyson}
\end{equation}
where $\bm{I}$ is the unit matrix and $\tilde{\bm{g}}$ is a matrix whose elements are
the propagators of pristine graphene, $g_{i,j}(\omega)$, between $C$ sites $i$ and $j$ having an impurity on top.
The quantity $\tilde{t}_{ij}=\gamma^2g_{i,j}(\omega)$ represents an effective (frequency dependent) hopping between impurities. The BLG retarded propagators take the form
\begin{widetext}
\begin{eqnarray}
g_{A_{1}i,A_{1}j}({\bm{R}},\omega)&=&\frac{4\pi}{\Omega_{BZ}}\cos({\bm{K}\cdot \bm{R}})\left[\mu_{1}^{AA}K_{0}\left(ik_{1}R\right)-\mu_{2}^{AA}K_{0}\left(ik_{2}R\right)\right]\,,\\
g_{A_{1}i,B_{1}j}({\bm{R}},\omega)&=&-\frac{4\pi}{\Omega_{BZ}}\sin({\bm{K}\cdot \bm{R}}+\theta_{R})\left[\mu_{1}^{AB}K_{1}\left(ik_{1}R\right)-\mu_{2}^{AB}K_{1}\left(ik_{2}R\right)\right]\,,\\
g_{B_{1}i,B_{1}j}({\bm{R}},\omega)&=&\frac{4\pi}{\Omega_{BZ}}\cos({\bm{K}\cdot \bm{R}})\left[\mu_{1}^{BB}K_{0}\left(ik_{1}R\right)-\mu_{2}^{BB}K_{0}\left(ik_{2}R\right)\right].
\end{eqnarray}
\end{widetext}
Here $K_{\upsilon}(x)$ is the $\upsilon$ order modified Bessel function of the second kind, $\Omega_{BZ}$ is the area of the first Brillouin Zone and the coefficients are
\begin{equation}
\mu_{j}^{AA}=\left(\frac{\left(\omega-V\right)\left(\omega+V\right)^{2}}{v_{F}^{4}\left(k_{1}^{2}-k_{2}^{2}\right)}+\frac{k_{j}^{2}\left(V-\omega\right)}{v_{F}^{2}\left(k_{1}^{2}-k_{2}^{2}\right)}\right),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\mu_{j}^{AB}=ik_{j}\left(\frac{\left(V+\omega\right)^{2}}{v_{F}^{3}\left(k_{1}^{2}-k_{2}^{2}\right)}-\frac{k_{j}^{2}}{v_{F}\left(k_{1}^{2}-k_{2}^{2}\right)}\right),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\mu_{j}^{BB}=\left(\frac{\left(V+\omega\right)\left(\omega^{2}-V^{2}-t_{\perp}^{2}\right)}{v_{F}^{4}\left(k_{1}^{2}-k_{2}^{2}\right)}+\frac{k_{j}^{2}\left(V-\omega\right)}{v_{F}^{2}\left(k_{1}^{2}-k_{2}^{2}\right)}\right),
\end{equation}
with $j=1,2$, $v_{F}$ is the Fermi velocity,
\begin{equation}
k_{1,2}^{2}=\frac{V^{2}+\omega^{2}}{v_{F}^{2}}\pm\frac{1}{2v_{F}^{2}}\sqrt{16V^{2}\omega^{2}+4\left(\omega^{2}-V^{2}\right)t_{\perp}^{2}}.
\end{equation}
and $\theta_R$ is the polar angle of the direction
of $\bm{R}$ with respect to the $x$ axis chosen to be along the direction of $K$-$K'$.
In addition, $g_{B_{1}j,A_{1}i}({\bm{R}},\omega)=g_{A_{1}i,B_{1}j}({-\bm{R}},\omega)$.
For a random distribution of impurities, we calculate the matrix $\tilde{\bm{g}}$ and obtain $ \bm{\mathcal{G}}$ from Eq. (\ref{Dyson}). We then take an average of $\ln{|\mathcal{G}_{ij}(\omega) |^2}$ for all sites $i$ and $j$ whose distance lies in a narrow window around a given value $R_{ij}$. In this procedure, to avoid finite size effects, we take site $i$ close to the centre on the cluster and neglect all sites $j$ lying close to the edges of the cluster. Finally, we make a configurational average by repeating the procedure with different impurity configurations. The obtained $\langle\ln{|\mathcal{G}_{ij}(\omega )|^2}\rangle_\mathrm{avg}$ versus $R_{ij}$ is then fitted using Eq. (\ref{lnG}) to obtain the localization length $\xi (\omega )$. Some of these fits are shown in Fig. \ref{fig5} for different values of the energy $\omega$ lying within gap of the biased BLG.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{Fig5.jpg}
\caption{Spatial dependence of $\langle\ln{|\mathcal{G}_{ij}(\omega)|^2}\rangle_\mathrm{avg}$ inside the gap of biased BLG. Top and bottom panels correspond to $100\%$ and $50\%$ of the impurities on the $B_{1}$ sublattice respectively. Left and right columns correspond to $V=0.1$ eV and $V=-0.1$ eV, respectively.}
\label{fig5}
\end{figure}
In Fig. \ref{fig6} the localization length $\xi (\omega)$ for the gated and ungated BLG cases and different impurity distributions are shown for a cluster with typical radius of the order of $40 \ell_{i}$ where $\ell_{i}$ is the mean impurity-impurity distance.
For the ungated system the localization length $\xi (\omega)$ presents a minimum in the conduction band for energies close to the renormalized energy $\bar{\varepsilon}_0$ of the impurity resonance. As the energy approaches the Dirac point from above, $\omega>0$, the localization length shows a fast increase exceeding the values for which our calculation gives reliable results (only localization lengths smaller than a fraction of the impurities cluster is considered). This behavior for $\omega>0$ is qualitative similar to what is observed in monolayer graphene.\cite{Usaj2014} In the valence band, there is a rapid increase of $\xi (\omega)$ as $|\omega|$ increases.
For the gated system, the impurity bands formed within the gap of the pristine BLG are strongly localized. In contrast, the states in the BLG bands tend to be much less localized, in particular in the valence band (consistent with the small sensitivity observed on the averaged LDOS, see Fig. \ref{fig4}) .
\subsection{Summary and discussion}
We have analyzed the effect of diluted adatoms on the electronic structure of gated and ungated bilayer graphene. The impurities are described as single orbital hybridized with the p$_{z}$ orbital of one of the C atoms of the top layer. We consider diluted systems, typically with impurity concentrations $n_{i}\approx 5\times10^{-4}$ and with different distributions on the two non-equivalent sites of the top graphene layer.
In the diluted limit studied in this work, and due to the small adsorption energy difference of fluorine on the two different sites, the most probable impurity distributions would correspond to an almost random distribution of impurities on the two sublattices. For the sake of concreteness, we consider the case of $50\%$ of the adatoms on each sublattice, illustrated in the bottom panels of Fig. \ref{fig6}, for our following concluding remarks.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{Fig6.jpg}
\caption{Localization length in units of the average distance between impurities for bias voltages and different impurity distributions. Parameters like in Fig. \ref{fig3}. Dashed lines are the average impurity spectral densities.}
\label{fig6}
\end{figure}
The first observation is that for the same impurities and the same concentration, the localization length is larger in ungated BLG than in graphene. The localization length shows a minimum for energies close to the impurity resonance, there our results show that $\xi(\omega)$ is at least two times larger in BLG than in graphene. The behavior of $\xi(\omega)$ at the Dirac point $(\omega \approx 0)$ shows a structure with a sharp minimum. In second place, the effect of an electric field perpendicular to the sample depends on the polarity of the field. The field induces a gap in the pristine BLG that is partially filled by strongly localized impurity states. However, the structure, distribution and localization length of these states depend on the field polarization. For positive $V$ a single impurity band covers the upper part of the gap. There, all states are strongly localized with a maximum of $\xi(\omega)$ at the centre of the band. The impurity spectral density shows a sharp resonance at the bottom of the conduction band. This resonance is due to localized states that are much more extended than those in the gap. In the valence band the localization length is too large for a good estimation with the system size used in the calculation. For negative $V$ two narrow impurity bands, separated from each other and from the valence and conduction bands by small pseudo-gaps, are obtained. In both bands the localization length shows marked energy dependence with a maximum at the centre of each band. The states in the valence and conduction bands are much less localized.
In systems with a weak energy dependence of the density of states and the localization length around the Fermi energy $E_{\mathrm{F}}$, the resistance $\mathcal{R}(T)$ is expected to show the Mott's variable range hopping (VRH) behavior. In two dimensional system the VRH theory gives $\mathcal{R}(T)\propto \exp[(T_{0}/T)^{\frac{1}{3}}]$, where $T_{0}$ is a characteristic activation temperature given by
\begin{equation}
T_{0}=\frac{\alpha}{k_\mathrm{B}\rho(E_{\mathrm{F}})\xi ^{2}(E_{\mathrm{F}})}\,.
\end{equation}
Here $\alpha$ is a numerical constant ($\alpha\approx 14$), $\rho(E_{\mathrm{F}})$ and $\xi(E_{\mathrm{F}})$ are the total density of states (DOS) and the localization length at the Fermi energy, respectively. In biased BLG, where two distinct strongly localized impurities bands may exist inside the gap, one could expect deviations of $\mathcal{R}(T)$ from a single VRH theory. In that case, a generalization of Eq.(15) to the case of two narrow impurity bands might be needed.
Finally, due to the dependence of the low energies electronic structure on the polarity of the electric field, the model predicts a dependence of the transport properties on the sign of $V$. Such asymmetry is not clearly observed in experiments with fluorinated graphene \cite{JunPrivComm}. If all impurities where adsorbed on the $B_{1}$ sublattice these asymmetries would be difficult to observe due to the similarities on the DOS and the localization length obtained for the two polarities, see top panels of Fig. \ref{fig6}. This scenario, however, is very unlikely. On the other hand, it has been reported that bilayer graphene samples grown on SiO$_{2}$/Si may show charge inhomogeneities with variations of the electronic density up to $10^{11}$cm$^{2}$. Such inhomogeneities, that locally shift the (electro) chemical potential in different regions of the sample, could also mask the asymmetries.
\section{Acknowledgements}
We acknowledge useful discussions with J. Sofo , J. Zhu and R. M. Guzm\'an Arellano. We thank financial support from PICT
Bicentenario 2010-1060 from ANPCyT, PIP 11220080101821 and 11220110100832 from CONICET and 06/C400 and 06/C415 SeCyT-UNC. HPOC
and GU acknowledge support from the ICTP. GU also acknowledges support from the Simons Foundation.
|
\section{Introduction}
The quark model can reproduce the behavior of observables such as the spectrum and the magnetic moments, but it neglects pair-creation (or continuum-coupling) effects.
Above threshold, this coupling leads to strong decays; below threshold, it leads to virtual $q \bar q - q \bar q$ ($qqq - q \bar q$) components in the hadron wave function and shifts of the physical mass with respect to the bare mass.
The unquenching of the quark model for hadrons is a way to take these components into account.
Pioneering work on the unquenching of meson quark models was done by Van Beveren and Rupp used an t-matrix approach \cite{vanBeveren:1979bd,vanBeveren:1986ea} , while T\"ornqvist and collaborators \cite{Ono:1983rd,Tornqvist} used their unitarized QM.
These methods were used (with a few variations) by several authors to study the influence of the meson-meson (meson-baryon) continuum on meson (baryon) observables.
As an example we mention the study of the scalar meson nonet ($a_0$, $f_0$, etc.) of Ref. \cite{vanBeveren:1986ea,Tornqvist:1995kr} in which the loop contributions are given by the hadronic intermediate states that each meson can access. It is via these hadronic loops that the bare states become ``dressed'' and the hadronic loop contributions totally dominante the dynamics of the process. A very similar approach was developed by Boglione and Pennington in Ref. \cite{Pennington:2002}, in which they investigated the dynamical generation of the scalar mesons by initially inserting only one ``bare seed''. The study of Ref. \cite{Geiger:1989yc} demonstrates that the effects of the $q \bar q$ sea pairs in meson spectroscopy is simply a renormalization of the meson string tension. The strangeness content of the nucleon electromagnetic form factors was investigated in \cite{Geiger:1996re,Bijker:2012zza}. Also Capstick and Morel in Ref. \cite{Capstick} analyzed
baryon meson loop effects on the spectrum of nonstrange baryons.
Eichten {\it et al.} explored the influence of the open-charm channels on the charmonium properties, using the Cornell coupled-channel model \cite{Eichten:1974af} to assess departures from the single-channel potential-model expectations.
The flavor asymmetry of the proton was studied in the framework of the unquenched quark model (UQM) \cite{Bijker:2012zza,Bijker:2009up,bottomonium,charmonium,Ferretti:2013vua,Ferretti:2014xqa}, in wich the effects of the quark-antiquark pairs were introduced into the constituent quark model (CQM) in a systematic way and the wave fuctions were given explicitly. The approach is a generalization of the unitarized quark model \cite{vanBeveren:1979bd,vanBeveren:1986ea,Tornqvist,Tornqvist:1995kr}.
In this contribution, we discuss some of the latest applications of the UQM to the study of meson observables.
\section{UQM }
\subsection{Formalism}
\label{Sec:formalism}
In the unquenched quark model for baryons \cite{Bijker:2012zza,Bijker:2009up} and mesons \cite{bottomonium,charmonium,Ferretti:2013vua,Ferretti:2014xqa}, the hadron wave function is made up of a zeroth order $qqq$ ($q \bar q$) configuration plus a sum over the possible higher Fock components, due to the creation of $^{3}P_0$ $q \bar q$ pairs. Thus, we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eqn:Psi-A}
\mid \psi_A \rangle &=& {\cal N} \left[ \mid A \rangle
+ \sum_{BC \ell J} \int d \vec{K} \, k^2 dk \, \mid BC \ell J;\vec{K} k \rangle \right.
\nonumber\\
&& \hspace{2cm} \left. \frac{ \langle BC \ell J;\vec{K} k \mid T^{\dagger} \mid A \rangle }
{E_a - E_b - E_c} \right] ~,
\end{eqnarray}
where $T^{\dagger}$ stands for the $^{3}P_0$ quark-antiquark pair-creation operator \cite{bottomonium,charmonium,Ferretti:2013vua,Ferretti:2014xqa}, $A$ is the baryon/meson, $B$ and $C$ represent the intermediate state hadrons, $E_a$, $E_b$ and $E_c$ are the corresponding energies, $k$ and $\ell$ the relative radial momentum and orbital angular momentum between $B$ and $C$ and $\vec{J} = \vec{J}_b + \vec{J}_c + \vec{\ell}$ is the total angular momentum.
It is worthwhile noting that in Refs. \cite{bottomonium,charmonium,Ferretti:2013vua,Ferretti:2014xqa,Kalashnikova:2005ui}, the constant pair-creation strength in the operator (\ref{eqn:Psi-A}) was substituted with an effective one, to suppress unphysical heavy quark pair-creation.
In the UQM \cite{Bijker:2012zza,Bijker:2009up,bottomonium,charmonium,Ferretti:2013vua,Ferretti:2014xqa}, the matrix elements of an observable $\hat O$ can be calculated as
\begin{equation}
O = \left\langle \psi_A \right| \hat O \left| \psi_A \right\rangle \mbox{ },
\end{equation}
where $\left| \psi_A \right\rangle$ is the state of Eq. (\ref{eqn:Psi-A}).
The result will receive a contribution from the valence part and one from the continuum component, which is absent in naive QM calculations.
The introduction of continuum effects in the QM can thus be essential to study observables that only depend on $q \bar q$ sea pairs, like the strangeness content of the nucleon electromagnetic form factors \cite{Geiger:1996re,Bijker:2012zza}.
In other cases, continuum effects can provide important corrections to baryon/meson observables, like the self-energy corrections to meson masses \cite{bottomonium,charmonium,Ferretti:2013vua,Ferretti:2014xqa} or the importance of the orbital angular momentum in the spin of the proton \cite{Bijker:2009up}.
\subsection{$c \bar c$ and $b \bar b$ spectra with self-energy corrections in the UQM}
In Refs. \cite{bottomonium,charmonium,Ferretti:2013vua,Ferretti:2014xqa}, the method was used by some of us to compute the $c \bar c$ and $b \bar b$ spectra with self-energy corrections, due to continuum coupling effects.
In the UQM, the physical mass of a meson,
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:self-trascendental}
M_a = E_a + \Sigma(E_a) \mbox{ },
\end{equation}
is given by the sum of two terms: a bare energy, $E_a$, calculated within a potential model \cite{Godfrey:1985xj}, and a self energy correction,
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:self-a}
\Sigma(E_a) = \sum_{BC\ell J} \int_0^{\infty} k^2 dk \mbox{ } \frac{\left| M_{A \rightarrow BC}(k) \right|^2}{E_a - E_b - E_c} \mbox{ },
\end{equation}
computed within the UQM formalism.
Our results for the self energies of charmonia \cite{charmonium,Ferretti:2014xqa} and bottomonia \cite{bottomonium,Ferretti:2013vua,Ferretti:2014xqa} show that the pair-creation effects on the spectrum of heavy mesons are quite small. Specifically for charmonium and bottomonium states, they are of the order of $2 - 6\%$ and $1 \%$, respectively.
The relative mass shifts, i.e. the difference between the self energies of two meson states, are in the order of a few tens of MeV.
However, as QM's can predict the meson masses with relatively high precision in the heavy quark sector, even these corrections can become significant.
These results are particularly interesting in the case of states close to an open-flavor decay threshold, like the $X(3872)$ and $\chi_b(3P)$ mesons.
For example, in our picture the $X(3872)$ can be interpreted as a $c \bar c$ core [the $\chi_{c1}(2^3P_1)$], plus higher Fock components due to the coupling to the meson-meson continuum. In Ref. \cite{Ferretti:2014xqa}, we showed that the probability to find the $X(3872)$ in its core or continuum components is approximately $45\%$ and $55\%$, respectively.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This work is supported in part by PAPIIT-DGAPA, Mexico (grant IN107314).
|
\section{Introduction}
It is known that \textit{Aedes aegypti} mosquitoes be the primary transmitters of dengue fever in the world \cite{BBG2002}. This species were predominantly tropical species and confined to coastal areas. Now they are widespread inland and cause deadly morbidities by means of dengue fever in mostly Southeast Asia, Africa, USA, Australia, Brazil, Argentina, Caribbean Islands, China, India, Japan, Portugal, etc \cite{PT2013,EG2007}. The areas where \textit{Aedes aegypti} mosquitoes most probably prevalent in which have tremendous threat of dengue outbreaks are densely urbanized areas \cite{BHL2003,CS2006}. Several studies confirmed that eradicating mosquito population had constricted the area of dengue endemicity throughout the globe, beside it helped to bring down the cost as regards a high number of surveillance. Even vector control has been considerably inexpensive, a government tendency to take out of concern the funding to attempt it continuously leads to a necessity of a more efficient and effective control management. In order the mosquito population to be precisely managed, one needs to model the dynamics of such population and further to investigate effectivity of a control scheme which is acted to it.
\textit{Aedes aegypti} belongs to species which inhabit in domestic water containers: bath vessels, flowerpots, drums, tins, unused tyres, untreated swimming pools, or even in curved broads where it is possible for water to last on for long time \cite{LHG1987}. Both male and female adult mosquitoes feed on nectar. Only females require additional blood sources to obtain nutrients before producing eggs and during eggs maturation. Note that a single female can lay down at one time about 100--200 immersing eggs in water \cite{CHF2010}. Potential eggs can be produced by \emph{Aedes aegypti} females up to five batches during their lifetime. An egg needs 2--5 days to maturate its living embryo, depending on water temperature \cite{JHH1965,MC2011}. In an advanced growth, each egg turns to a larva which posteriorly withstands for 5--10 days depending on water temperature and air humidity \cite{GGM1995}. This living larva usually eats algae and microorganisms in water surface, making each individual competes with its owns for logistics. A discussion on competitions amongst larvae can become important after the fact that in a joint container, \textit{Aedes albopictus} larvae outcompete \textit{Aedes aegypti} larvae, thus the winners develop at a faster rate \cite{Bar1996}. In the prescribed range of lifetime, each larva undergoes four times skin exfoliation and turns to a pupa at the very end of the processes. An idle pupa needs to wait for 1--5 days before it metamorphoses into an adult \cite{MRB2012}. In addition, the living adult can generally survive for 10 days, or in some extreme cases for 2--4 weeks \cite{ZK2010}.
Tabachnick et al. \cite{TMP1978} found three polytypic origins where \textit{Aedes aegypti} breeds: domestic (urban housing including its narrowing environment), sylvan (rural areas, some cases in tree holes and leaf axils), and peridomestic (artificial plantation areas such as coconut groves and farms). In general, separation of the origins as indoor and outdoor had also been highlighted. In \cite{IAA2012}, the authors notified that the number of \textit{Aedes aegypti} differed based on indoor-outdoor classification and heterogeneity of containers. A brief corresponding result showed that \textit{Aedes aegypti} species constituted as the most abundant in indoor containers compared to the other tested species. Some reference also mentioned that in indoor containers, competition amongst larvae had not always been the case since a particular tendency made \textit{Aedes aegypti} grew more than \textit{Aedes albopictus} \cite{CHC1971}.
By a basic idea of incorporating control measures to a mathematical model of mosquito population dynamics, several control schemes were tested toward fighting the spread of \textit{Aedes aegypti}. We highlight, for instances, utilization of ultra-low-volume (ULV) insecticide \cite{LCM2012} also combined with Temephos dissemination \cite{WGS2013} and the sterile insect technique (SIT) \cite{CT1975,PM1987,TYE2010,FMO2013} as a Genetic-based Vector Control (GVC). However, in this paper we do not take the epidemiology of mosquito population or infection exposures amongst individuals into account. Therefore, a susceptible-infected segregation is no longer in use. We accentuate a model of mosquito population dynamics based on indoor-outdoor life cycle classification and introduction of control intervention as well as investigation to the best strategy for reducing the population with cost as cheap as possible. As control devices, we highlight utilization of Temephos (mainly used to kill larvae) and fumigation (used to kill adults by blocking respiration process) after the fact that they have already been well-known schemes in an integrated mosquito eradication programme.
We organize the rest of the paper as the following. In Section 2, we set up a mathematical model for depicting the dynamics of multi-age-segregated mosquito population based on indoor-outdoor life cycle classification. We add two control measures to the system in order to check how the population trajectories response to such control. In Section 3, we examine the biological meaningfulness of the model based on positivity of the system's solution and existence and stability of equilibria. So far we use plausible constant value for the control. In Section 4, we discuss the optimal control model which generates a time-variant control solving the proposed optimization problem. In seeking an optimal solution, we first use the so-called indirect method to generate state-adjoint-gradient systems of equations and then utilize a gradient-based method to solve the generated systems in an algorithmic workflow. As the rest of the paper, in Section 5, we do numerical tests for bringing forward some visualizations of the model.
\section{The mathematical model}
To capture the dynamics of mosquito population, let us first classify the population based on age-segregation: egg $\text{\textbf{E}}$, larva $\text{\textbf{L}}$ and adult $\text{\textbf{A}}$. We out-concern the dynamics of pupa by our assumption that there will be no deaths and imbalance in- and outflow occurring amongst pupae, since then the population of pupa remains constant. Based on indoor-outdoor classification, the eggs and larvae differ from indoor $\text{\textbf{E}}_1,\text{\textbf{L}}_1$ and outdoor $\text{\textbf{E}}_2,\text{\textbf{L}}_2$. No more segregation for the adults since every individual can fly to wherever it prevalents, indoor as well as outdoor. We introduce the control measures $\text{\textbf{u}}_1$ and $\text{\textbf{u}}_2$ denoting the impact rate of utilization of Temephos dissemination and fumigation respectively. Let $[0,T]$ be the range of observation time $t$ and $\text{\textbf{x}}=(\text{\textbf{E}}_1,\text{\textbf{E}}_2,\text{\textbf{L}}_1,\text{\textbf{L}}_2,\text{\textbf{A}})^{\top}\in L^2([0,T],\rm I\!R^5)$ be the state variable. Our model is preliminarily exhibited by the following equation
\begin{equation}\label{eq:state}
\dot{\text{\textbf{x}}}(t)=\text{\textbf{f}}(\text{\textbf{x}}(t),\text{\textbf{u}}(t)),\quad \text{\textbf{x}}(0)=\text{\textbf{x}}_0\succeq \text{\textbf{0}}.
\end{equation}
We assume that adult mosquitoes will select indoor breeding sites with the probability $p$ and, therefore, select outdoor breeding sites with the probability $1-p$. Alongside with introduction of the tendency-based probability, we denote $\mu$ as the corresponding rate of the adults to lay eggs. It is assumed that natural deaths can occur in all classes, thus we denote $\eta_{\{1,\cdots,5\}}$ as the corresponding rates. In average periods, both indoor and outdoor eggs metamorphose into corresponding larvae with the transition rates $\alpha_{\{1,2\}}$. The same situations hold for respectively indoor and outdoor larvae, that they metamorphose into adults with the transition rates $\beta_{\{1,2\}}$. As an underlying discussion, we introduce the two logistic coefficients $\sigma_{\{1,2\}}$ to accommodate phenomena of competition amongst larvae. Assume that all in- or outdoor water containers are treated as homogeneous such that $\frac{\sigma_{1}}{\sigma_{2}}$ proportionates to some constant $M$. The fact that suitable choice for $M>1$ leads to the situation where outdoor breading sites have $M$-times larger carrying capacity than indoor. After all, the model \eqref{eq:state} is unfolded as
\begin{subequations}
\label{eq:compwise}
\begin{align}
\dot{\text{\textbf{E}}}_1 &= \mu p \text{\textbf{A}} - (\alpha_1+\eta_1) \text{\textbf{E}}_1 - q \text{\textbf{u}}_1 \text{\textbf{E}}_1\\
\dot{\text{\textbf{E}}}_2 &= \mu (1-p) \text{\textbf{A}} - (\alpha_2+\eta_2) \text{\textbf{E}}_2 \\
\dot{\text{\textbf{L}}}_1 &= \alpha_1 \text{\textbf{E}}_1 - \sigma_1 \text{\textbf{L}}_1^2 - (\beta_1+\eta_3) \text{\textbf{L}}_1 - \text{\textbf{u}}_1 \text{\textbf{L}}_1 \\
\dot{\text{\textbf{L}}}_2 &= \alpha_2 \text{\textbf{E}}_2 - \sigma_2 \text{\textbf{L}}_2^2 - (\beta_2+\eta_4) \text{\textbf{L}}_2\\
\dot{\text{\textbf{A}}} &= \beta_1 \text{\textbf{L}}_1 + \beta_2 \text{\textbf{L}}_2 - \eta_5 \text{\textbf{A}} - \text{\textbf{u}}_2 \text{\textbf{A}}.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Two control measures are added into the model. Temephos is practically disseminated into indoor water containers to kill larvae and eggs. The weighting factor $q\in \left[0,\tfrac12\right]$ accounts for the fact that the dissemination has less impact on eggs. Meanwhile fumigation is directly targeted to adult mosquito population.
It is assumed that all the control $\text{\textbf{u}}$ belongs to a set of admissible control $\mathcal{U}\subset L^2([0,T],\rm I\!R^2_+)$. Define
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{D}:=\{\text{\textbf{x}}:\dot{\text{\textbf{x}}}(t)=\text{\textbf{f}}(\text{\textbf{x}}(t),\text{\textbf{u}}(t)),t\in[0,T],\text{\textbf{x}}(0)=\text{\textbf{x}}_0\succeq \text{\textbf{0}},\text{\textbf{u}}\in\mathcal{U}\}
\end{equation}
as the feasible set of solutions. It is intuitively believed that the higher $\text{\textbf{u}}$ plugged into the model, the lesser the number of all classes. On the other hand, the lesser $\text{\textbf{u}}$, the more the population tends to explosion. The more $\text{\textbf{u}}$ means that a policy maker needs to spend more fund, otherwise there will be no significant reduction to the mosquito population size. Given positive trade-off constants $\omega_{\text{\textbf{x}},\{1,\cdots,5\}}$ and $\omega_{\text{\textbf{u}},\{1,2\}}$, the following objective functional accommodates the necessity of balancing situation between significant population reduction
and limitation of fund:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:obj}
J(\text{\textbf{u}}) :=\frac1{2 T} \int_0^T \sum_{i=1}^5 \omega_{\text{\textbf{x}},i} \text{\textbf{x}}_i^2(t)
+\sum_{j=1}^2 \omega _{\text{\textbf{u}},j} \text{\textbf{u}}_j^2(t)\, \text{d} t.
\end{equation}
Now our optimization problem is stated as
\begin{equation}
\text{\textbf{(OC)}: find }(\text{\textbf{x}},\text{\textbf{u}})\in\mathcal{D}\times\mathcal{U}\text{ such that }J(\text{\textbf{u}})\rightarrow\min.
\end{equation}
\section{Model analysis}
We need to ensure that our model is biologically meaningful. The following theorem gives a primary meaningfulness of the model: whenever the initial condition is positive, then evolution of the solution points in forward time stays positive.
\begin{theorem}
Consider the model \eqref{eq:state} where $\text{\textbf{u}}\in\mathcal{U}$. If $\text{\textbf{x}}_0\succeq\text{\textbf{0}}$ then $\text{\textbf{x}}(t)\succeq\text{\textbf{0}}$ for all $t>0$, or particularly on the observation range $(0,T]$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Following the steps in \cite{WGS2013}, we let $\text{\textbf{n}}$ be $(5\times5)$-matrix representing a collection of all normal vectors (by rows) to the boundary of nonnegative orthant $\partial\rm I\!R^5_+$. Thus we have $\text{\textbf{n}}=-I_5$ where $I_5$ denotes the identity matrix. To ensure that the trajectory of solution does not walk out of the nonnegative orthant, one only needs to check the trajectory of points in the boundary. Notice that at $i$-th boundary, $\partial_i\rm I\!R^5_+$,
\begin{equation*}
\left.\left[\text{\textbf{n}}\text{\textbf{f}}(\text{\textbf{x}},\text{\textbf{u}})\right]_i\right|_{\text{\textbf{x}}\in\partial_i\rm I\!R^5_+,\text{\textbf{u}}\in\mathcal{U}}\leq 0.
\end{equation*}
This means the direction of evolution of such points in a boundary is in counter-direction or at least perpendicular to the corresponding normal vector. Thus it follows that the solution must not leave $\rm I\!R^5_+$ for all $t>0$.
\end{proof}
Let us first consider the autonomous system of nonlinear differential equations~\eqref{eq:state} with constant control $\text{\textbf{u}}\in\rm I\!R^2_+$. For abbreviate purpose, let $s_1=\mu p$, $s_2=\mu(1-p)$, $s_3=\alpha_1$, $s_4=\alpha_2$, $s_5=\beta_1$, $s_6=\beta_2$ and $d_1=\alpha_1+\eta_1+q\text{\textbf{u}}_1$, $d_2=\alpha_2+\eta_2$, $d_3=\beta_1+\eta_3+\text{\textbf{u}}_1$, $d_4=\beta_2+\eta_4$, $d_5=\eta_5+\text{\textbf{u}}_2$. In order to obtain equilibria of the system, we need to solve $\text{\textbf{f}}(\text{\textbf{x}},\text{\textbf{u}})=\text{\textbf{0}}$. It follows from this process, one holds
\begin{subequations}
\label{eq:E}
\begin{eqnarray}
\text{\textbf{A}}^{\ast}&=&\frac{s_5\text{\textbf{L}}_1^{\ast}+s_6\text{\textbf{L}}_2^{\ast}}{d_5}\\
\text{\textbf{E}}_1^{\ast}&=&\frac{s_1 (s_5\text{\textbf{L}}_1^{\ast}+s_6\text{\textbf{L}}_2^{\ast})}{d_1d_5}\\
\text{\textbf{E}}_2^{\ast}&=&\frac{s_2 (s_5\text{\textbf{L}}_1^{\ast}+s_6\text{\textbf{L}}_2^{\ast})}{d_2d_5}
\end{eqnarray}
where $(\text{\textbf{L}}_1^{\ast},\text{\textbf{L}}_2^{\ast})$ follows the leading equations
\begin{eqnarray}
\text{\textbf{L}}_1^2+a_1\text{\textbf{L}}_1+b_1\text{\textbf{L}}_2&=&0\label{eq:L1}\\
\text{\textbf{L}}_2^2+a_2\text{\textbf{L}}_2+b_2\text{\textbf{L}}_1&=&0.\label{eq:L2}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
All the constants that belong to the last equations are given by
\begin{equation*}
a_1=\frac{d_3}{\sigma_1}-\frac{s_1s_3s_5}{d_1d_5\sigma_1},\,
b_1=-\frac{s_1s_3s_6}{d_1d_5\sigma_1},\,
a_2=\frac{d_4}{\sigma_2}-\frac{s_2s_4s_6}{d_2d_5\sigma_2},\,
b_2=-\frac{s_2s_4s_5}{d_2d_5\sigma_2}
\end{equation*}
It follows from \eqref{eq:L1}-\eqref{eq:L2}, three equilibria can simply be obtained
\begin{eqnarray*}
\text{\textbf{Q}}_1&=&(0,0,0,0,0)\\
\text{\textbf{Q}}_2&=&\left(-\frac{s_1s_5a_1}{d_1d_5},-\frac{s_2s_5a_1}{d_2d_5},-a_1,0,-\frac{s_5a_1}{d_5}\right)\\
\text{\textbf{Q}}_3&=&\left(-\frac{s_1s_6a_2}{d_1d_5},-\frac{s_2s_6a_2}{d_2d_5},0,-a_2,-\frac{s_6a_2}{d_5}\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
Definition of $\text{\textbf{Q}}_2$ and $\text{\textbf{Q}}_3$ only makes sense in biological point of view if only $a_1,a_2$ are negative. The definition simply means that after very long time, the class of either in- or outdoor larvae tends to extinction while the other classes stay alive. In biological context, such situation can hardly happen. In the next writing, we demonstrate that the choice of $a_1,a_2$ to be positive leads to a more interesting discussion. First, we introduce a measure whose cubic value is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:R}
\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})^3:=\frac{s_1s_3s_5}{d_5d_1d_3}+\frac{s_2s_4s_6}{d_5d_2d_4}.
\end{equation}
The following identity is found after some algebraic computations
\begin{equation}\label{eq:id}
\frac{b_1b_2-a_1a_2}{d_3d_4}\sigma_1\sigma_2=\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})^3-1.
\end{equation}
Using unity as a threshold value, the following theorem justifies the stability of zero equilibrium $\text{\textbf{Q}}_1$ by considering the nominal of $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})$ relative to the threshold. Meanwhile, the next theorem shows the existence of a positive nontrivial equilibrium (also well-known as coexistence equilibrium).
\begin{theorem}
The zero equilibrium $\text{\textbf{Q}}_1$ is locally asymptotically stable if $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})<1$ and is unstable if $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})>1$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Checking the stability of the zero equilibrium in local view, it is similar to see behavior of solution of the linearized system \eqref{eq:state} in the neighborhood of $\text{\textbf{Q}}_1$, i.e. $\dot{\text{\textbf{x}}}=J(\text{\textbf{Q}}_1,\text{\textbf{u}})(\text{\textbf{x}}-\text{\textbf{Q}}_1)$. In this case, $J(\text{\textbf{Q}}_1,\text{\textbf{u}})$ stands for Jacobian of $\text{\textbf{f}}$ evaluated at $\text{\textbf{Q}}_1$. Unfolding this $J(\text{\textbf{Q}}_1,\text{\textbf{u}})$, we get
\begin{equation*}
J(\text{\textbf{Q}}_1,\text{\textbf{u}})=\left[ \begin {array}{ccccc}
-d_1&0&0&0&s_1\\
0&-d_2&0&0&s_2\\
s_3&0&-d_3&0&0\\
0&s_4&0&-d_4&0\\
0&0&s_5&s_6&-d_5
\end {array} \right].
\end{equation*}
$\text{\textbf{Q}}_1$ is locally asymptotically stable if and only if all eigenvalues of $J(\text{\textbf{Q}}_1,\text{\textbf{u}})$ have negative real part. To see this, a simple cofactorization method computes determinant of $J(\text{\textbf{Q}}_1,\text{\textbf{u}})-\lambda I_5$ as the sum of all its cofactors, given by negative of
\begin{equation*}
(d_1+\lambda)(d_2+\lambda)(d_3+\lambda)(d_4+\lambda)(d_5+\lambda)-s_2s_4s_6(d_1+\lambda)(d_3+\lambda)-s_1s_3s_5(d_2+\lambda)(d_4+\lambda).
\end{equation*}
Clearly $\text{\textbf{coeff}}\left(\lambda^{\{3,4,5\}}\right)$ are real positive, meanwhile
\begin{eqnarray*}
\text{\textbf{coeff}}(\lambda^0)&=&d_1d_2d_3d_4d_5-s_1s_3s_5d_2d_4-s_2s_4s_6d_1d_3\\
\text{\textbf{coeff}}(\lambda^1)&=&d_1d_2d_3d_4+\cdots+d_2d_3d_4d_5-s_1s_3s_5(d_2+d_4)-s_2s_4s_6(d_1+d_3)\\
\text{\textbf{coeff}}(\lambda^2)&=&d_1d_2d_3+\cdots+d_3d_4d_5-s_1s_3s_5-s_2s_4s_6.
\end{eqnarray*}
If $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})<1$, or equivalently $\frac{s_1s_3s_5}{d_5d_1d_3}+\frac{s_2s_4s_6}{d_5d_2d_4}<1$, one can see that $\text{\textbf{coeff}}\left(\lambda^{\{0,1,2,3,4,5\}}\right)$ are real positive. Since $\lim_{\lambda\rightarrow\pm\infty}-\text{\textbf{det}}(J(\text{\textbf{Q}}_1,\text{\textbf{u}})-\lambda I_5)=\pm\infty$, $\left.-\text{\textbf{det}}(J(\text{\textbf{Q}}_1,\text{\textbf{u}})-\lambda I_5)\right|_{\lambda=0}>0$ and
\begin{equation*}
\left.-\frac{\text{d} \text{\textbf{det}}(J(\text{\textbf{Q}}_1,\text{\textbf{u}})-\lambda I_5)}{\text{d} \lambda}\right|_{\lambda>0}>0,\quad \left.-\frac{\text{d}^2 \text{\textbf{det}}(J(\text{\textbf{Q}}_1,\text{\textbf{u}})-\lambda I_5)}{\text{d} \lambda^2}\right|_{\lambda>0}>0,
\end{equation*}
then $\text{\textbf{det}}(J(\text{\textbf{Q}}_1,\text{\textbf{u}})-\lambda I_5)$ can not have zero that has positive real part. Moreover, all zeros of $\text{\textbf{det}}(J(\text{\textbf{Q}}_1,\text{\textbf{u}})-\lambda I_5)$ have negative real part. If $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})>1$, then $\text{\textbf{coeff}}(\lambda^0)<0$. Then for however the values of $\text{\textbf{coeff}}(\lambda^1)$ and $\text{\textbf{coeff}}(\lambda^2)$, it follows that there must be at least one real positive zero. This means $\text{\textbf{Q}}_1$ is unstable. If $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})=1$, then a similar step can prove that $\text{\textbf{det}}(J(\text{\textbf{Q}}_1,\text{\textbf{u}})-\lambda I_5)$ has one zero with the value $0$ and the other zeros remain with negative real part. In this case, $\text{\textbf{Q}}_1$ is considerably still stable but not asymptotical.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
If $a_1$ and $a_2$ are positive, a unique coexistence equilibrium $\text{\textbf{Q}}_{4}$ exists if $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})>1$ and does not if $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})\leq 1$. If $a_1$ and $a_2$ are negative, then there always exists a coexistence equilibrium for any value of $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})$. If else, then it always holds $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})>1$, and therefore, there always exists a coexistence equilibrium.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
One simple substitution in \eqref{eq:L1}-\eqref{eq:L2} makes the equilibrium state $\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}$ to follow
\begin{equation*}
\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}^{4}+2a_1\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}^{3}+(a_1^{2}-b_1a_2)\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}^{2}+(b_1^{2}b_2-a_1b_1a_2)\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}=0.
\end{equation*}
As $\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}=0$ results to equilibria that has been discussed before, now let us consider the remaining cubic
\begin{equation*}
P(\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}):=\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}^{3}+2a_1\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}^{2}+(a_1^{2}-b_1a_2)\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}+(b_1^{2}b_2-a_1b_1a_2).
\end{equation*}
Since coefficient of $\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}^{3}$ is $1>0$, then $\lim_{\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}\rightarrow \pm \infty}P=\pm \infty$. We prove this theorem by parity.
\textbf{Case 1} $a_1$ and $a_2$ are positive. In this case, three possibilities are carried out: $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})>1$, $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})<1$ and $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})=1$. If $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})>1$, then by identity \eqref{eq:id} it holds that $b_1b_2>a_1a_2$. Thus we have $0>b_1^{2}b_2-a_1b_1a_2=P(0)$ since $b_1<0$. It follows from the value of $P(0)$ and $\lim_{\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}\rightarrow \infty}P= \infty$ that $P$ must have at least one positive root. Now we have to check that $\text{\textbf{L}}_{2}=\frac{\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}(\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}+a_1)}{-b_1}>0$. To see this, let $\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}=\rho^{2}$ be the corresponding root, where $\rho\in\rm I\!R\backslash\{0\}$. Extracting $(\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}-\rho^{2})$ out of the cubic, we get $\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}^{2}+(2a_1+\rho^2)\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}+\mathcal{N}$ where
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{N}:=(a_1^{2}-b_1a_2)+\rho^{2}(2a_1+\rho^2).
\end{equation*}
Since $\mathcal{N}=\frac{-(b_1^{2}b_2-a_1b_1a_2)}{\rho^2}>0$ then together with the claim of uniqueness of positive root $\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}=\rho^{2}$, we need $(2a_1+\rho^2)>0$ to ensure that the remaining quadratic function does not have real positive root. Since $a_1>0$, then $(\rho^2+a_1)>0$. Now we have proved that $\text{\textbf{L}}_{2}$ is positive, and by \eqref{eq:E}, the other states are also positive. If $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})<1$, then $P(0)>0$. Since $\lim_{\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}\rightarrow -\infty}P= -\infty$, this means there exists at least one negative root $\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}=-\varepsilon^2$ of the cubic, where $\varepsilon\in\rm I\!R\backslash\{0\}$. Now extract $(\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}+\varepsilon^2)$ out of the cubic and we get the remaining quadratic function $\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}^{2}+(2a_1-\varepsilon^2)\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}+\mathcal{M}$ where
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{M}:=(a_1^2-b_1a_2)-\varepsilon^2(2a_1-\varepsilon^2).
\end{equation*}
It turns out that $\mathcal{M}=\frac{b_1^{2}b_2-a_1b_1a_2}{\varepsilon^{2}}=\frac{P(0)}{\varepsilon^{2}}>0$. Thus further analysis confirms that a positive root exists whenever $(2a_1-\varepsilon^2)$ is strictly less than zero and the discriminant $\Delta=(2a_1-\varepsilon^2)^{2}-4\mathcal{M}\geq 0$. One can see that $\Delta=(2a_1-\varepsilon^2)^{2}-4(a_1^2-b_1a_2)+4\varepsilon^2(2a_1-\varepsilon^2)=(2a_1+3\varepsilon^2)(2a_1-\varepsilon^2)-4(a_1^2-b_1a_2)<0$ since $a_1,a_2>0$ and $b_1<0$. This contradicts the necessity that $\Delta\geq 0$. Then there does not exist positive root of the cubic. At last, if $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})=1$, then $b_1^{2}b_2-a_1b_1a_2=0$ and we get the remaining quadratic $\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}^{2}+2a_1\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}+(a_1^{2}-b_1a_2)$. Since $a_1,a_2>0$ and $b_1<0$, it is clear that the quadratic does not have any real positive root.
\textbf{Case 2} $a_1$ and $a_2$ are negative. If $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})>1$, then it is easily seen that one positive root exists. Now we have to check that $\text{\textbf{L}}_{2}=\frac{\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}(\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}+a_1)}{-b_1}>0$. To see this, as it is previously done together with the claim of uniqueness of positive root $\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}=\rho^{2}$, we need $(2a_1+\rho^2)>0$ to ensure that the remaining quadratic function does not have real positive root. Then $(\rho^2+a_1)>(2a_1+\rho^2)>0$ since $a_1<0$. Now we have proved that $\text{\textbf{L}}_{2}$ is positive, and therefore, the other states are also positive. If $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})=1$, we have $b_1^{2}b_2-a_1b_1a_2=0$ and the remaining quadratic function is $\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}^{2}+2a_1\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}+(a_1^{2}-b_1a_2)$. Since $\Delta=4a_1^{2}-4(a_1^{2}-b_1a_2)=4b_1a_2>0$ and $2a_1<0$, then a positive root exists whose uniqueness is confirmed by the value of $(a_1^{2}-b_1a_2)$. Thus we need to proof that $\text{\textbf{L}}_{2}=\frac{\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}(\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}+a_1)}{-b_1}>0$. Let $\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}=\eta^{2}$ be such root, then the other root must be $\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}=-(2a_1+\eta^{2})$ where $(2a_1+\eta^{2})=-\frac{(a_1^{2}-b_1a_2)}{\eta^{2}}$. However, the positive root is unique if $(a_1^{2}-b_1a_2)\leq 0$, then $\eta^{2}+a_1>\eta^{2}+2a_1=-\frac{(a_1^{2}-b_1a_2)}{\eta^{2}}\geq 0$. This confirms that $\text{\textbf{L}}_{2}>0$. If $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{0}})<1$, then as before, we have at least one negative root $\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}=-\varepsilon^2$ and the remaining quadratic $\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}^{2}+(2a_1-\varepsilon^2)\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}+\mathcal{M}$. Observe that $\mathcal{M}>0$ and $(2a_1-\varepsilon^2)<0$ since $a_1<0$. Some factorization confirms that there exist two remaining positive roots $\text{\textbf{L}}^{(1,2)}_{1}=\{\rho^{2},\xi^{2}\}$ where $\xi^{2}=-(2a_1-\varepsilon^2+\rho^{2})$ and $\rho^{2}\xi^{2}=\mathcal{M}$. Then we have to check the result of $\text{\textbf{L}}^{(1,2)}_{1}+a$ since this confirms positivity of $\text{\textbf{L}}_{2}$, or furthermore, existence of positive equilibrium. Since $(\rho^{2}+a_1)+(\xi^{2}+a_1)=-(2a_1-\varepsilon^2)+2a_1=\varepsilon^2>0$, this ensures that at least one of the roots is greater than $-a_1$, since then at least one root makes $\text{\textbf{L}}_{2}$ positive.
\textbf{Case 3} Else. Since it always holds $b_1b_2>a_1a_2$, then this implies $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})>1$ and $P(0)=b_1^2 b_2-a_1b_1a_2<0$. Therefore, there is always (not necessarily unique) coexistence equilibrium. This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
All classes have responsibility to generate offsprings in sense that newborns are impossible whenever one class in the system remains zero for all time. In line with this sense, we define the mosquito-free equilibrium (MFE) as a static condition when all classes can not reproduce for the next offsprings. This means MFE is equivalent to the zero equilibrium $\text{\textbf{Q}}_1$. Following the next generation method \cite{DW2002}, we
define two matrices $F(\text{\textbf{u}}),V(\text{\textbf{u}})$ where $F(\text{\textbf{u}})$ is a matrix with zeros in the main diagonal and $V(\text{\textbf{u}})$ is a positive diagonal matrix such that $J(\text{\textbf{Q}}_1,\text{\textbf{u}})=F(\text{\textbf{u}})-V(\text{\textbf{u}})$. Then we define the so-called \textit{next generation matrix} $\text{\textbf{G}}(\text{\textbf{u}})=F(\text{\textbf{u}})V(\text{\textbf{u}})^{-1}$ which is nothing but
\begin{equation}
\text{\textbf{G}}(\text{\textbf{u}}) = \left(
\begin{array}{ccccc}
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \frac{s_1}{d_5}\\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \frac{s_2}{d_5}\\
\frac{s_3}{d_1} & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
0 & \frac{s_4}{d_2} & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & \frac{s_5}{d_3} & \frac{s_6}{d_4} & 0
\end{array}
\right).
\end{equation}
$(i,j)$-th element of this matrix represents the
average number of new individuals in compartment $i$ produced by a single individual
from compartment $j$ during compartment $j$'s average individual lifetime period.
It is easy to see that the spectral radius of $\text{\textbf{G}}(\text{\textbf{u}})$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\max\{|\rho|:\text{\textbf{u}}\in\mathbb{R}^2_+,\,\text{\textbf{det}}(\text{\textbf{G}}(\text{\textbf{u}})-\rho I_{5})=0\}=\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}}).
\end{equation}
This $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})$ is often called as \textit{the basic mosquito offspring number}. Formulation in \eqref{eq:R} provides dependency of the basic mosquito offspring number on several parameters and the control $\text{\textbf{u}}$. In Section 5, we check behaviour of the basic mosquito offspring number with respect to the control and to several unknown empirical parameters.
\begin{theorem}\label{th:coex}
The existing coexistence equilibrium $\text{\textbf{Q}}_4$ is globally asymptotically stable in the nonnegative orthant $\rm I\!R^5_+$ if $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})>1$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
We omit writing the detail for the proof of the theorem. Furthermore, it requires the use of the so-called Krasovskii--LaSalle principle. As another reference, one can further see from numerical results that the solution of the model is monotonic and tends asymptotically to $\text{\textbf{Q}}_4$, by supplemented condition that the set of parameters is chosen such that $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})>1$.
\end{remark}
\section{Optimal control problem}
Recall our optimization problem:
\begin{equation}
\label{e:opt}
\tag{\textbf{OC}}\text{ find }(\text{\textbf{x}},\text{\textbf{u}})\in\mathcal{D}\times\mathcal{U}\text{ such that }J(\text{\textbf{u}})\rightarrow\min.
\end{equation}
Denote by $\mathcal{U}$ a set of admissible controls where it is assumed to be compact. Let $\text{\textbf{g}}$ be a functional such that $J(\text{\textbf{u}})=\int_{0}^{T}\text{\textbf{g}}(\text{\textbf{x}},\text{\textbf{u}})\,\text{d} t$. Let $\bar{\text{\textbf{u}}}$ be an optimal control that solves \eqref{e:opt}. Consider a small variation around the optimal control
\begin{equation}
\text{\textbf{u}}^{\epsilon}(t)=\bar{\text{\textbf{u}}}(t)+\epsilon\kappa(t),\quad |\epsilon|\ll 1.
\end{equation}
Plugging this variation into \eqref{eq:state} together with positive initial condition, we have the resulting perturbed state $\text{\textbf{x}}^{\epsilon}$, where it holds
\begin{equation}
\dot{\text{\textbf{x}}}^{\epsilon}-\dot{\bar{\text{\textbf{x}}}}=\text{\textbf{f}}(\text{\textbf{x}}^{\epsilon},\text{\textbf{u}}^{\epsilon})-\text{\textbf{f}}(\bar{\text{\textbf{x}}},\bar{\text{\textbf{u}}}).
\end{equation}
Note that $\text{\textbf{f}}\in C^1(\rm I\!R^5\times\rm I\!R^2,\rm I\!R^5)$, thus we have the following Taylor approach
\begin{equation}
\frac{\text{d}}{\text{d} t}(\text{\textbf{x}}^{\epsilon}-\bar{\text{\textbf{x}}})=\text{\textbf{f}}_{\text{\textbf{x}}}(\bar{\text{\textbf{x}}},\bar{\text{\textbf{u}}})(\text{\textbf{x}}^{\epsilon}-\bar{\text{\textbf{x}}})+\epsilon\text{\textbf{f}}_{\text{\textbf{u}}}(\bar{\text{\textbf{x}}},\bar{\text{\textbf{u}}})\kappa+\mathcal{O}(\epsilon^2).
\end{equation}
Working at $\mathcal{O}(\epsilon^2)$, we let $\varphi$ be the solution of the differential equation
\begin{equation}\label{eq:varphi}
\dot{\varphi}=\text{\textbf{f}}_{\text{\textbf{x}}}(\bar{\text{\textbf{x}}},\bar{\text{\textbf{u}}})\varphi+\text{\textbf{f}}_{\text{\textbf{u}}}(\bar{\text{\textbf{x}}},\bar{\text{\textbf{u}}})\kappa,\quad \varphi(0)=\text{\textbf{0}}.
\end{equation}
Thus some algebraic computations show that our perturbed state is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:xe}
\text{\textbf{x}}^{\epsilon}=\bar{\text{\textbf{x}}}+\epsilon\varphi+\mathcal{O}(\epsilon^2).
\end{equation}
Further it can be proved that the solution of \eqref{eq:varphi} exists and therefore the term $\frac{\partial\text{\textbf{x}}^{\epsilon}}{\partial\epsilon}$ exists.
Let $\text{\textbf{z}}\in L^2([0,T],\rm I\!R^5)$ be some dual variable. It follows that $\int_{0}^{T}\frac{\text{d}}{\text{d} t}(\text{\textbf{z}}\cdot \text{\textbf{x}}^{\epsilon})\,\text{d} t=\text{\textbf{z}}(T)\cdot \text{\textbf{x}}^{\epsilon}(T)-\text{\textbf{z}}(0)\cdot \text{\textbf{x}}_{0}$.
Append this to the objective functional and we get the following expression
\begin{equation}
J(\text{\textbf{u}}^{\epsilon})=\int_{0}^{T}\left[\text{\textbf{g}}(\text{\textbf{x}}^{\epsilon},\text{\textbf{u}}^{\epsilon})+\frac{\text{d}}{\text{d} t}(\text{\textbf{z}}\cdot \text{\textbf{x}}^{\epsilon})\right]\,\text{d} t+ \text{\textbf{z}}(0)\cdot \text{\textbf{x}}_{0} - \text{\textbf{z}}(T)\cdot \text{\textbf{x}}^{\epsilon}(T).\label{eq:Jopt}
\end{equation}
Since $\bar{\text{\textbf{u}}}$ is a local minimizer of $J$, then derivative of $J$ over $\epsilon$ where $\epsilon=0$ exists and equals to zero, in other words $\left.\frac{\partial J(\text{\textbf{u}}^{\epsilon})}{\partial \epsilon}\right|_{\epsilon=0}=0$. Steering \eqref{eq:Jopt} together with simplifying the result by factorization, we get
\begin{equation}\label{eq:all}
0=\int_{0}^{T}(\text{\textbf{g}}_{\text{\textbf{x}}}+\text{\textbf{f}}_{\text{\textbf{x}}}^{\top}\text{\textbf{z}}+\dot{\text{\textbf{z}}})\cdot\left.\frac{\partial \text{\textbf{x}}^{\epsilon}}{\partial \epsilon}\right|_{\epsilon=0}\,\text{d} t+\int_{0}^{T}(\text{\textbf{g}}_{\text{\textbf{u}}}+\text{\textbf{f}}_{\text{\textbf{u}}}^{\top}\text{\textbf{z}})\cdot\kappa\,\text{d} t-\text{\textbf{z}}(T)\cdot\left.\frac{\partial \text{\textbf{x}}^{\epsilon}}{\partial \epsilon}\right|_{\epsilon=0}(T).
\end{equation}
Note from \eqref{eq:varphi}-\eqref{eq:xe} that variation of $\kappa$ makes $\frac{\partial \text{\textbf{x}}^{\epsilon}}{\partial \epsilon}$ varying. Zeroing the right hand side of \eqref{eq:all} together with taking $\kappa=\text{\textbf{g}}_{\text{\textbf{u}}}+\text{\textbf{f}}_{\text{\textbf{u}}}^{\top}\text{\textbf{z}}$, we get the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}
Consider the optimization problem \eqref{e:opt}. Let $\bar{\text{\textbf{u}}}\in \mathcal{U}$ be a local minimizer for $J$ and $\bar{\text{\textbf{x}}}\in \mathcal{D}$ be the resulting state. Then there exists a dual variable $\bar{\text{\textbf{z}}}\in L^2([0,T],\rm I\!R^5)$ such that the tuple $(\bar{\text{\textbf{x}}},\bar{\text{\textbf{u}}},\bar{\text{\textbf{z}}})$ satisfies the following system
\begin{equation}\label{eq:necc}
\dot{\text{\textbf{x}}}=\frac{\partial\mathcal{H}}{\partial \text{\textbf{z}}}\text{ with }\text{\textbf{x}}(0)=\text{\textbf{x}}_0\succeq\text{\textbf{0}},\quad
\dot{\text{\textbf{z}}}=-\frac{\partial\mathcal{H}}{\partial \text{\textbf{x}}},\quad
\frac{\partial\mathcal{H}}{\partial \text{\textbf{u}}}=\text{\textbf{0}}, \quad\text{\textbf{z}}(T)=\text{\textbf{0}}
\end{equation}
for all $t\in[0,T]$. The functional $\mathcal{H}(\text{\textbf{x}},\text{\textbf{u}},\text{\textbf{z}}):=\text{\textbf{g}}(\text{\textbf{x}},\text{\textbf{u}})+\langle\text{\textbf{z}},\text{\textbf{f}}(\text{\textbf{x}},\text{\textbf{u}})\rangle$ is Hamiltonian functional, meanwhile all equations in \eqref{eq:necc} are respectively the \textit{state}, \textit{adjoint}, \textit{gradient} equations and \textit{transversality condition}.
\end{theorem}
The adjoint (with transversality condition) and gradient equations can now be unfolded as
\begin{subequations}
\label{eq:adj}
\begin{align}
\dot{\text{\textbf{z}}}_{1} &=-\omega_{\text{\textbf{x}},1}\text{\textbf{E}}_1+ (\alpha_{1}+ q\text{\textbf{u}}_{1}+ \eta_{1})\text{\textbf{z}}_{1}- \alpha_{1}\text{\textbf{z}}_{3},&\text{\textbf{z}}_1(T)=0\\
\dot{\text{\textbf{z}}}_{2} &= -\omega_{\text{\textbf{x}},2}\text{\textbf{E}}_2+ (\alpha_{2}+
\eta_{2})\text{\textbf{z}}_{2}-\alpha_{2}\text{\textbf{z}}_{4},&\text{\textbf{z}}_2(T)=0\\
\dot{\text{\textbf{z}}}_{3} &=-\omega_{\text{\textbf{x}},3}\text{\textbf{L}}_{1}+ (2\sigma_{1}\text{\textbf{L}}_{1} +\beta_{1}+ \text{\textbf{u}}_{1}+\eta_{3})\text{\textbf{z}}_{3}- \beta_{1}\text{\textbf{z}}_{5},&\text{\textbf{z}}_3(T)=0\\
\dot{\text{\textbf{z}}}_{4} &=-\omega_{\text{\textbf{x}},4}\text{\textbf{L}}_{2} +(2\sigma_{2}\text{\textbf{L}}_{2} +
\beta_{2}+ \eta_{4})\text{\textbf{z}}_{4}- \beta_{2}\text{\textbf{z}}_{5},&\text{\textbf{z}}_4(T)=0\\
\dot{\text{\textbf{z}}}_{5}&=-\omega_{\text{\textbf{x}},5}\text{\textbf{A}}+(\text{\textbf{u}}_{2}+ \eta_{5})\text{\textbf{z}}_{5}- \mu p \text{\textbf{z}}_{1} - \mu(1-p) \text{\textbf{z}}_{2},&\text{\textbf{z}}_5(T)=0
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
and
\begin{subequations}
\label{eq:grad}
\begin{eqnarray}
\omega_{\text{\textbf{u}},1}\text{\textbf{u}}_{1}- q\text{\textbf{E}}_{1}\text{\textbf{z}}_{1}-\text{\textbf{L}}_{3}\text{\textbf{z}}_{3}&=&0\\
\omega_{\text{\textbf{u}},2}\text{\textbf{u}}_{2} -\text{\textbf{A}}\text{\textbf{z}}_{5}&=&0.
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
It is essential that $\mathcal{U}$ is bounded as this supports meaningfulness in practical implementation of the control. For the sake of simplicity, we consider $\mathcal{U}=L^2([0,T],[\text{\textbf{v}}_1,\text{\textbf{w}}_1]\times[\text{\textbf{v}}_2,\text{\textbf{w}}_2])$ and the according projection
\begin{equation}\label{eq:sat}
\text{\textbf{sat}}(\text{\textbf{u}})=\max\left(\text{\textbf{v}},\min\left(\text{\textbf{w}},\text{\textbf{u}}\right)\right)
\end{equation}
mapping any control $\text{\textbf{u}}$ into $\mathcal{U}$.
To solve the optimal control problem~\eqref{e:opt} for bounded control $\text{\textbf{u}} \in \mathcal{U}$, we first consider the unconstrained convex optimization problem
\begin{equation*}
\text{ find }(\text{\textbf{x}},\text{\textbf{u}})\in L^2\times L^2\text{ such that }J(\text{\textbf{u}})\rightarrow\min
\end{equation*}
and use the projection~\eqref{eq:sat} to map the control into a convex set $\mathcal{U}$. Since $\mathcal{U}$ is a constriction of $L^2$, the projection leads us to the optimal solution of~\eqref{e:opt}. After all, Algorithm 1 illustrates our scheme to solve \eqref{e:opt}.
\begin{algorithm}[!h]
\caption{Gradient-based method for solving \eqref{e:opt}.}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\REQUIRE $k=0$, an initial guess for the control $\text{\textbf{u}}^{k}\in\mathcal{U}$, an error tolerance $\epsilon>0$ and an initial step-length $\lambda>0$.
\STATE Compute $\text{\textbf{x}}^k_{\text{\textbf{u}}}\leftarrow\text{\textbf{x}}^{k}(\cdot;\text{\textbf{u}}^k)$ and $\text{\textbf{z}}^k_{\text{\textbf{u}}}\leftarrow\text{\textbf{z}}^{k}(\cdot;\text{\textbf{x}}^{k}(\cdot;\text{\textbf{u}}^k))$ consecutively from the state (with forward scheme) and adjoint equation (with backward scheme).
\STATE Compute the objective functional $J(\text{\textbf{u}}^k)$.
\STATE Compute $\bar{\text{\textbf{u}}}^k(\text{\textbf{x}}^{k}_{\text{\textbf{u}}},\text{\textbf{z}}^{k}_{\text{\textbf{u}}})$ from the gradient equation.
\STATE Update $\text{\textbf{u}}^{k+1}(\lambda)\leftarrow\text{\textbf{u}}^k+\lambda \bar{\text{\textbf{u}}}^k$ and $\text{\textbf{u}}^{k+1}\leftarrow\text{\textbf{sat}}(\text{\textbf{u}}^{k+1})$. Compute $\text{\textbf{x}}^{k+1}_{\text{\textbf{u}}}$ and $\text{\textbf{z}}^{k+1}_{\text{\textbf{u}}}$.
\STATE Compute $J(\text{\textbf{u}}^{k+1})$ and set $\Delta J\leftarrow J(\text{\textbf{u}}^{k+1})-J(\text{\textbf{u}}^{k})$.
\IF {$|\Delta J|<\epsilon$}
\STATE Stop. Set $(\hat{\text{\textbf{x}}},\hat{\text{\textbf{c}}},\hat{J})\leftarrow(\text{\textbf{x}}^{k+1}_{\text{\textbf{u}}},\text{\textbf{u}}^{k+1},J(\text{\textbf{u}}^{k+1}))$.
\ENDIF
\WHILE {$\Delta J\geq 0$}
\STATE Update new $\lambda\leftarrow\arg\min_{s\in[0,\lambda]}\phi(s):=J(\text{\textbf{u}}^{k+1}(s))$ where $\phi$ is a quadratic representative of $J$ with respect to the step-length $s$. Note that the solution exists since $\phi(0)$, $\phi'(0)$ and $\phi(\lambda)$ can be computed directly. Compute new $\text{\textbf{u}}^{k+1}(\lambda)\leftarrow\text{\textbf{u}}^k+\lambda \bar{\text{\textbf{u}}}^k$ and set $\text{\textbf{u}}^{k+1}\leftarrow\text{\textbf{sat}}(\text{\textbf{u}}^{k+1})$. Then compute new $\text{\textbf{x}}^{k+1}_{\text{\textbf{u}}}$ and $\text{\textbf{z}}^{k+1}_{\text{\textbf{u}}}$.
\STATE Compute $J(\text{\textbf{u}}^{k+1})$ and set $\Delta J\leftarrow J(\text{\textbf{u}}^{k+1})-J(\text{\textbf{u}}^{k})$.
\IF {$|\Delta J|<\epsilon$}
\STATE Stop. Set $(\hat{\text{\textbf{x}}},\hat{\text{\textbf{u}}},\hat{J})\leftarrow(\text{\textbf{x}}^{k+1}_{\text{\textbf{u}}},\text{\textbf{u}}^{k+1},J(\text{\textbf{u}}^{k+1}))$.
\ENDIF
\ENDWHILE
\STATE Set $k\leftarrow k+1$.
\STATE Go to Step 3.
\RETURN The tuple $(\hat{\text{\textbf{x}}},\hat{\text{\textbf{u}}},\hat{J})$.
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\section{Numerical results}
Several discussions in this section aims at determining the impact of control intervention to the abundance of mosquito population in visual statements. We accentuate in this paper that significant reduction of the population evolution in forward time be a carry-over from only a cheap optimal control. Realistically, optimal control still suffers from practical drawbacks that one can not easily implement it in real situation. The reason is slightly supported by undisciplined executors in the field to implement the programme as it looks as in optimal control result. On the other hand, a constant control benefits from its easy-to-implement scheme as the executors only need to deal with fixed-fund allotment problem with flat daily distribution. Another benefit from using constant control is that nominal of the basic mosquito offspring number can explicitly be computed. This computation educes some important statements regarding endemicity of the observed area. It has been preliminarily known that whenever the basic mosquito offspring number is less than unity, then two facts arise: the zero equilibrium is stable but the coexistence equilibrium does not exist. If this number is greater than unity, then the zero equilibrium is unstable and the coexistence equilibrium exists and is stable. This roughly means that the endemic situation will emerge and stay uninterruptible. Otherwise, constant control result always emerges with a higher cost compared to optimal control.
In order to do numerical tests, all the parameters involved in the model have to be represented in numerics. Table \ref{tab:1} gives an estimate for all parameters.
\begin{table*}[h!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabularx}{\linewidth}{r|*{10}{l}}
Param.&$M$ & $p$ & $\mu$ & $\eta_1$ & $\eta_2$ & $\eta_3$ & $\eta_4$ & $\eta_5$ & $q$ \\ \hline
Unit&- &- &$\text{day}^{-1}$ &$\text{day}^{-1}$ &$\text{day}^{-1}$ &$\text{day}^{-1}$ &$\text{day}^{-1}$ &$\text{day}^{-1}$ &- \\ \hline
Est. val.&$2$ & $0.4$ & $3.1$ & $0.02$ & $0.01$ & $0.002$ & $0.01$ & $0.4$ & $0.04$
\end{tabularx}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}[h!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabularx}{\linewidth}{r|*{7}{l}}
Param.&$\alpha_1$ & $\alpha_2$ & $\sigma_1$ & $\sigma_2$ & $\beta_1$ & $\beta_2$\\ \hline
Unit&$\text{day}^{-1}$ &$\text{day}^{-1}$ &$\text{ind.}^{-1}\times\text{day}^{-1}$ &$\text{ind.}^{-1}\times\text{day}^{-1}$ &$\text{day}^{-1}$ &$\text{day}^{-1}$ \\ \hline
Est. val.&$0.15$ & $0.13$ & $0.004$ & $\frac{\sigma_1}{M}$ & $0.08$ & $0.05$
\end{tabularx}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}[h!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabularx}{\linewidth}{r|*{7}{l}}
Param.&$T$ & $\omega_{\text{\textbf{x}},\{1,\cdots,4\}}$\hspace{0.4cm} & $\omega_{\text{\textbf{x}},5}$\hspace{0.4cm} & $\omega_{\text{\textbf{u}},\{1,2\}}$\hspace{0.4cm} & $\text{\textbf{v}}$ & $\text{\textbf{w}}$ \\ \hline
Unit&$\text{day}$\hspace{0.4cm} &- &- &- &$\text{day}^{-1}$\hspace{0.4cm} &$\text{day}^{-1}$ \\ \hline
Est. val.& $150$ &$1$ & $2$ & $4\times 10^4$ & $\text{\textbf{0}}$ & $[1,1]$
\end{tabularx}
\caption{\label{tab:1}Set of all parameters used in the model.}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Constant control}
To some reasons, the basic mosquito offspring number $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})$ reflects the hierarchy of endemicity of dengue. The higher $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})$, the more rapid mosquito's growth, and therefore the higher the number of dengue incidences. In this case, we demonstrate primary impacts of using constant control to $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})$. Alongside with this illustration, we show a dependence of $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{0}})$ to some unknown parameters that may be hard to find, or at least hard to estimate. Such parameters can be like $p$ (the prevalence probability of mosquito adult to breed indoor) and $\mu$ (the percapita birth rate of eggs). The following figures give the illustrations.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{minipage}{.495\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{rho_u.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:ru}Contour of the basic mosquito offspring number $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})$ in $(\text{\textbf{u}}_1,\text{\textbf{u}}_1)$-plane.}
\end{minipage}
\hfill
\begin{minipage}{.495\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{rho_p_eta.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:rp}Contour of the basic mosquito offspring number $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{0}})$ in $(p,\mu)$-plane.}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
From Fig.~\ref{fig:ru}, some conclusions are highlighted. It is clear from the figure that $\text{\textbf{u}}_2$ gives a more significant decrease to nominal of the basic mosquito offspring number compared to $\text{\textbf{u}}_1$. In constant control case, each value of control taken in the set of real positive numbers can roughly represent a negative return. A negative return $\text{\textbf{u}}_1$ of $1$ simply means that, $100\%$ the number of individuals as in the previous step (in day) has to be killed in the current step by Temephos dissemination. In practice, this requirement seems hard to achieve due to several arising technical and spatial heterogeneity problems. From Fig.~\ref{fig:ru}, a suitable choice of constant control pair in the range $[0,1]\times[0,1]$ still gives insignificant reduction to the number of mosquitoes. In an extreme case, killing $100\%$ the number of individuals as in the previous step in both Temephos dissemination and fumigation schemes still arises endemic situation in the observed area. However, to achieve the condition $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})<1$, one has to produce a high value of negative return. For example, killing $40\%$ (for indoor larvae and $q$ times indoor eggs) and $180\%$ (for adults) as in the previous step will produce $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})\approx 0.9$. With the same definition, killing respectively $60\%$ and $120\%$ leads to $\mathcal{R}(\text{\textbf{u}})\lesssim 1$, meaning that there will be a possibility for the mosquito population to be completely eradicated for long time.
Meanwhile from Fig.~\ref{fig:rp}, for whatever the values of $(p,\mu)$ are taken in the range $[0,1]\times[1,5]$, the mosquitoes will never die out. The choice of all parameters in the model seems suitable with real situation in endemic region, that is, the basic mosquito offspring number with the absence of control must be greater than unity. This is another reason why we need control intervention. In the figure, $\mu$ appears with similar sensitivity as $\text{\textbf{u}}_2$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:ru}. It can be seen that $\mu$ is very sensitive, as its slight changes lead to the significant differences of the hierarchy of endemicity. In reality, $\mu$ can be a number that depends on meteorological parameters. It is believed that the more environmental condition sustain mosquitoes' life, the higher $\mu$. The result as in Fig.~\ref{fig:rp} can be another way to confirm that meteorology distribution gives a significant impact to the mosquito abundance in the field. The figure also tells us that, based on our model, to where adult mosquitoes prevalent to breed is not really a big deal.
\subsection{Time-variant optimal control}
Initially, we consider the trajectory of solution to the equation $\dot{\text{\textbf{x}}}=\text{\textbf{f}}(\text{\textbf{x}},\text{\textbf{0}}),\,\text{\textbf{x}}_0\succeq\text{\textbf{0}}$, defined as $\text{\textbf{x}}(t;\text{\textbf{0}})$. It can numerically be shown that $\text{\textbf{x}}(t;\text{\textbf{0}})$ is monotonic and tends to the coexistence equilibrium $\text{\textbf{Q}}_4$ for very long time. Set $t_1=0$, $t_2=50$, $t_3=100$ and
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{D}_i:=\{\text{\textbf{x}}:\dot{\text{\textbf{x}}}=\text{\textbf{f}}(\text{\textbf{x}},\text{\textbf{u}}),\,t\in[0,T],\text{\textbf{x}}_0=\text{\textbf{x}}(t_i;\text{\textbf{0}}),\text{\textbf{u}}\in\mathcal{U}\},\quad i=1,2,3.
\end{equation}
We divide our numerical scheme based on three scenarios:
\begin{description}
\item[(Sc-1)] find $(\text{\textbf{x}},\text{\textbf{u}})\in\mathcal{D}_1\times\mathcal{U}$ such that $J(\text{\textbf{u}})\rightarrow\min$,
\item[(Sc-2)] find $(\text{\textbf{x}},\text{\textbf{u}})\in\mathcal{D}_2\times\mathcal{U}$ such that $J(\text{\textbf{u}})\rightarrow\min$,
\item[(Sc-3)] find $(\text{\textbf{x}},\text{\textbf{u}})\in\mathcal{D}_3\times\mathcal{U}$ such that $J(\text{\textbf{u}})\rightarrow\min$.
\end{description}
It is supposed that we want to check the dynamics of mosquito population in house-scale including its nearest neighborhood. On average proportion, we let $\text{\textbf{x}}(t_1;\text{\textbf{0}})=\left[8,8,6,6,5\right]$. Thus we obtained from our preliminary simulation that $\text{\textbf{x}}(t_2;\text{\textbf{0}})=\left[200.41,354.84,73.82,134.85,30.56\right]$ and $\text{\textbf{x}}(t_3;\text{\textbf{0}})=\left[283.12,514.21,91.19,168.22,39.16\right]$ respectively.
One purpose of dividing initial condition for our simulations is to check which scenario arising with the cheapest cost, the one which is applied in $T$ days after $t=t_1$ (the earliest growth time), $t=t_2$ (the peak of outbreak) or $t=t_3$ (the population almost reach the coexistence equilibrium). It may also be the case that the cost increases with respect to the magnitude of initial condition. Another purpose is to check which scenario giving the least total endpoints $\lVert\text{\textbf{x}}(T;\bar{\text{\textbf{u}}})\rVert_1$ and if the optimal control results in positive value for $\lVert\text{\textbf{x}}(0;\bar{\text{\textbf{u}}})\rVert_1-\lVert\text{\textbf{x}}(T;\bar{\text{\textbf{u}}})\rVert_1$, then there is a number $n>1$ such that continuation of optimal control scheme will completely eradicate mosquito population in $nT$ days. Concerning definition of the total cost $C(\text{\textbf{u}})$, we define a weighting factor $A>0$ such that
\begin{equation}
C(\text{\textbf{u}}):=\frac{A}{2T}\int_{0}^{T}\sum_{i=1}^{2}\omega_{\text{\textbf{x}},i}\text{\textbf{u}}_i^2\,\text{d} t.
\end{equation}
Numerical results from \textbf{Sc-1} are given as in Figs.~\ref{fig:inegg}-\ref{fig:control}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{minipage}{.495\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{inegg.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:inegg}Trajectory of indoor egg population.}
\end{minipage}
\hfill
\begin{minipage}{.495\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{outegg.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:outegg}Trajectory of outdoor egg population.}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{minipage}{.495\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{inlarv.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:inlarv}Trajectory of indoor larva population.}
\end{minipage}
\hfill
\begin{minipage}{.495\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{outlarv.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:outlarv}Trajectory of outdoor larva population.}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{minipage}{.495\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{adult.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:adult}Trajectory of adult population.}
\end{minipage}
\hfill
\begin{minipage}{.495\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{control.eps}
\caption{\label{fig:control}Trajectory of optimal control.}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
At first look, it is clear from Figs.~\ref{fig:inegg}-\ref{fig:adult} that the optimal control makes significant reduction to all classes of mosquito population. With the same scheme, we can find similar results for both \textbf{Sc-2} and \textbf{Sc-3}. It turns out that by using the data from Table \ref{tab:1}, fumigation relatively needs to be enhanced rather than Temephos dissemination during application of the control. Figs.~\ref{fig:ru} and~\ref{fig:control} tell us so. For further managerial reference, Table \ref{tab2} represents the performance of optimal control in each scenario. We also highlight the optimal control performance when one scheme vanishes.
\begin{table*}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabularx}{\linewidth}{l|l|l|l}
\hline
$C(\text{\textbf{u}})$, with $A=1$ & \textbf{Sc-1} & \textbf{Sc-2} & \textbf{Sc-3} \\ \hline
$\text{\textbf{u}}_1\neq 0,\,\text{\textbf{u}}_2=0$ & $7.4216\times 10^2$ & $2.9754\times10^{2}$ & $2.2304\times10^{2}$ \\ \hline
$\text{\textbf{u}}_1= 0,\,\text{\textbf{u}}_2\neq 0$ & $6.6658\times 10^3$ & $9.5861\times 10^3$ & $1.0150\times10^{4}$\\ \hline
$\text{\textbf{u}}_1\neq 0,\,\text{\textbf{u}}_2\neq 0$ & $1.4004\times10^{4}$ & $1.6217\times10^{4}$ & $1.6329\times10^{4}$ \\ \hline \hline
$\lVert\text{\textbf{x}}(0;\bar{\text{\textbf{u}}})\rVert_1$, $\lVert\text{\textbf{x}}(T;\bar{\text{\textbf{u}}})\rVert_1$ & \textbf{Sc-1} & \textbf{Sc-2} & \textbf{Sc-3} \\ \hline
$\text{\textbf{u}}_1\neq 0,\,\text{\textbf{u}}_2=0$ & 33, 839.57 & 794.50, 889.13 & $1.09\times10^{3}$, 901.57\\ \hline
$\text{\textbf{u}}_1= 0,\,\text{\textbf{u}}_2\neq 0$ & 33, 157.66 & 794.50, 154.73 & $1.09\times10^{3}$, 156.23\\ \hline
$\text{\textbf{u}}_1\neq 0,\,\text{\textbf{u}}_2\neq 0$ & 33, 31.62 & 794.50, 35.34 & $1.09\times10^{3}$, 37.52 \\ \hline \hline
$\frac{1}{T}\sum_{i=1}^{5}\lVert\text{\textbf{x}}_i(t;\bar{\text{\textbf{u}}})\rVert_{L^1}$ & \textbf{Sc-1} & \textbf{Sc-2} & \textbf{Sc-3} \\ \hline
$\text{\textbf{u}}_1\neq 0,\,\text{\textbf{u}}_2=0$ & $610.9374$ & $946.5915$ & $1.0169\times 10^3$ \\ \hline
$\text{\textbf{u}}_1= 0,\,\text{\textbf{u}}_2\neq 0$ & $196.5743$ & $225.8798$ & $235.1042$\\ \hline
$\text{\textbf{u}}_1\neq 0,\,\text{\textbf{u}}_2\neq 0$ & $74.7872$ & $119.5978$ & $132.6077$ \\ \hline
\end{tabularx}
\caption{\label{tab2}The performance of optimal control.}
\end{table*}
From the table, we conclude:
\begin{enumerate}
\item A complete control intervention using two schemes appears with the highest cost for each of three tested scenarios compared to the ones when one scheme vanishes. It is also noted that the cost slightly increases from \textbf{Sc-1} to \textbf{Sc-3}, meaning there is a positive correlation between initial condition taken for simulation and the cost. If we consider epidemiology of dengue amongst humans and mosquitoes, this fact can help us to decide when we should start to conduct eradication programme. It appears as well in the table that there is a huge difference between the cost for maintaining only Temephos dissemination and only fumigation. Mathematically, this phenomenon arises due to the choice of the trade-off coefficient $\omega_{\text{\textbf{x}}}$. In this case, we assume that the adults need to be accounted for more attention, hence we put a higher value for $\omega_{\text{\textbf{x}},5}$. However, this does not always mean that taking more consideration to reduce adult trajectory requires a higher value of fumigation measure rather than Temephos dissemination measure. In our simulation, even if we take $\omega_{\text{\textbf{x}},5}$ similar to the others, the result is more or less similar to the one as in Fig.~\ref{fig:control}. A reader can play around with this coefficient in order to get the result which suits the real situation best.
\item From the table, it is seen that a complete combination of two control measures can extremely reduce the total endpoints of mosquito population. Maintaining only Temephos dissemination leads us to the worst case, i.e. there will be up to 800 total individuals remaining alive after $T$ days of treatment. Meanwhile, maintaining only fumigation results in moderate total endpoints. If we compute $\lVert\text{\textbf{x}}(0;\bar{\text{\textbf{u}}})\rVert_1-\lVert\text{\textbf{x}}(T;\bar{\text{\textbf{u}}})\rVert_1$, then we would highly recommend to apply both control schemes as an integrated programme.
\item We interpret $\frac{1}{T}\sum_{i=1}^{5}\lVert\text{\textbf{x}}_i(t;\bar{\text{\textbf{u}}})\rVert_{L^1}$ as the average number of total population size at each time during observation. The higher its value, the higher the number of dengue incidences that may probably occur. Again, maintaining only Temephos dissemination leads to the worst case. We highlight that the complete control with two measures gives the best reduction. Now from the table we know that a preventive act of starting the control programme when the number of individuals is small and a simultaneous combination of both control measures will bring us tthe best results: least cost, fewest total endpoints and fewest number of individuals living during treatment. However, due to practical limitations, this ideal situation may not be achieved. Knowing the density of mosquito population in average house, we can refer to which column in the last three columns of Table \ref{tab2} in order to give the best decision for a suitable control management.
\end{enumerate}
\section{Conclusion}
We have an optimal control model for mosquito population dynamics with indoor-outdoor life cycle classification. This model initiates the depicting situation in most dengue
endemic areas where mosquitoes originate from indoor as
well as outdoor. Two schematic control measures are added to the model as regulators in reducing the evolution of mosquito population in forward time. The first measure represents a negative return that is earned by maintaining Temephos dissemination to some indoor spots where immature phases live. Temephos dissemination aims at killing larvae and a small percentage of eggs. Meanwhile the second measure is represented by a negative return earned from fumigation that targets directly to adults.
Some brief underlying results from the work in this paper are:
In constant control case, the proposed model enumerates a primary biological meaningfulness, i.e. the evolution of mosquito population in forward time results in positive values. With the given estimate of parameters and initial condition, it can numerically be seen that the evolution of total population remains bounded for all $t>0$ by the positive number $\max\{\lVert\text{\textbf{x}}(0;\text{\textbf{u}})\rVert_1,\lVert\text{\textbf{Q}}_4\rVert_1\}$.
If the basic mosquito offspring number is less than unity, then two conditions arise: (i) the zero equilibrium is locally asymptotically stable and (ii) the coexistence equilibrium does not exist.
If the basic mosquito offspring number is greater than unity, then three conditions arise: (i) the zero equilibrium is unstable, (ii) the coexistence equilibrium exists and (iii) is globally asymptotically stable in nonnegative orthant.
The optimal control results as displayed in Table \ref{tab2} can be used as a reference in decision-making process. A brief conclusion states that: in an endemic situation, the best mosquito control impacts are produced if the control is started when the number of individuals is as small as possible, also with combination of the two simultaneous schemes proposed in this paper.
Both in constant control and optimal control cases, one has to enhance implementation of fumigation rather than Temephos dissemination.
\section*{Acknowledgement}
The first and third authors acknowledge the financial support from Indonesia Endowment Fund for Education (LPDP) and Indonesia Directorate of Higher Education (DIKTI) on behalf of ITB Research Grant 2011. The authors are grateful to Prof. Mick Roberts (Massey University, NZ) and Prof. Neville Fowkes (University of Western Australia) and also the handling editor for their constructive comments and recommendations.
|
\section{INTRODUCTION}
We are poised on the threshold of unprecedented technical growth in wide-field time domain astronomy, where ground-based observations yield very precise measurements of stellar brightness from high-volume data streams. So far, wide-field time-series surveys has been spearheaded by relatively small telescopes since they are supported by large field of view (FOV) instruments operating with high duty cycle (see \citealt{bec04} for a summary of optical variability surveys). Within the last decade, the advent of large mosaic CCDs has facilitated the coverage of large sky area even for large-aperture telescopes (e.g., MMT Megacam: \citealt{mcl00}; ESO Very Large Telescope Omegacam: \citealt{kui02}; Subaru Suprime-Cam: \citealt{miy02}; CHFT Megacam: \citealt{bou03}; iPTF: \citealt{kul13}). Although these facilities are generally devoted to imaging surveys, researchers are attempting to utilize them for short- and long-term variability surveys with short-cadence exposures (e.g., \citealt{har08a,pie09,ran11}). Such wide-field imaging systems have enabled us to observe hundred of thousands of target stars simultaneously and also to detect various variability phenomena. A remarkable thing about these surveys is that the fraction of variable sources increases as the photometric precision of the survey improves. For this reason, it is important to improve the accuracy in photometry.
Another key issue in wide-field time-series photometry is the removal of temporal systematics from a single image frame or several consecutive image frames. It has recently become known that systematic trends in time-series data can be different and localized within the image frame when the FOV is large. Such spatially localized patterns may be related to subtle point spread function (PSF) differences and sky condition within the detector FOV (e.g., \citealt{kov05, pep08, bia09, kim09}). As these patterns change in time, we can see how the temporal variations of systematic trends affect the brightness and shape of light curves directly. The time-scale of systematic variation is sometimes comparable to short-term variability, such as transits or eclipses, and in some cases even long-term variability. Thus, it is often difficult to identify and characterize true variabilities.
In this paper, we introduce a new photometry procedure, called multi-aperture indexing, which is suited to analyzing well-sampled wide-field images of non-crowded fields with a highly varying PSF, such as those produced by wide-field mosaic imagers on large telescopes. We apply this procedure to archival imaging data from the MMT/Megacam transit survey of the open cluster M37 (Hartman et al. 2008a), demonstrating a substantial improvement over the existing photometry. Section 2 describes the MMT imaging database and identifies problems in the existing photometry which motivated the development of our new methods. Section 3 describes the multi-aperture photometry that utilize newly defined contamination index and carefully tuned calibration procedures, including the results of the basic tests to validate our approach. Section 4 gives an in-depth discussion about systematic trends in time-series data and suggests an efficient way for identifying, measuring, and removing spatio-temporal trends. Section 5 describes the effects of new calibration on period search, and we summarize our main results in the last section.
\section{ARCHIVAL MMT TIME-SERIES DATA OF M37}
\citet{har08a} have conducted a study to find Neptune-sized planets transiting solar-like stars in the rich open cluster M37. The observing strategy was carefully designed for a transiting planet search by several considerations (e.g., the reliability of exposure time per frame, the effects of pixel-to-pixel sensitivity variations, and sensitivity of filter). Their work did not reveal any transiting planets, but it did provide a rare opportunity to explore photometric variability at relatively high temporal resolution with 30--90 s. \citet{har08b} discovered 1430 new variable stars, including very short-period eclipsing binaries (e.g., V37, V706, V1160) and $\delta$ Sct-type pulsating stars (e.g., V397, V744, V1412).
We used the same data set on the open cluster M37. A detailed discussion of the observations, original data reduction, and light curve production is described in \citet{har08a,har08b}. The data archive consists of approximately 5000 $r'$-filter images taken over 24 nights with the wide-field mosaic imager (Megacam) mounted at the $f/5$ Cassegrain focus of the 6.5m MMT telescope. Note that Megacam is made up of 36 2048 $\times$ 4608 pixel CCD chips in a $9 \times 4$ pattern, covering a 24$\arcmin$$\times$24$\arcmin$ FOV \citep{mcl00}. This instrument has an unbinned pixel scale of $0^{\prime\prime}.08$, but it was used in $2 \times 2$ binning mode for readout.
The observation logs are summarized in Table 1 of \citet{har08a}. In brief, the $r\rq{}$-band time-series observations were undertaken between 2005 December 21 and 2006 January 21, with a median FWHM of $0.89\pm0.39$ arcsec. Exposure times are chosen to keep an $r\sim15$ mag star as close to the saturation limit, which is expressed as a function of seeing conditions. With an average seeing $\sim$0$^{\prime\prime}$.89 on images, the quality of the images is good to achieve high-precision light curves (less than 1\% rms value) down to 20. In addition to the imaging data set, this database includes light curve data sets for a total of 23,790 sources detected in a co-added reference image. Theses light curves are obtained by the image subtraction technique using a modified version of ISIS software (\citealt{ala98}; \citealt{ala00}).
As shown in Figure \ref{fig:Fig1}, however, the raw light curves from the original image subtraction procedures exhibit many unusual outliers, and more than $\sim$15\% of data get rejected by a simple filtering algorithm after cleaning procedures. In practice, brutal filtering that is often applied to remove outlying data points can result in the loss of vital data, with seriously negative impact to short-term variations such as flares and deep eclipses. We also find that the image subtraction technique often resulted in measurement failures from several frames due to poor seeing or tracking problem. After removing these bad frames, it leads to loss of additional $\sim$5\% data points from most light curves. In order to overcome this problem, we have re-processed the entire image database with new photometric reduction procedures.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth, angle=0]{Fig1.eps}
\caption{Example of MMT light curves for the brighter stars in archive. The dashed lines are weighted spline approximation with $\pm$3-$\sigma$ control limits (dotted lines). These light curves contain outlier points that significantly increase the rms scatter of the raw light curves.}
\label{fig:Fig1}
\end{figure}
\section{NEW PHOTOMETRIC REDUCTION}
\subsection{Preparation for Photometry}
We followed the standard CCD reduction procedures of the bias correction, overscan trimming, dark correction, and flat-fielding as described in \citet{har08a}. The individual CCD frames were calibrated in IRAF, using the mosaic data reduction package MEGARED.\footnote{The 64-bit version of Megacam reduction package is available from \url{https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/~bmcleod/Megared/.}} The first step is to correct the pixel-to-pixel zero-point differences that are usually described by the sum of a mean bias level and a bias structure. As the bias frames were not separately taken during the time of the observations, the mean bias level was subtracted from each image extension using an overscan correction and so we cannot remove any remaining bias structure from all overscan-subtracted data frames. According to description in Matt Ashby's Megacam reduction guide,\footnote{The detailed reduction procedures of MMT/Megacam are described by Matthew L. N. Ashby at \url{https://www.cfa.harvard.edu/~mashby/megacam/megacam_frames.html}.}
the bias structure can be very significant in some small regions such as the portions of the arrays close to the readout leads. The dark currents are normally insignificant for Megacam so that corrections are not needed even for long exposures. The next step is to correct pixel-to-pixel variations in the sensitivity of the CCD; we used the program \texttt{domegacamflat2}\footnote{This C routine is written by J. D. Hartman to reduce I/O overhead. It reads in a list of Megacam mosaic images and a Megacam mosaic flat-field image, and then writes out the flattened image over the existing image.}. This program determines the scaling factors to correct the gain difference between the two amplifiers of each chip by finding the mode in the quotient of pixels to the left and right of the amplifier boundary, and then flattens each of the frames with a master flat field frame. It is worth mentioning that the sky conditions were rarely photometric during the observing run, with persistent light cirrus for most of the nights. Therefore it was only possible to obtain twilight sky flats on a handful of nights (dome flats were not possible).
We removed bad pixels using the Megacam bad pixel masks distributed with the MEGARED package. The values of bad pixels are replaced with interpolated value of the surrounding pixels using the IRAF task \texttt{fixpix}. The numerous single pixel events (cosmic-rays) were identified and removed using the LACosmic package \citep{van01}.
The Megacam data already have a rough World Coordinates System (WCS) solution that is based on a single value of the telescope pointing. To update these with a more precise solution, we applied astrometric correction to each CCD in the mosaic using the WCSTools imwcs program \citep{min02}. The new solution is derived by minimizing the differences between the R.A. and decl. positions of sources in a single CCD chip and their positions listed in the 2MASS Point Source Catalog \citep{skr06}. The resulting astrometric accuracy is typically better than 0$\arcsec$.1 rms in both R.A. and decl.
\subsubsection{Building a Master Source Catalog}
Typically, a point or extended source detection algorithm is applied to each frame independently and it always requires criteria for what should be regarded as a true detection. In obtaining the pixel coordinates for all objects in the M37 fields, this procedure often misses some objects when the detection threshold approaches the noise level. Also it needs a substantial effort to match the objects that are detected in only some of the frames. Our approach is as follows: a complete list of all objects is obtained from a co-added reference frame, and then the photometry is performed for each frame using the fixed positions of the sources detected on the reference. Since the relative centroid positions of all objects are the same for all frames in the time series, we can easily place an aperture on each target and measure the flux even for the stars at the faint magnitude end.
We constructed the reference frame for each chip from the best seeing frames using the SWarp\footnote{SWarp is a program that resamples and co-adds FITS images, distributed by Astrometic.net at \url{http://www.astromatic.net/software/swarp.}} software. Benefiting from a highly accurate astrometric calibration of input frames, we were able to improve the quality of co-added images. In the SWarp implementation, the pixels of each frame were resampled using the Lanczos3 convolution kernel, then combined into the reference frame by taking a median or average. After this was done, sources were detected and extracted on the reference frame using the SExtractor software \citep{ber96}. When configured with a lower detection threshold, SExtractor extracts the number of spurious detections (e.g., diffraction spikes around bright stars, or outer features of bright galaxies). These false detections were removed by careful visual inspection for each chip. The final catalog contains a total of 30,294 objects including both point and extended sources.
\subsubsection{Refining the Centroid of Each Object}
Prior to the photometry, the initial centroid coordinates of the target objects for each frame were computed by using the WCSTools sky2xy routine \citep{min02}. The stored world coordinate system for each frame is used to convert the (R.A., decl.) coordinates from the master source catalog to the $(x, y)$ pixel locations. However, actual positions of objects for each frame can be slightly moved from its original locations depending on the focus condition of instrument, seeing condition, and the signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) in the individual observations. These types of positioning errors (i.e., centroid noise) will lead to the internal error for a photometric measurement that results from placement of the measuring aperture on the object being measured. The situation gets worse for faint stars because the centroid position of them is itself subject to some uncertainty. The fractional error in the measured flux as a result of mis-centering is given by:\begin{equation}
\frac{\delta F}{F_\mathrm{0}} \approx \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}} \frac{\Delta}{\sigma} \frac{2R\Delta}{\sigma^{2}}e^{-R^{2}/2\sigma^{2}},
\end{equation} where $\Delta$ is the positioning error, $R$ is the radius of aperture, $\sigma$ is the profile width for a source with a Gaussian PSF, and total flux $F_\mathrm{0}$ (see Appendix A in Irwin et al., 2007 for details). This expression shows that if we set the aperture radius equal to the FWHM ($R$=2.35-$\sigma$), even small differences in placement of the aperture (e.g., $\Delta$=0.1-$\sigma$) may increase the uncertainty in the flux measurements ($\approx$ 1 mmag). Thus, accurate centroid determination is important to achieve the high-precision photometry.
Following the windowed centroid procedure in the SExtractor, a refined centroid of each object is calculated iteratively. On average, the rms uncertainty in the coordinate transformation using the WCS information was $0.044\pm0.01$ pixels for the bright reference stars. After the coordinate transformation from sky to $xy$, however, the centroid coordinates ($x_\mathrm{ini}$, $y_\mathrm{ini}$) are slightly misaligned from their actual ones ($x_\mathrm{center}$, $y_\mathrm{center}$). The refined centroid values ($x_\mathrm{final}$, $y_\mathrm{final}$) are used only if the maximum displacement is at least less than 1.5 pixels. This condition prevents arbitrary shifting of a source centroid, especially for faint stars.
\subsubsection{Estimation of Background Level}
We estimated a local sky background by measuring the mode of the histogram of pixel values within a local annulus around each object, which is suitable choice for our uncrowded field (less than $\sim$1000 stars per chip). This process is a combination of $\kappa$-$\sigma$ clipping and mode estimation. The background histogram is clipped iteratively at $\pm$3-$\sigma$ around its median, and then the mode value is taken as:
\begin{equation}
Mode = 3 \times Median - 2 \times Mean.
\end{equation}
It represents the most probable sky value of a randomly chosen pixel in the sample of sky pixels \citep{ste87}. For relatively crowded regions, we utilized a background map created by SExtractor package using a mesh of $32\times32$ pixels and a median filter box of $5\times5$ pixels. This map is used to confirm the properness of individual sky values from annulus estimates.
\subsection{Multi-aperture Indexing Photometry}
Modern data reduction techniques aim to reach photon noise limit and minimize systematic effects. For example, differential photometry technique can be achieved better than 1\% precision for brighter stars (e.g., \citealt{eve01,har05}), and the deconvolution-based photometry algorithm leads to the minimization of systematic effects in very crowded fields (e.g., \citealt{mag07,gil07}). However, conventional data reduction methods often fail to handle various artifacts in wide-field survey data. We present below a new photometric reduction method for precise time-series photometry of non-crowded fields, without the need to involve complicated and CPU intensive process (e.g., PSF fitting or difference image analysis).
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth, angle=0]{Fig2.eps}
\caption{Tendency of optimal aperture selection from the multi-aperture photometry. As stars get fainter, the optimal aperture decreases in size. Sources outside of this sequence are suspected to be contaminated.}
\label{fig:Fig2}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Photometry with Multiple Apertures}
Our photometry is similar to standard aperture photometry, except in that we compute the flux in a sequence of several apertures and then determine the optimum aperture individually to each object at each epoch. This multi-aperture photometry is an efficient way to determine the optimum aperture size that gives the maximum S/N for a flux measurement. The maximum S/N is not necessarily at the same aperture for all objects, and it can be obtained from a relatively small aperture \citep{how89}. This {\itshape photometric} aperture is to achieve the optimal balance between flux loss and noises based on a relationship derived from the CCD equation (see \citealt{mer95}). Figure \ref{fig:Fig2} shows how the optimum apertures vary with the stellar magnitude. There is an obvious trend of decreasing aperture sizes with increasing magnitudes down to the faint magnitude limit in the example frame.
Once we measure the flux of each object with the optimum aperture, we need to apply the aperture correction for small apertures. The aperture correction terms are estimated from the growth curve analysis of selected isolated bright stars (i.e., reference stars). The average curve-of-growth for each frame is calculated by measuring the difference in magnitude between different pairs of apertures (up to 10 pixels aperture radius) and then an automatic correction is applied to all objects for each photometric aperture. The use of a common aperture correction for each CCD assumes that there is no variation in the correction across the CCD. This flux correction method gives nearly the same brightness within the measurement uncertainties for all apertures. Any PSF variation across the CCD causes systematic errors, however, and we deal with this in Section 3.4 and Section 4.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth, angle=0]{Fig3.eps}
\caption{Example of multi-aperture photometry for one star (ID=10213 in the master source catalog) through epochs t1 to t4. \emph{Top panels}: 100$\times$100 thumbnail images of the target star. \emph{Middle panels}: normalized S/N as a function of aperture size. \emph{Bottom panels}: aperture corrected magnitude as a function of aperture size. The arrows represent the peak locations in the aperture-S/N diagram (see text for details).}
\label{fig:Fig3}
\end{figure}
We performed the multi-aperture photometry based on the concentric aperture photometry algorithm in DAOPHOT package \citep{ste87}, using several circular apertures (up to 10 pixels aperture radius) with a fixed sky annulus from 35 to 45 pixels. The initial results of multi-aperture photometry are stored in ascii-format photometry tables, including the date of the observations (MJD), the pixel $(x, y)$ coordinates, the aperture-corrected magnitudes with errors for each aperture, the sky values and its errors. Figure \ref{fig:Fig3} shows the details of the multi-aperture photometry for one star at different epochs. In the former two epochs, the photometric apertures can be properly selected by the S/N cuts, while in the latter two epochs, S/N increases for lager apertures. This unusual behavior is due to contamination by a moving object. We automatically identifies similar unusual cases by the method of aperture indexing.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth, angle=0]{Fig4.eps}
\caption{Typical example of multi-aperture indexing photometry. Top panel is $r$-filter light curve of same star (ID=10213) as shown in Figure \ref{fig:Fig3}. Bottom panels show the multi-aperture indexing scheme. The $x$-axis is the aperture size and $the$ $y$-axis is the differential magnitude between pairs of apertures $\Delta m$(=$\acute{m_\mathrm{i,j,ref}}-\acute{m_\mathrm{i,j,k}}$). We can see whether and at what aperture the differential magnitude (solid lines) begins to deviate from the model curve (dashed lines) for each epoch.}
\label{fig:Fig4}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.78\textwidth, angle=0]{Fig5.eps}
\caption{Histogram of differences in the magnitude offsets between the left- and right-side of each chip ($\bar{\Delta}_\mathrm{l} - \bar{\Delta}_\mathrm{r}$) for the whole data set. Each histogram is normalized by the total number of data frames $N$ and is described by Gaussian distribution with different means and variances (dashed lines).}
\label{fig:Fig5}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Determination of the Best Aperture with Indexing Method}
Our multi-aperture indexing method is similar to the basic concept of the discrete curve-of-growth method \citep{ste90}. Each object is indexed based on the difference in aperture-corrected magnitude between pairs of apertures $\Delta m$(=$\acute{m_\mathrm{i,j,ref}}-\acute{m_\mathrm{i,j,k}}$) with mean trend for stars of similar brightness (see solid and dotted lines in bottom panels of Figure \ref{fig:Fig4}, respectively). The aperture with a 10 pixel radius is used as the fixed reference aperture. The mean trend is determined by computing the rms curve of the aperture correction values for all measured apertures, and used to evaluate whether magnitude at a given aperture significantly differs from the mean trend. Since the rms value depends on the chosen magnitude interval, all stars are divided into groups according to their brightness in the individual frames. We determine the rms curve for each magnitude group using an iterative $\sigma$-clipping until convergence is reached. Objects lying within $\pm$3-$\sigma$ of the model curve are indexed as contamination-free, and those above $\pm$3-$\sigma$ as a contaminated source. Figure \ref{fig:Fig4} shows that multi-aperture indexing guides us to throw out some photometric measurements if they are discrepant from the mean trend. This approach also gives us a chance to recover a measurement that would be otherwise thrown out. The problematic aperture can be simply replaced by one of the smaller apertures if it is indexed as contamination-free. This help us make a full use of the information offered by the data.
\subsection{Improved Photometric Calibration}
We present a new photometric calibration to convert the instrumental magnitudes onto the standard system, including a relative flux correction of the left and right half-region of each CCD chip. As mentioned in the Section 3.1, MMT/Megacam shows the temporal variations in the gain between two amplifiers on each CCD, as well as between CCDs that are part of the same mosaic. It may have been caused by unstable bias voltage of the CCD output drain which has a profound impact on the gain of the output amplifier. The level of readout noise is also unstable between two amplifiers. To correct for this effect, the photometric calibration needs to be performed individually for each amplifier region.
We use a sufficient number of (pre-selected) bright isolated stars as standard stars and compute the relative flux correction terms. These terms were derived for each frame using the mean magnitude offset ($\bar{\Delta}_\mathrm{l, r}$) of standard stars ($N_\mathrm{l, r}$) with respect to corresponding magnitudes ($m_\mathrm{i, j}$) in the master frame chosen as an internal photometric reference
\begin{mathletters}
\begin{equation}
\bar{\Delta}_\mathrm{l, r} = \frac{1}{N_\mathrm{l, r}}\sum m_\mathrm{i, j} - \acute{m_\mathrm{i, j}} + ZP_\mathrm{l, r},
\end{equation} where $\acute{m_{i, j}}$ is the aperture-corrected instrumental magnitudes in other frames and $ZP_\mathrm{l, r}$ is the photometric zero-points for the left- and right-side of each chip, respectively. To calculate the zero-points, we solve a linear calibration relation of the form:
\begin{equation}
r - m_\mathrm{i, j} = ZP_\mathrm{l, r} - 0.07 X + 0.107 (r - i),
\end{equation} where $r$ and $i$ are standard magnitudes from the photometric catalog of M37 \citep{har08a} and $X$ is an airmass term.
\end{mathletters}
The fit is performed iteratively using a sigma-clipping method.
Figure \ref{fig:Fig5} shows the difference in the magnitude offsets between the left- and right-side of each chip ($\bar{\Delta}_\mathrm{l} - \bar{\Delta}_\mathrm{r}$) for the whole data set, which is within $\pm0.02$ magnitude level for all 36 CCD chips. The histograms are normalized by the total number of data frames $N = 4,730$ and are described by a Gaussian function with slightly different mean values and shapes (dashed line). We clearly see a significant variation in difference between a pair of magnitude offsets for all CCDs.
\subsection{Field Distortion Correction}
The photometric calibration for wide-field imaging systems is also affected by position-dependent systematic errors due to a PSF variation across the FOV (e.g., \citealp{ive07,hod09}). We derive PSF variations across the FOV with the SExtractor package. The change of the PSF shapes in the image plane is represented by spatial distribution of PSF FWHM values for several bright stars, with parameters of \texttt{CLASS$\_$STAR} $>$ 0.9, \texttt{MAGERR$\_$AUTO} $<$ 0.01 mag, and \texttt{FLAGS} = 0 (i.e., isolated point sources with no contamination). Note that the PSF FWHM values are defined as the diameter of the disk that contains half of the object flux based on a circular Gaussian kernel. Figure \ref{fig:Fig6} presents the variation of the PSF FWHM as a function of distance from the image center for various seeing conditions. For each quadrant, the dashed lines represent the weighted spline approximation of the median value of each distance bin (1 arcmin). The result shows that the PSF FWHM varies significantly as a function of position on the single-epoch image frames and variations are at the level of $\sim$10\% to 20\% ($0\arcsec.1-0\arcsec.2$) across the FOV. As the field distortion is not negligible from the center of field to its edges, such variations limit the accuracy of stellar photometry.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth,angle=0]{Fig6.eps}
\caption{PSF FWHM variations as a function of distance from the image center for various seeing conditions. For each quadrant (denoted by different colors), the dashed lines represent the weighted spline approximation of the median value of each distance bin (one arcmin).}
\label{fig:Fig6}
\end{figure}
To address this issue, we perform a 2D polynomial fitting technique. For each frame, the correction terms are described by a linear or quadratic polynomial depending on the position $(x,y)$ only.
\begin{widetext}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\Delta \vec{m}_\mathrm{c,k}(x,y,m_\mathrm{err})_\mathrm{lin} & = c_\mathrm{0k} + c_\mathrm{1k}\vec{x} + c_\mathrm{2k}\vec{y},\\
\Delta \vec{m}_\mathrm{c,k}(x,y,m_\mathrm{err})_\mathrm{qud} & = c_\mathrm{0k} + c_\mathrm{1k}\vec{x} + c_\mathrm{2k}\vec{y} + c_\mathrm{3k}\vec{x}^{2} + c_\mathrm{4k}\vec{y}^{2} + c_\mathrm{5k}\vec{xy},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{widetext}where $x, y$ are the pixel coordinates of $N$ bright isolated stars, $m_\mathrm{err}$ is the statistical weight in the fitting procedure, $\vec{c}_\mathrm{k}$ are the sets of polynomial coefficients for each aperture size, and $\Delta \vec{m}_\mathrm{c, k}(x,y,m_\mathrm{err})$ are the difference in magnitude between the reference aperture and $k$ aperture, $\Delta \vec{m}_\mathrm{c, k}(x,y) = \vec{m}_\mathrm{c, 20}(x,y) - \vec{m}_\mathrm{c, k}(x,y)$, at the position $(x,y)$ for each chip $c$. We derived the optimal parameter values from a nonlinear least-squares fit using the Levenberg--Marquardt algorithm and automatic differentiation,\footnote{We used a \texttt{LeastSquareFit} module provided in the scientific python package (\url{http://www.scipy.org/}).} and choose between two models that best fit the data.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.34\linewidth, angle=-90]{Fig7a.eps}}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.34\linewidth, angle=-90]{Fig7a1.eps}}\vspace*{-1.5em}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.34\linewidth, angle=-90]{Fig7b.eps}}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.34\linewidth, angle=-90]{Fig7b1.eps}}\vspace*{-1.3em}
\caption{Example of the position-dependent magnitude offsets ($gray$ symbols) and the distortion correction by 2D polynomial fitting method ($black$ symbols) for selected CCD chips. For the outer ($left$) and the central ($right$) region of the mosaic, we compare the magnitude offsets between the reference aperture and the relatively smaller apertures (e.g., AP5, AP10) as a function of $(x,y)$ coordinates. The variation is usually more significant in the $y$-direction than in the $x$-direction, especially for the case of aperture photometry performed with small apertures.}
\label{fig:Fig7}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth, angle=0]{Fig8.eps}
\caption{Comparison of data recovery rate (\emph{top} panels) and rms photometric precision of light curves (\emph{bottom} panels) for the selected stars in the outer part (CCD 1) of the field of view. The black points are from the re-calibrated light curves, while the gray points are from the raw (left) and filtered (right) light curves in archive, respectively. Our results use nearly 100\% of observed data and reach comparable accuracy without any filtering.}
\label{fig:Fig8}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:Fig7} shows the field-dependent magnitude offsets and the distortion correction by 2D polynomial fitting method for one example mosaic CCD. For the outer and the central region of the mosaic, we compare the magnitude offsets between the reference aperture and the relatively smaller apertures as a function of $(x,y)$ coordinates. Here $x$-axis is in the declination direction and $y$-axis is opposite to the right ascension direction. We find that the magnitude difference depends on position $(x, y)$ and is most discrepant in the outer part of the FOV. This effect is usually more significant in the $y$-direction than in the $x$-direction, especially for the case of aperture photometry performed with small apertures. The correction for field-dependent PSF variation reduces the initial $\sim$10\% variation (gray lines) to less than $\sim$1\% (black lines).
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth, angle=0]{Fig9.eps}
\caption{Comparison of data recovery rate (\emph{top} panels) and rms photometric precision of light curves (\emph{bottom} panels) for the selected stars in the central part (CCD 21) of the field of view. The plotted symbols and notations are the same as Figure \ref{fig:Fig8}.}
\label{fig:Fig9}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Photometric Performance Diagnostics}
\subsubsection{Comparison with Archival Data}
We compare the photometric performance of the re-calibrated light curves with the non-de-trended archival light curves\footnote{Note that the archival data have not been trend-filtered, but \citet{har09} used the de-trended archival light curves as part of the transit detection process in their paper IV of the prior analysis.} by means of the two representative measures: (i) the rms photometric precision $\sigma_\mathrm{ph}$, and (ii) the data recovery rate $N_\mathrm{recovery}$. The former is defined as the standard deviation of light curves around the mean value as a function of $r$ magnitude:
\begin{equation}
\sigma_\mathrm{ph}(N_\mathrm{j},\bar{m}_\mathrm{j}) = \sqrt{\sum^{N_\mathrm{j}}_\mathrm{p=1}\frac{(m_\mathrm{p}-\bar{m}_\mathrm{j})^{2}}{N_\mathrm{j} - 1}},
\end{equation} where $N_\mathrm{j}$ is the number of data points in each light curve, $m_\mathrm{p}$ is the observed magnitude, and $\bar{m}_\mathrm{j}$ is the mean magnitude of the object $j$, and the latter refers to the number of \emph{analyzed} data frames normalized by the total number of observed data frames $N$ for each object. In typical cases, the data recovery rate should be near unity in the bright magnitude regime and decreases with magnitude for fainter objects. For comparison, we decided to select light curve samples which show either no significant variability or seeing-correlated variations induced by image blending. We remove all known variable stars from the sample list based on a new catalog of variable stars in M37 field (S.-W. Chang et al. 2015, hereafter Paper II). To remove the light curves of blended objects, we use an empirical statistical technique to quantify the level of blending by looking for seeing-correlated shifts of the object from its median magnitude \citep{irw07}.
\begin{displaymath}
b = \frac{\chi^{2}-\chi_\mathrm{poly}^{2}}{\chi^{2}},
\end{displaymath}
where
\begin{equation}
\chi^{2} = \sum^{}_\mathrm{p}\frac{(\sum m_\mathrm{p}-\bar{m}_\mathrm{j})^{2}}{\sigma_\mathrm{p}^{2}}
\end{equation} for light curve points $m_\mathrm{p}$ with uncertainties $\sigma_\mathrm{p}$, and $\chi_\mathrm{poly}^{2}$ is the same statistic measured with respect to a fourth order polynomial in FWHM fitted to the data. We adopt the value $b < 0.4$ for the selecting light curves with no blending. The last selection criterion is that the light curves must exit both in the archive and our database.
In the bottom panels of Figure \ref{fig:Fig8} and Figure \ref{fig:Fig9}, we plot the rms photometric precision of light curves for the two Megacam CCD chips in the outer (CCD 1) and central (CCD 21) part of the FOV, respectively. The black points show the rms values of the re-calibrated light curves, while the gray points are for the raw and filtered light curves in archive. The first impression from this comparison is that the typical rms scatter is overestimated from the raw light curves because of many outliers in the photometric data (bottom left panels). For the better results, these light curves were filtered out in two steps: (i) clipping 5-$\sigma$ outliers from each light curve and (ii) removing every data points that are outliers in a large number of light curves \citep{har08b}. In the second step, the outlier candidates are estimated by choosing a cutoff value for each CCD chip. The cutoff value is defined as the fraction of light curves for which a given image is a 3-$\sigma$ outlier. This filtering was applied to remove bad measurements due to image artifacts or poor conditions, which were previously thought to be unrecoverable, but resulting data loss is up to 20\% of the total number of data points (bottom right panels). As shown in the top panels of the two figures, the data recovery rate for the re-calibrated light curves is close to 100$\%$ over a wide range of magnitude and it appears to be more complete compared with the raw (top left panels) and filtered (top right panels) light curves. At bright magnitudes ($r < 16$) the data recovery rate does not reach 100$\%$ because the exposure time was chosen to be saturated at a magnitude of $r\sim15$. This comparison proves that our approach is a powerful strategy for improving overall photometric accuracy without the need to throw out many outlier data points.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.35\linewidth, angle=-90]{Fig10a.eps}}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.35\linewidth, angle=-90]{Fig10b.eps}}\vspace*{-1.3em}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.35\linewidth, angle=-90]{Fig10c.eps}}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.35\linewidth, angle=-90]{Fig10d.eps}}\vspace*{-1.3em}
\caption{Light curves for selected variable stars from Hartman et al. (2008b, top panels) and from this work (bottom panels), respectively. The recovered data points are marked with black squares. From upper left to lower right: ID=310010 (detached eclipsing binary star), ID=310139 (rotating variable star with flare), ID=100031 (pulsating variable star), and ID=100046 (aperiodic variable star).}
\label{fig:Fig10}
\end{figure*}
Finally, we compare the light curves themselves for selected variable stars between the archive and our own. This comparison serves to illustrate how the photometric precision and data recovery rate of the time-series data affect the ability to address a variety of variability characteristics. Figure \ref{fig:Fig10} shows a direct comparison with the filtered light curves (top panels) and our re-calibrated light curves (bottom panels) for four variable stars. It is shown that our method recovers more data points (black) from the same data set of images.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth, angle=0]{Fig11.eps}
\caption{Example of residual magnitudes and sky values between our multi-aperture photometry and the PSF-fitting photometry as a function of $x$ and $y$ coordinates, respectively, for selected CCD chips. The filled squares are relatively bright stars with $r \le 21$ mag, while the open squares are stars with $r > 21$ mag.}
\label{fig:Fig11}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Comparison with PSF-fitting Photometry}
In order to further investigate possible systematics in our approach, we conducted PSF-fitting photometry with DAOPHOT II and ALLSTAR \citep{ste87}. For each mosaic frame, we select bright, isolated, and unsaturated stars to make the PSF model varying quadratically with $(x,y)$ coordinates. After PSF modeling, we run ALLSTAR to perform iterative PSF photometry of all detected sources in the frame with initial centroids set to the same values used for our own photometry. We then calculated aperture corrections using the package DAOGROW \citep{ste90} after subtraction of all but PSF stars, which creates aperture growth curves for each frame and then integrates them out to infinity to obtain a total magnitude for each PSF star. The final step is to convert the instrumental magnitudes into the standard photometric system. For each frame, the initial zero-point correction is applied by correcting the magnitude offset with respect to the master frame. This places photometry for all frames on a common instrumental system. Following the same procedure in Section 3.3, the photometric calibration is performed individually for each amplifier region.
Figure \ref{fig:Fig11} shows the residual magnitudes and sky values between our multi-aperture photometry and the PSF-fitting photometry as a function of position in the selected CCD chips. There are no position-dependent trends in the magnitude residuals. For the brighter stars with $r \le 21$ mag, the rms magnitude difference between the two methods is very small ($\Delta_\mathrm{chip 1}$ = $-0.001\pm0.009$ and $\Delta_\mathrm{chip 21}$ = $0.001\pm0.012$, respectively), while for the relatively faint stars the rms difference is somewhat larger ($\Delta_\mathrm{chip 1}$ = $-0.002\pm0.055$ and $\Delta_\mathrm{chip 21}$ = $0.006\pm0.050$, respectively). The results of this example indicate that we can reliably correct for the PSF variations by our calibration procedures. Meanwhile, our sky values are slightly higher than the ALLSTAR sky values, but not to the degree that can seriously affect photometric measurements.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth, angle=0]{Fig12.eps}
\caption{Comparison of the photometric precision (rms) for our multi-aperture photometry and for the PSF-fitting photometry as a function of the $r$ magnitude in the central region of the open cluster M37 (left panel). The arrows indicate the three different magnitude levels from bright to faint in our sample shown in the right panels. Note that the variable object IDs are taken from the new variable catalog of the M37 (see Paper II).}
\label{fig:Fig12}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:Fig12} shows a comparison of the rms dispersion of the light curves obtained with our photometry with respect to the that of the PSF-fitting photometry in the central region of the open cluster M37. We only compare the light curves of non-blended objects as described in Section 3.5. Our multi-aperture photometry does not reach the same level of precision as PSF-fitting photometry for the faintest stars, while the PSF-fitting approach results in poorer photometry for bright stars. As shown in the right panels of Figure \ref{fig:Fig12}, it is clear that our photometry tend to have smaller measurement errors with respect to the PSF photometry for the bright stars.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth, angle=0]{Fig13.eps}
\caption{Example of shared systematic trend in the light curves of isolated bright stars. The numbers on the upper left- and right-side of each panel show the star's identification number and the mean value of magnitude, respectively. The numbers on the $x$-axis indicate the corresponding timestamps in each frame. The deviations from the mean value, $\Delta r$, are less than $\pm$0.01 mag level (with a rms values of 0.0021, 0.0025, and 0.0033 mag from the top panel down). These stars show a similar pattern of light variations over the observation span.}
\label{fig:Fig13}
\end{figure}
\section{TEMPORAL TRENDS IN THE RE-CALIBRATED LIGHTCURVES}
From a visual inspection of the re-calibrated light curves in the same CCD chip, we found that some light curves tend to have the same pattern of variations over the observation span (Figure \ref{fig:Fig13}). This kind of systematic variation (i.e., \emph{trend}) is often noticed in other studies. For example, the importance of minimizing known (or unknown) systematics have been recognized by several exo-planet surveys because planet detection performance can be easily damaged by them (e.g.,\citealt{kov05,tam05,pon06}). Also space-based time-series data (e.g., {\sc CoRoT} and {\sc Kepler}) are no exception to this behavior although it is completely free from systematics caused by the turbulent atmosphere. Most of the raw light curves are affected by a secular (or a sudden) variation of flux without any obvious physical reason \citep{maz09,mis10,jen10}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.46\textwidth,height=0.15\textheight, angle=0]{Fig14a.eps}}\vspace*{-1.3em}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth, height=0.23\textheight, angle=0]{Fig14b.eps}}\vspace*{-1.3em}
\caption{\emph{Top panel}: spatial distribution of the most prominent trend groups on the CCD plane which covers the small areas of the sky ($6\arcmin.14\times2\arcmin.73$). The colored dots represent the most systematic stars classified as group 1 (red), group 2 (blue), and group 3 (green), respectively. One interesting property of trends is that they are localized within a CCD frame where stars are isolated from each other. \emph{Bottom panel}: systematic features extracted from the selected light curves. These are calculated by the weighted sum of normalized light curves from each group.}
\label{fig:Fig14}
\end{figure}
In order to check the properties of temporal systematics, we examined the correlation coefficients as measure of similarity between two light curves $i$ and $j$ obtained from a single CCD chip (CCD 1).
\begin{equation}
C_\mathrm{ij}=\frac{1}{N-1}\frac{\sum^{n}_\mathrm{t=1} L_\mathrm{i}(t)L_\mathrm{j}(t) - n\overline{L}_\mathrm{i}\overline{L}_\mathrm{j}}{\sigma_\mathrm{i}\sigma_\mathrm{j}},
\end{equation} where $L(t)$ is the flux of each star at time $t$, $N$ is the total number of measurements, $\overline{L}$ is the mean flux of each star, and $\sigma$ is the standard deviation of $L(t)$. This comparison is a point-by-point comparison and is done for every pair of light curves in the data set. The resultant similarity matrix can be used to identify correlated pairs of light curves and to determine which light curve is least like all other light curves (e.g., \citealt{pro06}). After that, we selected stars showing most systematics based on a hierarchical clustering method with the correlation coefficients (See \citealt{kim09}, for more details). Figure \ref{fig:Fig14} represents spatial distribution of the most prominent trend groups on the CCD plane (top panel) and its strongly correlated features determined by the weighted sum of normalized light curves (bottom panel). There are two interesting features in this figure: the first one is that each trend covers only a certain part of the sky area and the second one is that some portions of neighboring trends show different variation patterns even at the same moment in time (shaded gray region in the figure). In particular, we found an anti-correlated variation for the trends between the group 1 ($g_{1}$) and the group 2 ($g_{2}$), so we might expect to find possible noise sources that are responsible for these discrepancies. Why the trends are different and localized within a single CCD frame is a subject of further study, but it is probably related to subtle changes in point spread function and sky condition within the detector FOV.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth,angle=0]{Fig15.eps}
\caption{Example subset of data for comparing the trends with several parameters from the two groups ($g_\mathrm{1}$ and $g_\mathrm{2}$) of stars. The numbers on the $x$-axis indicate the corresponding timestamps between the frame 1 and the frame 400. From the top to bottom, the panels show the average difference of trend, flux concentrations in which we applied a $-0.02$ mag shift to the $m_\mathrm{20}-m_\mathrm{12}$ value, sky level, and PSF FWHM value between the two groups.}
\label{fig:Fig15}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth, angle=0]{Fig16.eps}
\caption{Systematic variations in the magnitude offsets, $\Delta\mathrm{m}$, for the original multi-aperture magnitude measurements as a function of aperture size, which is marked with a gray dots in all panels. A positive $\Delta\mathrm{m}$ indicates that the photometric measurements with the corresponding aperture size, $m_\mathrm{ap}$, are brighter than those of reference aperture $m_\mathrm{20}$, while a negative $\Delta\mathrm{m}$ indicates vise versa. The dashed lines are the rms model profiles introduced in Section 3.2.2. There is a noticeable distinction between the group 1 (\emph{top panels}) and group 2 (\emph{bottom panels}) when looked at different concentration levels. But the trends are not fully explained by the difference patterns in $\Delta\mathrm{m}$ because those correlated variations become small after the correction for the PSF variation (black dots).}
\label{fig:Fig16}
\end{figure}
For these two groups, we consider a possible causal relationship between the systematic trends and average object/image properties. Figure \ref{fig:Fig15} shows the differences in trend, differential magnitudes, sky level, and PSF FWHM between the two groups, respectively. In the top panel, we plot the magnitude difference in trends, which shows variations in the range of $\pm0.02$ mag. We suspect that this may be due to the different concentration of star light between these two groups. It can be checked by using the magnitude difference $\Delta m = m_{20} - m_{ap}$, where $m_\mathrm{20}$ and $m_\mathrm{ap}$ are the reference aperture and the relatively small aperture, respectively. In fact, we already know that there is a magnitude variation in $\Delta m$ depend on the aperture size due to the field-dependent PSF variation (see Section 3.4). For example, Figure \ref{fig:Fig16} shows the response of multi-aperture photometry for the two groups of stars at one epoch (MJD = 53726.14817) before and after applying the distortion corrections. Although the magnitude variation between the group 1 and the group 2 seems to have different behavior as a function of aperture size (gray points), it is negligible after the removal of the PSF variation (black points).
We also check that the possible contribution of sky level ($\Delta\mathrm{sky}$) and PSF FWHM differences ($\Delta\mathrm{FWHM}$) to the systematic trends on the re-calibrated light curves. As mentioned by \citet{bra12}, sky over-subtraction may lead to the systematic trends as a function of the PSF FWHM, the amplitude of which increase for fainter stars. The third and forth panels of Figure \ref{fig:Fig15} show the variation of the mean $\Delta\mathrm{sky}$ and $\Delta\mathrm{FWHM}$, respectively. In our case, however, the form and amplitude of trends seem independent of sky level and PSF FWHM.
Some other possible sources that may contribute to the observed systematic trends include: higher order variations in the PSF shape beyond just the FWHM; cross-talk from other amplifiers, or ghosts from bright stars undergoing multiple reflections within the optics; non-uniform variations in the gain; and unmodeled temporal atmospheric variations that are dominated by Rayleigh scattering, molecular absorption by ozone and water vapor, and aerosol scattering \citep{pad08}. While we find a clear presence of trends that should be removed, we are not able to identify their exact cause.
\subsection{Removal of Temporal Systematics by Photometric De-Trending (PDT)}
In order to reduce systematic effects in photometric time-series data, several methods were introduced (e.g., TFA: \citealt{kov05}; Sys-Rem: \citealt{tam05}; PDT: \citealt{kim09}; CDA: \citealt{mis10}; PDC: \citealt{twi10}). All of these algorithms share a common advantage that they work without any prior knowledge of the systematic effects. We use the PDT algorithm, which has been designed to detect and remove spatially localized patterns. By default, this algorithm works with a set of light curves that contain the same number of data points distributed in the same series of epoch. In many cases, however, missing data occur when no photometric measurements are available for some stars in a given observed frame. These missing data can be simply replaced by means, medians, or the values from the interpolation of adjacent data points in each light curve (e.g., \citealt{kov05, kim10}). Although using the replaced value is the easiest way to reconstruct the light curve to be analyzed, it is not appropriate if the time separation between two subsequent observations is too large. Instead we use more straightforward approach by applying the PDT algorithm in two separate steps: (i) we construct the master trends from the subset of bright stars, and (ii) de-trend light curves of all stars with most similar master trend and matching time line.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth, angle=0]{Fig17.eps}
\caption{Example of selected light curves before (gray) and after (black) the removal of systematic trends. The numbers on the $x$-axis indicate the corresponding timestamps between the frame 1 and the frame 2000. The $y$-axis is $r$-filter magnitude (normalized by its mean value). While the morphology of the two light curves in the left panels appear to be variable stars of some kind, these turn out to be non-variable after applying the photometric de-trending method. In the case of the right panels, all true variabilities are preserved from the raw light curves. From upper left to lower right: ID=10032, ID=10039, ID=170088, and ID=170108.}
\label{fig:Fig17}
\end{figure}
We briefly describe the main procedure of our de-trending process following the algorithm derived by \citet{kim09}. We first select the template light curves from bright stars that show the highest correlation in the light-curve features. The total length of template light curves should be long enough to cover the whole time span of observations. In this step, we take a sequence of data points, $L_{i}(t_\mathrm{ref})$ as the reference time line. Using the correlation matrix calculated from Equation (7), we extract all subset of light curves that show spatio-temporally correlated features (i.e., clusters). Each cluster is determined by hierarchical tree clustering algorithm based on the degree of similarity. Next, we obtain master trends $T_{c}(t_\mathrm{ref})$ for each cluster by weighted average of the normalized differential light curves, $f_{i}(t_\mathrm{ref})$:
\vspace*{0.1 cm}
\begin{displaymath}
T_{c}(t_\mathrm{ref}) = \frac{\sum^{N_{c}}_\mathrm{i=1}w_{i}f_{i}(t_\mathrm{ref})}{\sum^{N_{c}}_\mathrm{i=1}w_{i}},
\end{displaymath}
\begin{displaymath}
f_{i}(t_\mathrm{ref}) = \frac{L_{i}(t_\mathrm{ref}) - \overline{L}_{i}}{\overline{L}_{i}},
\end{displaymath}
\begin{equation}
w_{i} = \frac{1}{\sigma_{f_{i}}^{2}},
\end{equation} where $N_{c}$ is the total number of light curves in each cluster $c$, $\overline{L}_{i}$ is mean value of \itshape{i}\upshape{th} light curve, and $\sigma_{f_{i}}$ is the standard deviation of $f_{i}(t_\mathrm{ref})$. After determining the master trends, we de-trend the light curves of all stars with matching master trend and time line. We adjust the temporal sequence of measurements for the master trends $T_{c}(t_{i})$ by that of individual light curves to be de-trended $L_{i}(t_{i})$. Because each light curve is assumed as a linear combination of master trends and noise, we can determine the optimal solution by minimizing the residual between the master trends and the light curve:
\begin{displaymath}
\hat{f_\mathrm{i}}(t_{i})=\sum^{m}_{c=1}\beta_{ic}T_{c}(t_{i}) + \epsilon_{i}(t_{i}),
\end{displaymath}
\begin{equation}
\hat{f_{i}}(t_{i})=\frac{L_{i}(t_{i}) - \overline{L}_{i}}{\overline{L}_{i}}.
\end{equation} where $m$ is the total number of master trends and $\beta_{ic}$ are free parameters to be determined by means of minimization of noise term $\sum_{t} \epsilon_\mathrm{i}(t_{i})^{2}$.
Figure \ref{fig:Fig17} shows examples of our light curves before and after removing the systematic trends. The algorithm we used for de-trending removes only the systematic variations that are shared by light curves of stars in the adjacent sky regions (left panels), while all kinds of true variabilities are preserved (right panels).
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth, angle=0]{Fig18.eps}
\caption{\emph{Top panels}: archival (left) and our final (right) light curves of a periodic variable star, V427. The light curves are folded by the best-fit period of 5.4615 \citep{har08b} and 4.4158 days, respectively. Such an period difference for the same star comes from data itself (e.g., both the different noise levels and the different data sampling intervals). \emph{Bottom panels}: the resulting amplitude spectrum of each light curve is calculated with \texttt{PERIOD04} package.}
\label{fig:Fig18}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth, angle=0]{Fig19.eps}
\caption{\emph{Top panels}: archival (left) and our final (right) light curves of low-amplitude pulsating variable star, V2276. The archival data is not adequate to discriminate a signal of astrophysical origin from the noise of the data stream. \emph{Bottom panels}: the resulting amplitude spectrum of each light curve is calculated with \texttt{PERIOD04} package. A significant peak is detected at the frequency 22.3979 days$^{-1}$ (indicated by arrow). The phased diagram of this candidate frequency is shown in the low-right panel. We see that the model fits well the overall pulsating variability (red line).}
\label{fig:Fig19}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth, angle=0]{Fig20.eps}
\caption{\emph{Top panels}: archival (left) and our final (right) light curves of a star, V347. This star turns out to be non-variable in the new data. \emph{Bottom panels}: all other details are same as Figure \ref{fig:Fig19}, but the subfigure of low-right panel is 200$\times$200 thumbnail image of the target star. There is no potential sources of contamination to hamper the interpretation of the power spectrum.}
\label{fig:Fig20}
\end{figure}
\section{IMPACT OF THE NEW CALIBRATION OF PERIOD SEARCH}
The usefulness of our photometry is tested for a set of variable stars. We immediately find abundant cases of improvements in the following three aspects: (i) refinement of the derived period, (ii) detection of a new significant peak in the periodogram, and (iii) separation of non-variable candidates where systematics in the light curves were mistaken for true variability. For each case, we compare light curves and power spectra for archival data and our data.
For the first example, we show that a new photometric measurement and calibration allowed us to derive a much improved refinement of the light curves and of the derived periods (Figure \ref{fig:Fig18}). We performed a Lomb-Scargle (L-S: \citealt{sca82}) search of both archival and new light curves for periodic variable star (V427). The light curves are folded by the best-fit period of 5.4615\footnote{For the archival data, we adopt the period found on the filtered light curves from \citet{har08b}.} and 4.4158 days, respectively. We also calculated the false-alarm probability ($\log$ FAP) for each peak and its signal to noise ratio (S/N): $\log$ FAP$_\mathrm{archival}$ = $-28.37$, S/N$_\mathrm{archival}$ = 43.2 for the archival data and $\log$ FAP$_\mathrm{new}$ = $-181.07$, S/N$_\mathrm{new}$ = 84.5 for the new data. Since we can get better estimation with much lowered minimum FAP value, our new period is the most likely result. In the bottom panels, the resulting amplitude spectrum was calculated with \texttt{PERIOD04} package. Since the archival data is more noisy than the new one, it is rather complicated to interpret the peaks of its power spectrum.
For the second example, we show the newly discovered low-amplitude pulsating variable star (Figure \ref{fig:Fig19}). We used the \texttt{PERIOD04} package to find multiple pulsation periods. The whole process of identifying, fitting, and pre-whitening successive frequencies was repeated until no significant frequencies were found. We adopt a conservative approach in selecting the statistical significant peaks from the amplitude spectrum. A S/N amplitude ratio of 4.0 is a good criterion for independent frequencies, equivalent to 99.9\% certainty of variability \citep{bre93}. While no clear periodicity was found in the archive data, our amplitude spectrum shows a clear excess of power centered at 22.3979 days$^{-1}$ with peak amplitudes of about 1 mmag (S/N$_\mathrm{new}$ = 9.02).
The last example is the opposite case of the second. Figure \ref{fig:Fig20} shows that this object is unlikely to be a variable source because there is no evidence for any significant peaks, which indicates that the variations are mostly noise. Extensive study on variabilities will be presented in Paper II.
\section{CONCLUSION}
In this paper, we introduce a new time-series photometry with multi-aperture indexing and spatio-temporal de-trending techniques, together with complex corrections to minimize instrumental biases. We used the archival, high-temporal time-series data from one-month long MMT/Megacam transit survey program. The re-calibration of the archival data has made several improvements as follows: (i) the photometric information derived from the multi-aperture indexing measurements is useful to obtain the best S/N measurement, but also to diagnose whether or not the targets are contaminated; (ii) the resulting light curves utilize nearly 100\% of available data and reach precisions down to sub mmag level at the bright magnitude end without the need to throw out many outlier data points, which makes it possible to preserve data points that show intrinsic sudden variations such as flare events; (iii) corrections for position-dependent PSF variations and de-trending of spatio-temporal systematic trends improve the quality of light curves; and (iv) new photometry enables us to determine the variability nature and period estimate more accurately.
While this study deals with a particular set of data from MMT, we find our approach has a potential for other wide-field time-series observations. Multi-aperture indexing measurement is a powerful tool in isolating and even correcting various contaminations. Spatio-temporal de-trending is also very useful in removing systematics caused by PSF variation and even non-uniform extinction of thin clouds across the FOV. \citet{cha13} proved this for different sets of archival survey data.
\acknowledgments
This research was supported by Basic Science Research Program of the National Research Foundation of Korea (2011-0030875). Y.-I.B. is grateful for support from KASI-Yonsei DRC program of Korea Research Council of Fundamental Science and Technology (DRC-12-2-KASI). We thank the MMT/M37 survey team for the kind provision of raw image data. Dr. Kim, D.-W. helped us to test the modified photometric de-trending algorithm. Additionally, we would like to thank the anonymous referee for many helpful comments, including the suggestion to use PSF photometry to further justify the successful removal of systematics (Section 3.5.2).
|
\section{Introduction}
Let us consider a non-autonomous semilinear elliptic equation of the type
\begin{equation}\label{generalf}
-\Delta u = g(|x|, u) \ \ \text{in} \ \ \Omega, \quad u = 0 \ \ \text{on} \ \ \partial \Omega,
\end{equation}
where $\Omega \subset {\mathbb R}^N$, $N \geq 2$, is either a ball or an annulus centered at the origin, $g: [0, +\infty) \times {\mathbb R} \rightarrow {\mathbb R}$ is such that $r \mapsto g(r,u)$ is $C^{0, \beta}$ on bounded sets of $[0,+\infty) \times {\mathbb R}$, $u \mapsto g_u(r,u)$ is $C^{0, \gamma}$ on bounded sets of $[0, + \infty) \times {\mathbb R}$, where $g_u$ denotes the derivative of $g$ with respect to the variable $u$. Since the problem is invariant by spherical symmetry we can consider classical radial solutions of \eqref{generalf}. Here we address the question of estimating the Morse index of sign changing radial solutions of \eqref{generalf}.
Given any continuous function $u:\Omega \rightarrow {\mathbb R}$ we will denote by $n(u)$ the number of nodal sets of $u$, i.e. of connected components of $\{ x\in \Omega; u(x) \neq 0\}$.
We recall that the Morse index $m(u)$ of a solution $u$ of \eqref{generalf} is the maximal dimension of a subspace of $H^1_0(\Omega)$ in which the quadratic form
\begin{equation}\label{Qint}
w \longmapsto Q_u(w,w) = \int_{\Omega} |\nabla w (x)|^2 dx - \int_{\Omega} g_u(|x|, u(x)) w^2(x) dx
\end{equation}
is negative definite. Alternatively, since we are considering the case of bounded domains, $m(u)$ can be defined as the number of negative eigenvalues, counted with their multiplicity, of the linearized operator $L_u : = -\Delta - g_u(|x|, u)$ in the space $H^1_0(\Omega)$.
In the case of autonomous problems, i.e. when the nonlinear term $g$ does not depend on the space variable, Aftalion and Pacella \cite{AftalionPacella}, as a consequence of a more general result in symmetric domains, obtained the following theorem.
\begin{named}{Theorem A}[Autonomous problems]\label{ThA}
Let $g(r,u) = f(u)$ with $f \in C^1({\mathbb R})$. Then any sign changing radial solution of \eqref{generalf} has Morse index greater than or equal to $N+1$.
\end{named}
\begin{remark}\label{remark4int}
More precisely in \cite{AftalionPacella} it is proved that the linearized operator $L_u$ has at least $N$ negative eigenvalues whose corresponding eigenfunctions are non-radial and change sign. Therefore, adding the first eigenvalue, which is obviously associated to a radial eigenfunction, one gets at least $N+1$ negative eigenvalues. In the case when $f$ is superlinear, i.e. satisfies \eqref{H:superlinear}, then it is easy to see, testing the quadratic form on the solution $u$ in each nodal region, that there are at least $n(u)$ negative eigenvalues in the space of radial functions. Hence for these nonlinearities, any sign changing radial solution has Morse index greater than or equal to $N+n(u)$. In particular this holds for Lane-Emden problems, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{p>2}
-\Delta u = |u|^{p-1}u \ \ \text{in} \ \ \Omega, \quad u = 0 \ \ \text{on} \ \ \partial \Omega, \ \ p>1.
\end{equation}
We also point out that the assumption $f(0) \geq 0$ in \cite{AftalionPacella} is not really needed.
\medbreak
\end{remark}
As a consequence of Theorem A and in the case of superlinear, subcritical problems, like \eqref{p>2} for $p <\frac{N+2}{N-2}$ if $N \geq 3$, in \cite{AftalionPacella} it is deduced that any least energy nodal solution cannot be radial, since their Morse index is precisely $2$; cf. \cite{CastroCossioNeuberger, BartschChangWang, BartschWeth}. Obviously this break of symmetry is relevant for many applications.
The proof of Theorem A uses in a crucial way the fact that the derivatives $\frac{\partial u}{\partial x_i}$, $i = 1, \ldots, N$, of a solution $u$ of \eqref{generalf} are indeed solutions of the linearized equation $L_u (w) = 0$. This property is a peculiarity of autonomous problems. For this reason the proof of \cite{AftalionPacella} does not extend to the case of non-autonomous nonlinearities. So it is an open question to understand whether a similar estimate on the Morse index of nodal radial solutions holds for the general problem \eqref{generalf} and also whether least energy nodal solutions are radial or not.
In this paper we answer these questions in the case of nonlinearities of the type $g(|x|, u) = |x|^{\alpha} f(u)$ and $N=2$. More precisely we consider the problem
\begin{equation}\label{weight+f}
-\Delta u = |x|^{\alpha} f(u) \ \ \text{in} \ \ \Omega, \quad u = 0 \ \ \text{on} \ \ \partial \Omega,
\end{equation}
where $\alpha> 0$, $\Omega \subset {\mathbb R}^2$ is either a ball or an annulus centered at the origin and $f: {\mathbb R} \rightarrow {\mathbb R}$ is $C^{1, \beta}$ on bounded sets of ${\mathbb R}$. In some of our results we also assume the following superlinear condition
\begin{equation}\label{H:superlinear}
f'(u) > \frac{f(u)}{u}\quad \forall \, u \in {\mathbb R}\backslash\{0\}.
\end{equation}
Our first result is the following.
\begin{theorem}\label{maintheoremN=2}
Let $u$ be a radial sign changing solution of \eqref{weight+f}. Then $u$ has Morse index greater than or equal to $3$. Moreover, if \eqref{H:superlinear} holds, then the Morse index of $u$ is at least $n(u)+2$.
\end{theorem}
In the case that $f(u) = |u|^{p-1}u$, with $p>1$, \eqref{weight+f} turns out to be the so called Hénon equation \cite{Henon}
\begin{equation}\label{henon}
-\Delta u = |x|^{\alpha}|u|^{p-1}u \quad x \in \Omega, \qquad u=0 \quad \text{on} \quad \partial \Omega,
\end{equation}
which has been extensively studied since the work of Ni \cite{Ni}. We mention that apart from its mathematical interest, the Hénon equation is important in the \linebreak applications, in particular in astrophysics; cf. \cite{Henon, EdersonPacella}. Ni considered \eqref{henon} in the case of $\Omega$ being an open ball centered at zero in ${\mathbb R}^N$ with $N\geq 3$. In this case the Poho{\v{z}}aev identity, as in \cite[Lemma 1.1]{deFigueiredoLionsNussbaum}, shows that \eqref{henon} has no nontrivial solution if $p \geq \frac{N+2 + 2\alpha}{N-2}$. On the other side, with $1 < p < \frac{N+ 2 + 2\alpha}{N-2}$, the existence of a positive radial solution can be proved by using classical variational methods, for example, combining the Radial Lemma in \cite{Ni} with the mountain pass theorem. Again in the same range of $p$, a combination of the Radial Lemma in \cite{Ni} with some arguments in \cite{BartschWeth} gives the existence of a least energy solution among the nodal radial solutions of \eqref{henon}, hereafter called least energy nodal radial solution. In addition, in the case when $\Omega$ is an annulus, these existence results hold trivially for any $p>1$, since no lack of compactness occurs in the setting of radial functions.
Next we recall that it is proved in \cite[Theorem 1.3]{BartschWeth}, see also \cite{CastroCossioNeuberger}, that a least energy nodal solution of \eqref{weight+f} exists and has Morse index $2$ if $f$ satisfies \eqref{H:superlinear} and the additional conditions:
\begin{equation}\label{growth}
f(0) = 0 \quad \text{and} \quad \exists \, p>1 \ \ s.t. \ \ |f'(u)| \leq C (1 + |u|^{p-1}) \ \ \forall \, u \in {\mathbb R},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{A-R}
\exists \, R> 0, \ \ \theta >2 \ \ s.t. \ \ 0 < \theta \int_0^u f(\tau) d\tau \leq u f(u) \ \ \forall \, |u| \geq R.
\end{equation}
Then, as a consequence of Theorem \ref{maintheoremN=2}, we get the following result.
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:symmetrybreaking}
Assume \eqref{H:superlinear}, \eqref{growth} and \eqref{A-R}. Then any least energy nodal solution of \eqref{weight+f} is not radially symmetric.
\end{corollary}
In contrast to the above symmetry breaking result, we recall that it is proved in \cite{PacellaWeth, BartschWethWillem} that every least energy nodal solution of \eqref{weight+f} is foliated Schwarz symmetric, i.e. axially symmetric and monotone in the angular coordinate. We also point out that Corollary \ref{cor:symmetrybreaking} was already shown for the Hénon equation \eqref{henon}, for every $N\geq2$, but only for particular cases of $\alpha$: for $\alpha$ large in \cite[Remark 6.4]{BartschWethWillem} by a comparison of energy argument; for $\alpha$ small in \cite[Corollary 1.6 (iii)]{BonheuredosSantosRamosTavares} by an asymptotic analysis, as $\alpha \rightarrow 0$, of the least energy nodal solutions. The general symmetry breaking result, for any $\alpha> 0$, was, up to now, an open question.
We point out that the proof of Theorem \ref{maintheoremN=2} is different from that of Theorem A of \cite{AftalionPacella}. Indeed it relies on a suitable change of variable which works well in ${\mathbb R}^2$. This change of variable was considered previously in \cite{ClementdeFigueiredoMitidieri}, see also the recent papers \cite{CowanGhoussoub, GladialiGrossiNeves}, where an alternative approach to identify the critical exponent $\frac{N+2 + 2\alpha}{N-2}$, $N \geq 3$, associated with the Hénon equation \eqref{henon} in the case when $\Omega$ is an open ball centered at zero in ${\mathbb R}^N$, was presented. In these three papers, while studying radial solutions, the authors consider the corresponding ODE problem. Then, the critical exponent $\frac{N+2 + 2\alpha}{N-2}$ comes out as a result of a suitable one dimensional change of variable that reduces the weighted problem to a non-weighted one.
The novelty in our arguments consists in applying the change of variable to functions in ${\mathbb R}^2$ which are not necessarily radially symmetric, even though it does not act well on the gradient or on the Laplacian as it does for spherically symmetric functions; cf. \eqref{fundamentalgradientspolar}, Remark \ref{changelaplacian}, \eqref{fundamentalgradientsradial} and \eqref{laplacians}. Nevertheless, we show that it is useful to get an estimate from below on the Morse index of radial nodal solutions of \eqref{weight+f} in the whole space $H^1_0(\Omega)$, i.e. not only on radial directions; cf. Proposition \ref{comparisonlemma}.
Another question which arises from Theorem \ref{maintheoremN=2} is that of having a more precise estimate on the Morse index as the exponent $\alpha$ varies. How does the weight $|x|^{\alpha}$ influence the Morse index of nodal radial solutions of \eqref{weight+f}\,? In this direction, using some different changes of variables, we prove that the Morse indices go to infinity along the sequence of even exponents $\alpha$.
\begin{theorem}\label{theoremalpha=2}
Let $\alpha>0$ be even and let $u$ be a radial nodal solution of \eqref{weight+f}. Then $u$ has Morse index greater than or equal to $\alpha +3$. If in addition \eqref{H:superlinear} holds, then the Morse index of $u$ is at least $ n(u) + \alpha + 2$.
\end{theorem}
The proof of Theorem \ref{theoremalpha=2} relies on a modification of the previous change of variable that works fine for the case when $\alpha$ is even. This change of variable is the key argument to prove the existence of many negative eigenvalues of the linearized operator $L_u$, associated to a radial sign changing solution $u$ of \eqref{weight+f}, and related to the weighted problem
\begin{equation}\label{weightedeigenvalue}
-\Delta \varphi - |x|^{\alpha} f'(u) \varphi = \lambda |x|^{\alpha} \varphi \ \ \text{in} \ \ \Omega, \ \ \varphi = 0 \ \ \text{on} \ \ \partial \Omega.
\end{equation}
Indeed its peculiarity is to transform eigenfunctions of the non-weighted problem \eqref{4.3''} with a certain symmetry into eigenfunctions of \eqref{weightedeigenvalue} with a different symmetry. A variant of this was used in \cite{PacellaSrikanth} in higher dimensions to pass from doubly symmetric solutions of a supercritical problem in dimension $2m$, $m \geq 2$, to axially symmetric solutions of a subcritical problem in dimension $m+1$. Here we do not change dimension but we apply a somehow similar idea to create a correspondence between eigenfunctions of linearized operators of two different problems. We believe that the simple ideas exploited in this paper could be useful in other kind of problems.
Next we consider the particular case of the Hénon equation \eqref{henon} and we prove the following non-degeneracy result.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:radialsolutions}
Let $\alpha \geq 0$ and $p>1$.
\begin{enumerate}[i)]
\item For each $n \in {\mathbb N}$ there is only one radial solutions $u_{\alpha,n}$ of \eqref{henon}, up to multiplication by $-1$, with $n$ nodal sets. Moreover,
\[
u_{\alpha,n} (x) = \left(\frac{\alpha+2}{2}\right)^{\frac{2}{p-1}} U_{\alpha,n}(|x|^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}x)
\]
where $U_{\alpha,n}$ is the unique, up to multiplication by $-1$, nodal radial solution of \eqref{p>2} in $\Omega_{\alpha}= \{ |x|^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}x; \, x \in \Omega \}$ with $n$ nodal regions.
\vspace{5pt}
\item Let $u_{\alpha}$ be a least energy nodal radial solution of \eqref{henon}. Then $u_{\alpha}$ has two nodal regions, and so $u_{\alpha} = u_{\alpha,2}$ or $u_{\alpha,p} = -u_{\alpha,2}$. Moreover, it is non-degenerate in the space of radial functions, that is, if $\varphi$ is a radial solution of
\[
-\Delta \varphi = p |x|^{\alpha}|u_{\alpha}|^{p-1} \varphi \ \ \text{in} \ \ \Omega, \quad \varphi = 0 \ \ \text{on} \ \ \partial \Omega,
\]
then $\varphi \equiv 0$.
\end{enumerate}
\medbreak
\end{theorem}
Finally, consider the case when $\Omega$ is the unit ball in ${\mathbb R}^2$ centered at zero. Then $\Omega_{\alpha} = \Omega$ for all $\alpha >0$ and $U_{\alpha,2}$ does not depend on $\alpha$ as well, hence we denote $U_{\alpha, 2}$ simply by $U$. Then the non-degeneracy of $u_{\alpha}$ in $H^1_{0, {\rm{rad}}}(\Omega)$, i.e. ii) of Theorem \ref{theorem:radialsolutions}, together with Theorem \ref{theoremalpha=2}, i.e. $m(u_{\alpha}) \rightarrow + \infty$ along the sequence of even exponents $\alpha$, indicates that there should be infinitely many branches of non-radial solutions of \eqref{henon} bifurcating from the curve
\[
C = \left\{ u_{\alpha}: \alpha> 0, \ u_{\alpha} (x) = \left(\frac{\alpha+2}{2}\right)^{\frac{2}{p-1}} U(|x|^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}x)\right\}
\]
of least energy nodal radial solutions of \eqref{henon}.
This paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{section:generalchangeofvariables} we introduce a change of variable in ${\mathbb R}^2$, we prove several properties of it and Theorem \ref{theorem:radialsolutions}. Then in Section \ref{section:proofmaintheorem}, based on the results from Section \ref{section:generalchangeofvariables}, we compare the Morse indices of radial nodal solutions of \eqref{weight+f} with those of the corresponding nodal solutions of a non-weighted problem, and we prove Theorem \ref{maintheoremN=2}. Finally, in Section \ref{section:doublysymmetric}, in the case of even $\alpha$, we consider some slightly different changes of variables in ${\mathbb R}^2$ which again relate weighted semilinear elliptic equations like \eqref{weight+f} to corresponding non-weighted ones. This allows to produce more directions in which the quadratic form $Q_u$ is negative definite proving so Theorem \ref{theoremalpha=2}.
\pagebreak
\section{Preliminary results} \label{section:generalchangeofvariables}
\subsection{A useful change of variable}
Let us fix some notation that will be used throughout in this paper. To a point $x= (x_1, x_2) \in {\mathbb R}^2$ in cartesian coordinates, we will associate the polar coordinates $(r, \theta)$, namely
\begin{equation}\label{identification x}
x_1 = r \cos{\theta}, \ \ x_2 = r \sin{\theta}, \ \ r= \sqrt{|x_1|^2 + |x_2|^2}.
\end{equation}
So, for every function $u$ defined according to the cartesian coordinates $(x_1, x_2)$, we will write
\begin{equation}\label{identification u}
u(x_1, x_2) = u(r \cos \theta, r \sin \theta) = u(r, \theta).
\end{equation}
Then we recall the following formulae
\begin{equation}
\nabla_ x = \left(\frac{\partial}{\partial x_1}, \, \frac{\partial}{\partial x_2}\right) = \left( \cos \theta \frac{\partial}{\partial r} - \frac{1}{r} \sin \theta \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta}, \, \sin \theta \frac{\partial}{\partial r} + \frac{1}{r} \cos \theta \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta}\right),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{gradientlaplacianpolar}
|\nabla_ x|^2 = \left( \frac{\partial}{\partial x_1} \right)^2 + \left( \frac{\partial}{\partial x_2} \right)^2 = \left( \frac{\partial}{\partial r}\right)^2 + \frac{1}{r^2} \left( \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta} \right)^2,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{laplacianpolar}
\Delta_x = \frac{\partial^2}{\partial x_1^2} + \frac{\partial^2}{\partial x_2^2} = \frac{\partial^2}{\partial r^2} + \frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial}{\partial r} + \frac{1}{r^2} \frac{\partial^2}{\partial \theta^2}.
\end{equation}
We will perform some changes of variables $x \longleftrightarrow y$ in ${\mathbb R}^2$. Then to $y = (y_1, y_2) \in {\mathbb R}^2$ we will associate the polar coordinates $(s, \sigma)$ by setting
\begin{equation}\label{identification y}
y_1 = s \cos{\sigma}, \ \ y_2 = r \sin{\sigma}, \ \ s= \sqrt{|y_1|^2 + |y_2|^2}.
\end{equation}
As before, if the function $v$ is defined according to the cartesian coordinates $(y_1, y_2)$ then we will also write
\[
v(y_1, y_2) = v(s \cos \sigma, s \sin \sigma) = v(s, \sigma).
\]
Let $\kappa>0$ and consider the following transformation
\begin{equation}\label{tkappa}
T_{\kappa}: {\mathbb R}^2 \rightarrow {\mathbb R}^2, \quad T_{\kappa} y := y |y|^{\kappa-1},
\end{equation}
where we set $T_{\kappa}(0,0):=(0,0)$ and $x = T_{\kappa}y$. Then, with respect to the polar coordinates $(s, \sigma)$ and $(r, \theta)$, the transformation $T_{\kappa}$ reads
\begin{equation}\label{tkappapolar}
T_{\kappa}: {\mathbb R}^2 \rightarrow {\mathbb R}^2, \quad T_{\kappa} (s, \sigma) := (s^{\kappa}, \sigma), \ \ \text{i.e.}, \ \ r = s^{\kappa}, \ \ \theta = \sigma.
\end{equation}
The transformation $T_{\kappa}$ has a simpler expression in polar coordinates, which shortens many computations. In view of the applications, we present some of our results, and arguments, also in cartesian coordinates.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:tkappa}
The following properties hold.
\begin{enumerate}[i)]
\item $T_{\kappa}$ is a homeomorphism whose inverse is
\begin{equation}\label{inversetkappa}
T_{\kappa}^{-1}x = x |x|^{\frac{1}{\kappa}-1}, \ \ \text{i.e.}, \ \ T_{\kappa}^{-1} = T_{\frac{1}{\kappa}}.
\end{equation}
\item In cartesian coordinates, the Jacobian matrix of $T_{\kappa}$ is
\begin{equation}
J_{T_{\kappa}}(y) = \frac{\partial (x_1, x_2)}{\partial (y_1, y_2)} (y) = |y|^{\kappa-3}
\left[
\begin{array}{cc}
|y|^2 + (\kappa -1) y_1^2 & (\kappa -1) y_1y_2\\ \\
(\kappa -1) y_1y_2 & |y|^2 + (\kappa -1) y_2^2
\end{array}
\right], \quad \forall \ y \neq0
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{jacobian}
\left| det\, J_{T_{\kappa}}(y) \right| = \kappa \, |y|^{2\kappa - 2}, \quad \forall \ y \neq0.
\end{equation}
\item Given a function $\psi$ defined on a subset of ${\mathbb R}^2$, set $\varphi = \psi \circ T_{\kappa}^{-1}$. Let $y \neq 0$ and $x = T_{\kappa}y$. Then $\psi$ is differentiable at $y$ if and only if $\varphi$ is differentiable at $x$.
\item Let $\psi$, $\varphi$, $y$, $x$ as before and $r$, $s$, $\sigma$ and $\theta$ as in \eqref{tkappapolar}. Then
\begin{equation}\label{fundamentalgradientspolar}
\left[\psi_s^2 + \frac{1}{s^2} \psi_{\sigma}^2\right] s^{2 -2\kappa}= k^2 \varphi_ r^2 + \frac{1}{r^2} \varphi_{\theta}^2, \ \ \forall \, s \neq0,
\end{equation}
which implies that
\begin{equation}\label{fundamentalgradients}
\min\{1,\kappa^2\} | \nabla \varphi (x)|^2 \leq |\nabla \psi (y)|^2 \, |y|^{2 -2\kappa}\leq \max\{1, \kappa^2\}| \nabla \varphi (x)|^2, \ \ \forall \ y \neq 0.
\end{equation}
Moreover, if $\psi$ is radially symmetric, then
\begin{equation}\label{fundamentalgradientsradial}
\kappa^2 | \nabla \varphi (x)|^2 = |\nabla \psi (y)|^2 \, |y|^{2 -2\kappa}, \ \ \forall \ y \neq 0.
\end{equation}
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The statements from i), ii) and iii) are just matter of computation. Regarding iv), the identity \eqref{fundamentalgradientspolar} follows from \eqref{tkappapolar}. From \eqref{fundamentalgradientspolar} we infer that
\[
\min\{ 1, k^2 \} \left[ \varphi_ r^2 + \frac{1}{r^2} \varphi_{\theta}^2 \right] \leq \left[\psi_s^2 + \frac{1}{s^2} \psi_{\sigma}^2\right]s^{2 -2\kappa} \leq \max\{ 1, k^2 \} \left[ \varphi_ r^2 + \frac{1}{r^2} \varphi_{\theta}^2 \right]
\]
which combined with \eqref{gradientlaplacianpolar} implies \eqref{fundamentalgradients}. If $\psi$ is radially symmetric, it is also clear that \eqref{fundamentalgradientsradial} follows from \eqref{fundamentalgradientspolar} since $\psi_{\sigma} \equiv0$ and $\varphi_{\theta} \equiv 0$.
\end{proof}
From now on in this section $\Omega \subset {\mathbb R}^2$ represents either a ball or an annulus centered at the origin and we set $\Omega_{\kappa} = T^{-1}_{\kappa}(\Omega)$, where $T_{\kappa}$ is given by \eqref{tkappa}.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:lr}
Let $1 \leq r < \infty$. Then
\[
S_{\kappa}: L^r (\Omega_{\kappa}) \rightarrow L^r(\Omega, |x|^{\frac{2- 2\kappa}{\kappa}}), \ \ \text{defined by} \ \ S_{\kappa} \psi := \psi \circ T^{-1}_{\kappa},
\]
is a continuous linear isomorphism such that
\begin{equation}\label{lrnorms}
\int_{\Omega_{\kappa}} |\psi(y)|^r dy = \kappa^{-1} \int_{\Omega} |\varphi (x)|^r |x|^{\frac{2 - 2 \kappa}{\kappa}} dx, \ \ \text{with} \ \ \varphi = \psi \circ T^{-1}_{\kappa}.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
In the case when $\Omega$ is an annulus centered at the origin, then \eqref{lrnorms} comes out as an application of the standard change of variables theorem, using \eqref{inversetkappa} and \eqref{jacobian}.
In the case when $\Omega = B(0,R)$ is a ball centered at the origin and radius $R>0$, the singularity at zero of $T_{\kappa}$ or $T_{\kappa}^{-1}$ causes no problem, since we can reduce the arguments to the previous case by approximation with annuli. Indeed, take into account that
\[
\int_{B(0,R)} |h(z)| dz = \lim_{\delta \rightarrow 0^+} \int_{B(0,R) \backslash B(0, \delta)}|h(z)| dz, \quad \forall \ h \in L^1(B(0,R)).
\]
Then the monotone convergence theorem, passing to the limit, gives the result for the ball.
\end{proof}
With the same arguments we can prove the following lemma.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:flrnorms}
Let $F:{\mathbb R} \rightarrow {\mathbb R}$ be a continuous function. Then $F \circ \psi \in L^1(\Omega_{\kappa})$ if, and only if, $F \circ \varphi \in L^1(\Omega, |x|^{\frac{2- 2\kappa}{\kappa}})$ with $\varphi = \psi \circ T^{-1}_{\kappa}$. Moreover,
\begin{equation}\label{compositionf}
\int_{\Omega_{\kappa}} F(\psi(y)) dy = \kappa^{-1} \int_{\Omega} F(\varphi (x)) |x|^{\frac{2 - 2 \kappa}{\kappa}} dx.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
We point out that if $\kappa = \frac{2}{\alpha +2}$, then $\frac{2- 2\kappa}{\kappa}= \alpha$ and so the weights $|x|^{\frac{2 - 2 \kappa}{\kappa}}$ at \eqref{compositionf} and $|x|^{\alpha}$ at \eqref{weight+f} coincide.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma:h1}
The application
\[
S_{\kappa}: H^1_0 (\Omega_{\kappa}) \rightarrow H^1_0(\Omega), \ \ \text{defined by} \ \ S_{\kappa} \psi := \psi \circ T^{-1}_{\kappa},
\]
is a continuous linear isomorphism. Moreover, with $\varphi = \psi \circ T^{-1}_{\kappa}$,
\begin{equation}\label{h1norms}
\min\left\{ \kappa,\frac{1}{\kappa}\right\} \int_{\Omega} |\nabla \varphi (x)|^2 dx \leq \int_{\Omega_{\kappa}} |\nabla \psi(y)|^2 dy \leq \max\left\{ \kappa,\frac{1}{\kappa}\right\} \int_{\Omega} |\nabla \varphi (x)|^2 dx,
\end{equation}
for all $\psi \in H^1_{0}(\Omega_{\kappa})$ and
\begin{equation}\label{h1norms=}
\kappa \int_{\Omega} |\nabla \varphi (x)|^2 dx = \int_{\Omega_{\kappa}} |\nabla \psi(y)|^2 dy, \ \ \forall \ \psi \in H^1_{0,{\rm{rad}}}(\Omega_{\kappa}).
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Here we use \eqref{inversetkappa}, \eqref{jacobian}, \eqref{fundamentalgradients}, \eqref{fundamentalgradientsradial} and we proceed as in the proof of Lemma \ref{lemma:lr}.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{remarkN>=3H1}
Let $N\geq 3$, $\kappa>0$ and consider the homeomorphism $T_{\kappa}: {\mathbb R}^N \rightarrow {\mathbb R}^N$ defined by
\[
T_{\kappa}(y_1, \ldots, y_N) = (y_1, \ldots, y_N)|(y_1, \ldots, y_N)|^{\kappa-1}
\]
i.e. the same as \eqref{tkappa} but in ${\mathbb R}^N$. Then observe that a result like the one of Lemma \ref{lemma:h1} cannot hold. For example, consider $\Omega = B(0,1)$ and $\psi (y) = |y|^{-\gamma}-1$, with $0< \gamma< \frac{N-2}{2}$ and $0 < \kappa \leq \frac{2\gamma}{N-2}$. Then, under these conditions, $\psi \in H^1_0(\Omega_{\kappa})$ but $\psi \circ T_{\kappa}^{-1} \notin H^1_0(\Omega)$.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Equivalence between some weighted and non-weighted elliptic equations in the setting of radial solutions} \label{section:radial}
Hereafter in this section we consider the change of variable \eqref{tkappa} restricted to radial functions. In this setting it was already used in \cite{ClementdeFigueiredoMitidieri, CowanGhoussoub, GladialiGrossiNeves}.
Let $\Omega \subset {\mathbb R}^2$ be either a ball or an annulus centered at the origin and set $\Omega_{\kappa} = T^{-1}_{\kappa}(\Omega)$, where $T_{\kappa}$ is given by \eqref{tkappa}. For a radial function $u: \Omega \subset {\mathbb R}^2 \rightarrow {\mathbb R}$ we define the radial function $v: \Omega_{\kappa} \rightarrow {\mathbb R}$ by setting $v(y) = u(T_{\kappa}y)$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{change1}
v(s) = u(s^k) = u(r), \quad r = s^{\kappa}, \ r = |x|, \ s = |y|.
\end{equation}
Then an easy computation yields
\begin{equation}\label{eqnova}
v_{ss}(s) + \frac{1}{s} v_{s}(s) = \kappa^2s^{2\kappa -2} \left[ u_{rr}(s^{\kappa}) + \frac{1}{s^{\kappa}} u_r(s^{\kappa}) \right], \ \ s>0.
\end{equation}
So, using the previous notation in polar coordinates, we infer that
\begin{equation}\label{laplacians}
\Delta v (y) = \kappa^2 |y|^{2\kappa -2} \Delta u (T_{\kappa}y) = \kappa^2 |x|^{2 -\frac{2}{\kappa}} \Delta u (x), \ \ r = |x|, \ \ s = |y|, \ \ r = s^{\kappa}.
\end{equation}
Hence, if $u$ is a radial solution of the Hénon type equation \eqref{weight+f}, then $v: \Omega_{\kappa} \rightarrow {\mathbb R}$ is a radial function that satisfies
\[
-\Delta v(y) = \kappa^2|y|^{2\kappa -2 + \kappa \alpha} f(v(y)), \quad y \in \Omega_{\kappa}, \quad v =0 \quad \text{on} \quad \partial \Omega_{\kappa}.
\]
Thus if we choose $\kappa$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{kappabom}
2\kappa -2 + \kappa \alpha = 0, \quad \text{i.e.}, \quad \kappa = \frac{2}{\alpha+2},
\end{equation}
then we infer that
\begin{equation}\label{reduced}
-\Delta v (y) = \left(\frac{2}{\alpha+2}\right)^2 f(v(y)), \quad y \in \Omega_{\kappa}, \quad v = 0 \quad \text{on} \quad \partial \Omega_{\kappa}.
\end{equation}
\begin{remark}\label{changelaplacian}
It is clear that, in general, the change of variable \eqref{tkappa} does not satisfy
\[
\Delta_{y} = \kappa^2 |x|^{2- \frac{2}{\kappa}}\Delta_x,
\]
as it does for radial functions; cf. \eqref{laplacians}. Indeed from \eqref{laplacianpolar} it is evident that also the angular part should be taken into account to write the complete Laplacian. However, see Proposition \ref{comparisonlemma}, the change of variable \eqref{tkappa}, with $\kappa = \frac{2}{\alpha+2}$, turns out to be very useful to compare the Morse index of a radial solution $u$ of \eqref{weight+f} and the Morse index of the corresponding radial solution $v = u \circ T_{\kappa}$ of \eqref{reduced}.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}\label{doesnotworkN>=3}
Let $N\geq 3$ and $\alpha >0$. Then it is easy to see, just a matter of computation as in \cite[Proposition 4.2]{CowanGhoussoub}, that it is not possible to find a one dimensional change of variable
\[
r = s^{\kappa}, \quad r = |x|, \quad s = |y|, \quad x, y \in {\mathbb R}^N,
\]
that is, to find $\kappa$, such that
\[
v(s) = u(s^{\kappa}) \ \ \text{and} \ \ \Delta_{y} v = C \frac{1}{|x|^{\alpha}}\Delta_x u, \ \ C \ \ \text{constant},
\]
in the setting of radial functions defined in ${\mathbb R}^N$. This is one of the reasons why the proofs of this paper cannot be extended to dimension $3$ or higher.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}[\textbf{Proof of Theorem \ref{theorem:radialsolutions}}]
${}$
\noindent i) This can be deduced by the analogous result for Lane-Emden equation \eqref{p>2}, cf. \cite[Theorem 2.15]{Ni1983} and \cite[p. 263]{Kajikiya1990}, by using the transformation \eqref{change1} and the identitie \eqref{laplacians} with $\kappa = \frac{2}{\alpha+2}$.
\medbreak
\noindent ii) Let $u_{\alpha}$ be a least energy nodal radial solution of \eqref{henon}. Since the Morse index of $u_{\alpha}$ in $H^1_{0, {\rm{rad}}}(\Omega)$ is two, then $u_{\alpha}$ has precisely two nodal regions and then $u_{\alpha} (x) = \left(\frac{\alpha+2}{2}\right)^{\frac{2}{p-1}} U_{\alpha}(|x|^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}x)$ where $U_{\alpha}$, up to multiplication by $-1$, is the unique least energy nodal radial solution of \eqref{p>2} in $\Omega_{\alpha}= \{ |x|^{\frac{\alpha}{2}}x; \, x \in \Omega \}$. Moreover, the equation \eqref{laplacians} with $\kappa = \frac{2}{\alpha+2}$ guarantees that $u_{\alpha}$ is a degenerate radial solution of \eqref{henon} in the space $H^1_{0, {\rm{rad}}}(\Omega)$ if, and only if, $U_{\alpha}$ is a degenerate radial solution of the Lane-Emden equation \eqref{p>2} in $\Omega_{\alpha}$ in the space $H^1_{0, {\rm{rad}}}(\Omega_{\alpha})$.
So the above argument reduces the proof to the case $\alpha=0$, i.e. to the Lane-Emden equation. With $\alpha=0$ and in the case that $\Omega$ is an annulus, this non-degeneracy result is known; cf. \cite[Proposition 4]{PacellaSalazar}. Next, essentially, we mimic the arguments from \cite[Proposition 4]{PacellaSalazar} to include both cases of a ball and an annulus.
Let $u$ be a least energy nodal radial solution of \eqref{p>2}. We know that $u$ has precisely two nodal sets and Morse index $2$ in the space $H^1_{0, {\rm{rad}}}(\Omega)$. By contradiction, suppose that $u$ is degenerate in $H^1_{0, {\rm{rad}}}(\Omega)$. Then the third eigenvalue in the space $H^1_{0, {\rm{rad}}}(\Omega)$ of $L_u = -\Delta - p|u|^{p-1}$ is zero, and hence there exists $w$, a radial solution of
\begin{equation}\label{zeroeigenvalue}
- \Delta w = p |u|^{p-1} w \ \ \text{in} \ \ \Omega, \quad w = 0 \ \ \quad{on} \ \ \partial \Omega,
\end{equation}
with precisely three nodal regions. Now consider the auxiliary function
\[
z = x \cdot \nabla u + \frac{2}{p-1} u.
\]
Then, by direct computation, we obtain that
\begin{equation}\label{auxiliaryz}
-\Delta z = p |u|^{p-1}z \ \ \text{in} \ \ \Omega, \quad z(x) = x \cdot \nabla u (x), \ \ x \in \partial \Omega.
\end{equation}
Next we multiply \eqref{zeroeigenvalue} by $z$, \eqref{auxiliaryz} by $w$ and we integrate by parts. The two resulting identities yield
\[
\int_{\partial \Omega} \left[x \cdot \nabla u (x)\right] \frac{\partial w}{\partial \nu}(x) \, dS = 0.
\]
However, if $\Omega$ is either a ball or an annulus, by the Hopf lemma, we infer that
\[
\left[x \cdot \nabla u (x)\right] \frac{\partial w}{\partial \nu}(x) > 0 \ \ \text{on} \ \ \partial \Omega \quad \text{or} \quad \left[x \cdot \nabla u (x)\right] \frac{\partial w}{\partial \nu}(x) < 0 \ \ \text{on} \ \ \partial \Omega,
\]
since $u$ and $w$ have two and three nodal regions, respectively. Hence, the proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{maintheoremN=2}} \label{section:proofmaintheorem}
Let $\Omega \subset {\mathbb R}^2$ be either a ball or an annulus centered at the origin. Let $\alpha> 0$ and $f: {\mathbb R} \rightarrow {\mathbb R}$ be $C^{1, \beta}$ on bounded sets of ${\mathbb R}$. From now on we take $\kappa = \frac{2}{\alpha+2}$ as in \eqref{kappabom} and $\Omega_{\kappa} = T_{\kappa}^{-1}(\Omega)$, with $T_{\kappa}$ as in \eqref{tkappa}. Given $u \in H^1_0(\Omega)$ and $v \in H^1_0(\Omega_{\kappa})$, consider the bilinear forms
\[
Q_u(U,W) = \int_{\Omega} \nabla U \nabla W dx - \int_{\Omega} |x|^{\alpha} f'(u) UW dx, \quad U,W \in H^1_0(\Omega)
\]
and
\[
\mathcal{Q}_{v}(\mathcal{U}, \mathcal{W}) = \int_{\Omega_{\kappa}}\nabla \mathcal{U} \nabla \mathcal{W} dy - \left( \frac{2}{\alpha+ 2}\right)^2 \int_{\Omega_{\kappa}} f'(v)\mathcal{U} \mathcal{W} dy, \ \ \mathcal{U}, \mathcal{W} \in H^1_0(\Omega_{\kappa})
\]
associated with \eqref{weight+f} and \eqref{reduced}, respectively. The crucial point for the proof of Theorem \ref{maintheoremN=2} is the following result.
\begin{proposition}\label{comparisonlemma}
Let $v, \psi \in H^1_{0}(\Omega_{\kappa})$ and set $u = v \circ T_{\kappa}^{-1}$ and $\varphi = \psi \circ T_{\kappa}^{-1}$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{generalenergy}
\mathcal{Q}_v(\psi, \psi) \geq \frac{2}{\alpha+2} Q_u(\varphi, \varphi), \quad \forall \, \psi \in H^1_{0}(\Omega_{\kappa})
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{radialenergy}
\mathcal{Q}_v(\psi, \psi) = \frac{2}{\alpha+2} Q_u(\varphi, \varphi), \quad \forall \, \psi \in H^1_{0,{\rm{rad}}}(\Omega_{\kappa}).
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} It is a direct consequence of Lemmas \ref{lemma:flrnorms} and \ref{lemma:h1}.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[\textbf{Proof of Theorem \ref{maintheoremN=2}}] Let $u$ be a radial nodal solution of \eqref{weight+f}. Then, define $v:\Omega_{\kappa} \rightarrow {\mathbb R}$ by setting $v(y) = u(T_{\kappa}(y))$, with $\kappa = \frac{2}{\alpha+ 2}$. Hence $v$ is a radial nodal solution of \eqref{reduced}. Observe that the eigenvalue problem for the linearized operator associated with \eqref{reduced} is
\begin{equation}\label{linearizedreduced}
-\Delta \psi - \left(\frac{2}{\alpha+2}\right)^2 f'(v) \psi = \lambda \psi \quad \text{in} \quad \Omega_{\kappa}, \qquad
\psi = 0 \quad \text{on} \quad \partial \Omega_{\kappa}.
\end{equation}
Hence, if $\psi$ is a radial eigenfunction of \eqref{linearizedreduced} then, writing $\psi(s) = \varphi(s^{\frac{2}{\alpha+2}})$, we infer from \eqref{laplacians} and \eqref{kappabom} that $\varphi$ is a radial eigenfunction of
\begin{equation}\label{linearized}
-\Delta \varphi - |x|^{\alpha} f'(u) \varphi = \lambda \left( \frac{\alpha+2}{2}\right)^{2} |x|^{\alpha} \varphi \ \ \text{in} \ \ \Omega, \qquad
\varphi = 0 \quad \text{on} \quad \partial \Omega.
\end{equation}
We know, from \cite{AftalionPacella}, that the Morse index of $v$ is at least $3$ and greater than or equal to $n(u)+2$ if \eqref{H:superlinear} is satisfied; cf. Theorem A and Remark \ref{remark4int} in the introduction. More precisely, the problem \eqref{linearizedreduced} has a negative eigenvalue $\lambda_{1,{\rm{rad}}}$ (the first eiganvalue) with a corresponding radial eigenfunction $\psi_{1,{\rm{rad}}}$ and there are two other negative eigenvalues $\lambda_2=\lambda_3$ with corresponding eigenfunctions $\psi_2$ and $\psi_3$. Moreover, see \cite{AftalionPacella},
\begin{equation}\label{oddevenaftalionpacella}
\begin{array}{l}
\psi_2(y_1, y_2) \ \ \text{is even w.r.t.} \ \ y_2 \ \ \text{and} \ \ \text{odd w.r.t.} \ \ y_1,\\
\psi_3(y_1, y_2) \ \ \text{is even w.r.t.} \ \ y_1 \ \ \text{and} \ \ \text{odd w.r.t.} \ \ y_2.\\
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Hence, in particular,
\[
\mathcal{Q}_v(\psi_{1, {\rm{rad}}}, \psi_{1, {\rm{rad}}}) < 0 \ \ \text{and} \ \ \mathcal{Q}_v(\psi_{i}, \psi_{i}) < 0, \quad \ \ i=2,3.
\]
Moreover, if \eqref{H:superlinear} is satisfied then the radial eigenvalues of \eqref{linearizedreduced}, up to the $n(u)$-th, are also negative. In this case let us denote these eigenvalues by $\lambda_{i, {\rm{rad}}}$ and the associated radial eigenfunctions by $\psi_{i, {\rm{rad}}}$, $i=2, \ldots, n(u)$.
As we have observed, the change of variable $s \mapsto s^{\kappa}$, guarantees that $\varphi_{i, {\rm{rad}}}$, defined by $\psi_{i, {\rm{rad}}} (y) = \varphi_{i, {\rm{rad}}}(T_{\kappa}(y))$ with $i=1,2, \ldots, n(u)$, are radial eigenfunction of \eqref{linearized} with $\lambda = \lambda_{i, {\rm{rad}}}$. Eventhough, $\varphi_2$ and $\varphi_3$ defined by $\varphi_{i}(x) = \psi_{i} (T_{\kappa}^{-1}x)$, $i=2,3$, are not eigenfunctions of \eqref{linearized}, they correspond to directions in which the quadratic form induced by $Q_u$ is negative definite, which follows from \eqref{generalenergy}. Moreover, using that
\begin{enumerate}[i)]
\item $\varphi_{i, {\rm{rad}}}$, $i=1,2, \ldots, n(u)$, are eigenfunctions of \eqref{linearized} with $\lambda = \lambda_{i, {\rm{rad}}}$;
\item the symmetries of $\varphi_{1, {\rm{rad}}}, \varphi_{2, {\rm{rad}}}, \ldots, \varphi_{n(u),{\rm{rad}}}, \varphi_2, \varphi_3$;
\end{enumerate}
it is simple to verify that $\varphi_{1, {\rm{rad}}}, \varphi_{2, {\rm{rad}}}, \ldots, \varphi_{n(u),{\rm{rad}}}, \varphi_2, \varphi_3$ are mutually orthogonal with respect to both the bilinear forms
\[
\begin{array}{l}
(U,W) \mapsto \int_{\Omega} |x|^{\alpha} U W dx, \quad \text{and}\\ \\
(U,W) \mapsto Q_u(U,W) = \int_{\Omega} \left[ \nabla U \nabla W - |x|^{\alpha} f'(u) UW \right]dx.
\end{array}
\]
Therefore, we infer that $Q_u(w,w) < 0$ for every nonzero $w$ in the span $\left[\varphi_{1, {\rm{rad}}}, \varphi_2, \varphi_3 \right]$ or for every nonzero $w$ in the span $\left[\varphi_{1, {\rm{rad}}}, \varphi_{2, {\rm{rad}}}, \ldots, \varphi_{n(u),{\rm{rad}}}, \varphi_2, \varphi_3 \right]$ if \eqref{H:superlinear} is satisfied. This proves Theorem \ref{maintheoremN=2}. \qedhere
\medbreak
\end{proof}
\section{Other changes of variables: proof of Theorem \ref{theoremalpha=2}} \label{section:doublysymmetric}
To the aim of proving Theorem \ref{theoremalpha=2} we now consider a variant of the change of variable in ${\mathbb R}^2$ defined in Section \ref{section:generalchangeofvariables}, which involves changing both polar coordinates $r$ and $\theta$.
Given $\kappa>0$ and $m \in {\mathbb N}$ we set
\begin{equation}\label{tkappam}
\begin{array}{l}
T_{\kappa,m}: [0, \infty) \times [0, 2\pi] \rightarrow [0, \infty) \times [0, \frac{2\pi}{m}], \vspace{6pt}\\
T_{\kappa,m}(s, \sigma) := \left(s^{\kappa}, \frac{\sigma}{m}\right), \ \ r = s^{\kappa}, \ \ \theta = \frac{\sigma}{m}.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Obviously $T_{\kappa,1}$ is just $T_{\kappa}$ of \eqref{tkappapolar}.
Consider any continuous function $\psi$ defined on a radially symmetric domain $\Omega$ in ${\mathbb R}^2$ in the cartesian coordinates $(y_1,y_2)$. Then, as in Section \ref{section:generalchangeofvariables}, using the polar coordinates
\[
y_1 = s \cos \sigma, \ \ y_2 = s \sin\sigma, \ \ s= \sqrt{|y_1|^2 + |y_2|^2},
\]
we can write
\[
\psi(y_1, y_2)
= \psi(s \cos \sigma, s \sin \sigma) = \psi (s, \sigma), \ \ \text{with} \ \ \sigma \in [0, 2\pi] \ \ \text{and} \ \ \psi(s,0) = \psi(s, 2\pi).
\]
We then set
\begin{equation}\label{psivarphim}
\varphi(x_1, x_2) = \varphi(r, \theta) = \psi(T_{\kappa,m}^{-1}(r, \theta)).
\end{equation}
Hence $\varphi$ is a function defined for $\theta \in [0, \frac{2\pi}{m}]$ which, since $\psi(s, 0) = \psi(s, 2 \pi)$, can be extended $\frac{2\pi}{m}$-periodically and continuously for all $\theta \in [0, 2\pi]$. We still denote this extension by $\varphi$ and we observe that if it is smooth, by direct computation, then we have
\begin{equation}\label{laplacianspolarkappam}
\kappa^2 r^{2 - \frac{2}{\kappa}}\left[\varphi_{rr} + \frac{1}{r} \varphi_{r} + \frac{1}{r^2} \varphi_{\theta \theta}\right] = \psi_{ss} + \frac{1}{s} \varphi_{s} + \frac{m^2 \kappa^2}{s^2} \psi_{\sigma \sigma}.
\end{equation}
Hence if we choose $\kappa = \frac{1}{m}$, for the Laplacian in cartesian coordinates we have
\begin{equation}\label{fundamental2m}
m^{-2} |x|^{2( 1-m)} \Delta \varphi (x) = \Delta \psi(y).
\end{equation}
In view of the relation \eqref{fundamental2m} involving the Laplacians of $\varphi$ and $\psi$, we will apply the above procedure to work with the Hénon type equations \eqref{weight+f} in the case that $\alpha = 2 (m-1)$, with $m \geq 2$, that is for every $\alpha$ even. Indeed
\begin{equation}\label{4.3'}
\alpha = 2 (m-1) \Longleftrightarrow \kappa = \frac{1}{m} = \frac{2}{\alpha+2}
\end{equation}
which coincides with the relation \eqref{kappabom} between $\kappa$ and $\alpha$.
Note that, in view of the complex plane, the above transformation $T_{\frac{1}{m},m}$ is just the one which sends $z$ into $z^{\frac{1}{m}}$, $z \in {\mathbb C}$.
\begin{remark}\label{remarkpacellasrikanth}
Observe that, in the particular case when $m$ is even, if $\psi$ is a function such that
\[
\psi(y_1, y_2) = \psi(y_1, -y_2), \ \ (y_1, y_2) \in {\mathbb R}^2
\]
i.e. even with respect to $y_2$, then the extended function $\varphi(x_1, x_2)$, given by $\psi = \varphi \circ T_{\frac{1}{m},m}$, is such that $\varphi$ is even with respect to $x_1$ and $x_2$, that is
\[
\varphi(x_1, x_2) = \varphi(|x_1|, |x_2|), \ \ (x_1, x_2) \in {\mathbb R}^2.
\]
Hence functions that are symmetric with respect to one axis produce functions that are symmetric with respect to both axes.
\medbreak
\end{remark}
With the above choice of $\alpha$ we consider a radial nodal solution $u$ of \eqref{weight+f}. By Theorem \ref{maintheoremN=2} we know that $u$ has Morse index greater than or equal to $3$ and at least $n(u)+2$ if \eqref{H:superlinear} is also satisfied. We will use the change of variable \eqref{tkappam} with $\kappa = \frac{1}{m}$ to construct $\alpha + 2 = 2m$ convenient non-radial directions on which the quadratic form $Q_u(w,w)$ is negative.
We can now proceed with the proof of Theorem \ref{theoremalpha=2}.
\begin{proof}[\textbf{Proof of Theorem \ref{theoremalpha=2}}]
Let $\alpha = 2(m-1)$, with $m \geq 2$, $\kappa = \frac{1}{m}$, and let $u$ be a radial nodal solution of \eqref{weight+f}. Then, by \eqref{reduced}, the radial function $v = u \circ T_{\kappa}$ solves
\[
-\Delta v = \frac{1}{m^2} f(v) \quad \text{in} \quad \Omega_{\kappa}, \quad v = 0 \quad \text{on} \quad \partial \Omega_{\kappa}.
\]
Therefore, by the results of \cite{AftalionPacella}, already used at \eqref{oddevenaftalionpacella}, there exist two eigenfunctions $\psi_2$ and $\psi_3$ for the eigenvalue problem
\begin{equation}\label{4.3''}
-\Delta \psi - \frac{1}{m^2} f'(v) \psi = \lambda \psi \quad \text{in} \quad \Omega_{\kappa}, \quad \psi = 0 \quad \text{on} \quad \partial \Omega_{\kappa},
\end{equation}
with the following properties:
\begin{enumerate}[i)]
\item the corresponding eigenvalues $\lambda_2 = \lambda_3$ are negative;
\item $\psi_2$ is even with respect to $y_2$ and odd with respect to $y_1$, while $\psi_3$ is even with respect to $y_1$ and odd with respect to $y_2$;
\item $\psi_2 (y_1, y_2) > 0$ if $y_1>0$, while $\psi_3(y_1, y_2) > 0$ if $y_2 >0$.
\end{enumerate}
Next, applying the change of variables \eqref{tkappam}, we consider the functions $\varphi_{m,i}(r, \theta) = \psi_i \circ T_{\frac{1}{m},m}^{-1}(r, \theta)$, $i=2,3$, extended by periodicity as before for all $\theta \in [0, 2 \pi]$, so to have them defined on the whole $\Omega$. Then, by the conditions $\frac{\partial \psi_2}{\partial \sigma} = 0$ and $\psi_3 = 0$ at $\sigma=0$, we have that $\varphi_{m, i}$, $i=2,3$, are $C^2(\overline{\Omega})$-functions and by \eqref{fundamental2m} they satisfy
\begin{equation}\label{fiftheigenvalue}
-\Delta \varphi - |x|^{\alpha}f'(u) \varphi = \lambda |x|^{\alpha}\varphi \quad \text{in} \quad \Omega, \quad \varphi = 0 \quad \text{on} \quad \partial \Omega,
\end{equation}
with $\lambda =\lambda_i m^2$. Moreover it is easy to see that both $\varphi_{m,i}$, $i=2,3$, have $2m$ nodal sets, each one being an angular sector of amplitude $\frac{\pi}{m}$. This means that each one is a first eigenfunction of \eqref{fiftheigenvalue} in that sector with corresponding eigenvalue $\lambda_i m^2 < 0$. In particular $\varphi_{m, 2}$ is the first eigenfunction in the sector
\[
\Omega_{m,2} = \left\{ (x_1, x_2) = (r \cos \theta, r \sin \theta) \in \Omega, \theta \in \left[- \frac{\pi}{2m}, \frac{\pi}{2m}\right] \right\},
\]
while $\varphi_{m,3}$ is the first eigenfunction in the sector
\[
\Omega_{m,3} = \left\{ (x_1, x_2) = (r \cos \theta, r \sin \theta) \in \Omega, \theta \in \left[0, \frac{\pi}{m}\right] \right\}.
\]
Then, by the monotonicity of the first eigenvalues with respect to the domain, by inclusion, we have that the first eigenvalue in $\Omega_{n,2}$ or $\Omega_{n,3}$ are also negative for every integer $1 \leq n < m$, $\Omega_{n,i}$ defined as before, replacing $m$ by $n$, for $i=2,3$. The corresponding eigenfunctions, say $\varphi_{n,i}$ extended by oddness with respect to the anticlockwise border of $\Omega_{n,i}$ and periodically, with angular period $\frac{2\pi}{n}$, give rise to other two eigenfunctions for \eqref{fiftheigenvalue}, for every $n \in \{1, \ldots, m\}$. By construction, their symmetry or antisymmetry, all these pairs of eigenfunctions are mutually orthogonal with respect to both the bilinear forms
\begin{equation}\label{bilinearforms}
\begin{array}{l}
(U,W) \mapsto \int_{\Omega} |x|^{\alpha} U W dx, \quad \text{and}\\ \\
(U,W) \mapsto Q_u(U,W) =\int_{\Omega} \left[ \nabla U \nabla W - |x|^{\alpha} f'(u) UW \right]dx,
\end{array}
\end{equation}
so that we get $2m$ negative eigenvalues for \eqref{fiftheigenvalue} corresponding to nonradial directions. Counting also the first radial eigenvalue, which is negative, and from the second up to the $n(u)$-th radial eigenvalue which are also negative if \eqref{H:superlinear} holds, we get the assertion, since $\alpha = 2 (m-1)$.
\end{proof}
\subsection*{Acknowledgements} The authors thank D. Bonheure and H. Tavares for some interesting discussions on the subject of this paper. This work was done while the first author was visiting the Dipartimento di Matematica of the Università di Roma {\it{Sapienza}}, whose hospitality he gratefully acknowledges.
|
\section{Introduction}
\begin{deluxetable*}{lcccc}
\tablecaption{Observation Details \label{tabobs}}
\tablecolumns{5}
\startdata
\hline
\hline\\[-1mm]
Observation & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 \\[1mm]
\hline\\[-1mm]
\textsl{NuSTAR}\xspace ObsID & 60002046002/3 & 60002046005& 60002046007& 60002046009 \\[1mm]
FPMA Net Exposure Time (ks) & 77 & 66 & 74 & 70 \\[1mm]
FPMB Net Exposure Time (ks) & 77 & 66 & 74 & 70 \\[1mm]
\hline \\[-1mm]
\textsl{XMM-Newton}\xspace ObsID & 0692840201 & 0692840301 & 0692840401 & 0692840501 \\[1mm]
MOS Net Exposure Time (ks) & 134 & 122 & 105 & 122 \\[1mm]
PN Net Exposure Time (ks) & 118 & 108 & 93 & 116 \\[-1mm]
\enddata
\end{deluxetable*}
NGC~1365 is a Seyfert 1.8 active galactic nucleus (AGN) that exhibits a highly complex and variable X-ray spectrum.
In addition to the power law continuum which is thought to arise in a hot corona very close to the central supermassive black hole,
the X-ray spectrum shows a strong Compton reflection hump peaking at 20--30~keV (see e.g., George \& Fabian 1991, Walton et al.\xspace 2010) and a
prominent Fe K emission complex (Risaliti et al.\xspace 2009, Risaliti et al.\xspace 2013), both of which are signatures of reflection off Compton-thick material.
Extended X-ray emission from plasma and starburst activity below $\sim\,$2~keV have been characterized by \textsl{Chandra}\xspace (Wang et al.\xspace 2009)
and \textsl{XMM-Newton}\xspace (Guainazzi et al.\xspace 2009). Absorption lines from ionized Fe species in the $\sim\,$7--8~keV range are thought to arise in a
highly ionized ($\xi \sim 10^3 - 10^4$\, erg\, cm\, s$^{-1}$) high-velocity outflow ($v \sim 1000-5000$ km s$^{-1}$)
that varies on timescales of days to months (Risaliti et al.\xspace 2005; Brenneman et al.\xspace 2013).
The mass of the central black hole has been estimated from the $H\beta$ width to be $M_{\rm BH} \,\sim\,2 \times 10^{6}$ \ensuremath{M_\odot}\xspace (Risaliti et al.\xspace 2009 and references therein),
implying an Eddington ratio of 0.02 to 0.12 $L/L_{\rm Edd}$.
Due to the complexity of this source, broad energy coverage is necessary in order to accurately characterize the X-ray spectrum.
Four simultaneous \textsl{XMM-Newton}\xspace and \textsl{NuSTAR}\xspace observations were taken in 2012 and 2013 with the primary aim of studying the broad Fe K$\alpha$\xspace line and prominent reflection hump
in this source likely associated with relativistic reflection from the inner regions of the accretion disk (Risaliti et al.\xspace 2013).
Measurements of the black hole spin from modeling the relativistic reflection indicate a rapidly rotating black hole with a dimensionless spin parameter $a \gtrsim 0.95$
(Risaliti et al.\xspace 2013; Walton et al.\xspace 2014), consistent with previous measurements (Brenneman et al.\xspace 2013), though with higher signal-to-noise broadband spectra.
Other work on this dataset by Kara et al.\xspace (2014) showed that the Fe K$\alpha$\xspace line and Compton reflection hump lag the continuum on
the same timescales and Walton et al.\xspace (2014) found a correlation between the strengths of the Fe K$\alpha$\xspace line and the Compton hump. This connection is
important in establishing that the broadness in the line is indeed associated with reflection from the accretion disk, rather than being due to absorption or some other spectral variance.
These joint \textsl{XMM-Newton}\xspace/\textsl{NuSTAR}\xspace observations revealed strong variability in the flux as well as in the spectral shape.
Walton et al.\xspace (2014) found that the majority of the spectral variability was due to variable line-of-sight absorption,
a result that was subsequently confirmed by principle component analysis (Parker et al.\xspace 2014).
Two of the observations caught the source in an unusually low absorption state, and the third of these observations actually showed an almost complete uncovering of the source.
Braito et al.\xspace (2014) have analyzed the \textsl{XMM-Newton}\xspace RGS spectrum from this observation and found evidence for a mildly ionized wind absorber in
addition to the previously known highly ionized wind absorber that is only evident when the source is uncovered and at a high luminosity level.
This paper aims to analyze the variable absorption seen in all four joint \textsl{XMM-Newton}\xspace/\textsl{NuSTAR}\xspace observations in order to further characterize the geometry of the absorbing material in this source.
Variable absorption is not uncommon in Seyfert galaxies on a wide range of timescales, from hours (MCG--6-30-15: Marinucci et al.\xspace 2014) to months
(NGC~3227 -- Lamer et al.\xspace 2003; Cen~A -- Rivers et al.\xspace 2011), to years (NGC~3516 -- Turner et al.\xspace 2008; NGC~2110 -- Rivers et al.\xspace 2014).
Changes over a timescale of years may be due to a global change in the amount of material surrounding the supermassive black hole,
while changes on shorter timescales (hours to months) are likely a result of inhomogeneous material.
Lamer et al.\xspace (2003) characterized an occultation event in NGC~3227 that showed a smooth rise and fall in the column density due to the
ingress into and egress out of the line of sight of a clump of material which was thought to be part of the broad line region (BLR).
A similar event lasting around 60 days was seen in Cen~A (Rivers et al.\xspace 2011) but was found to originate in the infrared torus,
consistent with the clumpy torus models set forth by Nenkova et al.\xspace (2008).
In the past, the absorption column in the line of sight to NGC~1365 has been seen to exhibit rapid variability on timescales of hours to days
(Risaliti et al.\xspace 2009). This is thought to be due to BLR clouds passing through the line of sight (Maiolino et al.\xspace 2010).
On longer timescales, the absorbing column has been seen to vary widely with a range of column densities spanning
$N_{\text{H}}$\xspace$\,\sim\, 10^{22} -10^{24}$ cm$^{-2}$ (Connolly et al.\xspace 2014). Connolly et al.\xspace (2014) also noticed an anti-correlation between the column
density and the intrinsic luminosity which they suggest could be explained by winds with variable launch radii.
This paper is structured in the following way: Section 2 contains details of the observations and data reduction, Section 3 describes the spectral analysis
with limited interpretation, and Section 4 discusses our results and the conclusions we can draw from them.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[trim=5cm 0cm 5cm 0cm,clip,height=\textwidth,angle=270]{LC.ps}
\caption{Light curves for all four observations showing 5--10~keV observed flux (top) and 5--10/3--5~keV hardness ratio (bottom). Dashed lines indicate time-resolved analysis intervals: P1--16 (black), the 8 subintervals of observation 3 (red) and the 8 subintervals of observation 4 (blue). Note that the gray data points at the end of observation 3 were excluded from analysis. A background flare occurred during this time creating large uncertainties, particularly for time-resolved analysis.}
\label{figlc}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\plottwo{specseufi1.ps}{specseufi2.ps}
\plottwo{specseufi3.ps}{specseufi4.ps}
\caption{Panel (a) shows the 0.4-70~keV unfolded spectra of all four observations (PN + FPMA in gray) with full model (black), absorbed and scattered power laws (blue), extended plasma components (red), relativistic and cold/distant reflection (green), and the phenomenological Gaussian component (light blue). Residuals are shown in panels b-e with red and orange data points corresponding to \textsl{XMM-Newton}\xspace MOS1 and MOS2, respectively, purple data points corresponding to PN data, and blue and green data points corresponding to \textsl{NuSTAR}\xspace FPMA and FPMB, respectively. Panel (b) shows the best fit to the initial model as described in Section 3.1 before including the extended plasma, scattered power law or additional absorption complexity. Panel (c) shows the best fit to a model including the extended plasma but with only one neutral absorber component (partial-covering). Panel (d) shows the best fit to a model without the phenomenological Gaussian at 0.68~keV. Panel (e) shows the best fit to our final model for each observation as described in the text with parameters given in Table 2. }
\label{figspecall}
\end{figure*}
\section{Observations and Data Reduction}\label{sec:analysis}
Data were taken 2012 July, 2012 December, 2013 January, and 2013 February with \textsl{XMM-Newton}\xspace and \textsl{NuSTAR}\xspace simultaneously.
Table \ref{tabobs} shows a log of the observations. All extractions were done using HEASOFT v.6.13.
In order to explore the changing spectral parameters, we have performed time-resolved spectral analysis.
In addition to characterizing the four individual observations, each has been further subdivided into a total of
16 intervals (four per observation) based on flux and hardness level as seen in Figure~\ref{figlc}, identical to those of Walton et al.\xspace (2014).
Additionally, we have performed analysis on very short timescales where rapid changes in the absorption column
are observed: eight half-intervals for observation 3 and eight 4~ks intervals for the first 32~ks (two intervals) of observation 4.
\subsection{\textsl{XMM-Newton}\xspace Reduction}
We reduced the \textsl{XMM-Newton}\xspace data for all four observations using the Science Analysis System (SAS v13.0.0) following the procedure detailed in the online guide and Walton et al.\xspace (2014).
We processed the data using EPPROC and EMPROC for the EPIC-pn (Str\"uder et al.\xspace 2001) and EPIC-MOS (Turner et al.\xspace 2001) data, respectively.
Spectra and light curves were extracted from circular source and background regions with 40\arcsec\ and 50\arcsec\ radius for the pn and MOS, respectively.
Response and ancillary response matrices were generated using the FTOOLs RMFGEN and ARFGEN.
During the last portion of observation 3 the source reached a peak in the flux level sufficient for pile-up to be a concern.
We found some evidence for pileup in the MOS below 10~keV, and therefore excluded the central
8\arcsec\ for the pn and 10\arcsec\ for the MOS for observation 3 and interval P12 (the last interval of observation 3).
Note that we did not include data from observation 3 past 110~ks
where a background flare occurred, possibly contaminating the data (see Figure \ref{figlc}).
\subsection{\textsl{NuSTAR}\xspace Reduction}
We reduced data from both \textsl{NuSTAR}\xspace modules, FPMA and FPMB (Harrison et al.\xspace 2013), using the standard pipeline in the \textsl{NuSTAR}\xspace Data Analysis Software v1.1.1.
Instrumental responses were taken from the \textsl{NuSTAR}\xspace CALDB v20130315.
The unfiltered event files were cleaned with the standard depth correction, which significantly reduces the internal
background at high energies, and SAA passages were excluded from our analysis.
For both modules we extracted spectra and light curves from a 100\arcsec\ circular source region and a 100\arcsec\ background region on the same chip as the source.
We grouped the \textsl{NuSTAR}\xspace spectra with a minimum of 25 counts per bin.
\begin{figure}
\plotone{parsplashi.ps}
\caption{Parameter evolution from time-resolved fitting the 16 intervals (four per observation): column density, covering fraction, photon index and the unabsorbed 2--10~keV flux.. The variation in column density is consistent with the hardness ratio evolution seen in Figure~\ref{figlc}. The photon index is stable over each observation and does not vary greatly between observations while the intrinsic flux varies greatly. $N_{\text{H}}$\xspace is in units of 10$^{22}$ cm\e{-2} and power law flux is in units of 10\e{-12} erg\,cm$^{-2}$\,s$^{-1}$\xspace.}
\label{figpars}
\end{figure}
\begin{deluxetable*}{l@{\hspace{2mm}}ccc@{\hspace{2mm}}c@{\hspace{2mm}}c@{\hspace{2mm}}c@{\hspace{2mm}}c@{\hspace{2mm}}c@{\hspace{2mm}}c@{\hspace{2mm}}r}
\tablecaption{Broadband Model Parameters \label{tabpar}}
\tablecolumns{11}
\startdata
\hline
\hline\\[-1mm]
Interval & Unabsorbed & Photon & PC Column & Covering & FC Column & Scattered & Soft Gaussian & Relativistic & Distant & $\chi^2$/dof \\[1mm]
& Continuum & Index & Density ($N_{\text{H}}$\xspace) & Fraction & Density & Power Law & at 0.68~keV & Reflection & Reflection & \\[1mm]
&F$_{2-10}$\tablenotemark{A} & ($\Gamma$) & [$10^{22}$\,cm$^{-2}$] & ($f$) & [$10^{22}$\,cm$^{-2}$] & F$_{0.5-2}$\tablenotemark{A}/F$_{2-10}$\tablenotemark{A} & Norm ($10^{-5}$) & Norm ($10^{-6}$) & Norm ($10^{-6}$) & \\[1mm]
\hline\\[-1mm]
Obs. 1 & 16.8$\,\pm\,$ 0.3 & 1.84$\,\pm\,$0.02 & 22.4$\,\pm\,$0.2 & 1.00$^{\dagger}$ ( $> 0.99$) & 1.0$^{*}$ & 0.27\,/\,0.38$\,\pm\,$0.01 & - & 1.0$\,\pm\,$0.0 & 3.0$\,\pm\,$0.2 & 1627/1243\\[1.5mm]
Obs. 2 & 27.3$\,\pm\,$ 0.6 & 2.01$\,\pm\,$0.01 & 8.4$\,\pm\,$0.2 & 0.76$\,\pm\,$ 0.01 & 1.4$\,\pm\,$0.1 & 0.44\,/\,0.52$\,\pm\,$0.03 & 4.3$\,\pm\,$ 1.3 & 2.0$\,\pm\,$0.1 & 3.4$\,\pm\,$0.4 & 2131/1353\\[1.5mm]
Obs. 3 & 23.0$\,\pm\,$ 0.5 & 2.04$\,\pm\,$0.01 & 5.8$\,\pm\,$0.4 & 0.49$\,\pm\,$ 0.01 & 1.1$\,\pm\,$0.1 & 0.78\,/\,0.75$\,\pm\,$0.05 & 20.5$\,\pm\,$ 2.4 & 2.1$\,\pm\,$0.1 & 3.2$\,\pm\,$0.5 & 1877/1347\\[1mm]
Obs. 4 & 21.6$\,\pm\,$ 0.5 & 1.92$\,\pm\,$0.01 & 11.3$\,\pm\,$0.2 & 0.97$\,\pm\,$ 0.01 & 1.0$\,\pm\,$0.2 & 0.35\,/\,0.46$\,\pm\,$0.02 & 0.2$^{\dagger}$ ($<1.0$) & 1.5$\,\pm\,$0.1 & 3.3$\,\pm\,$0.3 & 1888/1323\\[1mm]
\hline\\[-1mm]
P1 & 16.0$\,\pm\,$ 0.7 & 1.87$\,\pm\,$0.02 & 24.0$\,\pm\,$0.5 & 1.00$^{\dagger}$ ( $> 0.99$) & 1.0$^{*}$ & 0.26\,/\,0.37$\,\pm\,$0.01 & - & 1.1$\,\pm\,$0.1 & 2.4$\,\pm\,$0.4 & 953/804\\[1mm]
P2 & 21.2$\,\pm\,$ 1.1 & 1.90$\,\pm\,$0.03 & 21.3$\,\pm\,$0.5 & 1.00$^{\dagger}$ ( $>0.99$) & 1.0$^{*}$ & 0.34\,/\,0.46$\,\pm\,$0.02 & - & 1.3$\,\pm\,$0.2 & 3.5$\,\pm\,$0.6 & 918/708\\[1mm]
P3 & 17.4$\,\pm\,$ 1.2 & 1.89$\,\pm\,$0.03 & 25.6$\,\pm\,$0.8 & 1.00$^{\dagger}$ ( $>0.99$) & 1.0$^{*}$ & 0.26\,/\,0.36$\,\pm\,$0.02 & - & 1.2$\,\pm\,$0.2 & 2.5$\,\pm\,$0.6 & 641/544\\[1mm]
P4 & 17.5$\,\pm\,$ 1.3 & 1.91$\,\pm\,$0.04 & 22.6$\,\pm\,$0.7 & 1.00$^{\dagger}$ ( $>0.99$) & 1.0$^{*}$ & 0.26\,/\,0.35$\,\pm\,$0.02 & - & 1.2$\,\pm\,$0.2 & 2.6$\,\pm\,$0.7 & 569/515\\[1mm]
P5 & 23.9$\,\pm\,$ 1.2 & 2.05$\,\pm\,$0.03 & 8.8$\,\pm\,$0.4 & 0.82$\,\pm\,$ 0.01 & 1.4$^{*}$ & 0.39\,/\,0.48$\,\pm\,$0.04 & 1.5$\,\pm\,$ 0.6 & 2.1$\,\pm\,$0.2 & 4.7$\,\pm\,$0.8 & 806/690\\[1mm]
P6 & 31.2$\,\pm\,$ 1.1 & 2.03$\,\pm\,$0.02 & 8.2$\,\pm\,$0.3 & 0.80$\,\pm\,$ 0.01 & 1.4$^{*}$ & 0.36\,/\,0.51$\,\pm\,$0.03 & 3.1$\,\pm\,$ 0.5 & 2.6$\,\pm\,$0.2 & 5.7$\,\pm\,$0.8 & 1180/906\\[1mm]
P7 & 23.1$\,\pm\,$ 0.9 & 1.99$\,\pm\,$0.02 & 7.8$\,\pm\,$0.3 & 0.78$\,\pm\,$ 0.01 & 1.4$^{*}$ & 0.39\,/\,0.54$\,\pm\,$0.03 & 1.2$\,\pm\,$ 0.5 & 1.9$\,\pm\,$0.2 & 4.5$\,\pm\,$0.7 & 1100/883\\[1mm]
P8 & 27.5$\,\pm\,$ 1.1 & 1.97$\,\pm\,$0.02 & 7.8$\,\pm\,$0.4 & 0.70$\,\pm\,$ 0.01 & 1.4$^{*}$ & 0.45\,/\,0.62$\,\pm\,$0.04 & 2.8$\,\pm\,$ 0.6 & 1.7$\,\pm\,$0.2 & 3.7$\,\pm\,$0.8 & 1067/873\\[1mm]
P9 & 16.4$\,\pm\,$ 1.3 & 1.93$\,\pm\,$0.04 & 9.1$\,\pm\,$0.6 & 0.90$\,\pm\,$ 0.01 & 1.1$^{*}$ & 0.49\,/\,0.69$\,\pm\,$0.08 & 1.3$\,\pm\,$ 1.7 & 1.8$\,\pm\,$0.2 & 4.9$\,\pm\,$1.0 & 529/536\\[1mm]
P10 & 23.3$\,\pm\,$ 1.1 & 2.00$\,\pm\,$0.03 & 5.7$\,\pm\,$0.4 & 0.75$\,\pm\,$ 0.01 & 1.1$^{*}$ & 0.54\,/\,0.61$\,\pm\,$0.06 & 10.7$\,\pm\,$ 2.0 & 2.3$\,\pm\,$0.3 & 3.8$\,\pm\,$0.9 & 1102/774\\[1mm]
P11 & 24.0$\,\pm\,$ 1.1 & 2.04$\,\pm\,$0.03 & 4.2$\,\pm\,$0.4 & 0.59$\,\pm\,$ 0.01 & 1.1$^{*}$ & 0.58\,/\,0.56$\,\pm\,$0.06 & 15.1$\,\pm\,$ 2.2 & 2.2$\,\pm\,$0.2 & 6.6$\,\pm\,$0.9 & 1102/768\\[1mm]
P12 & 38.9$\,\pm\,$ 1.3 & 2.07$\,\pm\,$0.03 & 4.3$\,\pm\,$0.6 & 0.29$\,\pm\,$ 0.03 & 1.1$^{*}$ & 1.00\,/\,1.08$\,\pm\,$0.10 & 31.5$\,\pm\,$ 3.7 & 2.6$\,\pm\,$0.3 & 4.3$\,\pm\,$1.3 & 1011/874\\[1mm]
P13 & 40.7$\,\pm\,$ 1.3 & 2.07$\,\pm\,$0.03 & 7.2$\,\pm\,$0.2 & 1.00$^{\dagger}$ ($>0.99$) & 1.0$^{*}$ & 0.37\,/\,0.39$\,\pm\,$0.03 & 0.2$^{\dagger}$ ($<1.0$) & 2.0$\,\pm\,$0.3 & 2.5$\,\pm\,$1.2 & 908/719\\[1mm]
P14 & 18.9$\,\pm\,$ 1.1 & 1.93$\,\pm\,$0.04 & 11.7$\,\pm\,$0.5 & 0.97$\,\pm\,$ 0.01 & 1.0$^{*}$ & 0.33\,/\,0.43$\,\pm\,$0.05 & 0.3$^{\dagger}$ ($<1.0$) & 1.6$\,\pm\,$0.2 & 3.9$\,\pm\,$0.9 & 556/592\\[1mm]
P15 & 20.9$\,\pm\,$ 0.8 & 1.90$\,\pm\,$0.03 & 12.9$\,\pm\,$0.3 & 0.98$\,\pm\,$ 0.01 & 1.0$^{*}$ & 0.31\,/\,0.42$\,\pm\,$0.03 & 2.0$\,\pm\,$ 0.6 & 1.3$\,\pm\,$0.1 & 3.4$\,\pm\,$0.6 & 917/816\\[1mm]
P16 & 20.8$\,\pm\,$ 0.8 & 1.93$\,\pm\,$0.02 & 16.9$\,\pm\,$0.4 & 0.99$\,\pm\,$ 0.01 & 1.0$^{*}$ & 0.34\,/\,0.44$\,\pm\,$0.03 & 1.0$\,\pm\,$ 0.6 & 1.4$\,\pm\,$0.1 & 2.3$\,\pm\,$0.5 & 1089/950\\[1mm]
\enddata
\tablecomments{Best fit parameters for the four observations and the 16 intervals, four per observation. PC and FC stand for partial-covering and full-covering, respectively. The intrinsic continuum fluxes and soft scattered power law fluxes were determined using the PEGPWRLW model in \textsc{xspec}\xspace.
"*" indicates a frozen parameter. "$\dagger$" indicates a pegged parameter.}
\tablenotetext{A}{Flux is in units of $10^{-12}$~erg\,cm$^{-2}$\,s$^{-1}$\xspace.}
\end{deluxetable*}
\section{Spectral Analysis}
All spectral fitting was done in \textsc{xspec}\xspace v.12.8.0 (Arnaud 1996) using the solar abundances of Anders \& Grevessse (1989) with cross sections from Verner et al.\xspace (1996).
Uncertainties are listed at the 90\% confidence level ($\Delta \chi^2$ = 2.71 for one interesting parameter).
We included a constant offset for each instrument as a free parameter to account for known cross calibration uncertainties
and included a Galactic absorption column of 1.34 $\times 10^{20}$ cm\e{-2} in all models (Kalberla et al.\xspace 2005).
\subsection{Initial Modeling}
Initially we fit each of the four observations separately in the 3--70~keV range with an absorbed power law.
This fit was universally poor ($\chi^{2}/$dof\xspace = 2832/1047, 6926/1145, 4551/1137, and 3968/1113 for observations 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively)
and showed strong residuals in the Fe K bandpass ($\sim 5-9$ keV) as well as broad residuals in the 20--30 keV range
(see Figure 1 of Risaliti et al.\xspace 2013 and Figure 1 of Walton et al.\xspace 2014 for which the continuum and reflection modeling of these data has been done in great detail).
In order to model the apparent neutral Fe emission lines we added a neutral reflection component.
We used the \textsc{xillver} \textsc{xspec}\xspace model which includes Fe K emission lines and a Compton reflection hump from a disk geometry (Garc\'ia \& Kallman 2010).
There was significant improvement in the fit statistic for each observation ($\chi^{2}/$dof\xspace = 2106/1044, 5727/1142, 3630/1134, and 3059/1110).
Note that this model choice was not a significant improvement over a phenomenological modeling using multiple Gaussian components and a neutral
Compton hump such as from \textsc{pexrav}\xspace, but we prefer a self-consistent physical model whenever possible.
Strong negative residuals in the Fe K band remained, necessitating the addition of four absorption lines from highly ionized species of
Fe in a high velocity outflow (Risaliti et al.\xspace 2005; Brenneman et al.\xspace 2013).
We tied the velocities and line widths of the four lines, assuming intrinsic line energies of 6.70 keV, 6.97 keV, 7.88 keV, and 8.27 keV.
This greatly improved the fit statistics ($\chi^{2}/$dof\xspace = 1341/1039, 2325/1137, 2197/1129, and 1784.1/1105),
though broad residuals still remained near the Fe K$\alpha$\xspace line and above 10 keV.
Though there are several models available which might be used at this juncture, we have elected to use \textsc{relconv}$\times$\textsc{xillver}
to model relativistic reflection from the inner parts of an ionized accretion disk.
Inclination angle, ionization state, Fe abundance, black hole spin and normalization were left as free parameters in our initial fitting.
This model provided a good fit to the data in all four observations, ($\chi^{2}/$dof\xspace = 1087/1035, 1445/1133, 1283/1125, and 1300/1101, for the four observations, respectively).
Parameter values, detailed justification of the model, and physical interpretations for this analysis can be found in Walton et al.\xspace (2014).
Those parameters that we expect to remain constant over the timescale of our observations were frozen at their average values:
black hole spin (0.98), disk inclination (63\degr), Fe abundance (4.7).
Note that modeling the distant reflection with a torus model can lead to a much lower measurement of the Fe abundance for the distant reflector,
however this does not change our primary results so for simplicity we adhere to the model presented in Walton et al.\xspace (2014), tying the Fe abundance between the two reflectors.
We also froze the following parameters that showed no evidence for variability over the four observations:
ionization of the inner disk (log$\xi$=1.8), and disk emissivity index (6.75).
Note that we do not see evidence for a high energy cutoff in this source and it was therefore not included in our final model.
\subsection{Modeling the Spectrum Below 1 keV}
In order to fully characterize the partial-covering absorption in this source, we must extend our spectral analysis down to lower energies.
It was immediately evident that observations 2 and 3, and possibly observation 4, were partially unobscured in the 1--3 keV range.
We therefore replaced the full-covering absorber in our model with a partial-covering absorber, though for observation 1 the covering fraction remained pegged at 1.
Additionally, we chose to analyze the spectrum down to 0.4~keV in order to model the soft emission from diffuse plasma in the region, so that we could be
confident that our measurements of the absorption were not influenced by this component.
The extended plasma was previously studied in detail by Wang et al.\xspace (2009) using \textsl{Chandra}\xspace gratings data and by Guainazzi et al.\xspace (2009) using \textsl{XMM-Newton}\xspace RGS data.
These analyses determined that the plasma was likely a combination of thermal and photoionized plasma.
When the AGN is in an absorbed state the extended plasma dominates the soft X-ray flux and it is expected to remain essentially constant due to its spatial extent.
For our modeling we used a phenomenological double \textsc{apec} component (i.e., two-temperature collisionally ionized gas) with temperatures of 0.3 and $\sim$0.8~keV, and five additional
Gaussian components to model emission line complexes from photoionized gas at 0.50, 0.85, 1.03, 1.24, and 2.74~keV, similar to Brenneman et al.\xspace (2013).
These components are shown in red in Figure \ref{figspecall}. We determined the normalizations of these components using data from observation 1 only
since it is the only observation that is fully covered and therefore allowed for the best determination of the plasma parameters.
Since we do not expect the extended plasma to undergo any changes over the months between our observations we froze these parameters to those measured in observation 1.
We included an additional soft power law component in the modeling to account for differences in flux level below 2 keV for the four observations.
The photon index was tied to that of the primary continuum power law and in all fits was found to have a normalization around $\sim\,$2\% that of the primary power law,
as expected for a scattered continuum component (e.g., Turner et al.\xspace 1997; Guainazzi et al.\xspace 2005; Eugechi et al.\xspace 2009).
Compared to the flux of the combined plasma components, $F_{0.5-2} = 3.6 \times 10^{-13}$ erg\,cm$^{-2}$\,s$^{-1}$\xspace, the scattered power law 0.5--2 keV flux values were
2.7$\times 10^{-13}$ erg\,cm$^{-2}$\,s$^{-1}$\xspace, 4.4$\times 10^{-13}$ erg\,cm$^{-2}$\,s$^{-1}$\xspace, 7.8$\times 10^{-13}$ erg\,cm$^{-2}$\,s$^{-1}$\xspace, and 3.5$\times 10^{-13}$ erg\,cm$^{-2}$\,s$^{-1}$\xspace for the four observations, respectively.
We applied this model to the other three observations and discovered the need for an additional layer of
full-covering absorption, with an improvement in fit of $\Delta \chi^{2}$/dof = 6000/1 for observation 2, $\Delta \chi^{2}$/dof=1500/1 for observation 3,
and $\Delta \chi^{2}$/dof =1050/1 for observation 4 with a column density of $N_{\text{H}}$\xspace$\,\sim\,$ 1~$\times 10^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$\xspace for all three observations.
We will refer to this absorbing layer as the ``full-covering low column'' absorber for the remainder of the paper.
Given the consistency of this component over the last three observations it seems reasonable to assume that it is also present in observation 1, but it is completely degenerate with
the higher column density absorber which is fully covering during that observation. We have included the component in our modeling of observation 1 with a fixed column density
of 1.0~$\times 10^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$\xspace in the hopes that this gives us a more accurate measurement of the column density of the partial-covering absorber layer during that observation.
We also found unexpected variability below 1~keV which was not fit by the changing absorption or the scattered power law.
The unidentified excess appeared in the less absorbed observations, strongest in observations 2 and 3 while completely absent in observation 1.
None of the usual components that might account for this increase in flux below 1~keV were able to fit the data
(i.e., a blackbody or power law soft excess, changes in the fully-covering absorber, or reflection from ionized material).
We therefore fit the excess with an additional phenomenological Gaussian at 0.68~keV with a width of $\sigma \sim$ 200 eV.
Including this component resulted in an improvement in the fit of $\Delta \chi^{2}$/dof= 200/3 for observation 3 and
$\Delta \chi^{2}$/dof=30/3 for observation 2 with a null hypothesis probability of $4 \times 10^{-4}$.
It was not significant to include the component in observations 1 or 4, both of which result in a normalization of the component consistent with 0.
We investigate the source of this feature in Section 3.6.
Residuals to models excluding the full-covering low column absorber and the phenomenological Gaussian are shown for each observation in Figure \ref{figspecall}, panels (c) and (d), respectively.
\subsection{The Final Model and Time Resolved Fitting}
Our final model consisted of two collisional plasma components plus five Gaussian emission lines to model the extended plasma, a scattered power law,
the phenomenological Gaussian at 0.68~keV, a full-covering neutral absorber ($N_{\text{H}}$\xspace $\sim$ 1~$\times 10^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$\xspace), a partial covering neutral absorber,
four absorption lines from highly ionized species of Fe in a high velocity outflow, a continuum power law, relativistic disk reflection, and cold distant reflection.
The final form of the model in \textsc{xspec}\xspace is: \textsc{apec[$\times$2]\,+\,zGauss[$\times$5]\,+\,scattered power law\,+Gauss\,+\,zphabs\,$\times$\,zpcfabs\,$\times$\,gauabs[$\times$4]\,$\times$\,(power law\,+\,relconv\,$\times$\,xillver)\,+\,xillver}.
For consistency checks, we fit all four observations simultaneously, exploring which parameters were consistent across the observations.
We find that the full-covering absorber was very steady over all three observations where it was measurable.
In observation 1 this layer is completely degenerate with the high column density layer of absorption.
We therefore included this layer in all fits to observation 1 with a column density frozen at 1.0~$\times 10^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$\xspace.
Figure~\ref{figspecall} shows each of the four observations with final best fit model components in panel (a) and residuals to the best fit model in panel (e).
Parameters are listed in Table \ref{tabpar}.
We then fit the 16 intervals independently in the 0.3--70~keV range using our final model.
In order to reduce degeneracy we froze the column density of the full-covering constant absorber to the time-averaged value
for each observation and to 1.0~$\times 10^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$\xspace for all intervals of observation 1.
Best fit parameters for all 16 intervals are listed in Table \ref{tabpar} and
the evolution of the parameters with the most interesting variability ($N_{\text{H}}$\xspace, $f$, $\Gamma$, and intrinsic flux) is shown in Figure~\ref{figpars}.
Values for the Fe K ionized wind absorption were also left free, but did not vary significantly over the observations (i.e., they varied by less than the measured error bars).
\begin{figure}
\plotone{parsplas3.ps}
\caption{Parameter evolution over the course of observation 3: column density, covering fraction, photon index and unabsorbed 2--10~keV flux. Note that the decreasing column density and covering fraction seem to have an inverse relationship with the increasing intrinsic flux, while the photon index is relatively stable. This is unusual behavior for absorption variability may be indicative of a wind absorber scenario. $N_{\text{H}}$\xspace is in units of 10$^{22}$ cm\e{-2} and power law flux is in units of 10\e{-12} erg\,cm$^{-2}$\,s$^{-1}$\xspace.}
\label{fig3pars}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\plotone{contall3plasnew.ps}
\caption{Observation 3 contour plots of $N_{\text{H}}$\xspace versus $f$ for the partial-covering ``patchy'' absorber in the eight sub-intervals, showing that there is very little degeneracy between these parameters. Levels are at 1$\sigma$, 2$\sigma$, and 3$\sigma$.}
\label{figcont}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\plotone{contall3ffnew.ps}
\caption{Observation 3 contour plots of intrinsic flux versus $N_{\text{H}}$\xspace for the partial-covering ``patchy'' absorber in the eight sub-intervals. We see that there is some parameter degeneracy, but that it is not large and it is in the opposite sense to the observed evolution. Levels are at 1$\sigma$, 2$\sigma$, and 3$\sigma$.}
\label{figcontff}
\end{figure}
\subsection{The Uncovering of the Source in Observation 3}
In observation 3 we saw a dramatic drop in the absorption by the partial-covering absorber.
The line of sight covering fraction ($f$) fell from 0.9 to 0.3 over the course of the observation, almost completely uncovering the source.
The column density also dropped significantly (nearly a factor of 2) to 5~$\times 10^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$\xspace. Figure~\ref{figpars} shows the rapid decrease in both parameters with
a corresponding increase in the unabsorbed power law flux. In order to get a clearer picture of the evolution of these parameters
we performed additional time-resolved analysis on observation 3, breaking each interval in half and fitting the 8 sub-intervals.
We used the final model as described in section 3.3 with the full covering absorber column density held fixed at the time-averaged value of 1.1~$\times 10^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$\xspace.
Figure~\ref{fig3pars} shows the evolution of the column density, covering fraction, photon index and intrinsic power law flux for observation 3.
The rapid decrease in both $N_{\text{H}}$\xspace and $f$ could plausibly be due to parameter degeneracy; however the error
bars seem too small for this to be the case. A contour plot of $N_{\text{H}}$\xspace versus $f$ for the eight sub-intervals shown in Figure~\ref{figcont}
verifies that little to no parameter degeneracy is apparent between $N_{\text{H}}$\xspace and $f$. While there is an expected degeneracy between the column density and flux
of the source shown in Figure~\ref{figcontff}, it is generally small compared to the changes in the parameters and is in the opposite sense to the observed evolution.
The decreasing column density and covering fraction both seem to have an inverse relationship with the increasing intrinsic flux.
The photon index is relatively stable over the same period.
This is unusual behavior for absorption variability caused by clumps moving into and out of the line of sight.
Column density and covering fraction do not typically vary in lock step with one another and we would not expect either parameter to correlate with intrinsic flux.
This may be indicative of an evolution in the absorbing material with luminosity, such as in the wind absorber scenario proposed by Connolley et al.\xspace (2014; discussed in Section 4.1).
We will refer to this layer of absorption (seen primarily in observation 3) as the ``patchy partial-covering'' absorber to distinguish it from the
sometimes partial-covering ``high column density'' absorber which dominates in observations 1 and 4
\subsection{Occultation Event in Observation 4}
Observation 4 shows a rapid increase in column density during the first 32~ks (intervals P13 and P14) with little to no change in the covering fraction.
We broke the first 32~ks down into eight 4~ks sub-intervals and fit just the PN+FPMA data in the 1--40~keV range for computational brevity, using the final model as described in section 3.3.
Parameters for the full-covering absorber, scattered power law, highly ionized wind absorber, and reflection were also held constant.
We find an evolution of the continuum and absorption parameters shown in Figure~\ref{fig4pars}.
The column density peaked around 20--24~ks, with a seemingly symmetrical profile strongly indicative of a clump of material passing through the line of sight.
Though degeneracy between the column density and intrinsic flux is again present in these fits, the lack of change in the covering fraction makes this behavior very different
from that seen in observation 3. Again, the level of degeneracy is less than the observed changes (see Figure~\ref{figcont4}).
If this is indeed an occultation event then it is consistent in duration with events seen previously in this source and thought to be due to
BLR clouds passing through the line of sight (Maiolino et al.\xspace 2010). Using their estimate for $R_{\rm BLR}$ of $\sim \,10^{16}$ cm, and
assuming a black hole mass of $2 \times 10^{6}$ \ensuremath{M_\odot}\xspace we estimate the velocity of the cloud in a circular orbit to be $\sim 1600 km/s$.
Following the analysis of Rivers et al.\xspace (2011) for a smooth, symmetrical occultation event assuming a circular orbit around the black hole,
we fit the absorption profile with a solid sphere, a beta profile ($\rho \propto r^\beta$) and a sphere of linear density profile ($\rho \propto r^{-1}$), shown in Figure~\ref{fig4nh}.
We find a cloud size of $\sim \, 4\times10^{12}$ cm ($\sim 10\,R_{\rm g}$) with a central density of $\sim\,3\times10^{10}$ cm$^{-3}$ for the linearly decreasing density sphere.
These numbers are consistent with physical properties inferred by Maiolino et al.\xspace (2010) for the cloud cores, although we do not see evidence of
the same cometary structure inferred in that work ($N_{\text{H}}$\xspace rises again after the first 32~ks of observation 4 and the covering factor is relatively stable over the course of the event).
\begin{figure}
\plotone{parsnew4.ps}
\caption{Parameter evolution for the first two intervals (32~ks) of observation 4 divided into eight equal time bins: column density, covering fraction, photon index and unabsorbed 2--10~keV flux. Here the smooth increase and decrease in column density are reminiscent of occultation events seen in this source and others in the past, though there still seems to be an inverse relationship with the intrinsic flux. The covering fraction and photon index do not show significant evolution over this time period. $N_{\text{H}}$\xspace is in units of 10$^{22}$ cm\e{-2} and power law flux is in units of 10\e{-12} erg\,cm$^{-2}$\,s$^{-1}$\xspace.}
\label{fig4pars}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\plotone{contall4new.ps}
\caption{Observation 4 contour plots of intrinsic flux versus $N_{\text{H}}$\xspace for the partial-covering absorber in the eight sub-intervals. We see that there is some parameter degeneracy, but that it is not large and it is in the opposite sense to the observed evolution. Levels are at 1$\sigma$, 2$\sigma$, and 3$\sigma$.}
\label{figcont4}
\end{figure}
\subsection{The Additional Soft Component}
From Table \ref{tabpar} we see that the phenomenological Gaussian component at 0.68~keV peaks strongly in observation 3.
The strength of this feature seems to be anti-correlated with the covering fraction, not showing up at all in observation 1,
which is fully covered, and only very weakly in observation 4 where the covering fraction is 0.97--1.0.
This component is therefore clearly not associated with the extended plasma and likely arises within the radius of the variable high column density partial-covering absorber.
Braito et al.\xspace (2014) have analyzed the RGS spectrum of observation 3 and found evidence for an increasing ionization in their low column absorber over the course of the observation.
What we are seeing in the MOS/PN may be due to further leakage of the power law below 1~keV due to increasing ionization of the low column full-covering absorber
as the source increases in luminosity.
The material would have to be quite close to the central source since it is directly correlated with the observed increase in intrinsic power law flux.
With time resolved fitting on timescales of around 20~ks this would mean the material is at a distance of $\lesssim$10\e{16} cm,
which is roughly the radius of the BLR and is consistent with being inside the radius of the high column density partial-covering absorber.
Another possibility is the uncovering of actual emission lines such as from O VIII Lyman $\alpha$ at 0.654~keV.
This could be from highly ionized material very close to the central source, only visible when the full-covering
low column absorber becomes ionized enough to be semi-transparent at energies below 1~keV.
Braito et al.\xspace (2014) also noticed that some broader soft X-ray lines started to emerge during the last part of observation 3, for instance from Mg XI and Mg XII,
which were much broader than the usual distant narrow line emission, and which seemed to have P Cygni like profiles.
These lines could be associated with a disk wind very close to the central source.
It is worth noting that a visual inspection of the RGS residuals in Figure 4 of Braito et al.\xspace (2014) reveals systematically high residuals around 0.65--0.7 keV.
\begin{figure}
\plotone{nh_fit.ps}
\caption{Fitting the occultation event in observation 4 with a solid sphere (dashed black), a beta profile ($\rho \propto r^\beta$; red) and a sphere of linear density profile ($\rho \propto r^{-1}$; blue). Residuals for the models are shown in (b), (c), and (d), respectively, showing that the latter two models both fit the data reasonably well.}
\label{fig4nh}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion and Conclusions}
From our spectroscopic analysis of NGC~1365 we begin to understand the full complexity of the multi-layer absorption.
It has long been known that the central nucleus is surrounded by patchy material that provides distant reflection
and variable absorption of the X-ray corona, both on short timescales (hours) likely associated with eclipsing BLR clouds,
and on longer timescales (days to months) likely associated with slowly moving material in the torus.
A full-covering layer of neutral absorbing material with a low column density ($N_{\text{H}}$\xspace $\sim$ 1~$\times 10^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$\xspace) is required by the data.
This additional ``full-covering low column'' layer is only detectable when the central source is uncovered by the sometimes partial-covering high column absorber.
Given its stability over at least $\sim$2 months, it is likely not in the inner-most regions of the nucleus.
However, since the extended soft plasma emission is not attenuated by this absorber, it must be closer to the nucleus than the extended plasma.
A third layer of partial covering ``patchy'' neutral absorption is distinguishable from the high column absorber by its unusual variability during observation 3.
Note that while we only fit a single partial covering absorber component, the drastic difference in behavior during the four different observations leads us to the
conclusion that we are witnessing multiple layers of absorption dominating at different times.
\begin{figure*}
\plotone{trends.ps}
\caption{These plots show relationships between spectral fit parameters on the various analyzed intervals. Left: $N_{\text{H}}$\xspace versus intrinsic power law flux and $N_{\text{H}}$\xspace versus covering fraction for the 16 time resolved intervals (P1-16). Middle: $N_{\text{H}}$\xspace versus intrinsic power law flux and $N_{\text{H}}$\xspace versus covering fraction for the 8 half-intervals of observation 3. Right: $N_{\text{H}}$\xspace versus intrinsic power law flux and $N_{\text{H}}$\xspace versus covering fraction for the 4~ks sub-intervals of the beginning of observation 4.}
\label{figtrends}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{The Nature of the Variable Absorber}
The uncovering of the continuum by the high column partial covering absorber seen during 2012 December (observation 2) and 2013 January (observation 3) is an unusual event,
particularly the extreme uncovering witnessed in the January observation, where both the column density and covering fraction dropped dramatically.
This is in contrast to earlier observations of fast absorption variability due to ``comet-like'' BLR clouds, which show an increase in the covering fraction as the column density declines,
indicative of a denser core leading a diffuse tail (Maiolino et al.\xspace 2010).
The simultaneous drop in both column density and covering fraction in our third observation
is inconsistent with this kind of event.
In order to discover the origin of the variability in the absorber we looked for relationships between the parameters that showed the greatest variations.
Figure~\ref{figtrends} shows the relationships between $N_{\text{H}}$\xspace and intrinsic flux, and between $N_{\text{H}}$\xspace and $f$.
The flux plotted here is the unabsorbed power law 2--10~keV flux which corresponds directly to the intrinsic luminosity of the source.
For the 16 intervals, $N_{\text{H}}$\xspace appears to be correlated with flux at the 99.5\% level and with the covering fraction at the 99.9\% level by the Pearson correlation test.
These trends are also seen for the subintervals at around the $\sim$95\% confidence level (although note the small sample sizes).
There is some indication that on longer timescales the photon index softens as the source brightens (correlated at the 99.9\% level for the 16 intervals).
However this correlation is not seen on shorter timescales (for the subintervals of observations 3 and 4).
The relationship between $N_{\text{H}}$\xspace and flux in observation 3 is consistent with the anti-correlation noticed by Connolly et al.\xspace (2014) from analyzing {\it Swift} monitoring data of NGC 1365.
Our data do not show a simple linear correlation between these parameters. It seems clear, however, that when the X-ray source is brighter
($\gtrsim 2 \times 10^{-11}$~erg\,cm$^{-2}$\,s$^{-1}$\xspace) the column density is much lower ($\lesssim 1 \times 10^{23}$ cm$^{-2}$). For lower values of
flux ($\lesssim 2 \times 10^{-11}$~erg\,cm$^{-2}$\,s$^{-1}$\xspace), the column density is much higher ($\gtrsim 1 \times 10^{23}$ cm$^{-2}$).
Connolly et al.\xspace (2014) suggested that this could be due to a wind absorber which launches from further out when the source flux goes up.
This patchy wind absorber is only clearly seen in observation 3. In the other three observations a high column, sometimes partial-covering absorber dominates.
This high column absorber is likely associated with the BLR (as evidence by the occultation event in observation 4 and those seen previously) as well as with the
torus. The timescale of the uncovering between observations 2, 3, and 4 is weeks to months rather than hours, indicating that it is either due to a gap in the torus clouds
or to a global attenuation of material. Since we do not see any other evidence of a temporary drop in overall accretion rate, we favor the former scenario.
One other possibility is that the drop in covering fraction in observation 3 could be explained by a cloud moving out of the line of sight.
If the cloud were decreasing in size, such as with a drawn out filamentary tail, then instead of the comet-like increase in covering fraction
we would see a shrinking covering fraction as less and less of the tail covered the source. This would match our observed absorption parameter evolution,
though it does not explain the correlation between the absorber parameters and intrinsic flux seen in observation 3. We therefore reject this hypothesis.
\subsection{Size of the X-ray Emitting Region}
In this data set we see changes in the absorbers on multiple timescales.
We see an initial drop in total column density over the course of $\sim$5 months from 22 to 8~$\times 10^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$\xspace.
Then in observation 3 $N_{\text{H}}$\xspace goes from 11 to 4~$\times 10^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$\xspace in $\sim$130~ks while the covering fraction drops to 0.45.
And in the first 20--24~ks of observations 4 $N_{\text{H}}$\xspace rises from 7 to 14~$\times 10^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$\xspace.
This last is the most rapid change and can be used to place constraints on the size of the X-ray emitting region.
Since the occultation in observation 4 is nearly fully covering, we can infer that the X-ray emitting region is no larger than the size to the occulting cloud: $\lesssim 10\,R_{\rm g}$.
This agrees with previous estimates of the compactness of the X-ray corona from the measured relativistic reflection,
observed reverberation and BLR occultation events (Walton et al.\xspace 2014; Kara et al.\xspace 2014; Maiolino et al.\xspace 2010).
However it presents a conundrum when we consider the extremely low covering fraction seen in observation 3.
To see such a clear drop in covering fraction would require that the absorber is either very close to the source or made up of clumps/filaments that are smaller than the size of the X-ray emitting region.
Since the drop in covering fraction occurs slowly over the entire observation and taking into account the low ionization state of the absorbers,
the latter scenario seems more plausible, possibly due to a patchy disk wind.
\subsection{Summary}
Between July 2012 and February 2013, \textsl{NuSTAR}\xspace and \textsl{XMM-Newton}\xspace performed four long-look joint observations of NGC 1365.
We have analyzed the variable absorption seen in these observations in order to characterize the geometry of the absorbing material.
Fortuitously, two of the observations caught the source in an unusually low absorption state, revealing additional complexity which had previously been hidden.
This ``peak between the clouds'' allowed us to see past the typical torus/BLR clouds, which tend to have column densities of around $\sim\,$10$^{23}$ cm$^{-2}$,
uncovering a patchy absorber with a variable column around $\sim\,10^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$ and a measured covering fraction of $f$=0.3--0.9.
Additionally, we found that this patchy absorber seems to respond to the intrinsic source flux, with the column density and covering fraction dropping as
the source grows brighter. This could be due to a high luminosity event pushing an absorbing wind out to a large radius where the covering fraction and effective $N_{\text{H}}$\xspace both drop dramatically.
This latter theory is espoused by Connolly et al.\xspace (2014) who noticed an anti-correlation between $N_{\text{H}}$\xspace and luminosity in NGC~1365, a trend which our data confirms.
We also find evidence of an additional constant absorber with a low column density of 1 $\times$ 10$^{22}$ cm$^{-2}$, the geometrical location of which is still unclear.
The ionized wind absorbers seen in this source (Risaliti et al.\xspace 2005; Braito et al.\xspace 2014) most likely reside closer to the central source than the
three layers of neutral absorbers we have characterized in this work.
A short occultation event in Feb 2013 was observed, likely due to a BLR clump passing through the line of sight.
We estimate a clump size of $\sim \, 4\times10^{12}$ cm with a central density of $\sim\,3\times10^{10}$ cm$^{-3}$.
From this we also infer a small X-ray corona with a linear dimension of only a few R$_{\rm g}$.
\begin{acknowledgments}
This work was supported under NASA Contract No. NNG08FD60C, and
made use of data from the {\it NuSTAR} mission, a project led by
the California Institute of Technology, managed by the Jet Propulsion
Laboratory, and funded by the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration. We thank the {\it NuSTAR} Operations, Software and
Calibration teams for support with the execution and analysis of
these observations. This research has made use of the {\it NuSTAR}
Data Analysis Software (NuSTARDAS) jointly developed by the ASI
Science Data Center (ASDC, Italy) and the California Institute of Technology (USA).
This work has made use of HEASARC online services, supported by NASA/GSFC, and the NASA/IPAC
Extragalactic Database, operated by JPL/California Institute of Technology under contract with NASA.
This work also made use of data from the \textsl{XMM-Newton}\xspace observatory.
\end{acknowledgments}
{\it Facilities:} \facility{NuSTAR}, \facility{XMM}
|
\section{Introduction}
A \emph{Coxeter group} $G$ is given by the presentation
\[
\langle a_1,\dots, a_r\mid a_i^2, (a_ia_j)^{m_{ij}} : 1\leq i < j\leq r \rangle
\]
where $m_{ij}\in\{2,3,\dots,\infty\}$ and where $m_{ij}=\infty$ means no relator of the form $(a_ia_j)^{m_{ij}}$. Throughout this paper all presentations of Coxeter groups are of the above form. It is traditional to encode the above data for $G$ in terms of an associated labelled graph $\Upsilon_G$, whose vertices correspond to the generators and where an edge labelled by $m_{ij}$ joins vertices $a_i, a_j$ when $m_{ij}<\infty$. We omit an edge for $m_{ij}=\infty$.
\begin{defn}
A group $G$ is \emph{coherent} if every finitely generated subgroup of $G$ is finitely presented. Otherwise, $G$ is \emph{incoherent}.
\end{defn}
Our main result which is stated and proven as Theorem~\ref{thm:nonuniform case} is the following:
\begin{thm}
For each $M$ there exists $R=R(M)$ such that if $K$ is a Coxeter group with $3\leq m_{ij}\leq M$ and rank $r\geq R$ then $K$ is incoherent.
\end{thm}
Our result joins a similar result for groups acting properly and cocompactly on Bourdon buildings \cite{WiseRandomMorse} and we expect that there is more to come in this direction.
\section{Preliminaries on Coxeter groups, Walls, and Morse Theory}
\subsection{Euler characteristic and compression}\label{sec:euler}
Let $G$ be a Coxeter group given by
\[
\langle a_1,\dots, a_r\mid a_i^2, (a_ia_j)^{m_{ij}} : 1\leq i < j\leq r \rangle
\]
and let $X$ be the standard $2$-complex associated to this presentation.
Consider an index $d$ torsion-free subgroup $G'$ of $G$. Let $\widehat X\to X$ be a cover of $X$ corresponding to $G'$. All edges embed in $\widehat X$, since all generators are torsion elements, and all $2$-cells embed since each proper subword of $(a_ia_j)^{m_{ij}}$ is a torsion element. Consider the complex $\overline{X}$ obtained from $\widehat X$ by firstly collapsing $2$-cells corresponding to $a_i^2$ relators to $1$-cells and secondly collapsing $2m_{ij}$ copies of $2m_{ij}$-gons with the same boundary when $m_{ij} \neq \infty$.
The complex $\overline X$ is the \emph{compression} of $\widehat X$. See Figure~\ref{fig:compression} for the compression arising from $\langle a,b\mid a^2, b^2, (ab)^3\rangle$.
\begin{figure}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1]
\tikzset{%
> = angle 60,
arrow/.style = {%
decoration = {%
markings,
mark = at position .5 with {\arrow {>};}
},
postaction = decorate
}
}
\tikzset{%
> = angle 60,
arrowback/.style = {%
decoration = {%
markings,
mark = at position .5 with {\arrow {<};}
},
postaction = decorate
}
}
\tikzset{%
> = angle 60,
darrow/.style = {%
decoration = {%
markings,
mark = at position .6 with {\arrow {>>};}
},
postaction = decorate
}
}
\tikzset{%
> = angle 60,
darrowback/.style = {%
decoration = {%
markings,
mark = at position .57 with {\arrow {<};}
},
decoration = {%
markings,
mark = at position .43 with {\arrow {<};}
},
postaction = decorate
}
}
\draw[arrowback] (30:1) to[in=-60, out=180] (90:1);
\draw[darrowback](90:1) to[out=240,in=0] (150:1);
\draw[arrowback](150:1) to[out=-60, in=60] (210:1);
\draw[darrowback](210:1) to[out=0, in=120] (270:1);
\draw[arrowback](270:1) to[out=60, in=180] (330:1);
\draw[darrowback](330:1) to[out=120, in=-120] (30:1);
\draw[arrow] (30:1) to[in=0, out=120] (90:1);
\draw[darrow](90:1) to[out=180,in=60] (150:1);
\draw[arrow](150:1) to[out=-120, in=120] (210:1);
\draw[darrow](210:1) to[out=-60, in=180] (270:1);
\draw[arrow](270:1) to[out=0, in=-120] (330:1);
\draw[darrow](330:1) to[out=60, in=-60] (30:1);
\draw[->] (1.8,0) to (2.6,0);
\end{tikzpicture}\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1]
\tikzset{%
> = stealth,
notarrow/.style = {%
decoration = {%
markings,
mark = at position .5 with {\arrow{|};}
},
postaction = decorate
}
}
\tikzset{%
> = stealth,
dnotarrow/.style = {%
decoration = {%
markings,
mark = at position .45 with {\arrow {|};}
},
decoration = {%
markings,
mark = at position .55 with {\arrow{|};}
},
postaction = decorate
}
}
\draw[notarrow] (30:1) to (90:1);
\draw[dnotarrow] (90:1) to (150:1);
\draw[notarrow] (150:1) to (210:1);
\draw[dnotarrow] (210:1) to (270:1);
\draw[notarrow] (270:1) to (330:1);
\draw[dnotarrow] (330:1) to (30:1);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The compression $\widehat X\to\overline X$. Each bigon collapses to an edge and six $2$-cells collapse to a single $2$-cell.}\label{fig:compression}
\end{figure}
We say $G$ has \emph{dimension~$\leq 2$} when $\overline X$ is aspherical. This holds precisely when $\frac{1}{m_{ij}}+\frac{1}{m_{jk}} +\frac{1}{m_{ki}} \leq 1$ for each $i,j,k$. Indeed, there is then a natural metric of nonpositive curvature on $\overline X$ induced by metrizing each $2$-cell as a regular Euclidean polygon. However if some 3-generator subgroup is finite, then $\overline X$ contains a copy of $S^2$. We focus on Coxeter groups of dimension~$\leq 2$, in which case the following discussion of $\chi(G)$ is sensible.
The complex $X$ has one $0$-cell, $r$ $1$-cells and one $2$-cell for each pair of generators $\{i,j\}$ with $m_{ij}< \infty$. As $\degree(\widehat X\rightarrow X)=d$, the complex $\widehat X$ has $d$ $0$-cells, $dr$ $1$-cells and $d$ $2$-cells for each pair $\{i,j\}$ with $m_{ij}<\infty$. The complex $\overline X$ has $d$ $0$-cells, $\frac{dr}{2}$ $1$-cells and $\frac{d}{2m_{ij}}$ $2$-cells for each pair $\{i, j\}$ with $m_{ij}<\infty$. The \emph{Euler characteristic of $G$} is:
\begin{equation}\label{eulerformula}
\chi(G) = \frac{\chi(\overline X)}{[G:G']} = \frac{1}{d}\bigg(d - \frac{dr}{2} +\sum_{\{i,j\}}\frac{d}{2m_{ij}}\bigg) = 1 - \frac{r}{2} +\sum_{\{i,j\}}\frac{1}{2m_{ij}}.
\end{equation}
This is independent of the choice of finite index torison-free subgroup.
We thus have:
\[\chi(G_{(r,m)}) = 1 - \frac{r}{2} + \frac{(r-1)r}{4m}.\]
Thus if $m$ is fixed then $\chi(G_{(r,m)})>0$ for all sufficiently large $r$.
\subsection{Walls}
Let $K$ be a combinatorial $2$-complex
with the property that each $2$-cell has an even number of sides (we have in mind $K = \overline X$ as defined in previous section).
Two $1$-cells in the attaching map $\partial_\textup{\textsf{p}} C\to K^{1}$
of a $2$-cell $C$ are \emph{parallel}
if they are images of opposite edges in $\partial_\textup{\textsf{p}} C$.
An \emph{abstract wall} is an equivalence class
of $1$-cells in the equivalence relation generated by parallelism. A \emph{wall} $W$ associated to an abstract wall $\bar W$ is a graph with a locally injective map $\phi:W\to K$ defined as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item for each $1$-cell $a$ in $\bar W$ there is a vertex $v_a$ in $W$,
\item $\phi(v_a)$ is the center of $a$,
\item for each pair of $1$-cells $a,a'$ in $\bar W$ and each $2$-cell $C$ in which $a,a'$ are parallel, there is an edge $(v_a,v_{a'})$ in $W$,
\item the edge $(v_{a},v_{a'})$ is sent by $\phi$ to an arc in $C$ joining $\phi(v_a)$ and $\phi(v_{a'})$.
\end{itemize}
The wall $W$ is \emph{dual} to each $1$-cell in $\bar W$. The wall $W$ is \emph{adjacent to $x$ at a vertex $v$} of $\link(x)$, if it is dual to the $1$-cell corresponding to $v$. The wall $W$ is \emph{adjacent to $x$ at an edge $e$} of $\link(x)$, if $W$ is not adjacent at either endpoint of $e$ but is dual to a pair of $1$-cells in $\partial_\textup{\textsf{p}} C$ where $C$ is a $2$-cell corresponding to $e$. We say that the wall $W$
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{embeds} if $W\to K$ is injective,
\item is \emph{two-sided} if $W\to K$ extends to an embedding $W\times (-1,1)\to K$,
\item \emph{self-osculates at $x$} if it is adjacent to $x$ at more than one vertex and/or edge of $\link(x)$. See Figure \ref{self-osculation}.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.5]
\draw[thick] (210: 1) to (240: 1.732) to (270: 2) to (300:1.732) to (330: 1) to (0:1.732) to (30:2) to (60:1.732) to (90:1) to (120:1.732) to (150:2) to (180:1.732) to (210:1) to (0:0) to (90:1);
\draw[thick] (330:1) to (0:0);
\path[draw,thick,red] (-2.2,0.65) to[out=-30,in=180] (-1.75, 0.5) to[out=0,in=180] (1.75,0.5) to[out = 0, in = 120] (3,0) to[out=300,in=10] (2.5, -1.75) to[out=190,in=0] (0.5*1.732,-1) to[out =180, in=0] (-0.5*1.732, -1) to[out=180,in=60] (-1.5,-1.2);
\end{tikzpicture}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale = 0.5]
\draw[thick] (-1,0) to (-1.6, 0.6) to (-1.6, 1.6) to (-0.6, 1.6) to (0, 1) to (0.6, 1.6) to (1.6,1.6) to (1.6, 0.6) to (1,0) to (1.6, -0.6) to (1.6, -1.6) to (0.6, -1.6) to (0, -1) to (-0.6, -1.6) to (-1.6, -1.6) to (-1.6, -0.6) to (-1,0) to (0,0) to (1,0);
\draw[thick] (0,1) to (0,-1);
\path[draw, thick, red] (-2.1, 1.3) to[in=180, out=-40] (-1.6, 1.1) to[in=180, out=0] (0,1/2) to[in=180, out=0] (1.6, 1.1) to[in=90, out=0] (2.8,0) to[in=0, out=270] (1.6, -1.1) to[in=0, out=180] (0,-1/2) to[in=0, out = 180] (-1.6, -1.1) to[in=40, out=0] (-2.1, -1.3);
\end{tikzpicture}\,\,\,\,
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale = 0.5]
\draw[thick] (210: 1) to (240: 1.732) to (270: 2) to (300:1.732) to (330: 1) to (0:1.732) to (30:2) to (60:1.732) to (90:1) to (120:1.732) to (150:2) to (180:1.732) to (210:1) to (0:0) to (90:1);
\draw[thick] (330:1) to (0:0);
\path[draw, thick ,red] (-3*1.732/4 - 0.5, -0.45) to [in=240, out= 10] (-3*1.732/4,-0.25) to[in=240,out=60] (-1.732/4,1.25) to[in=170,out=60] (1.5,2) to[in=110,out=-10] (2.8,1) to[in=10,out=290] (2,-0.9) to[in=0,out=190] (0.866, -1) to[in=0,out=180] (-0.866,-1) to[out=180, in=60] (-1.2, -1.2);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{In each case above, the wall self-osculates at the central vertex.}\label{self-osculation}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Orientation of walls}
An embedded wall $W\to K$ is two-sided if and only if there is a globally consistent orientation of its dual $1$-cells such that parallel $1$-cells in any $2$-cell $C$ have opposite orientations in $\partial_\textup{\textsf{p}} C$. An \emph{orientation} of a two-sided wall $W$ is one of two globally consistent orientations of its dual $1$-cells. Let $\mathcal W$ be the set of all walls in $K$. An \emph{orientation} on $\mathcal W$ is a choice of orientation on each $W\in\mathcal W$.
\subsection{Bestvina-Brady Morse theory}
An \emph{affine complex} $K$ has cells that are convex Euclidean polyhedra, which metrically agree on their faces.
A map $f:K \to \ensuremath{\field{R}}$ is a \emph{Morse function} if it is linear on each cell $C$, constant on $C$ if only if $\dim C = 0$, and the image $f(K^0)$ of the $0$-skeleton is a closed discrete subset of $\ensuremath{\field{R}}$. It follows that the restriction of $f$ to a cell has a unique minimum and maximum.
Let $x\in K^0$. A vertex $v\in \link(x)$ is \emph{ascending} (resp. \emph{descending}) if the corresponding $1$-cell is oriented away from $x$ (resp. toward $x$). An edge $e\in\link(x)$ is \emph{ascending} (resp. \emph{descending}) if each wall passing through the corresponding $2$-cell is oriented away from $x$ (resp. toward $x$). The \emph{ascending link} $\link_{\uparrow}(x)$ (resp. \emph{descending link} $\link_{\downarrow}(x)$) is the subgraph of $\link(x)$ consisting of all ascending (resp. descending) vertices and edges.
We will employ the following result of Bestvina-Brady proven in \cite[Thm~4.1]{BestvinaBrady97}:
\begin{thm} \label{bestvina-brady thm} Let $K$ be a finite (aspherical) affine cell complex. Consider a map $K\to S^1$ that lifts to a Morse function $\widetilde K\to \mathbb R$. If $\link_{\uparrow}(x)$ and $\link_{\downarrow}(x)$ are nonempty and connected for each $x\in \widetilde K^{0}$, then $\ker(\pi_1K\to \mathbb Z)$ is finitely generated.\end{thm}
\subsection{An orientation induces a combinatorial map $K^{1}\to S^1$}\label{orienatation induces a map} Let $S^1$ have a cell structure with one $0$-cell and one (oriented) $1$-cell. Each orientation on $\mathcal W$ determines an orientation preserving combinatorial map $K^{1}\to S^1$. The map $\partial_\textup{\textsf{p}} C\to S^1$ is null-homotopic for each $2$-cell $C$, since pairs of opposite $1$-cells in $\partial_\textup{\textsf{p}} C$ travel in opposite directions around $S^1$. Thus the map $K^{1}\to S^1$ extends to $K \to S^1$. The map $K\to S^1$ lifts to $\widetilde K\to \widetilde S^1\simeq \mathbb R$, but the restriction of this map to a $2$-cell does not necessarily have a unique minimum or maximum.
The \emph{lawful subcomplex}
$Y\subset K$ is the subcomplex of $K$ obtained by discarding $2$-cells whose attaching maps cannot be expressed as the concatenation $\alpha\beta^{-1}$ where $\alpha\to K^1$, $\beta\to K^1$ are positively directed paths. The restriction $Y\to S^1$ of the map $K\to S^1$ lifts to $\widetilde Y \to \mathbb R$ which is a Morse function in the sense of Bestvina-Brady.
\section{Main Theorem}
The \emph{Coxeter group of uniform exponent $m$ and rank $r$} is the Coxeter group $G_{(r,m)}$ with the following presentation:
$$\langle a_1,\ldots, a_r \mid a_i^2, (a_ia_j)^m \ : \ 1 \leq i < j \leq r\rangle$$
The standard $2$-complex of the above presentation for $G_{(r,m)}$ is denoted by $X_{(r,m)}$.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:uniform case}
For each $m\geq 3$ there exists $R_m$ such that for all $r\geq R_m$
the group $G_{(r,m)}$ has a finite index torsion-free subgroup $G'$ that admits an epimorphism $G'\rightarrow \ensuremath{\field{Z}}$ whose kernel $N$ is finitely generated.
\end{thm}
\begin{cor}\label{cor:uniform}For $m\geq 3$, the group
$G_{(r,m)}$ is incoherent for all sufficiently large $r$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}A result of Bieri in \cite{BieriBook81} states that a nontrivial finitely presented normal subgroup of a group of cohomological dimension $\leq 2$ is either free or of finite index.
Since $[G':N] = \infty$ it remains to exclude the case where $N$ is free, whence:
\[
\chi(G') = \chi(N)\cdot \chi(\ensuremath{\field{Z}}) = (1-\rank(N))\cdot 0 = 0.\]
This is impossible for all sufficiently large $r$, since then $\chi(G')>0$ (see Section~\ref{sec:euler}).
\end{proof}
A {\em Coxeter subgroup} is generated by a subset of the generators of $G$.
It is presented by those generators together with all relators
in those generators appearing in the presentation of $G$~\cite{DavisCoxeterBook2008}. We now prove the main result stated in the introduction:
\begin{thm}\label{thm:nonuniform case}
For each $M$ there exists $R=R(M)$ such that if $K$ is a Coxeter group with $3\leq m_{ij}\leq M$ and rank $r\geq R$ then $K$ is incoherent.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
The multi-color version of Ramsey's theorem \cite{GrahamRothschildSpencer80} states that given a number of colors $c$ and natural numbers $n_1,\dots, n_c$ there exists a number $R = R(n_1,\dots, n_c)$ such that if the edges of a complete graph $\Gamma$ of order at least $R$ are colored with $c$ colors, then for some $i$ there exists a complete subgraph of $\Gamma$ of order $n_i$ with edges of color $i$. Let $c = M$ and $n_i = R_{i}$ of Theorem~\ref{thm:uniform case}. Consequently there exists a uniform exponent Coxeter subgroup $G_{(r,m)}$ of $K$ for some $m\leq M$ and $r = R_m$. By Corollary~\ref{cor:uniform} the subgroup $G_{(r,m)}$ is incoherent and hence so is $K$.
\end{proof}
The above results lend credence to the following:
\begin{conj}\label{conj:positive incoherent}
Let $G$ be a finitely generated infinite Coxeter group of dimension~$\leq 2$. If $\chi(G)>0$ then $G$ is incoherent.
\end{conj}
\subsection{A polynomial degree finite cover of $X_{(r,m)}$ with good walls}\label{finite cover r}
The goal of this subsection is to prove the following:
\begin{prop}\label{prop:finite cover}
There is a homomorphism $\beta:G_{(r,m)}\to Q^{k(r)}$ such that the compression $\overline X_{(r,m)}$ of the induced cover $\widehat X_{(r,m)}\to X_{(r,m)}$ has the following property: each wall is $2$-sided, embedded and has no self-osculation.
Moreover $|\overline X^0_{(r,m)}|$ is at most $|Q|^{k(r)}\leq |Q| r^C$ for some constant $C$.
\end{prop}
The proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:finite cover} appears at the end of this subsection.
A \emph{partition} of a set $S$ is a map $p:S\to \{1,2,3,4\}$. The partition $p$ \emph{separates}
$a,b,c,d$ if $p(a), p(b), p(c), p(d)$ are distinct.
\begin{lem}\label{partitions}Let $S$ have cardinality $ r\geq 4$. There is a collection of $k =k(r)=\bigg\lceil \frac{\log{r\choose4}}{\log\frac {32} {29}} \bigg\rceil$ partitions such that each quadruple of distinct elements of $S$ is separated by this collection.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} Let $M$ denote the set of all partitions of $S$, and note that $|M| = 4^r$.
Let $\mathcal M_k$ denote the collection of cardinality $k$ subsets of $M$ and note that $|\mathcal M_k|={4^r \choose k}$.
Let $\mathcal N_k\subset \mathcal M_k$ be the subcollection consisting of sets of $k$ partitions that do not separate some quadruple. We want to show that $|\mathcal N_k|<|\mathcal M_k|$. Let $\mathcal N_k(\{a,b,c,d\})\subset\mathcal M_k$ be the subcollection of sets that fail to separate $a,b,c,d\in S$. We have
\[
|\mathcal N_k|\leq {r\choose 4}|\mathcal N_k(\{a,b,c,d\})|
\]
since there are ${r\choose 4}$ quadruples $\{a,b,c,d\}$ of distinct elements of $S$.
There are $4! \cdot 4^{r-4} = 6\cdot 4^{r-3}$ partitions that separate $a,b,c,d$. Thus there are $4^r - 6\cdot 4^{r-3} = \frac{29}{32}\cdot 4^{r}$ partitions that do not separate $a,b,c,d$. We thus have
\[|\mathcal N_k(\{a,b,c,d\})|= {\frac{29}{32}\cdot 4^{r}\choose k}.\]
Observe that we have the following:
\[
{\frac{29}{32}\cdot 4^{r}\choose k} < \Big(\frac{29}{32}\Big)^k{4^r\choose k}.
\]
Since $k\geq \log{r\choose 4}/\log\frac{32}{29}$ we have
\begin{align*}
{r\choose 4}\Big(\frac{29}{32}\Big)^k\leq1.\end{align*}
Altogether we have
\[
|\mathcal N_k|\leq {r\choose 4}|\mathcal N_k(\{a,b,c,d\})
<{r\choose4}\Big(\frac{29}{32}\Big)^k{4^r\choose k}\leq {4^r\choose k}=|\mathcal M_k(P)|.
\qedhere\]
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:finite cover}]
There is a finite quotient $\psi:G_{(4,m)}\twoheadrightarrow Q$ such that $\ker \psi$ is torsion-free, and the compression $\overline X_{(4,m)}$ of the induced cover $\widehat X_{(4,m)}\to X_{(4,m)}$ has the following property: each wall in $\overline X_{(4,m)}$ is $2$-sided, embedded and has no self-osculation. This follows from the separability of wall stabilizers \cite{HaglundWiseCoxeter}.
Let $S=\{1,\dots,r\}$. Each partition $p:S\to \{1,2,3,4\}$ defines a homomorphism $\phi_p:G_{(r,m)} \to G_{(4,m)}$ induced by $\phi_p(a_i)=a_{p(i)}.$ Let $$\beta=(\psi\circ\phi_{p_1},\dots, \psi\circ\phi_{p_k}) : G_{(r,m)}\to Q^{k(r)}$$
where $(p_1,\dots p_k)$ is a collection of partitions from Lemma~\ref{partitions}. For each partition $p$ there is a map $\overline{\phi}_p:X_{(r,m)}\to X_{(4,m)}$ induced by $\phi_p$. We will show that a ``wall pathology'' in $X_{(r,m)}$ would project to a wall pathology in $X_{(4,m)}$ for a suitable $p$ and hence there are no such wall pathologies. Suppose there is a wall $W$ in $X_{(r,m)}$ that self-intersects within a $2$-cell $C$. Let $a_i, a_j$ be the generators of $G_{(r,m)}$ labelling $C$. Let $p\in\{p_1,\dots, p_k\}$ separate $i$ and $j$. The image $\overline \phi_p(W)$ is a wall in $X_{(4,m)}$ that self-intersect, which is a contradiction. Thus walls in $X_{(r,m)}$ embed. We now show that no wall in $X_{(r,m)}$ has a self-osculation. Suppose $W$ in $X_{(r,m)}$ that has a self-osculation at some $0$-cell $x$, let $C,C'$ be $2$-cells adjacent to $x$ such that $W$ is dual to edges in both $C, C'$. Let $a_i, a_j, a_{i'}, a_{j'}$ be generators that label the boundaries of $C, C'$. If $i,j,i',j'$ are distinct consider a partition $p$ that separates them. The image $\overline \phi_p(W)$ is a wall in $X_{(4,m)}$ that has a self-osculation, which is a contradiction. Otherwise $C$ and $C'$ share one label and we let $p$ be a partition that separates the three distinct generators, and the argument is similar. Hence walls do not have self-osculations in $X_{(r,m)}$. Finally, the fact that all walls of $X_{(r,m)}$ are $2$-sided follows by considering a single $\overline\phi_p:X_{(r,m)}\to X_{(4,m)}$.
Finally, to see that the degree is bounded by a polynomial we observe that:
\[
|Q|^k \leq |Q|^{\frac{\log{r\choose 4}}{\log\frac {32} {29}}+1} = |Q| {r\choose 4}^{\frac{\log|Q|}{\log\frac {32} {29}}}\leq |Q|r^{\frac{4\log|Q|}{\log\frac {32} {29}}}. \qedhere
\]
\end{proof}
\subsection{Probability of empty or disconnected link is exponentially small}\label{probability}
Let $\Gamma$ be a complete graph on $r$ vertices.
Consider assigning a vertex to be ascending [respectively descending] with probability $\frac12$.
Furthermore, for an edge whose vertices are ascending [descending] assign it to be ascending [descending]
with probability $\frac{1}{2^{m-2}}$. Let $\Gamma_{\uparrow}$ [$\Gamma_{\downarrow}$] be the subgraph of $\Gamma$ consisting of all ascending [descending] vertices and edges.
Observe that $\Gamma_{\uparrow}$ is assured to be nonempty and connected if
\begin{enumerate}
\item there exists an ascending vertex in $\Gamma$, and
\item for each pair of distinct vertices $v_1, v_2\in\Gamma_{\uparrow}$ there is a third vertex $v_3\in\Gamma_{\uparrow}$ such that $(v_1, v_3)$ and $(v_2, v_3)$ are edges in $\Gamma_{\uparrow}$.
\end{enumerate}
Let $P_i$ denote the probability that condition~$(i)$ fails to be satisfied. If $\Gamma$ \emph{fails} to be nonempty and connected then at least one of $(1),(2)$ is not satisfied. Consequently
\[
\pr{\Gamma_{\uparrow}\text{ fails}}\leq P_1+P_2.\]
Similarly,
\[
\pr{\Gamma_{\downarrow}\text{ fails}}\leq P_1+P_2.\]
\begin{lem} $P_1 = \frac 1 {2^{r}}.$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}Since no wall in $\mathcal W$ has a self-osculation, each wall is adjacent to $x$ at at most one vertex of $\Gamma$. Each of the $r$ vertices in $\Gamma$ is descending with probability $\frac 1 2 $ and these probabilities are independent. Hence $P_1=\frac 1{2^r}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}
$P_2\leq {r\choose 2} \frac 1 4 (1-\frac 1{2^{2m-3}})^{r-2}.
$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
For distinct vertices $v_1,v_2\in\Gamma_{\uparrow}$ the edge $(v_1,v_2)$ is ascending with probability $\frac 1 {2^{m-2}}$.
For a triple $v_1,v_2,v_3$ of distinct vertices in $\Gamma$, where $v_1, v_2$ are ascending the probability that $v_3$ is also ascending and both edges $(v_1, v_3), (v_2, v_3)$ are ascending is
\[\frac1 {2^{2m-3}}.\]
For $v_1,v_2\in\Gamma_{\uparrow}$ the probability that there is no connecting $v_3$ as above equals
\[(1-\frac 1{2^{2m-3}})^{r-2}.\]
Thus \[
P_2\leq\sum_{v_1, v_2\in \Gamma}\frac 1 4 (1-\frac 1{2^{2m-3}})^{r-2} = {r\choose 2} \frac 1 4 (1-\frac 1{2^{2m-3}})^{r-2}.\qedhere
\]
\end{proof}
Consider orientations on the set of all walls $\mathcal W$ of $\overline X_{(r,m)}$. We orient each wall randomly, assigning probability $\frac 12$ to each of two orientations for each wall $W\in \mathcal W$.
For each $0$-cell $x\in \overline X_{(r,m)}$ the graph $\link(x)$ is complete on $r$ vertices. No self-osculations in $\overline X_{(r,m)}$ provide that walls adjacent to two distinct edges and/or vertices of $\link(x)$ are distinct. Thus every vertex of $\link(x)$ is ascending [descending] with probability $\frac 12$ and each edge of $\link(x)$ whose edges are ascending [descending] is ascending [descending] with probability $\frac{1}{2^{m-2}}$. We thus have the following:
\begin{cor}\label{cor:probability}
$\pr{\link_{\uparrow}(x)\text{ or }\link_{\downarrow}(x)\text{ fails}}$ is exponentially decreasing. Specifically
\begin{align*}
\pr{\link_{\uparrow}(x)\text{ or }\link_{\downarrow}(x)\text{ fails}}
&\leq\; \pr{\link_{\uparrow}(x)\text{ fails}} + \pr{\link_{\downarrow}(x)\text{ fails}}\\
&\leq\; 2(P_1+P_2)\leq \frac 1{2^{r-1}}+{r\choose 2} \frac 1 2 (1-\frac 1{2^{2m-3}})^{r-2}.
\end{align*}
\end{cor}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:uniform case}}
\begin{proof
Proposition~\ref{prop:finite cover} provides a finite cover $\widehat X_{(r,m)}$ whose degree is bounded by a polynomial in $r$, and such that the compression $\overline X=\overline X_{(r,m)}$
has the property that its walls are two-sided and have no self-osculations.
To apply Theorem~\ref{bestvina-brady thm} we need to find an orientation on $\mathcal W$ such that $\link_{\uparrow}(x)$ and $\link_{\downarrow}(x)$ are nonempty and connected for each $x\in\overline X^{0}$.
We orient each $W\in\mathcal W$ randomly assigning probability $\frac 12$ to each of two orientations of $W$. We need to prove that
\[
\pr{\link_{\uparrow}(x) \text{ or }\link_{\downarrow}(x) \text{ fails for some }x\in \overline X^{0}}<1.
\]
Since the left hand side is bounded above by
\begin{align*}
\sum_{x\in \overline X^{0}} \pr{\link_{\uparrow}(x) \text{ or }\link_{\downarrow}(x) \text{ fails}}
\end{align*}
it suffices to prove that for each $x\in \overline X^{0}$
\begin{align}\tag{$*$}\label{ineq}
\pr{\link_{\uparrow}(x) \text{ or }\link_{\downarrow}(x) \text{ fails}}<\frac 1 {|\overline X^{0}|}.
\end{align}
As $|\overline X^{0}|$ is bounded by a polynomial in $r$, but by Corollary~\ref{cor:probability} the probability on the left decreases exponentially in $r$, hence the inequality~\eqref{ineq} holds for all $r$ greater than some $R(m)$.
After finding an orientation on $\mathcal W$ such that $\link_{\uparrow}(x)$ and $\link_{\downarrow}(x)$ are nonempty and connected, we consider the lawful subcomplex $Y\subset \overline X$ and the map $\overline X \xrightarrow{\phi} S^1$ induced by the orientation whose restriction to $Y$ lifts to a Morse function $\widetilde Y\to \ensuremath{\field{R}}$. By Theorem~\ref{bestvina-brady thm} the group $\ker(\pi_1Y\to \ensuremath{\field{Z}})$ is finitely generated. Consequently, its quotient $N=\ker(\pi_1\overline X\to \ensuremath{\field{Z}})$ is also finitely generated.
To see that $\pi_1\overline X\to \ensuremath{\field{Z}}$ is nontrivial, observe that $X^1$ has a positively directed closed path since $\overline X$ is compact and each $\link_{\uparrow}(x)$ is nonempty.
\end{proof}
\section{Local quasiconvexity and Coxeter groups with nonpositive sectional curvature}
\subsection{Negative sectional curvature and local quasiconvexity}
\begin{defn}[Sectional curvature]
An \emph{angled $2$-complex} is a $2$-complex $Y$
with an \emph{angle} $\measuredangle (e)\in \mathbb R$
assigned to each edge $e$ of $\link(y)$ for each $y\in Y^{0}$. As edges in $\link(y)$ correspond to corners of $2$-cells at $y$, we regard the angles as assigned to corners of $2$-cells at $y$.
The curvature at a $2$-cell $f$ of $Y$ is given by
\[\kappa(f) = 2\pi - \sum_{e\in \text{Corners}(f)} \deficiency(e)\]
where $\deficiency(e) = \pi - \measuredangle(e)$.
The \emph{curvature} of $Y$ at $y$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{curvatureformula}
\kappa(y) = 2\pi - \pi\chi(\link(y)) +\sum_{e\in\text{Corners$(y)$ }}\measuredangle (e) = (2-v)\pi +\sum \deficiency(e).
\end{equation}
A \emph{section} of a combinatorial $2$-complex $Y$
at the $0$-cell $y$ is a combinatorial immersion $(S,s)\to (Y,y)$.
A section is \emph{regular} if $\link(s)$ is finite, connected, nonempty, with no valence $\leq 1$ vertex.
Pulling back the angles at a corner at $y$ to corners at $s$, the \emph{curvature} of a section $(S,s)\to (Y,y)$ is defined to be $\kappa(s)$.
We say that $Y$ has \emph{sectional curvature} $\leq\alpha$ at $y$
if all regular sections of $Y$ at $y$ have curvature $\leq\alpha$.
Finally, $Y$ has \emph{sectional curvature} $\leq \alpha$ if each $2$-cell has curvature $\leq \alpha$ and $Y$ has sectional curvature $\leq \alpha$ at each $0$-cell.\end{defn}
\begin{defn}[Quasiconvexity]
Let $G$ be a group with a finite generating set $S$ and the Cayley graph $\Gamma(G,S)$. A subgroup $H$ of $G$ is \emph{quasiconvex}
if there is a constant $L\geq 0$ such that
every geodesic in $\Gamma(G,S)$
between two elements of $H$ lies in the $L$-neighborhood of $H$. When $G$ is hyperbolic, the quasiconvexity of $H$ is independent of the generating set of $G$ \cite{Short91}.
A group $G$ is \emph{locally quasiconvex}
if every finitely generated subgroup of $G$ is quasiconvex.
Every quasiconvex subgroup of a hyperbolic group
is finitely presented \cite{Short91}. Thus a locally quasiconvex
hyperbolic group is coherent.
\end{defn}
The main result about negative sectional curvature is as follows \cite{WiseSectional02, MartinezPedrozaWiseSectional}
\begin{thm}\label{thm:negative sectional}
If $Y$ is a compact, piecewise Euclidean nonpositively curved $2$-complex whose associated angles have negative sectional curvature, then $\pi_1Y$ is locally quasiconvex.
\end{thm}
The following is known about locally quasiconvex Coxeter groups:
\begin{prop}\label{prop:locally quasiconvex}For each $r\geq 3$ there exists $N(r)$
such that for all $m>N(r)$ the group $G_{(r,m)}$
is locally quasiconvex.\end{prop}
We briefly review two ways of proving Proposition~\ref{prop:locally quasiconvex}. One method to prove Proposition \ref{prop:locally quasiconvex} is from \cite{McCammondWiseCoherence} or \cite[Thm IV]{Schupp03} and shows that a Coxeter group $G_{(r,m)}$ is locally quasiconvex whenever $m\geq \frac 3 2 r$.
\begin{com}check
\end{com}
We shall focus on reviewing conditions ensuring negative sectional curvature so that Theorem~\ref{thm:negative sectional} provides Proposition~\ref{prop:locally quasiconvex}.
As in Section~\ref{sec:euler}, let $X$ be the standard $2$-complex of the presentation of $G=G_{(r,m)}$ and let $\overline X$ be the compression of a finite cover of $X$ corresponding to a finite index torsion-free subgroup of $G$. If each 3-generator Coxeter subgroup of $G$ is infinite (i.e. $\frac{1}{m_{ij}}+\frac{1}{m_{jk}} +\frac{1}{m_{ki}} \leq 1$) then there is a natural metric of nonpositive curvature on $\overline X$ induced by metrizing each $2$-cell as a regular Euclidean polygon. The previous condition is equivalent to the nonpositive curvature of all sections $(S,s)\to (\overline X,x)$ where $S$ is a disc. Thus we say that $G$ has \emph{nonpositive planar sectional curvature}, when all 3-generator Coxeter subgroups are infinite.
Finally, if all exponents satisfy $m_{ij}>\frac{r(r-1)}{2(r-2)}$ then $\overline X$ has negative sectional curvature \cite[Thm~13.3]{WiseSectional02}.
\subsection{Nonpositive sectional curvature}
Let $X$ denote the standard $2$-complex of the presentation of Coxeter group $G$ and let $\overline X$ denote the compression of a cover of $X$ corresponding to a finite index torsion-free subgroup.
There is a surprisingly elegant characterization of nonpositive sectional curvature of $\overline X$ in terms of the Euler characteristic of Coxeter subgroups of $G$.
\begin{thm}
The following are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\overline X$ has nonpositive sectional curvature
\item $\chi(H)\leq 0$ for each nontrivial Coxeter subgroup $H\subset G$ whose associated graph $\Upsilon_H$ is connected but not a tree.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}$(1)\Rightarrow (2)$: Suppose $\chi(H)> 0$ and $\Upsilon_H$ is connected and not a tree.
We can assume that $\Upsilon_H$ has no valence $1$ vertex, since the Coxeter subgroup $H'$ associated to the subgraph $\Upsilon _{H'}$ of $\Upsilon_H$ obtained by removing a valence $1$ vertex satisfies $\chi(H')\geq \chi(H)$ by Equation~\eqref{eulerformula}.
A section at a $0$-cell of $\overline X$ whose vertices correspond to the generators of $H$ has curvature $2\pi\chi(H)$ by comparing Equations~\eqref{eulerformula} and \eqref{curvatureformula}.
$(2)\Rightarrow (1)$:
Let $x$ be a $0$-cell of $\overline X$. It suffices to consider sections corresponding to the full subgraphs of $\link(x)$. Indeed $\deficiency(e)> 0$ for each edge $e$ since each angle is $< \pi$ and thus adding edges increases $\kappa$ by the second part of Equation~\eqref{curvatureformula}.
Any regular section corresponding to a full subgraph is isomorphic to the associated graph $\Upsilon_H$ of a Coxeter subgroup $H$ and the curvature of the section equals $2\pi\chi(H)$. Thus if the section has positive curvature then $\chi(H)>0$.
\end{proof}
\begin{prob}\label{prob:positive incoherent}
Let $G$ have a nonpositive planar sectional curvature with $\chi(G)>0$ and $\Upsilon_G$ connected and not a tree.
Is it true that $\pi_1G$ is incoherent?
\end{prob}
We hope that the methods used here can be applied to an
appropriate finite index subgroup.
An affirmative answer to Problem~\ref{prob:positive incoherent} would be a step in proving the following:\
\begin{conj}
If $G$ has nonpositive planar sectional curvature then
the following are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $G$ is coherent
\item$\overline X$ has nonpositive sectional curvature.
\end{enumerate}
\end{conj}
\bibliographystyle{alpha}
|
\section{Introduction}
A networked control system (NCS) is a system that is controlled over a communication network. Recently, NCSs have attracted considerable research interests due to emerging distributed control applications. For example, the NCSs are broadly used in applications including traffic monitoring, networked autonomous mobile agents, chemical plants, sensor networks and distributed software systems in cloud
computing architectures. Due to the communication network between subsystems, communication delays or communication losses may occur, resulting in performance degradation or even instability.
Therefore, it has led various researches to analyze the NCSs with communication delays \cite{cheng1988distributed}, \cite{walsh2002stability}, \cite{yook2002trading}, \cite{yang2006h}, \cite{nilsson1998stochastic}, \cite{xiao2000control}, \cite{lee2015performance}, \cite{lee2014acc}. In particular, \cite{xiao2000control} constructed a switched system structure for the analysis of NCS by including actuators, sensors, and the plant as a single system.
In this paper, we study distributed networked control systems (DNCS) with a large number of spatially distributed linear subsystems (or agents). For such large-scale systems, our primary goal is to analyze system stability when \textit{random communication delays} exist between subsystems.
Typically, such delays have been modeled as \textit{Markov jump linear system} (MJLS) \cite{xiao2000control}, \cite{shi1999control}, \cite{seiler2001analysis}, \cite{zhang2005new}, \cite{shi2009output}, \cite{liu2009stabilization}, in which switching sequence is governed by a Markovian process. Therefore, stability analysis in the existence of communication delays has been performed in the MJLS framework \cite{feng1992stochastic}, \cite{do2006discrete}, \cite{zhang2009stability}. However, these results are applicable to the systems with a small number of switching modes \cite{xiao2000control}, \cite{liu2009stabilization}, \cite{shi2009output}, \cite{seiler2001analysis}, whereas the large-scale DNCSs in which we are particularly interested give rise to an extremely large number of switching modes.
For such systems, previous approaches for stability analysis are computationally intractable.
Although \cite{lee2015async} investigated the massively parallel asynchronous numerical algorithm by employing the switched linear system framework that circumvents the scalability issue with respect to the large number of the switching modes, it is developed for the independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.) switching.
In addition, we are also interested in systems where the transition probabilities are inaccurately known as in \cite{zhang2009stability}, \cite{zhang2010necessary}, \cite{karan2006transition} because, in practice, it is difficult to accurately estimate the Markov transition probability matrix that models the random communication delays.
This paper provides two key contributions to analyze the stability of the large-scale DNCS with random communication delays. Firstly, we guarantee the mean square stability of such systems by introducing a reduced mode model. We prove that the mean square stability for individual switched system implies a necessary and sufficient stability condition for the entire DNCS. This drastically reduces the number of modes necessary for analysis. Secondly, we present a new method to estimate the bound for uncertain Markov transition probability matrix for which stability is guaranteed. These results enable us to analyze large-scale systems in a computationally tractable manner.
Rest of this paper is organized as follows. We introduce the problem for the large-scale DNCS in section 2.
Section 3 presents the switched system framework for the stability analysis with communication delays. In Section 4, we propose the reduced mode model to efficiently analyze stability. Section 5 quantifies the stability region and bound for uncertain Markov transition probability matrix. This is followed by the application of the proposed method to an example system in section 6, and we conclude the paper with section 7.
\textbf{Notation:} The set of real number is denoted by $\mathbb{R}$. The symbols $\parallel\cdot\parallel$ and $\parallel\cdot\parallel_{\infty}$ stand for the Euclidean and infinity norm, respectively. Moreover, the symbol $\#(\cdot)$ denotes the cardinality -- the total number of elements in the given set. Finally, the symbols $\text{tr}(\cdot)$, $\rho(\cdot)$, $\otimes$, and $\textnormal{diag}(\cdot)$ represent trace operator, spectral radius, Kronecker product, and block \textnormal{diag}onal matrix operator, respectively.
\section{Problem Formulation}
\subsection{Distributed networked control system with no delays}
Consider a DNCS with discrete-time dynamics, given by:
\begin{equation}
x_i(k+1) = \sum_{j\in\mathcal{N}_i}A_{ij}x_j(k),\quad i=1,2,\hdots,N,\label{eqn:1}
\end{equation}
where $k$ is a discrete-time index, $N$ is the total number of agents (subsystems), $x_i\in \mathbb{R}^n$ is a state for the $i^{th}$ agent, $\mathcal{N}_i$ is a set of neighbors for $x_i$ including the agent $x_i$ itself, and $A_{ij}\in\mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$ is a time-invariant system matrix that represents the linear interconnections between agents. Note that we have $A_{ij} = 0$ if there is no interconnection between the agents $i$ and $j$.
To represent the entire systems dynamics, we define the state $x(k)\in\mathbb{R}^{Nn\times Nn}$ as $x(k)\triangleq [x_1(k)^{\top},x_2(k)^{\top},\hdots,x_N(k)^{\top}]^{\top}$.
Then, the system dynamics of the DNCS is given as
\begin{align}
x(k+1) = \mathcal{A}x(k),\label{eqn:2}
\end{align}
where the matrix $\mathcal{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{Nn\times Nn}$ is defined by
\begin{align*}
&\quad \mathcal{A} \triangleq \begin{bmatrix}
A_{11} & A_{12} & A_{13} & \cdots & A_{1N}\\
A_{21} & A_{22} & A_{23} & \cdots & A_{2N}\\
A_{31} & A_{32} & A_{33} & \cdots & A_{3N}\\
\vdots& \vdots & \vdots & \ddots &\vdots\\
A_{N1} & A_{N2} & A_{N3} & \cdots & A_{NN}
\end{bmatrix}, \\
A_{ij} &=
\begin{dcases}
0, \text{ if no connection between the agents $i$ and $j$,}\\
A_{ij}, \text{ otherwise.}
\end{dcases}
\end{align*}
For the discrete-time system in \eqref{eqn:2}, it is well known that the system is stable if and only if the condition $\rho(\mathcal{A}) < 1$ is satisfied. We assume that the system in \eqref{eqn:2}, which is the case without communication delays is stable throughout the paper. Then, we address the problem to analyze the stability in the presence of \textit{random communication delays}. We remind the reader that $N$ is very large.
\subsection{DNCS with communication delays}
Often, network communication between agents encounter time delays or packet losses while sending and receiving data as described in Fig. \ref{fig.1}. We denote the symbol $\tau$ as communication delays and assume that $\tau$ has a discrete value bounded by $0\leq \tau \leq \tau_d < \infty$, where $\tau_d$ is a finite-valued maximum delay. Then, the dynamics for the agent $i$ with communication delays can be expressed as:
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{schematic_of_DNCS2.jpg}
\caption{The schematic of the large-scale distributed networked control system. The communication delay is represented by $k^{*}\triangleq k - \tau$, where $\tau$ is the random communication delay term.}\label{fig.1}
\end{figure}
\begin{align}
&x_i(k+1) = \sum_{j\in\mathcal{N}_i}A_{ij}x_j(k^*),\quad i=1,2,\hdots,N,\label{eqn:3}
\end{align}
where $k^* \triangleq k-\tau$.
Note that we have no communication delays when $i=j$ since there is no communication in this case.
The communication delay, modeled as a stochastic process, is represented by the term $k^*$. To analyze the stability of the DNCS, we define an augmented state $X(k)$ as $X(k) \triangleq [x(k)^{\top},\:x(k-1)^{\top},\:\cdots,\: x(k-\tau_d)^{\top}]^{\top}\in\mathbb{R}^{Nnq \times Nnq}$, where $q\triangleq \tau_d+1$. Then, the dynamics for the entire system is given by
\begin{align}
X(k+1) = W(k)X(k),\label{eqn:4}
\end{align}
where
$W(k) \triangleq \begin{bmatrix}
\tilde{A}_1(k) & \tilde{A}_2(k) & \cdots & \tilde{A}_{q-1}(k) & \tilde{A}_q(k)\\
I & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0\\
0 & I & \cdots & 0 & 0\\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots &\vdots \\
0 & 0 & \cdots & I & 0\\
\end{bmatrix}\in \mathbb{R}^{Nnq\times Nnq},$\\
the matrix $I$ denotes an identity matrix with proper dimensions, and the time-varying matrices $\tilde{A}_j(k)\in\mathbb{R}^{Nn\times Nn}$, $j=1,2,\hdots,q$, model the randomness in the communication delays between neighboring agents.
\section{Switched System Approach}
Without loss of generality, the dynamics of the large-scale DNCS with communication delays in \eqref{eqn:4} can be transformed into a switched system framework as :
\begin{equation}
x(k+1) = W_{\sigma(k)}x(k), \quad \sigma(k)\in\{1,2,\cdots,m\},\label{eqn:5}
\end{equation}
where the set of matrices $\{W_{\sigma(k)}\}_{\sigma(k)=1}^{m}$ represents all possible communications delays between interconnected agents, $\{\sigma(k)\}$ is the switching sequence, and $m$ is the total number of switching modes.
When the switching sequence $\{\sigma(k)\}$ is stochastic, \eqref{eqn:5} is referred to as a stochastic switched linear system or a stochastic jump linear system \cite{lee2015performance}.
For the stochastic switched linear system, the switching sequence $\{\sigma(k)\}$ is governed by the mode-occupation switching probability $\pi(k)=[\pi_1(k),\pi_2(k),\hdots,$ $\pi_m(k)]$, where $\pi_i$ is a fraction number, representing the modal probability such that $ \sum_{i=1}^{m}\pi_i=1$ and $0 \leq \pi_i \leq 1$, $\forall i$.
Typically, randomness in communication delays or communication losses has been modeled by the MJLS framework \cite{shi1999control}, \cite{seiler2001analysis}, \cite{zhang2005new}, \cite{shi2009output}, \cite{liu2009stabilization}.
Therefore, we make the following assumption in our analysis.
\begin{itemize}
\item Assumption: Consider the stochastic jump linear system \eqref{eqn:5} with the switching probability $\pi(k)=[\pi_1(k),\pi_2(k),\hdots,\pi_m(k)]$. Then, $\pi(k)$ is updated by the Markovian process given by $\pi(k+1) = \pi(k)P$, where $P\in\mathbb{R}^{m\times m}$ is the Markov transition probability matrix.
\end{itemize}
Since the MJLS is a family of the stochastic switched linear system, various stability notions can be defined \cite{feng1992stochastic}. In this paper, we will consider the mean square stability condition, defined below.
\begin{definition}(Definition 1.1 in \cite{fang2002stabilization})
The MJLS is said to be mean square stable if for any initial condition $x_0$ and arbitrary initial probability distribution $\pi(0)$, $\displaystyle\lim_{k\rightarrow\infty}\mathbb{E}\left[||x(k,x_0)||^2\right]=0$.
\end{definition}
Note that for the large-scale DNCS, the total number of switching modes $m$ depends on the size $q$ and $N$.
Since the communication delays take place independently while receiving and sending the data for each agent, $m$ is calculated by counting all possible scenarios to distribute every matrices $A_{ij}\in\mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$ for $i\neq j$ in the block matrix $\mathcal{A}\in\mathbb{R}^{Nn\times Nn}$ given in \eqref{eqn:2}, into each $\tilde{A}_j(k)\in\mathbb{R}^{Nn\times Nn}$, $j=1,2,\hdots,q,$ given in \eqref{eqn:4}, which results in $m=q^{N(N-1)}$. For large $N$, $m$ is quite large, which makes current analysis tools for the MJLS computationally intractable.
Before we further proceed, we introduce the following proposition that was developed for the stability analysis of the MJLS.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:4.1}(Theorem 1 in \cite{costa1993stability})
The MJLS with the Markov transition probability matrix $P$ is mean square stable if and only if
\begin{eqnarray}
\rho\left(\left(P^{\top}\otimes I\right)\textnormal{diag}(W_j\otimes W_j) \right) < 1,\label{eqn:10}
\end{eqnarray}
where $I$ is an identity matrix with a proper dimension,
{\small
\begin{align*}
\textnormal{diag}(W_j\otimes W_j) \triangleq \begin{bmatrix}
(W_1\otimes W_1) & 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0\\
0 & (W_2\otimes W_2) & 0 & \cdots & 0\\
\vdots & & \ddots &&\vdots\\
0 & 0 & & (W_{m\text{-}1}\otimes W_{m\text{-}1}) & 0\\
0 & 0 & \hdots & 0 & (W_m\otimes W_m)
\end{bmatrix},
\end{align*}}
and $m$ is the total number of the switching modes.
\end{proposition}
For the given set of matrices $\{W_{\sigma(k)}\}_{\sigma(k)=1}^{m}$ and the transition probability matrix $P$, one can always compute the spectral radius given in \eqref{eqn:10}, and hence guarantee the system stability.
Unfortunately, this condition is not applicable to large-scale DNCSs since $N$ is very high and results in extremely large $m$.
For example, even if $q=2$ and $N=100$, we have $m = 2^{100\times 99}$. It is not possible to compute the spectral radius for such problems. To circumvent this scalability issue, we present next a new analysis approach for such large-scale DNCSs.
\section{Stability with Reduced Mode Dynamics}
In this section, we define a new augmented state to reduce the mode numbers as follows:
\begin{align*}
\hat{x}_i(k) \triangleq [\tilde{x}_i(k)^{\top}, \: \tilde{x}_i(k-1)^{\top}, \: \cdots, \: \tilde{x}_i(k-\tau_d)^{\top}]^{\top}\in\mathbb{R}^{\hat{n}_in q},
\end{align*}
where $\tilde{x}_i(k) \triangleq [x_i(k)^{\top}, \:\: x_j(k)^{\top}]^{\top}\in\mathbb{R}^{\hat{n}_in}$, $\hat{n}_i\triangleq\#(\mathcal{N}_i)$, and $x_j(k)\in\mathbb{R}^n$ with $j\in\mathcal{N}_i$ denotes all states that are neighbor to $x_i(k)\in\mathbb{R}^n$.
Then, we can construct a switched linear system framework similarly to \eqref{eqn:5} as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
\hat{x}_i(k+1) = \hat{W}^i_{\sigma_i(k)}\hat{x}_i(k),\quad \sigma_i(k)\in\{1,2,\hdots,m_i\},\label{eqn:12}
\end{eqnarray}
where
$\hat{W}^i_{\sigma_i(k)} \triangleq \begin{bmatrix}
\hat{A}_{1}(k) & \hat{A}_{2}(k) & \cdots & \hat{A}_{q-1}(k) & \hat{A}_{q}(k)\\
I & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0\\
0 & I & \cdots & 0 & 0\\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots & \vdots\\
0 & 0 & \cdots & I & 0
\end{bmatrix} \in \mathbb{R}^{\hat{n}_in q\times \hat{n}_in q}$\\
with the time-varying matrix $\hat{A}_j(k)\in\mathbb{R}^{\hat{n}_in\times \hat{n}_in}$, $j=1,2,\hdots,q$. In this case, the total number of the switching modes for \eqref{eqn:12} is given by
$m_i=q^{\hat{n}_i(\hat{n}_i-1)}$.
By implementing the reduce mode model given in \eqref{eqn:12}, we will provide a computationally efficient tool for the stability analysis of the original DNCS in the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:4.1}
Consider the large-scale DNCS \eqref{eqn:5} with Markovian communication delays accompanied by the transition probability matrix $P$. The necessary and sufficient condition for the mean square stability of this system is then given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\rho\Big(({P^i}^{\top}\otimes I)\text{\textnormal{diag}}(\hat{W}^i_j\otimes \hat{W}^i_j)\Big) < 1, \quad\forall i=1,2,\hdots,N,\label{eqn:13}
\end{eqnarray}
where $P^i\in\mathbb{R}^{m_i\times m_i}$ is the transition probability matrix for the reduced mode MJLS given in \eqref{eqn:12}, $I$ is an identity matrix with a proper dimension, $N$ is the total number of the agents in the system, $m_i=q^{\hat{n}_i(\hat{n}_i-1)}$ is the total mode numbers for the reduce mode MJLS, and
{\footnotesize
\begin{align*}
\textnormal{diag}(\hat{W}^i_j\otimes \hat{W}^i_j) \triangleq \begin{bmatrix}
(\hat{W}^i_1\otimes \hat{W}^i_1) & 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0\\
0 & (\hat{W}^i_2\otimes \hat{W}^i_2) & 0 & \cdots & 0\\
\vdots & & \ddots &&\vdots\\
0 & 0 & & (\hat{W}^i_{m_i\text{-}1}\otimes \hat{W}^i_{m_i\text{-}1}) & 0\\
0 & 0 & \hdots & 0 & (\hat{W}^i_{m_i}\otimes \hat{W}^i_{m_i})
\end{bmatrix}.
\end{align*}}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let the matrix $Q^{i}(k)$ be of the form $Q^{i}(k)\triangleq \mathbb{E}[\hat{x}_i(k)\hat{x}_i(k)^{\top}]$. Then, $Q^i(k)$ is alternatively obtained by the following equation: $\displaystyle Q^{i}(k) = \sum_{s=1}^{m_i}Q_{s}^{i}(k)$, where $\displaystyle Q_{s}^{i}(k) \triangleq \mathbb{E}\left[\hat{x}_i(k){\hat{x}_i(k)}^{\top}|\sigma_i(k)=s\right]\pi_s^{i}(k)$, and $\pi_{s}^{i}(k) \triangleq \mathbf{Pr}\big(\sigma_i(k)=s\big)$. Then, $Q_s^i(k)$ satisfies
{\small
\begin{align*}
Q_s^i(k) &= \sum_{r=1}^{m_i}\mathbb{E}[\hat{x}_i(k){\hat{x}_i(k)}^{\top}\mid \sigma_i(k) =s,\sigma_i(k-1) =r]\\[-0.1in]
&\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\mathbf{Pr}(\sigma_i(k-1) = r\mid \sigma_i(k) =s)\pi_s^i(k)\\
&= \sum_{r=1}^{m_i}\mathbb{E}[\hat{x}_i(k){\hat{x}_i(k)}^{\top}\mid \sigma_i(k) =s,\: \sigma_i(k-1) =r]\\[-0.1in]
&\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\underbrace{\mathbf{Pr}(\sigma_i(k) = s\mid \sigma_i(k-1) =r)}_{\triangleq p^{i}_{rs}}\pi_r^i(k-1)\\
&= \sum_{r=1}^{m_i}{p}_{rs}^{i}
\:\mathbb{E}[\hat{x}_i(k){\hat{x}_i(k)}^{\top}\mid \sigma_i(k) =s, \sigma_i(k-1) =r]\pi_r^i(k-1)\\
&= \sum_{r=1}^{m_i}{p}_{rs}^{i}\:\mathbb{E}[\hat{W}^i_{\sigma_i(k-1)}\hat{x}_i(k-1){\hat{x}_i(k-1)}^{\top}\hat{W}^{i^{\top}}_{\sigma_i(k-1)} \mid \sigma_i(k-1) =r]\pi_r^i(k-1)\\
&= \sum_{r=1}^{m_i}{p}_{rs}^{i}\:\hat{W}^i_{r}\underbrace{\mathbb{E}[\hat{x}_i(k-1){\hat{x}_i(k-1)}^{\top}\mid \sigma_i(k-1) =r]\pi_r^i(k-1)}_{=Q_r^i(k-1)}\hat{W}^{i^{\top}}_{r}\\
&= \sum_{r=1}^{m_i}{p}_{rs}^{i}\:\hat{W}^i_{r}Q_r^i(k-1){\hat{W}^{i^{\top}}_{r}}.
\end{align*}}
In the second equality of above equation, $p_{rs}^i$ denotes the mode transition probability from $r$ to $s$ in the Markov transition probability matrix $P^i$.
Taking the vectorization in above equation results in
\begin{align*}
\text{vec}\left(Q_s^i(k)\right) &= \text{vec}\left(\sum_{r=1}^{m_i}{p}_{rs}^{i}\:\hat{W}^i_{r}Q_r^i(k-1){\hat{W}^{i^{\top}}_{r}}\right)\\
&= \sum_{r=1}^{m_i}{p}_{rs}^{i}\text{vec}\left(\hat{W}^i_{r}Q_r^i(k-1){\hat{W}^{i^{\top}}_{r}}\right)\\
&= \sum_{r=1}^{m_i}{p}_{rs}^{i}(\hat{W}_r^i\otimes \hat{W}_r^i)\text{vec}(Q_r^i(k-1)).
\end{align*}
In the last equality, we used the property that $\text{vec}(ABC) = (C^{\top}\otimes A)\text{vec}(B)$. We define a new variable $y_{(\cdot)}^i(k) \triangleq \text{vec}\left(Q_{(\cdot)}^i(k)\right)$, which leads to
\begin{align*}
&y_s^i(k) = \sum_{r=1}^{m_i}{p}_{rs}^{i}(\hat{W}^i_{r}\otimes \hat{W}^i_{r})y_r^i(k-1).
\end{align*}
By stacking $y_{(\cdot)}^i(k)$ from $1$ up to $m_i$, with a new definition for the augmented state $\hat{y}^i(k) \triangleq [{y_1^i}(k)^{\top}\:{y_2^i}(k)^{\top}\:\hdots\:{y_{m_i}^i}(k)^{\top}]^{\top}$, we have the following recursion equation:
{\footnotesize
\begin{align*}
\hat{y}^i(k)&=\underbrace{\begin{bmatrix}
{p}_{11}^i(\hat{W}^i_{1}\otimes \hat{W}^i_{1}) & {p}_{21}^i(\hat{W}^i_{2}\otimes \hat{W}^i_{2}) & \hdots & {p}_{m_i1}^i(\hat{W}^i_{m_i}\otimes \hat{W}^i_{m_i})\\
{p}_{12}^i(\hat{W}^i_{1}\otimes \hat{W}^i_{1}) & {p}_{22}^i(\hat{W}^i_{2}\otimes \hat{W}^i_{2}) & \hdots & {p}_{m_i2}^i(\hat{W}^i_{m_i}\otimes \hat{W}^i_{m_i})\\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots\\
{p}_{1m_i}^i(\hat{W}^i_{1}\otimes \hat{W}^i_{1}) & {p}_{2m_i}^i(\hat{W}^i_{2}\otimes \hat{W}^i_{2}) & \hdots & {p}_{m_im_i}^i(\hat{W}^i_{m_i}\otimes \hat{W}^i_{m_i})\\
\end{bmatrix}}_{
=({P^i}^{\top}\otimes I)\text{\textnormal{diag}}(\hat{W}^i_j\otimes \hat{W}^i_j)}
\underbrace{
\begin{bmatrix}
y_1^i(k-1)\\
y_2^i(k-1)\\
\vdots\\
y_{m_i}^i(k-1)
\end{bmatrix}}_{=\hat{y}^i(k-1)}.
\end{align*}}
From the above equation, it is clear that $\rho\Big(({P^i}^{\top}\otimes I)\text{\textnormal{diag}}(\hat{W}^i_j\otimes \hat{W}^i_j)\Big) < 1$ implies $\displaystyle \lim_{k\rightarrow\infty}\hat{y}^i(k)=0$, and hence this leads to $\displaystyle\lim_{k\rightarrow\infty}Q^i(k) = 0 \Longleftrightarrow \lim_{k\rightarrow\infty}\text{tr}\left(Q^i(k)\right)=0 \Longleftrightarrow \lim_{k\rightarrow\infty}\mathbb{E}\left[||\hat{x}_i(k)||^2\right]=0$, which is the sufficient mean square stability condition for $\hat{x}_i(k)$. On the other hand, if we have $\rho\Big(({P^i}^{\top}\otimes I)\text{\textnormal{diag}}(\hat{W}^i_j\otimes \hat{W}^i_j)\Big) > 1$, then $\hat{y}^i(k)$ will diverge, resulting in necessity for the mean square stability of $\hat{x}_i(k)$.
Hence, the spectral radius being less than one is the necessary and sufficient mean square stability condition for the state $\hat{x}_i(k)$.
Further, we have $\displaystyle\lim_{k\rightarrow \infty}\mathbb{E}\left[||\hat{x}_i(k)||^2\right]=0,\: \forall i=1,2,\hdots,N \Longleftrightarrow \lim_{k\rightarrow \infty}\mathbb{E}\left[||x(k)||^2\right]=0,$ where $x(k)$ is the state for the DNCS defined in \eqref{eqn:5}.
This concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
Theorem \ref{theorem:4.1} provides an efficient way to analyze the stability for the large-scale DNCSs.
The key idea stems from the hypothesis that the stability of each subsystem by partitioning the original system will provide the stability of the entire system.
Without any relaxation or conservatism, theorem \ref{theorem:4.1} proved the necessary and sufficient condition for stability, which is equivalent to \eqref{eqn:10} for the mean square stability of the entire system. Compared to the total number of modes of full state model \eqref{eqn:5}, which is $q^{N(N-1)}$, the reduced mode model \eqref{eqn:12} has total $\sum_{i=1}^{N}q^{\hat{n}_i(\hat{n}_i-1)}$ modes. Consequently, the growth of mode numbers in full state model is exponential with respect to $N^2$, whereas that in reduced mode model is \textbf{linear} with regard to $N$. Therefore, theorem \ref{theorem:4.1} is computationally more efficient.
\end{remark}
\section{Stability Region and Stability Bound for Uncertain Markov Transition Probability Matrix}
The Markov transition probability matrix can be obtained from data of communication delays. However, the statistics itself contains uncertainties due to the uncertainty in the data. Thus, one cannot estimate the exact transition probability matrix in practice. In this subsection, we assume that the Markov transition probability matrix has uncertainty, i.e. $P^i = \bar{P}^i + \Delta P^i$, where $\bar{P}^i$ is the nominal value and $\Delta P^i$ is the uncertainty in the Markov transition probability matrix for $i^{th}$ subsystem. Due to the variation in $\Delta P^i$, the system stability may change and hence we want to estimate the bound for $\Delta P^i$ to guarantee the system stability.
Here we assume that $\Delta P^i$ has the following structure:
\begin{align}
\Delta P^i \triangleq \begin{bmatrix}
\Delta p^i_{11} & \Delta p^i_{12} & \cdots & \Delta p^i_{1m_i}\\
\Delta p^i_{21} & \Delta p^i_{22} & \cdots & \Delta p^i_{2m_i}\\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots\\
\Delta p^i_{m_i1} & \Delta p^i_{m_i2} & \cdots & \Delta p^i_{m_im_i}
\end{bmatrix}, \in\mathbb{R}^{m_i\times m_i}\nonumber\\
\text{ s.t. }\sum_{s=1}^{m_i}\Delta p^i_{rs} = 0, \forall r=1,2,\hdots,m_i\label{eqn:11-1}
\end{align}
Since we have a constraint such that the row sum has to be zero for $\Delta P^i$ in above equation, we aim to find the feasible maximum bound for each row, $\varepsilon^{i}_{r}$, satisfying the inequality $|\Delta p^i_{rs}| \leq \varepsilon^i_{r},\:\forall r=1,2,\hdots,m_i$, to guarantee the system stability. Then, $\varepsilon^i_r$, $\forall r=1,2,\hdots,m_i$ can be obtained by the following two steps.\\
\noindent\textbf{Step 1: Solve via Linear Programming (LP)}\\[-0.2in]
\begin{eqnarray}
&\text{maximize}&\mathbf{1}^{\top}z\qquad\text{(for upper bound)}\label{eqn:14}\\
\Big(\text{or} &\text{minimize}&\mathbf{1}^{\top}z\qquad\text{(for lower bound)}\Big)\nonumber\\
&\text{subject to}&\mathbb{A}|z| < b_s,\quad \forall s=1,2,\hdots, m_i\label{eqn:15}\\
&& lb_s \leq z_s \leq ub_s, \forall s=1,2,\hdots, m_i\label{eqn:16}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{align*}
&z_s \triangleq [\Delta p^i_{1s},\: \Delta p^i_{2s},\:\cdots,\: \Delta p^i_{m_is}]^{\top},&\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\\
&z \triangleq [z_1^{\top},\: z_2^{\top},\: \cdots, \: z_{m_i}^{\top}]^{\top},
\end{align*}
\begin{align*}
&\mathbb{A} \triangleq \Big[
\alpha_1,\:\alpha_2,\:\cdots,\:\alpha_{m_i}
\Big],\text{ with }
\alpha_j \triangleq \parallel \hat{W}^i_j \otimes \hat{W}^i_j \parallel_{\infty},\: j=1,2,\hdots,m_i,\\
&b_s \triangleq 1 -\sum_{r=1}^{m_i}\alpha_r\bar{p}_{rs}^{i},\\
&lb_s \triangleq [-\bar{p}^i_{1s}, \: -\bar{p}^i_{2s}, \: \cdots \: -\bar{p}^i_{m_is}]^{\top},\\
&ub_s \triangleq [1-\bar{p}^i_{1s}, \: 1-\bar{p}^i_{2s}, \: \cdots \: 1-\bar{p}^i_{m_is}]^{\top}.
\end{align*}
The inequality constraint \eqref{eqn:15} in the LP problem guarantees the mean square stability according to the Lemma \ref{lemma:4.1} and Theorem \ref{theorem:4.2}. The term $lb_s$ and $ub_s$ in \eqref{eqn:16} are the lower and upper bounds for $z_s$, according to $0 \leq p^i_{rs}=(\bar{p}^i_{rs} + \Delta p^i_{rs}) \leq 1$.\\
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.75]{stability_region.jpg}
\caption{The geometry of the Stability Region Analysis for the uncertain Markov transition probability matrix when $m_i=2$. Each region is described in the figure.}\label{fig:2}
\end{figure}
\noindent\textbf{Step 2: Obtain Feasible Solution with Hyperplane Constraint}\\
We can compute the feasible maximum bound for $\Delta p^i_{rs}$ as follows.
\begin{align}
&\varepsilon_r^i = \min\left(\min(|\varepsilon_{r,\text{lb}}^{i}|),\min(\:|\varepsilon_{r,\text{ub}}^i|)\right),\quad r = 1,2,\hdots,m_i.\label{eqn:17}
\end{align}
where
$\varepsilon_{r,\text{lb}}^i \triangleq [(\Delta p^i_{r1})^{\star}_{\text{lb}},\:(\Delta p^i_{r2})^{\star}_{\text{lb}},\:\hdots,\: (\Delta p^i_{rm})^{\star}_{\text{lb}}]^{\top}$, $\varepsilon_{r,\text{ub}}^i \triangleq [(\Delta p^i_{r1})^{\star}_{\text{ub}},\:(\Delta p^i_{r2})^{\star}_{\text{ub}},$ $\hdots,\: (\Delta p^i_{rm})^{\star}_{\text{ub}}]^{\top}$, and $(\Delta p_{rs}^i)^{\star}_{lb}$, $(\Delta p_{rs}^i)^{\star}_{ub}$ denote optimal lower and upper bounds for $\Delta p_{rs}^i$, obtained from the LP, respectively.
Since upper or lower bounds are solved by maximizing or minimizing the objective function, $(\Delta p^i_{rs})^{\star}$ has different values for upper and lower bounds.
Fig.\ref{fig:2} shows the geometry of stability region analysis for uncertain transition probability matrix. The region $S_1$ stands for the bounds that come from $-\bar{p}^i_{rs} \leq \Delta p^i_{rs} \leq 1-\bar{p}^i_{rs}$. $S_2$ can be obtained from inequality constraint \eqref{eqn:15}. The region $S_3$ denotes the solution from the LP and $S$ is the feasible maximum upper and lower bounds with a stability guarantee.
Note that $\Delta P^i$ satisfies $\sum_{s=1}^{m_i}\Delta p^i_{rs} = 0, \: \forall r=1,2,\hdots,m_i$ and hence feasible solutions should lie on the hyperplane, satisfying $\Delta p^i_{r1} + \Delta p^i_{r2} + \hdots + \Delta p^i_{rm_i} = 0$, $\forall r=1,2,\hdots,m_i$. Therefore, we can compute the feasible maximum bound from \eqref{eqn:17} for each row $r$.
Now we prove that inequality constraint \eqref{eqn:15} guarantees the system stability.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:4.1}
Consider a block matrix $X$ defined by
\begin{align*}
X = \begin{bmatrix}
X_{11} & X_{12} & \cdots & X_{1m}\\
X_{21} & X_{22} & \cdots & X_{2m}\\
\vdots & \vdots& \vdots & \vdots\\
X_{m1} & X_{m2} & \cdots & X_{mm}
\end{bmatrix},
\end{align*}
where matrix $X_{ij}\in\mathbb{R}^{n\times n}$.
Then, we have $\rho\left(X\right) < 1$, if $\displaystyle\sum_{j=1}^{m}\left\lVert X_{ij}\right\rVert_{\infty} < 1,\:\forall i=1,2,\hdots,m.$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
For the block matrix $X$ given above, the following inequality condition $\parallel X \parallel_{\infty} \leq \max_i \sum_{j=1}^{m}$ $\parallel X_{ij} \parallel_{\infty}$ holds. Also, it is well known that $\rho(X) \leq$ $\parallel X \parallel_p$ for any choice of $p$.
Therefore, we conclude that $\sum_{j=1}^{m}\parallel X_{ij} \parallel_{\infty} < 1,\:\forall i=1,2,\hdots,m \Rightarrow \rho(X) \leq \parallel X \parallel_{\infty} < 1$.
\end{proof}
\vspace{0.1in}
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem:4.2}
Consider the MJLS \eqref{eqn:5} for the large-scale DNCS with communication delays. Then, \eqref{eqn:5} is mean square stable if
\begin{eqnarray*}
&\displaystyle\sum_{r=1}^{m_i}\alpha_r |\Delta p^i_{rs}| < \beta_s,\quad\begin{matrix}
\forall s=1,2,\hdots,m_i,\\
\forall i=1,2,\hdots,N
\end{matrix}
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\alpha_r = \parallel \hat{W}^i_r \otimes \hat{W}^i_r\parallel_{\infty}$ and $\displaystyle \beta_s = 1 - \sum_{r=1}^{m_i}\bar{p}^i_{rs}\parallel \hat{W}^i_r \otimes \hat{W}^i_r\parallel_{\infty}$,
is satisfied.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
If the Markov transition probability matrix for the system in \eqref{eqn:12} has the uncertainty denoted by $P^i = \bar{P}^i + \Delta P^i$, then
the term $\rho\Big(({P^i}^{\top}\otimes I)$ $\text{\textnormal{diag}}(\hat{W}_{j}^{i}\otimes \hat{W}_{j}^{i})\Big)$ in \eqref{eqn:13} can be expressed as
\begin{align}
&\rho\Big(({P^i}^{\top}\otimes I)\text{\textnormal{diag}}(\hat{W}_{j}^{i}\otimes \hat{W}_{j}^{i})\Big)\nonumber\\
= &\rho\Big(\big({(\bar{P}^i + \Delta P^i)}^{\top}\otimes I\big)\text{\textnormal{diag}}(\hat{W}_{j}^{i}\otimes \hat{W}_{j}^{i})\Big)\nonumber\\
= &\rho\bigg(\Big(({\bar{P^i}}^{\top}\otimes I) + (\Delta {P^i}^{\top}\otimes I)\Big)\text{\textnormal{diag}}(\hat{W}_{j}^{i}\otimes \hat{W}_{j}^{i})\bigg)\nonumber\\
= &\rho\bigg(({\bar{P^i}}^{\top}\otimes I)\text{\textnormal{diag}}(\hat{W}_{j}^{i}\otimes \hat{W}_{j}^{i}) + (\Delta {P^i}^{\top}\otimes I)\text{\textnormal{diag}}(\hat{W}_{j}^{i}\otimes \hat{W}_{j}^{i})\bigg)\nonumber\\
\leq &\parallel({\bar{P^i}}^{\top}\otimes I)\text{\textnormal{diag}}(\hat{W}_{j}^{i}\otimes \hat{W}_{j}^{i}) + (\Delta {P^i}^{\top}\otimes I)\text{\textnormal{diag}}(\hat{W}_{j}^{i}\otimes \hat{W}_{j}^{i})\parallel_{\infty}\nonumber\\
\leq &\parallel({\bar{P^i}}^{\top}\otimes I)\text{\textnormal{diag}}(\hat{W}_{j}^{i}\otimes \hat{W}_{j}^{i})\parallel_{\infty} + \parallel(\Delta {P^i}^{\top}\otimes I)\text{\textnormal{diag}}(\hat{W}_{j}^{i}\otimes \hat{W}_{j}^{i})\parallel_{\infty},\label{eqn:15-1}
\end{align}
In the first inequality, we used the fact that $\rho(\cdot) \leq \parallel\cdot\parallel_{\infty}$ and the sub-multiplicative property was applied in the last inequality. The block matrix structure for each term of the last inequality is alternatively expressed as follows:
{\small
\begin{align*}
&\left\lVert(\bar{P^i}^{\top}\otimes I)\text{\textnormal{diag}}(\hat{W}_{j}^{i}\otimes \hat{W}_{j}^{i})\right\rVert_{\infty}\\
&=\left\lVert
\underbrace{\begin{bmatrix}
\bar{p}^i_{11}I & \bar{p}^i_{21}I & \cdots & \bar{p}^i_{m_i1}I\\
\bar{p}^i_{12}I & \bar{p}^i_{22}I & \cdots & \bar{p}^i_{m_i2}I\\
\vdots & \vdots & \cdots & \vdots \\
\bar{p}^i_{1m_i}I & \bar{p}^i_{2m_i}I & \cdots & \bar{p}^i_{m_im_i}I\\
\end{bmatrix}}_{=(\bar{P^i}^{\top}\otimes I)}
\underbrace{\begin{bmatrix}
\hat{W}^i_1\otimes \hat{W}^i_1 & 0 & \cdots & 0\\
0 & \hat{W}^i_2\otimes \hat{W}^i_2 & & 0\\
\vdots & & \ddots & \\
0 & 0 & &\hat{W}^i_{m_i}\otimes \hat{W}^i_{m_i}
\end{bmatrix}}_{=\text{\textnormal{diag}}(\hat{W}_{j}^{i}\otimes \hat{W}_{j}^{i})}
\right\rVert_{\infty}\\
\\
&=\left\lVert \begin{matrix}
\gamma_1\bar{p}^i_{11} & \gamma_2\bar{p}^i_{21} & \cdots & \gamma_{m_i}\bar{p}^i_{m_i1}\\
\gamma_1\bar{p}^i_{12} & \gamma_2\bar{p}^i_{22} & \cdots & \gamma_{m_i}\bar{p}^i_{m_i2}\\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots\\
\gamma_1\bar{p}^i_{1m_i} & \gamma_2\bar{p}^i_{2m_i} & \cdots & \gamma_{m_i}\bar{p}^i_{m_im_i}\\
\end{matrix} \right\rVert_{\infty},
\end{align*}}
where $\gamma_j = (\hat{W}_j^i \otimes \hat{W}_j^i)$, $j=1,2,\hdots,m_i$, and similarly,
\begin{align*}
&\left\lVert(\Delta {P^i}^{\top}\otimes I)\text{\textnormal{diag}}(\hat{W}_{j}^{i}\otimes \hat{W}_{j}^{i})\right\rVert_{\infty} =
\left\lVert \begin{matrix}
\gamma_1\Delta p^i_{11} & \gamma_2\Delta p^i_{21} & \cdots & \gamma_{m_i}\Delta p^i_{m_i1}\\
\gamma_1\Delta p^i_{12} & \gamma_2\Delta p^i_{22} & \cdots & \gamma_{m_i}\Delta p^i_{m_i2}\\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots\\
\gamma_1\Delta p^i_{1m_i} & \gamma_2\Delta p^i_{2m_i} & \cdots & \gamma_{m_i}\Delta p^i_{m_im_i}\\
\end{matrix} \right\rVert_{\infty}.
\end{align*}
By applying the result in Lemma \ref{lemma:4.1} into \eqref{eqn:15-1}, it is guaranteed that $\rho\Big(({P^i}^{\top}\otimes I)\text{\textnormal{diag}}(\hat{W}_{j}^{i}\otimes \hat{W}_{j}^{i})\Big) < 1$,
if the following condition
\begin{align*}
\displaystyle\sum_{r=1}^{m_i}\alpha_r|\Delta p^i_{rs}| + \sum_{r=1}^{m_i}\alpha_r\bar{p}^i_{rs} < 1,\quad \begin{matrix}
\forall s=1,2,\hdots,m_i,\\
\end{matrix}
\end{align*}
where $\alpha_r\triangleq ||\hat{W}_r^i\otimes \hat{W}_r^i||_{\infty}$, is satisfied.
Therefore, \eqref{eqn:5} is mean square stable by Theorem \ref{theorem:4.1} if it is guaranteed that
\begin{align*}
\displaystyle\sum_{r=1}^{m_i}\alpha_r|\Delta p^i_{rs}| < \beta_s,\quad \begin{matrix}
\forall s=1,2,\hdots,m_i,\\
\forall i=1,2,\hdots,N,
\end{matrix}
\end{align*}
where $\beta_s \triangleq 1 - \sum_{r=1}^{m_i}\alpha_r\bar{p}^i_{rs}$.
\end{proof}
\section{Examples}
\subsection{Stability Analysis for $N$ Inverted Pendulum System}
Consider $N$ inverted pendulum system, which are physically interconnected by linear springs \cite{wang2008event}. The discrete-time subsystem dynamics with communication delays is modeled by
\begin{align*}
&\quad\qquad x_i(k+1) = A_ix_i(k) +
B_iu_i(k) +
\sum_{\substack{j\in\mathcal{N}_i \\ j\neq i}}
H_{ij}x_j(k^*),
\end{align*}
with subsystem matrices:
\begin{align*}
&A_i = \begin{bmatrix}
1 & \Delta t\\
\left(\frac{g}{l} \textbf{--} \frac{a_iK}{\check{m}l^2}\right)\Delta t & 1
\end{bmatrix},\:
B_i =
\begin{bmatrix}
0\\
\frac{\Delta t}{\check{m}l^2}
\end{bmatrix},\:
H_{ij} =
\begin{bmatrix}
0 & 0\\
\frac{h_{ij}K}{\check{m}l^2}\Delta t & 0
\end{bmatrix},
\end{align*}
where $k$ denotes the discrete-time index and $x_i = (x_{i_1},\:x_{i_2})^{\top}\in\mathbb{R}^2$.
The communication delay is described by the term $k^* = k - \tau$ with the discrete value $\tau$. The meaning of each parameter and its value are given in Table \ref{table_inverted_pendulum}.
For this system, we consider a state feedback law given by $u_i(k) = K_ix_i(k)$, where $K_i\triangleq \displaystyle\begin{bmatrix}
a_iK-\frac{\check{m}l^2}{4}(8+\frac{4g}{l}), & -3\check{m}l^2\end{bmatrix}$
for the control input $u_i(k^*)$.
\begin{table}[h]
\begin{center}
\caption{Nomenclature for $N$ Inverted Pendulum Dynamics}\label{table_inverted_pendulum}
{\small
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}\hline
Definition & Symbol & Value\\\hline
\begin{tabular}{@{}c@{}}Number of Springs connected to \\$i^{th}$ Pendulum\end{tabular} & $a_i$ &
\begin{tabular}{@{}c@{}}1, \:$i=1,N$\\\:2, otherwise\end{tabular}\\
Interaction term with neighbours & $h_{ij}$ & 0.04,\:\:$\forall j\in\mathcal{N}_i$\\
Gravity & $g$ & 9.8\\
Spring Constant & $K$ & 5\\
Pendulum Mass & $\check{m}$ & 0.5\\
Pendulum Length & $l$ & 1\\
Sampling time for discrete-time dynamics & $\Delta t$ & 0.1
\\\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{center}
\end{table}
We can rewrite the closed-loop dynamics for this $N$ inverted pendulum system as follows:
\begin{align*}
x_i(k+1) = \sum_{j\in\mathcal{N}_i}A_{ij}x_j(k^*), \text{ where }A_{ij} \triangleq \begin{dcases}
A_{i}+B_iK_i, \text{ if } j=i,\\H_{ij}, \text{ otherwise}.
\end{dcases}
\end{align*}
If there is no communication delay (i.e., $k^*=k$), the dynamics for the entire DNCS is given by \eqref{eqn:4}, where the matrix $\mathcal{A}$ of which structure is also given in \eqref{eqn:4} satisfies $\rho(\mathcal{A}) = 0.9525 < 1$. Therefore, we can assure that the $N$ inverted pendulum system with no communication delays is stable.
Next, we test the stability for this system with random communication delays.
We assume that the communication delay $\tau$ is bounded by $0 \leq \tau \leq \tau_{d} = 1$, i.e., $k^* = \{k,\:k-1\}$, $\forall i=1,2,\hdots,N$. Also, we assume that every communication delays are governed by the Markov process with an initial probability distribution $\pi(0)$ and the Markov transition probability matrix $P$ given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\pi(0) = [1,\:0], \quad
P = \begin{bmatrix}
0.5 & 0.5\\
0.3 & 0.7
\end{bmatrix}.\label{eqn:18}
\end{eqnarray}
For this system, even with $N=100$, the full state model \eqref{eqn:5} has total $q^{N(N-1)} = 2^{100\times 99}$ modes.
Since this inverted pendulum system has only interconnected terms with neighbors when $j= i\pm 1$, otherwise we have $A_{ij}=0$.
Based on this fact and by excluding these cases (i.e., where $A_{ij}=0$), we can further reduce the mode number to $q^{2(N-1)}=2^{2\times 99}$, which is still large. It is computationally intractable to deal with $2^{2\times 99}$ numbers of matrices to analyze system stability. However, in contrast, the reduce mode model \eqref{eqn:12} has total $\sum_{i=1}^{N}q^{\hat{n}_i(\hat{n}_i-1)} = 98\times(2^{3\times 2}) + 2\times (2^{2\times 1}) = 6280$ modes.
Furthermore, the proposed method fully maximizes its own advantage to reduce the mode numbers by considering the symmetric property between agents, which cannot be implemented on the full state model.
Since subsystems are symmetric for $\forall i=2,3,\hdots,N-1$ and for $\forall i=1,N$, we only need to check the stability condition for these two cases. Taking into account the interconnection link (i.e., the case where $A_{ij}\neq 0$), the symmetric structure results in total $2^{2\times (3-1)}+2^{2\times (2-1)} = 20$ modes, which is drastically reduced when compared to $2^{2\times 99}$ numbers of modes.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.85]{N_inv_pend_trajectory2.pdf}
\caption{State trajectories of each agent for the $N$ inverted pendulum system with the Markovian communication delays. Initial conditions are randomly generated for all states $x_i$, $\forall i=1,2,\hdots,100$.}\label{fig:3}
\end{figure}
The spectral radius for $i=2,3,\hdots,99$ is computed by $\rho\Big( ({P^i}^{\top}\otimes I)$ $\text{\textnormal{diag}}(\hat{W}_j^i\otimes \hat{W}_j^i)\Big)=0.8864 < 1$, where $P^i=(P\otimes P\otimes P\otimes P)$. For $i=1$ and $N$, we have $\rho\Big( ({P^i}^{\top}\otimes I)\text{\textnormal{diag}}(\hat{W}_j^i\otimes \hat{W}_j^i)\Big)=0.8682 < 1$, where $P^i = (P\otimes P)$. Consequently, the $N$ inverted pendulum system is stable in the mean square sense according to Theorem \ref{theorem:4.1}. The state trajectory plot also supports this result, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:3}.
For this simulation, initial condition was assumed to be uniformly distributed in $[-1,1]$, and was generated by manipulating the MATLAB$^{{\tiny \mycirc{R}}}$ command \texttt{rand(...)} that generates uniformly distributed pseudo random numbers between $0$ and $1$.
\subsection{Stability Bound for Uncertain Markov transition probability matrix}
In order to solve the LP to estimate the bound for uncertain Markov transition probability matrix, we used MATLAB$^{{\tiny \mycirc{R}}}$ with CVX\cite{grant2008cvx}, a Matlab-based software for convex optimization.
\subsubsection{Scalar system}
Although the proposed method to estimate maximum bound for uncertain Markov transition probability matrix is developed for the large-scale DNCS, it is also applicable to general MJLS. We adopted a following example, introduced in \cite{karan2006transition} to compare the performance of maximum bound estimation.
Consider the following MJLS that has two modes with scalar discrete-time dynamics.
\begin{align*}
&x(k+1) = a_{\sigma(k)}x(k),\quad\sigma(k)\in\{1,2\},\\
&a_1 = 1/2,\quad a_2=5/4.
\end{align*}
The Markov transition probability matrix has the form of $P=\bar{P}+\Delta P$, where
\begin{align*}
\bar{P} = \begin{bmatrix}
0.4 & 0.6\\
0.5 & 0.5
\end{bmatrix},\:
\Delta{P} = \begin{bmatrix}
\Delta p_{11} & \Delta p_{12}\\
\Delta p_{21} & \Delta p_{22}
\end{bmatrix},\:\sum_{j=1}^{2}\Delta p_{ij} = 0,\quad\forall i=1,2.
\end{align*}
After applying the two steps proposed in this paper, we obtained the maximum bound $\varepsilon_1=0.4,\:\varepsilon_2=0.02$ whereas \cite{karan2006transition} gives the value as $\varepsilon_1=\varepsilon_2=0.021$, which is more conservative. For stability check, among all possible scenarios with $|\Delta p_{rs}| \leq \varepsilon_r$, $\forall r,s=1,2$, we have $\max\rho\Big((P^{\top}\otimes I)\textnormal{diag}(a_j\otimes a_j)\Big) = 1$, which is a marginal value for stability. Hence, the system is stable with obtained maximum bound that is more relaxed than \cite{karan2006transition}.
\subsubsection{The $N$ Inverted Pendulum System}
Recalling the $N$ inverted pendulum system, we assume that the Markov transition probability matrix $P^i $ has uncertainty $\Delta P^i$ that satisfies $\Delta P^i = P^i - \bar{P}^i$. The nominal matrix $\bar{P}^i$ is given by $\bar{P}^i = (\bar{P}\otimes \bar{P})$ for $i=1,N$ and $\bar{P}^i = (\bar{P}\otimes \bar{P}\otimes \bar{P} \otimes \bar{P})$ for $i=2,3,\hdots,N-1$, where $\bar{P}$ has a same structure with the transition probability matrix given in \eqref{eqn:18}.
The feasible solution with the LP provides the maximum bound $\varepsilon^i = [\varepsilon_1^i,\:\varepsilon_2^i,\:\hdots\varepsilon_{16}^i]=10^{-3}\times [4.9,\:0.9,\:0.9,$ $\:0.8,\:0.9,\:0.8,\:0.8,\:6.9,\:0.9,\:0.8,\:0.8,$ $\:6.9,\:0.8,\:6.9,\:6.9,\:13.5]$, $\forall i=2,3,\hdots,N-1$.
For $i=1$ and $N$, we obtained $\varepsilon^i = [\varepsilon_1^i,\:\varepsilon_2^i,\:\varepsilon_3^i,\:\varepsilon_4^i] = [0.01,\:0.01,\:0.01,\:0.03]$.
Therefore, we can assure that $N$ inverted pendulum system is mean square stable if the uncertainty in the Markov transition probability matrix is within the bound such that $|\Delta p^i_{rs}| \leq \varepsilon^i_r$, $\forall r$ and $\forall i=1,2,\hdots,N$.
\section{Conclusions}
This paper studied the mean square stability of the large-scale DNCSs. Since the number of modes in such systems is extremely large, current stability analysis tools are intractable. To avoid this scalability problem, we provided a new analysis framework, which incorporates a reduced mode model that scales linearly with respect to the number of subsystems. Additionally, we presented a new method to estimate bounds for uncertain Markov transition probability matrix for which system stability is guaranteed. We showed that this method is less conservative than those proposed in the literature. The validity of the proposed methods were verified using an example based on interconnected inverted pendulums.
\section{Acknowledgements}
This research was supported by the National Science Foundation award \#1349100, with Dr. Almadena Y. Chtchelkanova as the program manager.\\
\footnotesize
\bibliographystyle{unsrt
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:introduction}
In the recent years, a large number of surveys have obtained multi-wavelength
imaging and spectroscopy for large samples of galaxies at different redshifts. Thanks to these surveys,
we have learned a lot about how galaxies form and evolve.
However, many physical processes, such as the regulation of star formation by gas accretion,
remain poorly understood.
The accretion of cold gas in the form of gas-rich
dwarf galaxies can bring gas to galaxies and fuel star formation
\citep[]{Sancisi-08,Silk-Mamon-12,Conselice-13}.
The presence of extra-planar gas \citep[]{Chaves-Irwin-01, Boomsma-05, Wakker-07},
lopsided H{\sc{I}} morphologies \citep[]{Sancisi-76, Shang-98, Thilker-07}
and gas tails \citep[]{Kregel-Sancisi-01, Oosterloo-10} may directly be
linked to ongoing cold gas accretion through mergers.
While some portion of the gas in galaxies is being acquired through the
accretion of dwarf galaxies, the inferred gas accretion rate is not sufficient
to sustain star formation in galaxies ($\sim1.0\,{\rm M_{\odot}}\,{\rm yr}^{-1}$)
\citep{Binney-Dehnen-Bertelli-00}. As a consequence, a large fraction
of gas should be accreted directly from the Intergalactic Medium (IGM).
Low-density galaxies lose their gas through tidal interactions or ram pressure
stripping, which may finally quench their star formation
\citep[]{Moore-96, Calcaneo-Roldan-00, Mayer-06, McCarthy-08, Kapferer-08, Chang-Maccio-Kang-13}.
This process happens more frequently in dense environments.
The Bluedisk project, which was carried out with the Westerbork Synthesis Radio Telescope(WSRT), was designed to
map the H{\sc{I}} distribution is a sample of 25 unusually H{\sc I}-rich galaxies.
Galaxies with large H{\sc{I}} excess
usually have bluer and younger outer disks \citep{Wang-11}, and more metal-poor ionized gas \citep{Moran-12}.
A sample of 25 control galaxies was also observed for
comparison. These galaxies were closely matched in stellar mass, stellar surface mass density,
redshift and inclination, but were not unusually rich in H{\sc I}. The goal of the project was to
determine whether there was any evidence for recent gas accretion onto unusually H{\sc I}-rich galaxies by
investigating and contrasting the H{\sc{I}} structure and environment of the gas-rich galaxies
with that of the control sample.
In the first paper of Bluedisk project, \citet[Paper I]{Wang-13} concentrated
on the H{\sc{I}} size and morphology of the 42 targeted galaxies. They found
that H{\sc{I}}-rich galaxies do not differ from normal
galaxies with respect to H{\sc{I}} asymmetry indices or optical/H{\sc{I}}
disk position angle differences. This is inconsistent with a scenario in which
the excess gas was brought in by mergers. In this paper, we extend
this work to the galaxies in the neighbourhood of the targeted galaxies that lie within
the WSRT data cubes.
Our paper is organized as follows. In section 2, we briefly recap our observations, describe the
data and the data processing that we carried out for our environmental study, including
our procedure for accurate
primary beam correction.
In section 3, we discuss our identification of galaxy neighbours via cross-matching with the
spectroscopic catalogue of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) and how we
build a uniform catalog of these sources.
In section 4, we examine the H{\sc{I}} mass-size relation and the correlation between
H{\sc I} and optical properties such as mass and stellar surface density for both the
neighbours around H{\sc I}-rich and control galaxies.
In section 5, we discuss the morphology and properties of galaxies which are found to be outliers from
the standard scaling relations.
We summarize our results in section 6.
Throughout this paper, all the distance-dependent
parameters are computed with $\Omega=0.3$,
$\Lambda=0.7$ and $H_0= 70$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$.
\section{Data}
\subsection{Observation and data reduction}
The 50 targets were observed with the WSRT in 2011 and 2012. Target selection and
data reduction are described in detail in Paper I. For detailed information
on the targeted galaxies we refer the reader to table 1 in Paper I.
The H{\sc{I}} raw data cubes were reduced using a
pipeline produced by \cite{Serra-12}, based on the Miriad
reduction package \citep{Sault-Teuben-Wright-95}.
The data used in this paper are H{\sc{I}} cubes built with
a Robust weighting of 0.4, which provides a suitable compromise between
sensitivity and resolution. The pixel size is
4 arcsec and the velocity width for each channel is about
$13$ km s$^{-1}$. The velocity resolution is $26$ km s$^{-1}$ (FWHM).
The typical beam has Half-Power Beamwidth (HPBW) of $16\times16/$sin($\delta$) arcsec$^2$,
where $\delta$ is the declination.
Every cube has 148 channels, covers a redshift
range of $\Delta z=0.006$, and has a size of 1 degree on each side, which
corresponds to a physical scale of 1.7 Mpc at a redshift $z=0.025$.
We point out that 92.0\% of the galaxies are within a systematic velocity
difference of 500 km s$^{-1}$ from the primary galaxies. However, some
untargeted galaxies are not in the immediate neighborhood of the primary
galaxies: in the radial direction, the farthest galaxy is 884 km s$^{-1}$ away.
Hence we are investigating a relatively large-scale environmental effect
rather than the direct interaction between galaxy pairs in this paper.
We generate two-dimensional H{\sc{I}} total-intensity maps
(moment-0 maps) for each cube. First we identify 3-d regions of emission by a smoothing and clipping
algorithm. We then add all the
detected H{\sc{I}} emission from all velocity channels.
We also estimate errors for all non-zero pixels in the H{\sc{I}} intensity map.
\subsection{Physical properties of galaxies}
The physical quantities required for this work are a spectrophotometric estimate of the stellar
mass $M_{*}$, stellar surface mass density $\mu_{*}$, and the NUV-r colour.
Stellar masses were taken from the MPA-JHU database (http://www.mpa-garching.mpg.de/SDSS/DR7/),
and are derived from Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) photometry. The stellar surface mass density is defined as
$\mu_{*}=M_{*}\,(2\pi R_{\rm 50,z}^2)^{-1} $, where
$R_{\rm 50,z}$ is the physical radius which contains half the
total light in the z-band. The NUV magnitude is available from the Galaxy Evolution Explorer (GALEX)
pipeline and the NUV-r colors are corrected for Galactic extinction.
The H{\sc{I}} size $R1$, $R_{\rm 50,H{I}}$,
$R_{\rm 90,H{I}}$ and $rs$, and H{\sc{I}} mass $M_{\rm H{I}}$,
are measured using our H{\sc{I}} data cubes. $R1$ is
the radius where radially averaged face-on H{\sc{I}} column density
reaches $1\,{\rm M_{\odot}}\,{\rm pc}^{-2}$(corresponding to $1.25\times10^{20}$atoms cm$^{-2}$).
$R_{\rm 50,H{\sc I}}$ and $R_{\rm 90,H{\sc I}}$ are the radii enclosing 50 and 90 percent of the H{\sc{I}} flux,
respectively. Note that an inclination correction is not applied when calculating $R1$
for unresolved galaxies ($R_{\rm 50,H{\sc I}}$ less than 15 arcsec), because their H{\sc{I}} sizes
are less than the beam size. For these galaxies, the derived value of $R1$
should be regarded as an upper limit to the true value of $R1$.
$rs$ is the scale-length of the outer exponential disk,
and is measured by assuming a PSF-convolved two-component model for the radial distribution
of H{\sc{I}} (see Wang et al. 2014 for details).
The H{\sc{I}} mass is defined as
$M_{\rm H{\sc I}}$=$2.356\times10^5$($D_{\rm lum}\,{\rm Mpc}^{-1}$)$^2$($F_{\rm tot}\,{(\rm Jy\,km\,s^{-1}})^{-1}$),
where $D_{\rm lum}$
is the luminosity distance
and $F_{\rm tot}$ is the integrated H{\sc{I}}-line flux density.
The measurements of these parameters are described in more detail
in Paper I.
\subsection{Primary beam correction}
\begin{figure*}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{plots/com.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{plots/com3.pdf}}
\caption{Test of the two methods for primary beam correction:
1) applying the standard WSRT analytic model (with $c$=63),
and 2) a nonparametric model by Popping \& Braun (2008).
This figure shows the relation between the primary beam
corrected flux density and the FIRST/NVSS flux density.
Black circles and blue crosses represent the FIRST data and the NVSS data,
respectively. The left and right
panels are for Popping's model and the empirical model, respectively.}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure*}
Our work depends critically on the primary beam correction, which accounts for the
attenuation by the primary beam towards large radii. We consider two methods.
One is a non-parametric model (data cube) provided by \cite{Popping-Braun-08},
the other one is to apply a parametric correction function of the form $\cos^6(c\times \nu\times d)$
as routinely used for the WSRT, where $\nu$ is the frequency in GHz,
and $d$ is the angular distance from the pointing centers in degrees.
To test and calibrate both approaches, we compare the un-corrected flux densities of point
sources in the radio continuum maps, which are an additional product of our data reduction
pipeline (see Wang et al. 2013) with the flux densities listed in the NRAO FIRST
\citep[Faint Images of the Radio Sky at Twenty-Centimeters]{Becker-White-Helfand-95}
and NVSS \citep[NRAO VLA Sky Survey]{Condon-98} catalogues.
Specifically, we first extract sources from
our continuum maps using Source Extractor (SE). Then we use the point spread function (PSF) fitting
method to derive the flux density of each source extracted from our continuum
maps. With a detection threshold of $5\sigma$, where $\sigma$ is the rms noise with a typical value
of $8.0\times 10^{-5}$ Jy beam$^{-1}$, we extract more than two thousand sources from all images.
This catalog is then matched to the FIRST
and NVSS catalogs. In total, there are 4128 sources in the FIRST
catalog \citep[12Feb16 Version]{Becker-12} located in these 50 H{\sc{I}}
observed regions, with integral flux density greater than 1 mJy.
Among them, 1322 sources are classified as point sources
at FIRST resolution (with a major axis FWHM of 2 arcsec).
About one hundred detections in our cubes were matched with both FIRST
and NVSS point sources. We restrict the analysis to point sources because
FIRST and NVSS flux densities are very
consistent with each other for point sources, with a scatter of 0.05 dex.
This way, we obtain an best-fit $c$ of 63, differing distinctly from the commonly used
and recommended $c=68$ (see WSRT web pages). This difference in $c$ causes a
0.46 dex difference in flux intensity for pixels at the farthest edge of the
continuum map (0.71 degree from the map center at redshift $z=0.025$),
and a largest difference of 0.17 dex for our farthest detected source.
On average, the flux densities corrected with $c=63$ are 0.04 dex smaller
than that of $c=68$ for our untargeted sources.
Fig. 1 shows the comparison between the primary beam corrected
PSF flux densities from our continuum maps and
the FIRST/NVSS flux densities using both methods, the empirical analytic (standard) model,
and Popping's nonparametric model.
We can see a good linear correlation
between the corrected PSF flux density and the FIRST/NVSS data. It is difficult to tell which
model is better according to the data points, because the scatter is
similar ($\sim$ 0.7 dex). However, we remark that the standard
recommended analytic model with $c=68$ would have provided an insufficient primary
beam correction in the wavelength range considered in this work.
Since we confirm that the model of \citet{Popping-Braun-08} works well, we adopt it for our primary beam
correction for the Bluedisk data cubes.
\section{Source identification}
We use the source finder developed by \citet{Serra-12} to detect sources
in the cubes. The pipeline uses a smooth-and-clip algorithm: it smooths
the cube and searches for regions with a flux intensity above 3$\sigma$ of
the cube. The resulted catalog of 1962 sources includes both real sources
and noise peaks. We take a few steps to filter the real galaxies with
reliable flux measurements. The first step is to match the H{\sc I} catalog with
the SDSS spectroscopic catalog. 163 H{\sc I} sources are matched with optical
galaxies, with an angular distance smaller than 20 arcsec (roughly the
beam size). 10 of them have more than one matched optical counterpart.
We further constrain in redshift by requiring $|z_{\rm spec}-z_{\rm H{\sc I}}|<0.001$,
which left us with 120 H{\sc I} sources, and none of them have multiple
optical counterparts. Although we may miss the galaxies with no optical
spectroscopic observation, we efficiently exclude most of the unreliable
sources from the H{\sc I} catalog.
In the following sections, we describe how we further select the sources
with reliable H{\sc I} flux measurements.
\subsection{Defining the outermost H{\sc{I}} contour}
\begin{figure*}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{plots/snr.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{plots/limit.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{plots/limit_num.pdf}}
\caption{ The left panel shows the SNR varies with applying different column density limits.
The middle panel shows the flux fraction varies with increasing column density limit. The flux fraction is the ratio of
the total H{\sc{I}} flux above a specific column density limit to the H{\sc{I}} flux without
giving a column density limit. The right panel shows the
column density limit versus the fraction of retained sources. The color
curves represent different pixel number cuts (If the effective pixel
number of the source is greater than the cut, it is treated as
a source).\label{fig2}}
\end{figure*}
In Paper I, we describe how we build error maps for the H{\sc{I}} moment-0 images.
We use these error maps to determine a H{\sc I} column density threshold
that reliably defines an outermost contour for morphological analysis.
The outermost contour should also contain most of the total flux of the
source.
The left panel of Fig. 2 shows the signal-to-noise ratio at different H{\sc I} column density levels
for all the detected sources.
The black curve shows the median signal-to-noise ratio,
and the gray region shows the 20\% to 80\% percentile range.
The SNR is typically above 3 when the threshold is set to be $10^{20}$ atoms cm$^{-2}$.
The middle panel of Fig. 2 shows how the fraction of the total flux of the galaxy
varies as a function of column density limit.
The back curve shows the median flux fraction for all sources, and
the gray region shows the 20\% to 80\% percentile range.
\footnote {At a column density limit of zero,
the H{\sc{I}} flux fraction is larger than 1.0 for all galaxies,
because by clipping at that level, the noise contribution is neglected (i.e., some negative
total flux from negative noise peaks has to be added to counterweight this effect at the edges of
the detected sources.}
We see that most of the galaxies retain more than 90\% of their
total flux when the limiting contour
level is $10^{20}$ atoms cm$^{-2}$.
We require sources to contain at least 20 pixels in the moment-0
maps to be included in our catalogues. In the right panel of Fig. 2, we show the fraction
of sources that meet this criterion as a function of different density
threshold cuts (the black curve). We also show how the curve changes if we
change the resolving criteria to 10, 30 and 40 pixels.
We can see more than 90\% of the sources are resolved with 20 pixels at
a density detection threshold of $10^{20}$ atoms cm$^{-2}$.
Based on the analysis shown above, we adopt $10^{20}$ atoms cm$^{-2}$
as our H{\sc I} column density threshold, because it is demonstrated to be a good threshold for
reliably describing the shape and size of the H{\sc{I}} while still retaining most of
the H{\sc{I}} mass, and it also includes most of the well-resolved H{\sc{I}} sources.
\subsection{Extracting sources with reliable H{\sc{I}} fluxes}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{plots/scatter.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{plots/scatter1.pdf}
\caption{ The left panel shows the changing of H{\sc{I}} flux scatter with different H{\sc{I}} flux bins for
simulated sources.
The right panel shows the distributions of H{\sc{I}} flux ratio for different H{\sc{I}} flux
intervals for simulated sources. The black histogram represents the distribution of H{\sc{I}} flux ratio
for H{\sc{I}} flux greater than 0.5 Jy km s$^{-1}$, and the red dot-and-dash histogram is for galaxies
with H{\sc{I}} flux less than 0.5 Jy km s$^{-1}$. Besides, the red
histogram is also for galaxies with H{\sc{I}} flux less than 0.5 Jy km s$^{-1}$, but with SNR greater than
3. \label{fig3}}
\end{figure*}
To estimate the reliability of our determinations of the total H{\sc{I}} flux, we use a bootstrap method. We
simulate a set of repeat observations by adding random noise with
the same characteristics as the noise in the Bluedisk cubes, and measure the
resulting variance if the total H{\sc I} flux.
In practice, we take the channels that have no detected sources from the data cube, and randomly repeat
them to make noise cubes that have the same size as the Bluedisk data cubes. We add the noise cubes to the original
Bluedisk cubes to make a ``perturbed'' cube. We repeat this process 10 times for each original Bluedisk
cube.
In addition, we also generate error maps for these simulated cubes.
The left panel of Fig. 3 shows how the scatter in the derived H{\sc{I}} between the different perturbed cubes varies
function of the original fluxes. The H{\sc{I}} flux scatter rises sharply for H{\sc{I}} fluxes
less than 0.5 Jy km s$^{-1}$, and becomes almost flat at a value of about 0.04 dex for H{\sc{I}} fluxes greater than
0.5 Jy km s$^{-1}$.
The right panel of Fig. 3 shows the distribution of the ratios of simulated H{\sc{I}} fluxes and input H{\sc{I}} fluxes
in two flux bins. The black histogram shows the ratio of the distribution for galaxies with H{\sc{I}} fluxes greater
than 0.5 Jy km s$^{-1}$, and the red dot-and-dash histogram shows the distribution for galaxies with H{\sc{I}} fluxes less
than 0.5 Jy km s$^{-1}$. The simulated H{\sc{I}} fluxes in the lower H{\sc{I}} flux bin are clearly more scattered than
in the higher H{\sc{I}} flux bin. We further select galaxies that have a SNR of at least 3 for the
$10^{20}$ atoms cm$^{-2}$ H{\sc I} column density contour. The distribution of their flux ratios
is shown as the red histogram in Fig. 3.
We find it to be similar to that of galaxies with high H{\sc{I}} flux.
In what follows, we exclude low H{\sc{I}} flux sources (total H{\sc{I}} fluxes less than 0.5 Jy km s$^{-1}$) with
a SNR of less than 3 in the $10^{20}$ atoms cm$^{-2}$ contour.
Our tests show that this ensures that
the error in the H{\sc{I}} fluxes we measured will be less than about 0.04 dex.
There are 43 targeted galaxies and 65 additional galaxies
in the final sample. Among the galaxies that were not targeted, 45 galaxies are resolved
and 20 galaxies are unresolved. Among these additional galaxies, 15 galaxies are located in
the ``peculiar cubes'' \citep{Wang-13}, in which the targeted galaxy is not detected
in H{\sc{I}} or is otherwise disturbed. We exclude these galaxies
in the analysis described below. We also divide our targeted galaxies into two parts according to
whether they lie above or below the H{\sc I}-plane defined in \cite{Catinella-10}.
Hereafter, targeted galaxies
which lie above the H{\sc I}-plane are referred to H{\sc I}-rich galaxies (blue sample)
and the cubes they reside in are referred as blue cubes.
Similarly, the rest of targeted galaxies are referred as control sample and the rest of cubes are
referred as control cubes.
This definition is different to what was designed in observation, but it properly reflects
the actual H{\sc I} content of each system.
At last, 23 blue targeted galaxies, 20 control targeted galaxies, 26 untargeted galaxies in blue
cubes and 24 untargeted galaxies in control cubes are left.
The detailed properties of all the additional detected galaxies are listed in table 1.
Galaxies in ``peculiar cubes'' are also listed in this table, but not used for
analysis in the following part of the paper.
As can be seen, they span stellar masses from $10^8-10^{11} {\rm M_{\odot}}$ and H{\sc I} masses from
$10^{8.5}-10^{10.4} {\rm M_{\odot}}$.
Although our sample is small in size, it is unique in that it samples the environments
rare, very H{\sc I}-rich systems.
Most of the galaxies are resolved in H{\sc{I}}, enabling us to
study their resolved morphology and their kinematics. Compared to the Westerbork observations of neutral Hydrogen
in Irregular and SPiral galaxies (WHISP), our data are more sensitive.
\\
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{0.9}
\begin{tabular*}{1.0\textwidth}{c c c c c c c c c c c c c}
\hline \hline
\multicolumn{1}{c}{ID} &\multicolumn{1}{c}{ra} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{dec} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{z} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\log M_*$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\mu_*$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{NUV-r} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\log\,M_{\rm H{\sc{I}}}$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$Dis$}& \multicolumn{1}{c}{$R1$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$R_{\rm 50,H{\sc I}}$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$R_{\rm 90,H{\sc I}}$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$rs$} \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{ } &\multicolumn{1}{c}{ } & \multicolumn{1}{c}{ } & \multicolumn{1}{c}{ } & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\rm M_{\odot}$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\rm M_{\odot} kpc^{-2}$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{ } & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\rm M_{\odot}$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{degree}& \multicolumn{1}{c}{arcsec} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{arcsec} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{arcsec} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{arcsec} \\
\hline
14 & 112.31934 & 42.27963 & 0.02307 & 10.39 & 8.33 & 2.87 & 9.88 & 0.30 & 61 & 31 & 57 & 3.8 \\
78 & 123.48852 & 52.64847 & 0.01820 & 11.01 & 8.99 & 3.80 & 10.40 & 0.22 & 140 & 63 & 132 & 16.4 \\
84 & 123.03966 & 52.45524 & 0.01874 & 9.61 & 8.14 & 2.03 & 9.55 & 0.16 & 46 & 23 & 41 & - \\
143 & 127.30350 & 40.85448 & 0.02510 & 9.33 & 7.74 & 2.49 & 8.77 & 0.21 & 16 & 12 & 21 & 37.0 \\
179 & 127.73492 & 55.83517 & 0.02542 & 8.91 & 7.53 & 2.56 & 8.73 & 0.39 & 15 & 11 & 21 & 6.1 \\
221 & 129.17748 & 41.47231 & 0.02919 & 9.88 & 8.29 & 1.94 & 9.80 & 0.08 & 42 & 24 & 46 & 11.9 \\
248 & 129.80326 & 30.92383 & 0.02569 & 8.51 & 7.10 & 2.03 & 9.19 & 0.19 & 23 & 17 & 31 & 15.4 \\
306 & 132.05204 & 36.78074 & 0.02527 & 10.24 & 8.49 & 2.52 & 9.46 & 0.24 & 32 & 16 & 29 & 4.1 \\
307 & 132.66660 & 36.46876 & 0.02521 & 6.98 & 6.98 & 1.51 & 9.94 & 0.35 & 57 & 25 & 55 & - \\
346 & 132.02870 & 41.85922 & 0.02997 & 10.11 & 7.99 & 2.64 & 9.53 & 0.26 & 32 & 21 & 36 & - \\
370 & 137.21930 & 44.93228 & 0.02657 & 10.27 & 9.31 & 3.62 & 8.96 & 0.13 & 14 & 14 & 43 & 7.9 \\
375 & 137.33753 & 45.03975 & 0.02730 & 8.89 & 7.25 & 1.63 & 9.55 & 0.26 & 37 & 17 & 31 & 7.3 \\
394 & 138.20927 & 40.49874 & 0.02759 & 9.60 & 8.03 & 2.17 & 9.73 & 0.41 & 37 & 18 & 37 & 7.4 \\
396 & 138.39333 & 40.46574 & 0.02758 & 8.59 & 7.12 & 1.93 & 9.34 & 0.35 & 27 & 16 & 26 & 4.8 \\
444 & 138.37436 & 51.31519 & 0.02773 & 8.80 & 7.25 & - & 9.33 & 0.23 & 25 & 13 & 27 & 28.8 \\
446 & 138.53751 & 51.41797 & 0.02805 & 9.51 & 8.59 & - & 9.17 & 0.14 & 21 & 14 & 32 & 8.7 \\
454 & 138.84323 & 51.05039 & 0.02881 & 9.68 & 7.78 & 2.41 & 9.45 & 0.32 & 31 & 19 & 28 & 4.3 \\
482 & 139.35935 & 45.97174 & 0.02574 & 9.45 & 7.89 & 2.80 & 8.49 & 0.20 & 6 & 14 & 28 & 22.2 \\
483 & 139.55919 & 45.65171 & 0.02690 & 10.70 & 8.47 & 2.87 & 10.16 & 0.30 & 68 & 35 & 61 & 5.0 \\
517 & 139.90499 & 32.35320 & 0.02652 & 9.72 & 8.54 & 2.01 & 9.25 & 0.23 & 24 & 18 & 45 & 11.3 \\
563 & 141.20293 & 49.39827 & 0.02723 & 9.73 & 8.27 & 3.30 & 8.72 & 0.24 & 15 & 10 & 19 & - \\
773 & 153.03446 & 46.29371 & 0.02425 & 10.34 & 8.48 & 2.63 & 10.03 & 0.40 & 47 & 34 & 66 & - \\
776 & 152.84976 & 45.73539 & 0.02375 & 8.69 & 7.20 & 1.60 & 8.88 & 0.23 & 19 & 12 & 21 & - \\
840 & 153.80716 & 56.60331 & 0.02667 & 8.82 & 7.43 & 1.24 & 9.41 & 0.07 & 28 & 17 & 33 & 8.9 \\
889 & 154.25328 & 55.88005 & 0.02437 & 9.77 & 8.28 & 2.34 & 9.56 & 0.28 & 36 & 18 & 33 & 6.7 \\
941 & 153.81151 & 58.69174 & 0.02295 & 8.61 & 7.73 & 1.80 & 9.12 & 0.29 & 6 & 29 & 49 & 4.5 \\
983 & 162.50634 & 36.25677 & 0.02190 & 9.75 & 8.09 & 3.12 & 8.47 & 0.09 & 6 & 17 & 27 & - \\
997 & 162.75426 & 36.19258 & 0.02380 & 9.85 & 7.80 & 2.23 & 9.98 & 0.23 & 55 & 23 & 47 & - \\
999 & 162.49449 & 36.41499 & 0.02327 & 9.50 & 8.20 & 3.34 & 8.78 & 0.08 & 17 & 13 & 24 & 5.7 \\
1020 & 166.86889 & 35.46365 & 0.02828 & - & - & 3.05 & 9.87 & 0.10 & 37 & 26 & 58 & - \\
1022 & 166.95902 & 35.40299 & 0.02840 & 10.47 & 8.81 & 3.49 & 9.56 & 0.07 & 36 & 18 & 32 & 18.0 \\
1024 & 166.95821 & 35.68483 & 0.02846 & 10.30 & 9.10 & 2.97 & 9.62 & 0.22 & 41 & 25 & 42 & 9.1 \\
1027 & 167.10516 & 35.33068 & 0.02888 & 8.96 & 7.33 & 3.81 & 8.94 & 0.16 & 18 & 13 & 25 & - \\
1042 & 168.52972 & 34.30886 & 0.02526 & 8.70 & 6.97 & 1.91 & 9.09 & 0.16 & 25 & 18 & 31 & 17.1 \\
1104 & 177.57556 & 35.25409 & 0.02128 & 10.22 & 8.97 & 2.84 & 10.08 & 0.36 & 68 & 35 & 76 & - \\
1143 & 185.61022 & 40.76168 & 0.02292 & 8.40 & 7.68 & -0.14 & 9.14 & 0.17 & 28 & 16 & 27 & 16.9 \\
1183 & 193.23760 & 51.82684 & 0.02762 & 8.58 & 7.78 & 1.50 & 8.90 & 0.20 & 16 & 11 & 22 & 23.2 \\
1230 & 196.76312 & 57.86514 & 0.02874 & 8.77 & 7.04 & 2.04 & 9.09 & 0.27 & 19 & 12 & 22 & 4.6 \\
1254 & 198.42330 & 47.29923 & 0.02808 & 8.80 & 7.20 & 1.22 & 9.19 & 0.20 & 23 & 15 & 25 & 6.3 \\
1259 & 198.26018 & 47.34518 & 0.02841 & 8.76 & 7.28 & 1.79 & 9.02 & 0.11 & 17 & 14 & 30 & 10.4 \\
1261 & 197.86026 & 47.44052 & 0.02861 & 9.03 & 7.29 & 2.46 & 8.92 & 0.25 & 15 & 9 & 15 & - \\
1296 & 198.84572 & 35.17351 & 0.02309 & 8.90 & 8.12 & 1.82 & 8.98 & 0.19 & 19 & 12 & 22 & 7.1 \\
1298 & 198.67004 & 35.03638 & 0.02374 & 8.67 & 7.46 & 1.61 & 9.21 & 0.28 & 22 & 14 & 29 & 13.2 \\
1323 & 203.28755 & 40.85307 & 0.02400 & 8.88 & 7.70 & 1.24 & 8.97 & 0.33 & 10 & 22 & 33 & 3.7 \\
1407 & 212.50986 & 38.70812 & 0.02576 & 9.86 & 8.31 & 3.81 & 9.67 & 0.21 & 34 & 28 & 52 & - \\
1410 & 212.67758 & 38.71842 & 0.02561 & 8.57 & 7.42 & 1.30 & 9.26 & 0.18 & 23 & 19 & 47 & - \\
1411 & 212.62710 & 38.73950 & 0.02606 & 8.95 & 7.86 & 1.23 & 9.44 & 0.15 & 29 & 16 & 31 & 12.5 \\
1414 & 212.69582 & 38.75970 & 0.02570 & 8.74 & 7.46 & 1.72 & 8.81 & 0.14 & 15 & 11 & 25 & - \\
1415 & 212.72923 & 38.78592 & 0.02580 & 8.43 & 7.14 & 1.54 & 9.13 & 0.13 & 14 & 15 & 31 & 7.2 \\
1533 & 241.43411 & 36.27508 & 0.03123 & 9.40 & 7.50 & 1.74 & 9.79 & 0.30 & 44 & 23 & 38 & - \\
1554 & 242.24289 & 36.61088 & 0.03014 & 11.02 & 8.83 & 3.33 & 10.42 & 0.31 & 26 & 50 & 104 & 26.6 \\
1605 & 246.16476 & 41.01995 & 0.02712 & 8.79 & 7.33 & 0.66 & 9.70 & 0.10 & 33 & 15 & 31 & 6.1 \\
1632 & 246.06271 & 41.11062 & 0.02926 & 9.97 & 8.21 & 3.27 & 9.70 & 0.22 & 38 & 17 & 33 & 9.6 \\
1639 & 246.70860 & 40.91786 & 0.02915 & 8.93 & 7.68 & 1.83 & 9.21 & 0.34 & 21 & 29 & 33 & 9.0 \\
1643 & 246.13086 & 40.68445 & 0.02943 & 8.80 & 7.49 & 1.10 & 9.06 & 0.28 & 20 & 18 & 36 & - \\
1647 & 246.08427 & 40.86501 & 0.03000 & 9.34 & 7.50 & 2.46 & 9.13 & 0.16 & 17 & 12 & 44 & - \\
1648 & 245.99846 & 41.13817 & 0.03029 & 9.08 & 7.39 & 1.34 & 9.59 & 0.27 & 34 & 17 & 33 & 20.6 \\
1663 & 250.62296 & 42.26285 & 0.02750 & 8.78 & 7.27 & 1.27 & 9.08 & 0.14 & 20 & 16 & 32 & 15.6 \\
1669 & 250.56263 & 42.05996 & 0.02780 & 8.82 & 7.68 & 1.96 & 9.17 & 0.22 & 20 & 18 & 50 & 19.7 \\
1700 & 251.48897 & 39.98583 & 0.03020 & 10.17 & 8.22 & 3.18 & 9.69 & 0.36 & 5 & 20 & 35 & 7.2 \\
1713 & 251.87396 & 40.56570 & 0.03108 & 8.92 & 7.44 & 1.39 & 9.68 & 0.32 & 37 & 19 & 32 & - \\
1725 & 258.80617 & 30.45146 & 0.02864 & 9.98 & 8.17 & 2.56 & 9.66 & 0.31 & 39 & 20 & 34 & - \\
1774 & 259.68221 & 58.13513 & 0.02908 & 10.95 & 8.85 & 3.60 & 9.98 & 0.39 & 55 & 26 & 48 & 13.5 \\
1795 & 258.77994 & 58.24045 & 0.03101 & 10.20 & 8.35 & 3.08 & 9.78 & 0.26 & 40 & 18 & 38 & - \\
1907 & 262.17343 & 57.11476 & 0.02812 & - & - & -0.42 & 9.03 & 0.03 & 17 & 11 & 23 & 16.7 \\
\hline \hline
\end{tabular*}
\caption{Properties of additional galaxies extracted in
the data cubes of the Bluedisk project. The detailed information
of the targeted galaxies is presented in Paper I.
From left to right, columns represent galaxy ID, Right Ascension,
Declination, redshift, base-10 logarithm of the
stellar mass, base-10 logarithm of the stellar surface density,
NUV--r color, base-10 logarithm of the H{\sc{I}} mass, distance to the
central of the data cube (in degree), $R1$, $R_{\rm 50,H{\sc{I}}}$,
$R_{\rm 90,H{\sc{I}}}$ and exponentially scale length rs,
respectively. }
\label{table}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\section{Results}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{plots/mass_dis1.pdf}
\caption{ Stellar mass distribution of our sample.
The stellar mass is from the MPA-JHU DR7 catalogue. Our sample is
divided into BTG (blue), CTG (red),
BUG (green) and CUG (purple).\label{fig4}}
\end{figure}
The mass distribution for our final sample is shown in Fig. 4. The
sample is divided into four subsamples: the blue targeted galaxies (BTG)
, the control targeted galaxies (CTG), the additional
galaxies located in blue cubes (BUG) and the additional galaxies located in control cubes (CUG).
By selection, all targeted galaxies are massive with $\log M_{*}/M_{\odot}>10$.
The additional galaxies have a very
broad stellar mass distribution from $10^8 \rm M_{\odot}$ to $10^{11} \rm M_{\odot}$.
The goal of this paper is to study their H{\sc{I}} properties.
\subsection{H{\sc{I}} mass-size relation}
\begin{figure*}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{plots/mass_scale1_cir.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{plots/mass_scale2_cir.pdf} }
\caption{ The H{\sc{I}} mass-size relation for our sample.
The left panel shows the mass-size relation for BTG (blue), CTG (red), BUG (green) and CUG (purple).
The right panel is similar to left one but for different stellar
mass ranges. Some outliers in H{\sc{I}} mass-size relation are
marked by their IDs (these galaxies are discussed in detail in section 5).}
\label{fig5}
\end{figure*}
The tight relation between the diameter of the H{\sc{I}} disk and the total
H{\sc{I}} mass in galaxies was investigated by \cite{Broeils-Rhee-97}. Later, it was found that
this relation changes very little for different kinds
of galaxies \citep{Swaters-02, Noordermeer-05}. Fig. 5
shows the H{\sc{I}} mass-size relation for our sample. The left panel shows
this relation for the four subsamples: BTG (blue),
CTG (red), BUG (green) and CUG (purple). The black line is from
\cite{Broeils-Rhee-97}. The right panel shows the same relation for different
stellar mass ranges. Some outliers far from this relation are
marked by their IDs.
Almost all the galaxies closely
obey this relation, which is consistent with the result of Paper I.
This relation is similarly tight for galaxies with both high and low stellar masses:
the average column density of H{\sc{I}} is about same for all spiral galaxies.
\cite{Wang-14} suggest that this relation is primarily a result of atomic-to-molecular
gas conversion in the inner disk and is further enhanced by a homogeneous radial distribution
of H{\sc{I}} density in the outer disk of galaxies. We will investigate the nature
of the handful of outliers later in the paper.
\subsection{H{\sc{I}}-optical scaling relations}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{plots/fhi_mstar.pdf}
\caption{The H{\sc{I}} mass fraction plotted as a function of stellar mass,
stellar surface mass density and NUV-r for target
galaxies(black), other galaxies in the H{\sc I}-rich cubes (blue),
other galaxies in the control cubes (red) and GASS sample galaxies (gray).
The black curve in the left panel shows the empirical relation of H{\sc{I}}
mass fraction as a function of stellar mass,
which is taken from \citet{Evoli-11}.}
\label{fig6}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{plots/HI_plane_C10.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{plots/bias_dis_C10.pdf} }
\caption{
Left panel: H{\sc{I}}-plane for our sample.
This panel illustrates that the ratio of H{\sc{I}} mass to stellar
mass versus the combination of surface mass density and NUV-r.
Galaxies in the BTG (blue), CTG (red), BUT (green), CUG (purple) samples are colour-coded.
The gray data points show the GASS sample. Right panel: The distribution of
deviations from the H{\sc{I}}-plane (corresponding to the black line
in the left panel) for our sample. The blue, red, green and purple distributions represent
for the distributions of BTG, CTG, BUG and CUG galaxies, respectively.
The K-S test probability for the difference in deviation from the H{\sc I}-plane
between the BUG and CUG samples is denoted at the top-right corner of the right panel.}
\label{fig7}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{plots/bias_center1.pdf}
\caption{The distributions of $\Delta$center, $R_{\rm 90,H{\sc{I}}}/R_{\rm 50,H{\sc{I}}}$, $rs$ and $rs/R1$ for BTG (blue),
CTG (red), BUG(green) and CUG(purple).
The K-S test probability that the H{\sc I}-rich and control cube
distributions are drawn from the same underlying distribution
is given in the top right corner of each panel.}
\label{fig8}
\end{figure*}
In Fig. 6, we plot the H{\sc{I}}-to-stellar mass ratio as a function of stellar mass,
stellar surface mass density and NUV-r color for our sample.
The H{\sc{I}} mass fraction correlates with stellar mass, surface mass density and NUV-r, and extends the
mean relations quantified for normal galaxies with stellar masses
greater than $10^{10} \rm M_{\odot}$ in former studies \citep[]{Catinella-10,Cortese-11,Huang-12}.
We do not see different H{\sc{I}} scaling relations for galaxies in the data cubes with
a central targeted H{\sc{I}} excess galaxy and data cubes with a central targeted control galaxy.
We plot the H{\sc{I}} plane linking H{\sc{I}}-to-stellar mass ratio with
stellar surface mass density and NUV-r colour defined by Catinella et al. (2010) in the
left panel of Fig. 7. The gray data points represent galaxies from
GASS \citep{Catinella-10}. In this projection, both
targeted and untargeted galaxies lie close to the H{\sc{I}} plane.
Differences arise when we focus on the {\em displacement} from the plane.
As already found in Paper I, we observe
a tilt of our observed galaxies with respect to the diagonal of the plot. The plane underpredicts the
H{\sc{I}} content of all observed galaxies at the high-H{\sc{I}}-fraction end
and slightly over-predicts it at the low-H{\sc{I}}-fraction end of
our sample. The underprediction at the high-H{\sc{I}}-fraction end is discussed in detail by \cite{Li-12}, who argue
that the addition of additional parameters yield a more unbiased prediction of H{\sc I} content.
The right panel of Fig. 7 shows the distributions
of the deviations from the H{\sc{I}}-plane (the black line in Fig. 7).
We find a significant difference between the distributions of the galaxies in the
cubes of the H{\sc I}-rich targets and the galaxies in the control cubes.
We perform a Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) test to quantify this significance,
and obtain a probability of 0.041, suggesting a 96\% significance for the
null hypothesis of the two samples being drawn from the same parent
distribution to be rejected.
It appears that on average, galaxies in the data cubes with an H{\sc{I}} excess
targeted galaxy do on average contain more H{\sc{I}} (relative to their
surface mass density and colour ) than galaxies
in the cubes containing a control galaxy.
This suggests that galaxies associated with blue targeted galaxies are also likely to be gas-rich.
This supports the observation pointed out by \cite{Kauffmann-Li-Heckman-10},
see also \cite{Weinmann-06}, who found that there is
more photometrically estimated H{\sc{I}} in satellites around more star-forming primary galaxies than
in satellites around less star-forming primary galaxies. In the following, we refer to this as ``H{\sc{I}} conformity''.
Those authors argued that the satellites trace a large-scale
gas reservoir that is accreted onto the central galaxies.
Next, we repeat the morphological analysis of Paper I for the additional galaxies detected in the cubes.
In Fig. 8, we plot distributions of $\Delta$Center, $R_{\rm 90,H{\sc I}}/R_{\rm 50,H{\sc I}}$, $rs$ and $rs/R1$.
$\Delta$Center is calculated as the distance between the H{\sc{I}} center and the r-band center,
normalized by the semi-major axis of the H{\sc{I}} ellipse.
$R_{\rm 90,H{\sc I}}/R_{\rm 50,H{\sc I}}$ describes the concentration/extension of the H{\sc{I}} disks.
$rs$ is the exponentially scale length of H{\sc{I}} disks.
The galaxies in the H{\sc I}-rich cubes do not differ from those in the control cubes in their distribution of
$\Delta$Center. However, their distributions of $R_{\rm 90,H{\sc I}}/R_{\rm 50,H{\sc I}}$ do show a significant difference.
Galaxies in the H{\sc I}-rich cubes
tend to have larger $R_{\rm 90,H{\sc I}}/R_{\rm 50,H{\sc I}}$ than in the control cubes.
If we investigate galaxies with $R_{\rm 90,H{\sc I}}/R_{\rm 50,H{\sc I}}$ greater than 2.0, we find almost all of them have more H{\sc{I}} gas than
the predicted by their optical properties. The distribution of the deviations from the H{\sc I}-plane for these galaxies
is shown in Fig. 9. The median value of the deviations is 0.44 dex, which means these galaxies have 2.7
times H{\sc I} of the predicted values in general.
We also find their H{\sc{I}} to extend far beyond the optical disk.
The $rs$ and $rs/R1$ distributions of the galaxies in the H{\sc I}-rich cubes do not differ significantly from
those for galaxies in the control cubes.
To assess whether the density of the environment may play a role in these
differences, we checked the number of SDSS
spectroscopically observed galaxies of which fall in our cubes,
but which have no H{\sc{I}} detections.
There are 95 galaxies with no H{\sc{I}} detections in the H{\sc I}-rich cubes and 295 galaxies with no H{\sc{I}} detections
in the control cubes. Most of these galaxies have stellar masses in the
range between $10^8 \rm M_{\odot}$ and $10^{10} \rm M_{\odot}$.
We also quantify the environment by using the 3-d reconstructed matter overdensity
based on SDSS DR7 data set \citep{Jasche-10},
which is defined as $\delta=(\rho-\bar{\rho})/\bar{\rho}$, where $\rho$ is the matter density and $\bar{\rho}$
is the mean matter density. Thus the mean overdensity of galaxies in control cubes is
10.7, while the mean over-density of galaxies in blue cubes is 4.6.
It is clear that the control cubes are located in denser regions than the H{\sc I}-rich
cubes, and the fraction of optically-identified galaxies that have detectable H{\sc{I}} masses is much higher in the blue
cubes than in the control cubes.
This may indicate that H{\sc{I}} conformity is closely related to the environment of the galaxy.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{plots/plothist_con.pdf}
\caption{The distribution of deviations from the H{\sc I}-plane for untargeted galaxies with $R_{\rm 90,H{\sc I}}/R_{\rm 50,H{\sc I}}$ greater than
2.0. The median value of these deviations is 0.44 dex.}
\label{fig9}
\end{figure}
\section{Morphology of outliers}
\begin{figure*}
\mbox{
\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{plots/outliers/0890_m.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/0890_v.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/SDSS/0890_s.pdf}
}\par
\mbox{
\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{plots/outliers/0941_m.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/0941_v.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/SDSS/0941_s.pdf}
}\par
\mbox{
\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{plots/outliers/0983_m.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/0983_v.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/SDSS/0983_s.pdf}
}\par
\mbox{
\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{plots/outliers/1104_m.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/1104_v.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/SDSS/1104_s.pdf}
}
\mbox{
\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{plots/outliers/1323_m.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/1323_v.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/SDSS/1323_s.pdf}
}\par
\caption{H{\sc{I}} column density contours overlaid on optical images; H{\sc{I}} velocity maps and SDSS spectra for outliers.
The galaxy ID, stellar mass and the predicted H{\sc{I}} mass fraction
are labeled in the top-left-hand corner of each left panel.
The white, green, red and yellow H{\sc{I}} contours represent 2.0, 4.0, 14.0 and 20.0 times
the median SNR of the outermost contour, respectively.
The shape of the beam is plotted in green at the bottom-right corner of each map. All the maps are displayed as
north up and east left. }
\label{fig10}
\end{figure*}
\addtocounter{figure}{-1}
\begin{figure*}
\mbox{
\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{plots/outliers/1378_m.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/1378_v.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/SDSS/1378_s.pdf}
}\par
\mbox{
\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{plots/outliers/1407_m.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/1407_v.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/SDSS/1407_s.pdf}
}\par
\mbox{
\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{plots/outliers/1554_m.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/1554_v.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/SDSS/1554_s.pdf}
}\par
\mbox{
\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{plots/outliers/1700_m.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/1700_v.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/SDSS/1700_s.pdf}
}
\caption{Continued}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\mbox{
\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{plots/outliers/0220_m.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/0220_v.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/SDSS/0220_s.pdf}
}\par
\mbox{
\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{plots/outliers/0441_m.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/0441_v.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/SDSS/0441_s.pdf}
}\par
\mbox{
\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{plots/outliers/1333_m.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/1333_v.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/SDSS/1333_s.pdf}
}\par
\mbox{
\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{plots/outliers/1662_m.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/1662_v.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/SDSS/1662_s.pdf}
}
\mbox{
\includegraphics[width=0.25\textwidth]{plots/outliers/1663_m.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/1663_v.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.30\textwidth]{plots/outliers/SDSS/1663_s.pdf}
}\par
\caption{The same as Fig. 10 but for some of the non-outlier galaxies, selected
randomly from our sample galaxies with the offset to H{\sc I} mass-size relation less than 0.2 dex and the offset
to H{\sc I}-plane less than 0.2 dex.}
\label{fig11}
\end{figure*}
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{0.9}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c}
\hline \hline
\multicolumn{1}{c}{ID} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{Environment} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\log_{10} M_{\rm halo}$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{H{\sc{I}} MS} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{H{\sc{I}}-plane} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\Delta$Center} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$R_{\rm 90,H{\sc I}}/R_{\rm 50,H{\sc I}}$} \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{ } & \multicolumn{1}{c}{ } &\multicolumn{1}{c}{$\rm M_{\odot}$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{dex} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{dex} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{ } & \multicolumn{1}{c}{}\\
\hline
941 & isolated & - & 1.15& 0.65 & 0.252 & 1.68 \\
1323 & - & - & 0.51& 0.08 & 0.3981 & 1.51 \\
1554 & isolated & 12.59 & 0.97& 0.27 &0.350 & 2.09\\
1700 & isolated & - & 1.63& 0.15 &0.960 & 1.73\\
& & & & & & \\
890 & isolated & 12.37 & -0.14& -0.87 & 0.447 & 1.85\\
983 & isolated & - & 0.55& -0.70 & 0.517 & 1.52\\
1104 & isolated & - & 0.09& 0.66 & 0.129 &2.16\\
1378 & isolated & 12.37 & -0.02& -0.50 & 0.320 &1.76\\
1407 & - & - & 0.12& 0.62 & 0.517 & 1.87\\
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{The list of outliers of H{\sc{I}} mass-size relation and H{\sc{I}}-plane.
From left to right, columns represent galaxy ID, environment, halo mass,
offset from normal H{\sc{I}} mass-size
relation, offset from normal H{\sc{I}}-plane, $\Delta$Center and $R_{\rm 90,H{\sc I}}/R_{\rm 50,H{\sc I}}$, respectively.}
\label{table}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{plots/outlier_com.pdf}
\caption{The distributions of $\Delta$Center and $R_{\rm 90,H{\sc I}}/R_{\rm 50,H{\sc I}}$ for outliers (red) and non-outliers (black).
The K-S test probability is given in the top right corner of each panel. The
non-outliers are selected from all the galaxies with both the offset to H{\sc I}
mass-size relation and the offset to H{\sc I}-plane less than 0.2 dex.}
\label{fig12}
\end{figure*}
Galaxies accrete cold gas directly from the intergalactic medium or through interaction with companions, and
lose their gas through tidal or ram pressure stripping.
Some authors have tried to connect specific H{\sc{I}} structures in galaxies with ongoing cold gas accretion, such
as the existence of extra-planar gas and warped structures of H{\sc{I}} distribution in
galaxies \citep[]{Wakker-07, Thilker-07, Oosterloo-10}.
Ram pressure striping, especially
in clusters also affect the morphology of H{\sc{I}} disks \citep[]{McConnachie-07,Bernard-12,Serra-13,Zhang-13}.
In this section, we investigate the structures of those galaxies which are outliers in the
H{\sc{I}} mass-size relation (see Fig. 5) or the H{\sc{I}}-plane (see Fig. 7).
We argue that (after close inspection) either offset is an indication for ongoing interaction
with the environment.
Outliers are defined to include galaxies that are offset in their H{\sc{I}} mass by more than 0.4 dex from the
normal H{\sc{I}} mass-size relation or offset more than 0.5 dex from the H{\sc{I}}-plane.
Here we just discuss the outliers with $M_{*}>M_{\rm H{\sc I}}$, since the H{\sc{I}} plane would underestimate
the H{\sc{I}} fraction for galaxies with $\log_{10}(M_{*}/M_{\rm H{\sc I}})>0$.
We select the outliers from all cubes with ``peculiar cubes'' (Section 3) excluded.
Note that there is no indication that outliers tend to fall preferentially into
either group of galaxies around H{\sc I}-rich galaxies (blue sample) or control galaxies.
In table 2, we list the environment of galaxies, host system Dark Matter (DM) mass, offset from the H{\sc{I}} mass-size
relation, offset from the H{\sc{I}}-plane, $\Delta$Center and $R_{\rm 90,H{\sc I}}/R_{\rm 50,H{\sc I}}$.
The environment of galaxies (isolated or in group) and
the host halo mass estimates are from \citet{Yang-07}.
Fig. 10 shows H{\sc{I}} total intensity contours overlaid on an SDSS colour image, an H{\sc{I}} velocity field and an SDSS
spectrum for each of these outliers. The white, green, red and yellow H{\sc{I}} contours
represent 2.0, 4.0, 14.0 and 20.0 times the median SNR of the outermost H{\sc I} contour, respectively.
The velocity fields are derived from a Gauss-Hermite fitting procedure (den Heijer et al., in preparation).
\subsection{Outliers in the H{\sc{I}} mass-size relation}
Galaxies marked 941, 1323, 1554 and 1700 are outliers from the H{\sc{I}} mass-size relation.
Galaxy 1554 and 1700 are edge-on galaxies, while Galaxy 941, 1323 and 1622 are not.
We will discuss Galaxy 941, 1323, 1554 and 1700 in detail.
Galaxy 983 is investigated in next subsection because
it is also offset from the H{\sc{I}} fundamental plane.
\textbf{Galaxy 941 and 1323} are both starburst dwarf galaxies, but most of their H{\sc{I}} is distributed asymmetrically,
and is also offset from the optical disks. The H{\sc{I}} of Galaxy 941 is distributed in patches
that extend 10 times further than the optical disks. The nearby object seen in the SDSS image,
is found to be a foreground star.
The H{\sc{I}} disk of Galaxy 1323 shows a big void in the region of the optical disk.
There are two possible explanations for these disturbed
morphologies. One is feedback processes (by AGN or by superwinds powered by SNe and
stellar winds in the starburst) that push gas from inside the galaxy to the outside.
The other explanation is that the H{\sc{I}} gas in the stellar disk regions have been converted to molecular gas
to sustain the fast star formation, while the H{\sc{I}} gas in the outer regions has not had enough time to flow into the
stellar disk.
The stellar masses of the galaxies and their position on the ``Baldwin, Phillips \& Terlevich'' (BPT)
diagram suggests that they do not have AGNs in their cores.
We check the star formation time scale for these two galaxies.
It would take more than 0.4 Gyr
to consume ten percent of their total H{\sc{I}} gas with the current star formation rate.
We conclude that SNe explosions and stellar winds are the most likely cause for
the holes in the H{\sc{I}} intensity maps.
In similar case, \cite{Muhle-05} argued that a huge hole in
H{\sc{I}} distribution of NGC 1569 is probably driven from SNe feedback in the center of the galaxy over the past 20Myr.
\textbf{Galaxy 1554 and 1700} are edge-on galaxies. As can be seen from the SDSS spectrum,
the dust extinction is very high in Galaxy 1554.
The H{\sc{I}} gas is concentrated and distributed in the stellar disk. Galaxy 1700 is a
star-forming galaxy in which the H{\sc{I}} seems to be vertically offset with respect to the stellar disk.
The inclination correction creates significant uncertainty when calculating H{\sc{I}} sizes
for edge-on galaxies, since the H{\sc{I}} disks
are usually thicker than stellar disks. This may result in the offset in the H{\sc{I}} mass-size relation.
\subsection{Outliers from the H{\sc{I}}-plane}
\textbf{Galaxy 983} exhibits a large offset from both the H{\sc{I}} mass-size relation and the H{\sc{I}}-plane.
While it appears to be H{\sc{I}} deficient with respect to the plane, its H{\sc{I}} is more concentrated
than predicted by the H{\sc{I}} mass-size relation. In addition, a significant part of its H{\sc{I}} appears
to show irregular kinematics and is offset from the galaxy disk. Hence, morphology and kinematics
suggest recent tidal or ram-pressure stripping to have removed gas in the outskirts of the galaxy.
\textbf{Galaxy 890} has its H{\sc{I}} gas compressed against the stellar disk on one side and
extended to larger radius on the opposite side.
Its morphological H{\sc{I}} and optical centers are distinctly offset from each other. This
is very similar to the ram-pressure stripped
galaxies observed in clusters \citep[]{Vollmer-04,Koopmann-Kenney-04,Crowl-05, Chung-09}.
The observed H{\sc{I}} gas mass is just 12\% of the predicted value.
The velocity map shows a nice spider diagram in the optical region, marked in black ellipse (see Fig. 10).
For the west extended part, which also contains most of the H{\sc{I}}, it shows a clear decrease in
velocity from the inner region to the outer region.
So it is likely that the direction of ram-pressure stripping
is from east to west and from far to near.
\textbf{Galaxy 1104 and Galaxy 1407} have at least
3 times more H{\sc{I}} than predicted (see Fig. 7).
Galaxy 1104 is a warped edge-on galaxy with a high warp amplitude. The
H{\sc{I}} distribution is also rather asymmetric, suggesting a recent interaction.
Galaxy 1407 is a star-forming galaxy with a large amount of H{\sc{I}} offset from the regularly rotating disk.
It seems to be interacting with two close companions.
\textbf{Galaxy 1378} has less H{\sc{I}} gas than predicted and its H{\sc{I}} gas is highly
lopsided.
It is an isolated galaxy with strong on-going star formation at the center.
This galaxy possesses a large amount of gas outside the regularly
rotating disk, suggesting ram-pressure stripping or tidal stripping of H{\sc{I}}
from the galaxy.
For comparison, we also present a set of ``non-outlier'' galaxies in Fig. 11. These are selected
randomly from our sample galaxies with both the offset to H{\sc I} mass-size relation and the offset
to H{\sc I}-plane less than 0.2 dex. Generally speaking, the H{\sc I} shapes of these non-outliers are
more regular compared to the H{\sc I} shapes of outliers. Most of them are less asymmetric and have less
H{\sc I}-gas clouds in their outer region, which suggests no violent interaction with IGM.
The comparison between Fig. 10 and Fig. 11 confirms that most of the outliers really have very
irregular H{\sc I} morphologies.
Fig. 12 compares $\Delta$Center (left panel) and $R_{\rm 90,H{\sc I}}/R_{\rm 50,H{\sc I}}$
(right panel) between outliers and non-outliers.
Note that the non-outlier sample includes all the non-outliers defined in the
same way as above, not only those shown in Fig. 11.
The outliers appear to have larger $\Delta$Center and smaller $R_{\rm 90,H{\sc I}}/R_{\rm 50,H{\sc I}}$
when compared to the non-outliers. This result is
consistent with the conclusion above, which are drawn from the example H{\sc I} maps
in Fig. 11. However, given the small sample size and the resulting poor statistics indicated by
the K-S tests (see the K-S probabilities quoted in the figure),
this result should not be overemphasized.
We list $\Delta$Center and $R_{\rm 90,H{\sc I}}/R_{\rm 50,H{\sc I}}$ for the outliers
in table 2. Galaxy 1700 has very large
$\Delta$Center ($\sim$0.9) that is consistent with its clearly biased H{\sc I} distribution.
Galaxy 1407 and Galaxy 983 have relatively large $\Delta$Center ($\sim$0.5),
which are attributed to their extra-planar gas.
Galaxy 1104, Galaxy 1554 and Galaxy 1407 have the largest $R_{\rm 90,H{\sc I}}/R_{\rm 50,H{\sc I}}$ among others.
Their location on H{\sc I}-plane are all above the mean relation. This is consistent with what we find in Fig. 9.
However, we don't compare $rs$ and $rs/R1$ for the outliers, as their $rs$
cannot be well determined.
\section{Summary and discussion}
In this paper, we present a catalogue of galaxies from the Bluedisk H{\sc{I}} galaxy survey that
includes sources within the cubes that were not specifically targeted for observation.
These galaxies are nevertheless very interesting, because they probe the environments
of unusually H{\sc I}-rich galaxies, as well as a control sample of galaxies with similar
masses and structural properties, but with more normal H{\sc I} content.
We present the distribution of H{\sc{I}} morphological parameters, the H{\sc I} mass-size relation and
scaling relations between H{\sc I} gas mass fraction and galaxy mass, structure and colour.
The main results in this work are listed below.
\begin{itemize}
\item Our sample follows established H{\sc{I}} scaling relations as
function of stellar mass, stellar surface density and colour very well, and fits the
H{\sc{I}} mass-size relation, except for a few outliers.
\item Galaxies in the H{\sc I}-rich cubes are displaced to higher H{\sc I} gas mass fractions than predicted
by the optical properties, compared to galaxies in the control cubes.
\item We inspect the H{\sc{I}} intensity maps and velocity fields of the outliers from the H{\sc{I}} mass-size
relation and the plane.
We find that all these galaxies are likely to have undergone recent
interaction with their environment.
\end{itemize}
The phenomenon of galactic conformity was first discovered by \cite{Weinmann-06}, who argued that
the properties of satellite galaxies are strongly correlated with those of their central
galaxies. In particular, early-type central galaxies have a larger fraction of
early-type satellites than late-type central galaxies with the same stellar mass.
Subsequently, \cite{Kauffmann-Li-Heckman-10} found that the total mass of gas in satellites
has a strong correlation with the colours and specific star formation
rates of central galaxies of
all stellar masses, and that this correlation extends out to
radii of 1 Mpc or more. This suggests that more gas-rich galaxies
should have more gas in satellites in their immediate surroundings.
This work was, however, based on optical proxies for H{\sc I} content and not on real H{\sc I} data.
In this paper, we find that galaxies in the large-scale environment of H{\sc{I}}-rich targeted galaxies
tend to be H{\sc{I}}-rich and to have a larger $R_{\rm 90,H{\sc I}}/R_{\rm 50,H{\sc I}}$.
Our findings thus support the conjectures presented in \citep{Kauffmann-Li-Heckman-10}.
\citet{Weinmann-06} and \citet{Ann-Park-Choi-08} argued that the X-ray-emitting hot gas of
host early-type central galaxies can deprive their satellites of their gas reservoirs
through hydrodynamic interactions. However, this cannot explain the conformity
effect in low mass halos. \citet{Kauffmann-Li-Heckman-10} argued that satellite galaxies
trace the high density peaks of underlying reservoir of ionized gas, which provides
fuel for star formation in central galaxies.
In this work we have been able to study a few galaxies which have irregular H{\sc{I}} shapes and
anomalous H{\sc{I}} gas content. In most cases, we find signatures of interaction with the environment
that is suggestive of tidal or ram pressure stripping,
though two galaxies are found (1407 and 1104) that
may be accreting H{\sc{I}} clouds.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
EW and CL would like to thank the hospitality of the Max Planck
Institute for Astrophysics while this work was being initiated.
EW is grateful to Paolo Serra and Zhixiong Liang for helpful discussion on
data analysis progress, to Milan den Heijer for providing
the Gauss-Hermite velocity maps, and to Attila Popping
for readily providing his primary beam attenuation model.
This work is supported by National Key Basic Research Program
of China (No. 2015CB857004), NSFC (Grant No. 11173045, 11233005,
11325314, 11320101002), the Strategic Priority Research
Program ``The Emergence of Cosmological Structures'' of CAS
(Grant No. XDB09000000), and the exchange program between CAS
and the Max Panck Society.
Funding for the SDSS and SDSS-II has been provided by the Alfred P.
Sloan Foundation, the Participating Institutions, the National Science
Foundation, the U.S. Department of Energy, the National Aeronautics
and Space Administration, the Japanese Monbukagakusho, the Max Planck
Society, and the Higher Education Funding Council for England. The
SDSS Web Site is http://www.sdss.org/. The SDSS is managed by the
Astrophysical Research Consortium for the Participating
Institutions. The Participating Institutions are the American Museum
of Natural History, Astrophysical Institute Potsdam, University of
Basel, University of Cambridge, Case Western Reserve University,
University of Chicago, Drexel University, Fermilab, the Institute for
Advanced Study, the Japan Participation Group, Johns Hopkins
University, the Joint Institute for Nuclear Astrophysics, the Kavli
Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology, the Korean
Scientist Group, the Chinese Academy of Sciences (LAMOST), Los Alamos
National Laboratory, the Max-Planck-Institute for Astronomy (MPIA),
the Max-Planck-Institute for Astrophysics (MPA), New Mexico State
University, Ohio State University, University of Pittsburgh,
University of Portsmouth, Princeton University, the United States
Naval Observatory, and the University of Washington.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{I}
Soft magnetic composites (SMC) have physical properties which are used for adapting these materials to specific applications \citep{bib:Shok},\citep{bib:Lemi}. Very often the functionality of these materials depends on more than one feature. This leads to multi-criteria optimization problems, which has not been applied yet in the design of SMC. However, there are papers which treat more than one physical property of SMC but these are not considered as target functions in an optimization procedure \citep{bib:Sho2},\citep{bib:Sho3}.
Recently an algorithm for designing values of the hardening temperature and the compaction pressure in the production process of soft magnetic composites (SMC) has been derived by using the concept of the pseudo-state equation \citep{bib:sok2}. In equilibrium thermodynamics the equation of state relates thermodynamic parameters. For instance, in the case of gas-liquid system they are the temperature, pressure and volume of the considered material. By analogy with the equation of state we consider a phenomenological relation between the technological parameters and physical properties of the material. Such an approach for SMC is possible thanks to the topology of the completed set of scaled power loss characteristics. The most important features of this topology are the following,\citep{bib:sok2}:
Set of characteristics consists of one variable smooth function
\begin{equation}
\label{uno}
\frac{P_{tot}}{(B_{m})^{\beta}}=F\left (\frac{f}{B_{m}^{\alpha}}\right ),
\end{equation}
where $P_{tot}$ is density of power loss, $B_{m}$ is peak of induction, $f$ is frequency of electromagnetic field wave, $F(\cdot)$ is a function of the following form \citep{bib:sok2}:
\begin{equation}
\label{equ}
F\left (\frac{f}{B_{m}^{\alpha}}\right )=(f/B_{m}^{\alpha}\cdot\left(\Gamma_{1}+f/B_{m}^{\alpha}\cdot\left(\Gamma_{2}+f/B_{m}^{\alpha}\cdot\left(\Gamma_{3}+
f/B_{m}^{\alpha}\cdot\Gamma_{4}\right)\right)\right),
\end{equation}
where $\Gamma_{i}, \alpha$ and $\beta$ have to be determined from experimental data. The form (\ref{uno}) has been derived from the assumption about the power losses as a homogeneous function in a general sense.
Each characteristic is determined by the values of $\Gamma_{i}$ coefficients and $\alpha$ as well as $\beta$ exponents. These are functions of the technological parameters $T$ and $p$
\begin{equation}
\label{expony1}
\Gamma_{i}=\Gamma_{i}( T,p),\hspace{2mm}\alpha=\alpha( T,p),\hspace{2mm} \beta=\beta(T,p),
\end{equation}
where $T$ and $p$ are hardening temperature and compaction pressure, respectively. (\ref{expony1}) reveals that characteristics (\ref{uno}), (\ref{equ}) of samples composed at different $T,p$ conditions possess different dimensions, whereas all disentangled characteristics
\begin{equation}
\label{equ2}
P_{tot}=B_{m}^{\beta}(f/B_{m}^{\alpha}\cdot\left(\Gamma_{1}+f/B_{m}^{\alpha}\cdot\left(\Gamma_{2}+f/B_{m}^{\alpha}\cdot\left(\Gamma_{3}+
f/B_{m}^{\alpha}\cdot\Gamma_{4}\right)\right)\right),
\end{equation}
possess a common physical dimension.
Why do we use the implicit form (\ref{uno}),(\ref{equ})? Note that the right-hand side of this equation depends only on one effective variable $\frac{f}{B_{m}^{\alpha}}$. Therefore, calculations performed with (\ref{uno}),(\ref{equ}) are represented by one curve for all values of $f$ and $B_{m}$, whereas results of calculations performed with (\ref{equ2}) are split into many curves. For instance, if one needs $P_{tot}$ as a function of $f$ then the number of generated characteristics is equal to the required number of different values of $B_{m}$.
Because of the different dimensions of the different characteristics they do not cross each other except at origin point $\frac{f}{B_{m}^{\alpha}}=0$, for which dimension is not very important. According to the Egenhofer theorem \citep{bib:egenh} the relations between characteristics are invariant with respect to scaling, translation and rotation. Just the conservation of the relations with respect to the scaling enables us to use the implicit form of characteristics.
All the characteristics are monotonic increasing functions of $\frac{f}{B_{m}^{\alpha}}$
According to (\ref{expony1}) the power loss characteristics are parameterized by pressure and temperature. This dependence enables us to introduce a measure of distance in the space of characteristics. Let $(p_{1},T_{1})$ and $(p_{2},T_{2})$ be labels of the characteristics of the two composites which have been composed under conditions corresponding to these pressures and temperatures, respectively. Then the distance between these characteristics has the following general form:
\begin{equation}
\label{distance}
\rho(p_{1},T_{1},p_{2},T_{2})=R(|p_{1}-p_{2}|,|T_{1}-T_{2}|),
\end{equation}
where $R(\cdot,\cdot)$ satisfies axioms of the distance function.
Therefore, the set of all characteristics constitutes metric space.We have shown in \citep{bib:sok2} that this space consists of two subspaces. Therefore, by introducing the distance measure in the space of all characteristics we make each of these subspaces compact.
Each compact set corresponds to physical phase which is defined by characteristic values of the physical parameters. For instance, in \citep{bib:sok2} we considered the low and high losses phases of SOMALOY 500.
All the properties mentioned above are presented in Fig. \ref{H_L_phas}; however, the compactness of characteristics' subsets is ensured by the existence of (\ref{distance}).
These properties have enabled us to introduce a measure of power loss $V(T,p)$ which was the average of characteristics with respect to $\frac{f}{B_{m}^{\alpha}}$ \citep{bib:sok2}:
\begin{equation}
\label{V1}
V( {T}, {p})=\frac{1}{\phi_{max}-\phi_{min}}\int_{\phi_{min}}^{\phi_{max}}\frac{P_{tot}(\frac{f}{B_{m}^{\alpha}})}{B_{m}^{\beta}}\,d(\frac{f}{B_{m}^{\alpha}}).
\end{equation}
Note that the dimension of the denominator in front of the integral and the dimension of integration limits cancel themselves out.
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{GraphHigh_Low_losses.eps}
\caption{The five loss characteristics for $T\le 550^{o}C$ corresponding to the low losses phase and the one characteristic for $T=600^{o}C$ corresponding to the high losses phase.}
\label{H_L_phas}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
From the topological properties of the characteristics' set and on (\ref{expony1}) as well as on (\ref{V1}) the pseudo-state equation for soft magnetic composites has been derived. This equation has enabled us to determine the optimal values of the technological parameters \citep{bib:sok2}.
However, the described optimization relates only to the power losses and in design processes optimization of induction is also important. Therefore, the goal of this paper is to create a new algorithm for optimization of both the power losses and the induction within the frame of a bicriteria problem.
\section{Experimental Data}
Specimens were produced by cold pressing under pressure of 500$\dots$900 MPa. The specimens made of Somaloy 500 powder were cured at a temperature of 400$\dots$600$^o$C for 30 minutes in air atmosphere.
The specimens used in experiments were ring-shaped with a square cross-section. The specimens had the following dimensions: external diameter 55 mm, internal diameter 45 mm and thickness 5 mm.
Total power loss density $P_{tot}$, expressed in watts per kilogram (W/ kg), was obtained from measurements of the AC hysteresis cycle according to IEC Standard 60404-6 using the system AMH-20K-HS produced by Laboratorio Elettrofisico Walker LDJ Scientific. Total power losses$ P_{tot}$ were measured at maximum flux density $B_{m}$ = 0.1\dots1.3 T over a frequency range of 10 to 5000 Hz. During measurements of the total power losses $P_{tot}$, the shape factor of the secondary voltage was equal to 1.111$\pm$1.5 \%. Maximum measurement error of the total energy losses was equal to 3\%.
In order to optimize the magnetic properties, the magnetic inductions $B$ at fixed magnetic field $H$ equal to 1000 A/m were determined. These values were obtained from measurements of the DC magnetization curve according to IEC Standard 60404-4 using the same measuring system.
\section{Power Losses and Induction Pseudo-State Equations}
Optimization of the power losses was based on the topological properties of the characteristics. However, in the case of magnetic properties the situation is much simpler. For optimization of magnetic properties we selected induction $B_{1000}$ for the fixed magnetic field $H$=1000$($A/m$)$. We chose this value because the magnetic permeability of the soft magnetic composites reaches a maximum value around this magnetic field.
We expected that the pseudo-state equation would properly describe induction at this point as a function of $T$ and $p$. In the previous paper \citep{bib:sok2} it was assumed and confirmed that the loss measure $V$ obeys the scaling. Here, this assumption was extended to induction. In order to justify this assumption we referred to two phenomena: invariance of power losses (area of the hysteresis loop) with respect to scaling and invariance of the hysteresis loop with respect to scaling \citep{bib:sok3}. Therefore, for the bicriteria optimization problem, minimization of the power losses and maximization of the induction for a fixed magnetic field, we
used the following pseudo-state equations of general form:
\begin{equation}
\label{general2}
V\left(T,p\right)=\left(\frac{p}{p_{c}}\right)^{\gamma}\,\cdot\,\Phi(X),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{general3}
B_{1000}\left(T,p\right)=\left(\frac{p}{p'_{c}}\right)^{\gamma'}\,\cdot\,\Lambda(X'),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
X=\frac{\frac{T}{T_{c}}}{(\frac{p}{p_{c}})^{\delta}}\label{general2p},\label{general2a}\\
X'=\frac{\frac{T}{T'_{c}}}{(\frac{p}{p'_{c}})^{\delta'}}\label{general3p},\label{general3a}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\Phi(\cdot)$ and $\Lambda(\cdot)$ were arbitrary functions to be determined. $\gamma$, $\delta$ , $\gamma'$, $\delta'$ and $T_{c}$, $p_{c}$, $T'_{c}$, $p'_{c}$ are scaling exponents and scaling parameters respectively, and were to be determined. In the case of the power losses' pseudo-state equation all calculations concerning modelling of $\Phi(\cdot)$ and fitting of scaling exponents as well as model parameters were done in \citep{bib:sok2}. The most important result was the derivation of an infinite set of solutions for the technological parameters which minimized the power losses:
\begin{equation}
\label{optim}
\frac{\frac{T}{T_{c}}}{(\frac{p}{p_{c}})^{\delta}}=19,75.
\end{equation}
\section{ Induction Pseudo-State Equation}
In this Section we derive a pseudo-state equation for induction $B_{1000}$ which will constitute a function of the two variables $p$ and $T$. This function and the power losses' pseudo-state equation (\ref{general2}) will enable us to optimize induction and losses together. The optimization criteria are the following: find $V=V_{min}$ and $B_{1000}=B_{1000\,max}$ with respect to $p$ and $T$.
Deriving in \citep{bib:sok2} the form for $\Phi( \cdot)$ we reveal two phases of Somaloy 500: low losses and high losses. Therefore, in terms of the induction pseudo-state equation we have to take into account this phase separation. Measurement data of $B_{1000}$ vs. $T$ and $p$ are separated into these two phases in Table \ref{Table:Table2}.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\scriptsize
\caption {Somaloy 500. Measure of induction $B_{1000}$ vs. hardening temperature $T$ and compaction pressure $p$ for magnetic field $H$=1000 $($A/m$)$.}
\label{Table:Table2}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
Temperature & Pressure & Induction \\
\hline
$($K$)$ & $($MPa$)$ & $($T$)$ \\
\hline
723,15& 800& 0,378\\
773,15& 900& 0,496\\
773,15& 700& 0,483\\
673,15& 800& 0,335\\
773,15& 600& 0,467\\
823,15& 800& 0,546\\
773,15& 500& 0,414\\
\hline
741,15& 764& 0,425\\
773,15& 750& 0,489\\
773,15& 800& 0,504\\
773,15& 650& 0,469\\
773,15& 725& 0,467\\
873,15& 800& 0,568\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
The horizontal line between $B_{1000}=0,414($T$)$ and $B_{1000}=0,425($T$)$ indicates the crossover between the low losses phase and the high losses phase. This transition is clearly visible in the jump of the $V(T,p)$ function around the separation line \citep{bib:sok2}. For each phase we assume an independent branch of the pseudo-state equation in the form of the Pad{\'e} approximant. In order to simplify notations we introduce the following abbreviations:
\begin{equation}
\label{state0}
\pi=\frac{p}{p_{c}},
\hspace{2mm}\pi'=\frac{p}{p'_{c}},
\end{equation}
Expressing $\Lambda(\cdot)$ in (\ref{general3}) by the Pad{\'e} approximant we get the following form for the induction pseudo-equation of state:
\begin{equation}
\label {eq8a}
B_{1000}(T,p)= \pi'^{\gamma'}\frac{\tilde{G}_{0}+\tilde{G}_{1}\,X'+ \tilde{G}_{2}\,X'^2 +
\tilde{G}_{3}\,X'^3 +\tilde{G}_{4}\,X'^4}{1+\tilde{D}_{1}\,X'+ \tilde{D}_{2}\,X'^2 +
\tilde{D}_{3}\,X'^3 +\tilde{D}_{4}\,X'^4},
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{G}_{0},\dots,\tilde{G}_{4}, \tilde{D}_{1},\dots,\tilde{D}_{4}$ are parameters of the Pad\'e approximant. All parameters
have to be determined from the data presented in Table \ref{Table:Table2}. The corresponding pseudo-state equation for the power losses has been derived in \citep{bib:sok2}:
\begin{equation}
\label {eq8aa}
V(T,p)= \pi^{\gamma}\frac{G_{0}+G_{1}\,X+ G_{2}\,X^2 +
G_{3}\,X^3 +G_{4}\,X^4}{1+D_{1}\,X+ D_{2}\,X^2 +
D_{3}\,X^3 +D_{4}\,X^4}.
\end{equation}
\section{ Estimation of Parameters for Induction Pseudo-State Equation }
The above-mentioned crossover between low-loss and high-loss phases is observed as
A sudden change of $V$ between two points:
$[773,15;500,0]$ and $[742,15;764,0]$ Table \ref{Table:Table2}. However, this effect is not seen in the induction magnitude. Therefore in order to have a compact description of the power losses and the induction we take that into account and we divide the data of Table \ref{Table:Table2} into two subsets corresponding to the two respective phases. Minimizations of $\chi^{2}$ for both phases have been performed with Microsoft Excel 2010, where
\begin{equation}
\label{chi2}
\chi^{2}=\sum_{i=1}^{N}\left( B_{1000}(\tau'_{i},\pi'_{i})- {\pi'_{i}}^{\gamma'} \frac{\tilde{G}_{0}+\tilde{G}_{1}\,{X'}_{i}+ \tilde{G}_{2}\,{X'}_{i}^2 +
\tilde{G}_{3}\,{X'}_{i}^3 +\tilde{G}_{4}\,{X'}_{i}^4}{1+\tilde{D}_{1}\,{X'}_{i}+ \tilde{D}_{2}\,{X'}_{i}^2 +
\tilde{D}_{3}\,{X'}_{i}^3 +\tilde{D}_{4}\,{X'}_{i}^4}\right)^{2},
\end{equation}
where $N=7$ and $N=6$ for the low-losses and high-losses phases, respectively.
Table \ref{Table:Table3} and Table \ref{Table:Table4} present estimated values of the model parameters for the low-loss and high-loss phases, respectively.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\scriptsize
\caption {Somaloy 500, low-loss phase. Values of the induction pseudo-state equation's parameters and the Pad{\'e} approximant's coefficients of (\ref{eq8a}). }
\label{Table:Table3}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
$\gamma'$ & $\delta'$ & $T'_{c}$ & $p'_{c}$ & $\tilde{G}_{0}$ & $\tilde{G}_{1}$ & $\tilde{G}_{2}$\\
\hline
1,114 & 0,499 & 32,186 & 25,849 & -784,41 & 764,05 & -276,06\\
\hline\hline
$\tilde{G}_{3}$&$\tilde{G}_{4}$& $\tilde{D}_{1}$ &$\tilde{D}_{2}$ &$\tilde{D}_{3}$ &$\tilde{D}_{4}$ & -\\
\hline
43,412 & -2,4315& 3,6486&2,9005 &2,8373& 3,975 & - \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\scriptsize
\caption {Somaloy 500, high-losses phase. Values of the induction pseudo-state equation's parameters and the Pad{\'e} approximant's coefficients of (\ref{eq8a}). }
\label{Table:Table4}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
$\gamma'$ & $\delta'$ & $T'_{c}$ & $p'_{c}$ & $\tilde{G}_{0}$ & $\tilde{G}_{1}$ & $\tilde{G}_{2}$\\
\hline
1,1146 & 0,4992 & 32,19 & 25,83 & -808,91 &747,44 &-266,95\\
\hline\hline
$\tilde{G}_{3}$&$\tilde{G}_{4}$& $\tilde{D}_{1}$ &$\tilde{D}_{2}$ &$\tilde{D}_{3}$ &$\tilde{D}_{4}$ & -\\
\hline
42,852 & -2,5142 & 0,5846 & -3,001 &-9,968 & 7,1432 & - \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\section{Optimization of Induction and Power Losses}
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[ width=10cm]{Graphbinew1.eps}
\caption{Scaled $B_{1000}$ vs. scaled temperature in the low loss and high loss phases.}
\label{Fig.1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In the optimization of the power loss problem \citep{bib:sok2} we have applied low loss phase solutions and high loss phase solutions have not been considered. However, it is not clear whether this simplification excludes important solutions for the induction. The binary relations are invariant with respect to scaling \citep{bib:egenh},\citep{bib:sok2}. This enables us to present all scaled characteristics in the one picture Fig.\ref{Fig.1} and draw the following conclusion. All considered pressure characteristics of the high losses phase are covered by the set of the low losses phase characteristics. Therefore for further investigations we limit our searching to the low losses phase. To this end we draw part of the phase diagram of Somaloy 500 corresponding to the low losses phase Fig. \ref{Fig.2} and we deliver values of $G_{i}, D_{i},p_{c},\gamma$ which are displayed in Table \ref{Table:TableA}.\\
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[ width=10cm]{GraphLOSSESlow.eps}
\caption{Scaled $V$ vs. scaled temperature in the low losses phase. According to (\ref{general2a}) $\tau\,\pi^{-\delta}=X$.}
\label{Fig.2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\scriptsize
\caption {Somaloy 500, low-losses phase. Values of the $V$ pseudo-state equation's parameters and the Pad{\'e} approximant's coefficients of (\ref{eq8a}) \citep{bib:sok2}. This table is an amended version of Table 3 in \citep{bib:sok2} }
\label{Table:TableA}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
$\gamma$ & $\delta$ & $T_{c}$ & $p_{c}$ & $G_{0}$ & $G_{1}$ & $G_{2}$\\
\hline
1,2812 & 0,1715 &21,622 & 37,729 & 370315315 & -47752251 & 1734952\\
\hline\hline
$G_{3}$&$G_{4}$& $D_{1}$ &$D_{2}$ &$D_{3}$ &$D_{4}$ & -\\
\hline
-1,3764 & -678,26 & 170,80 & 6243,8 & 386,96 & -28,699 & - \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\scriptsize
\caption {Somaloy 500, low-losses phase. Optimum solutions in technological and in physical spaces. }
\label{Table:TableB}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
$p\textrm{(MPa)} $& $T(^o\textrm{C})$ &$V(\textrm{W/kgT}^{-\beta})$ & $B_{1000}\textrm{(T)}$ \\
\hline
389 &370 &14,1& 0,300\\
492 &407 &20,0 &0,356\\
584& 440 &27,3 &0,400\\
683& 478 &40,0 &0,449\\
733& 499& 50,0 &0,479\\
764 &515& 58,5& 0,500\\
800 &532 &70,0 &0,525\\
838& 549 &82,9&0,550\\
906& 570 &101& 0,580\\
979 &584& 116 &0,600\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[ width=10cm]{GRAPHp_T.eps}
\caption{Technological optimum curve presenting dependence of optimum temperature vs optimum pressure.}
\label{Fig.3}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[ width=10cm]{GRAPHB1000_V.eps}
\caption{Physical optimum curve. Induction $B_{1000}$ vs.losses measure $V$.}
\label{Fig.4}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Details of Bicriteria Problem}
All calculations in this section have to satisfy the following conditions: $18,4<X<22,9$, which results from limitation of the presented calculations to the Low Losses Phase presented in Fig. \ref{Fig.2}.
The considered bicriteria problem is formulated by the initial value of $V=V_{1}$, feasible set of $(p,T)$ and the two criteria : $V(p,T)=V_{min}$ whereas $B_{1000}(p,T)=B_{1000\,max}$.
Since increase of $B_{1000}$ causes increase of $V$ these conditions are in contradiction.
Therefore looked for solving criterion should lead to self- consistency between $V_{min}$ and $B_{1000\,max}$. Such consistency will be achieved as a fixed point of the following recurrence procedure.
Let maximiztion and minimization procedures be reprezented by the operators $\hat O_{max}$ and $\hat O_{min}$, respectively. Let $B_{1000}(T,p)$ and $V(T,p)$ be functions defined by $(\ref{eq8a})$ and $(\ref{eq8aa})$ respectively. Then the one step of independent optimizations of $B_{1000}(T,p)$ and $V(T,p)$ can be writen in the following form:
\begin{eqnarray}
\hat {O}_{max} B_{1000}=B_{1000,max}\hspace{2mm}for\hspace{2mm} T=T_{1},\hspace{2mm} p=p_{1} \label{R2}\\
\hat {O}_{min}V=V_{min}\hspace{2mm}for\hspace{2mm} T=T_{2},\hspace{2mm} p=p_{2} \label{R3}.
\end{eqnarray}
The obtained result consits of the two points $(T_{1},p_{1}),(T_{2},p_{2})$ and the corresponding values of magnitudes to be optimized $B_{1000}(T_{1},p_{1})$ and $V(T_{2},p_{2})$. Therefore, any further optimization is not possible and the bicriteria problem is not solved.
In order to mesh $B_{1000,max}$ and $V_{min}$ we introduce constrain $V(T,p)=V_{0}$ which protects (\ref{R2}) and (\ref{R3}) against collapse, where $V_{0}$ is an initial value of loss. Then (\ref{R2}) get the following form which coupled $B_{1000,max}$ and $V_{min}$ as well as leaved some space for further optimization:
\begin{equation}
\label{R4}
V(T,p)=V_{0},\hspace{2mm}\hat {O}_{max} B_{1000}(T,p)=B_{1000}(T_{1},p_{1}).
\end{equation}
Having $B_{1000}(T_{1},p_{1})$ we protect (\ref{R3}) against collapse:
\begin{equation}
\label{R5}
B_{1000}(T,p)=B_{1000}(T_{1},p_{1}),\hspace{2mm}\hat {O}_{min}V=V(T_{2},p_{2}).
\end{equation}
Therefore, after $n$ steps we obtain:
\begin{eqnarray}
V(T,p)=V(T_{2\,n},p_{2\,n}),\hspace{2mm}\hat {O}_{max} B_{1000}(T,p)=B_{1000}(T_{2\,n+1},p_{2\,n+1})\label{R6},\\
B_{1000}(T,p)=B_{1000}(T_{2\,n+1},p_{2\,n+1}),\hspace{2mm}\hat {O}_{min}V=V(T_{2\,n+2},p_{2\,n+2})\label{R7}.
\end{eqnarray}
(\ref{R4})-(\ref{R7}) generate the two converging series: $T_{1},T_{2},\cdots,T_{2\,n+2}$ and $p_{1},p_{2},\cdots,p_{2\,n+2}$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\lim\limits_{k\to\infty}T_{k}=T^{*}\label{fix1}\\
\lim\limits_{k\to\infty}p_{k}=p^{*}\label{fix2}.
\end{eqnarray}
Substituting $T^{*}$ and $p^{*}$ to $(\ref{eq8a})$ and $(\ref{eq8aa})$ we derive the meshed values of $V$ and $B_{1000}$:
\begin{equation}
\label{fix3}
V^{*}=V(T^{*},p^{*}),\hspace{2mm} B_{1000}^{*}=B_{1000}(T^{*},p^{*}).
\end{equation}
The found solutions are not unique. Selecting set of initial values for $V_{o}$ we derive the set of final solutions.
Optimization has been done by SOLVER routine of EXCEL2010 program. Obtained output
is presented in TABLE \ref{Table:TableB}. Fig.\ref{Fig.3} and Fig.\ref{Fig.4} present these results in technological and in physical spaces, respectively. The obtained results represented by markers are fixed points of the proposed procedure. There is one to one correspondence between these points in physical and technological spaces (TABLE \ref{Table:TableB}). In order to select an unique solution one must provide an additional criterion resulting from a relation between importance of losses and induction.
For instance, assuming the deepest minimum for the scaled measure of losses $V\pi^{-\gamma}$ we apply condition given by (\ref{optim}). Intersection of two curves presented in Fig.\ref{Fig.4NOWY} leads to the following single solution $p=382 (\textrm{MPa})$ and $T=363(^{o}\textrm{C})$. In the physical space this point corresponds to $V=13,64(\textrm{W}\,\textrm{kg}^{-1}\textrm{T}^{-\beta})$ and $B_{1000}=0,29(\textrm{T})$.
\begin{figure
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[ width=10cm]{NOWE_KRYTERIUM.eps}
\caption{Reduction of the feasible set of solutions for the technological parameters $\{p,T\}$ to the single point $(p=382 \textrm{MPa}, T=368^{o}\textrm{C})$.}
\label{Fig.4NOWY}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
At the end we pay some attention to the power losses measure $V$. This is an auxiliary magnitude which help us to derive values of designing technological parameters due to the following features:
\begin{itemize}
\item $V$ is pseudo-thermodynamic average with respect to magnitude created with the peak of induction and the frequency of electromagnetic field wave. Therefore, this includes information about both independent variables.
\item $V$ depends on the technological parameters.
\item Physical dimension of $V$ is unknown yet due to a dummy exponent $\beta$. However, the value of $V$ is well determined together with values of $p$ and $T$ which enables us to compose SMC specimen and to perform measurements of its characteristics. Finally, applying (\ref{uno}),(\ref{equ}) we are able to calculate $\beta$ and to determine the physical dimension of the current $V$.
\end{itemize}
\section{Conclusions}
We have presented method for the bicriteria optimization of the chosen physical properties of Soft Magnetic Composites. By this way we have solved the problem mentioned in \citep{bib:sok2} which concerns optimization of losses and induction. Achievement of the fixed point is interpreted as revelation of an equilibrium between the both assumed criteria.The crucial roles in the presented method play scaling and the notion of pseudo-state equation. The created system is as good as the experimental data which have been used for the estimations of model parameters. Therefore, presented here the first version will be improved by forthcoming new experimental data. The presented example in this paper is a minimum nontrivial case of Multiphysics problem and shows that this approach suits for designing Magnetic Composites. Therefore, the presented algorithm is going to be extended for more than two physical features of the composing material. For instance, the designing of magnetic composites requires also optimization of mechanical properties, since the susceptibility of such materials to cracking in service is of fundamental concern \citep{bib:crack}. We address the derived algorithm to designers of SMCs.
|
\section{Introduction}
{ Infrared dark clouds (IRDCs) are believed to represent the earliest stage in the formation of massive stars. Observations in different bands of the infrared wavelength have significantly improved our understanding of the dynamics of these clouds.} The early identifications of IRDCs based on the ISO and MSX data \citep{perault1996, egan1998} are extended by observations with the Spitzer Space Telescope. Higher resolution images in the Spitzer IRAC bands reveal intricate details of IRDCs thanks to galactic plane surveys such as GLIMPSE \citep{churchwell2009}. Observations by the Herschel Space Observatory provide a complementary view of IRDCs at far IR wavelengths \citep{molinari2011,wilcock2012a,ragan2012b}. Some of the IRDCs remain in absorption at the 70 $\mu$m band of the Herschel Space Observatory, and transition to emission in the 250, 350 and 500 $\mu$m bands. These 70 $\mu$m-dark IRDCs may represent dense clouds at the earliest evolution stage of star formation.
Among the IRDCs, those with masses of $10^3$ M$_\odot$\ or higher at a scale of $\sim$1 pc are the prime candidates to study massive star and cluster formation, { which hereafter we refer to as clumps\footnote{This paper follows the nomenclature used in \citet{zhang2009}, and refers a {\it cloud} as an entity of molecular gas of $10 - 100$ pc, a molecular {\it clump} as an entity of $${\raisebox{-.9ex}{$\stackrel{\textstyle<}{\sim}$}}$ $ 1 pc
that forms massive stars with a population of lower mass stars, and {\it dense cores} as an entity of 0.01 to 0.1 pc
that forms one or a group of stars, and {\it condensations} as an entity of $${\raisebox{-.9ex}{$\stackrel{\textstyle<}{\sim}$}}$ $ 0.01 pc.}.}
These clumps contain molecular masses similar to those that harbor massive protostars \citep{beuther2002a, beltran2004, walsh2014} and hypercompact HII regions \citep{zhang1998a,kurtz2002,keto2007}, whose { relatively large} luminosities ($> 10^4$ \lsun), the presence of complex molecules \citep{beuther2007d,rathborne2008,rathborne2011}, and massive and energetic outflows \citep{zhang2001,beuther2002b} all point to active massive star formation. In contrast to clouds with embedded massive star formation, IRDC clumps show few signs of star formation despite their large reservoir of molecular gas at high densities of $>10^4$ \cm3. A survey toward 144 IRDC clumps for H$_2$O masers, a signpost of star formation, found only 14\% of maser occurrence in the sample \citep{wang2006}, a frequency much lower than that in high-mass protostellar objects and HII regions \citep{beuther2002a}. In addition, IRDCs have consistently lower gas temperatures and line widths. Studies in $\rm{NH_3}$ found that they have a temperature { on the order of} 15 K, and a line width { on the order of} 2 \kms-1\ averaged over a spatial scale of 1pc \citep{pillai2006b,wang2008,ragan2011,ragan2012a}, lower than those in high-mass protostellar objects (HMPOs) and HII regions \citep{molinari1998, beuther2002a,lu2014}. These characteristics, together with their low luminosities, place massive IRDC clumps at an earlier evolutionary stage than HMPOs and HII regions \citep{rathborne2007}.
High resolution observations of IRDC clumps reveal structures at $${\raisebox{-.9ex}{$\stackrel{\textstyle<}{\sim}$}}$ $ 0.1pc scales and provide first glimpses of initial physical and chemical states of cluster star formation. IRDCs tend to have high deuteration fractionation and CO depletion \citep{pillai2007,pillai2012, hernandez2011a, fontani2011, chen2010, zhang2009}, as expected in a low temperature and high density environment \citep{caselli1999, caselli2002a, bergin2007}. { Thermodynamic} analysis found that cores in some clumps are sub-virial, with their gas mass a factor of several greater than the virial mass derived from the line width \citep{pillai2011, li2013, tan2013, lu2014}. Considering that these cores are embedded in dense clumps with substantial external pressure, the imbalance between the gravitational mass and the internal support can be even larger. These analyses do not include magnetic fields, which supply additional support. Indeed, in a recent polarization survey of 14 massive clumps with HMPOs, \citet{zhang2014} found that magnetic fields are important during the formation of dense cores. The plane-of-sky component of magnetic fields derived from statistical analysis is typically 1 - 10 mG \citep{girart2009, tang2009b, girart2013, qiu2013, frau2014, qiu2014}. The magnetic field strength required for a virial balance in these IRDCs cores, on the other hand, is on an order of 0.5 mG. Therefore, IRDC cores can still be in a virial equilibrium for a moderate magnetic field \citep{pillai2015}.
{ Understanding the formation of massive cores is an essential precursor to improving our understanding of the formation of star clusters.
For a typical star-formation efficiency of 10 - 30 \% \citep{lada2010}, and for a cluster having a Salpeter type initial stellar mass function (IMF), one would expect a $10^3$ M$_\odot$\ clump to form a cluster of mass between 100 to 300 M$_\odot$, with at least 75 stars of mass between 0.5 - 20 M$_\odot$.
Therefore, significant fragmentation of molecular gas is required in the clump in order to form a cluster of stars. In such a cluster environment, the majority of stars are at stellar masses of $${\raisebox{-.9ex}{$\stackrel{\textstyle<}{\sim}$}}$ $ 1 M$_\odot$, which corresponds well to the thermal Jeans mass in the clump with a typical temperature of 15 K and a density of $10^4$ \cm3} \citep{bonnell2002, larson2005, teixeira2007, zhang2009, palau2013}. The question arises when it comes to forming stars around 10 M$_\odot$\ or larger. Although hot cores surrounding massive protostars often have masses $10 - 10^2$ M$_\odot$\ at a scale of $${\raisebox{-.9ex}{$\stackrel{\textstyle<}{\sim}$}}$ $ 0.1pc based on direct high angular resolution observations \citep[e.g.][]{cesaroni1999a, beltran2006a, beuther2005c, zhang2007a, jimenez2012}, they may not represent the state of early fragmentation \citep{longmore2010, rathborne2008}. Observations of massive IRDCs provide direct insights into formation of massive cores. Indeed, significant fragmentation is observed in massive molecular clumps \citep{zhang2009, swift2009, zhang2011, wang2011, wang2012, wang2014}. These studies find that massive cores are typically 10 to $10^2$ times more massive than the thermal Jeans mass, pointing to a significant support from turbulence as well as perhaps magnetic fields. In addition, cores tend to further fragment, indicating that massive stars form in close groups.
This paper extends the study of a massive IRDC G28.34-0.06 (hereafter G28.34) and presents sensitive ALMA observations of continuum and molecular line emission at the 230 GHz band. The cloud,
at a kinematic distance of $\sim$4.8 kpc, contains several $10^3$ M$_\odot$ of
dense gas along the infrared absorption filament extending 6 pc
in the sky \citep{carey2000,
rathborne2006, pillai2006b, wang2008}. Figure 1 presents an overview of this region from the mid, far infrared to 1.3mm continuum, and gas in $\rm{NH_3}$. Two prominent dust continuum clumps, P1 and P2,
are revealed in the 850 and 450 $\mu$m images obtained from the JCMT \citep{carey2000} . Besides these two massive clumps, additional continuum peaks are revealed in the 1.2mm image obtained from the
IRAM 30m telescope \citep{rathborne2006, rathborne2010}.
Despite the fact that P1 and P2 clumps contain a similar amount of dense gas
within 0.3 pc, the P2 region has a high
gas temperature of 30 K, large $\rm{NH_3}$ FWHM line width of 3.3 \kms-1\,
and is associated with
a strong 24 $\mu$m point source with far IR luminosity of $10^3$ \lsun, and with emission of complex organic molecules such as CH$_3$OCH$_3$ and CH$_3$CHO \citep{vasyunina2014}.
This region is in contrast to P1 which has a gas temperature of 13 K, a relatively
narrow $\rm{NH_3}$ line width of 2.7 \kms-1, and an upper limit to the luminosity of
$10^2$ \lsun\ \citep[][hereafter Paper I]{wang2008}, and devoids of a complex molecular chemistry. Furthermore, the gas in P1 appears to be
externally heated with
temperatures decreasing from 20 K in the outside of the cloud
to 13 K inside of the cloud. Likewise, the turbulence measured by the
$\rm{NH_3}$ line widths
appears to decrease from pc scales to 0.1 scales.
These observations led \citet{wang2008} to suggest that P1 is at a much
earlier stage of massive star formation compared to P2.
The SMA observations at 1.3mm resolved the G28.34 P1 clump into five cores along
the filament with masses from 22 to 64 M$_\odot$\ and an average
projected separation of 0.19 pc \citep[][hereafter Paper II]{zhang2009}. Subarcsecond-resolution observations in 0.88mm reveal further fragmentation in two of the five cores \citep[][hereafter Paper III]{wang2011}. The masses of the fragments are typically a factor of 10 larger than the Jeans mass derived from the average temperature and density of the medium they are embedded in. Collimated outflows are detected in the CO 3-2 emission, emanating from each of the five cores whose temperatures indicate little heating by embedded protostars \citep[][hereafter Paper IV]{wang2012}. Besides CO, no molecular line emission is detected in the 2+2 GHz band of the SMA at 230 and 345 GHz. \citet{zhang2009} find strong CO depletion in the region. These previous studies found that cores in G28.34 P1 clump likely harbors intermediate mass protostars, based on the energetics of molecular outflows. Furthermore, these cores follow turbulent fragmentation, rather than thermal fragmentation.
Our previous observations of G28.34 with the SMA do not have adequate sensitivity and/or dynamic range to reliably detect fragments of thermal Jeans mass (approximately 2 M$_\odot$). In addition, the chemical properties in these cores are largely unknown due to a lack of detection of molecular line emission. Here, we present ALMA observations of G28.34 P1 in Band 6 (230 GHz). The continuum data reach a $1 \sigma$ rms of 75 $\mu$Jy, or 0.065 M$_\odot$\ at 1.3mm assuming a dust temperature of 15 K. There is a lack of a population of low-mass protostars with masses down to $\sim 0.4$ M$_\odot$\ within the clump. The observations also reveal a plethora of molecules arising from five intermediate-mass cores. This paper focuses on the analysis of physical properties of the region, and potential population of low-mass protostars in the protocluster. The chemical properties of dense cores will be discussed in a future publication. The paper is organized as follows: Section 2 presents the observational setup. Section 3 presents results, and in Section 4, we discuss the implication of the data relevant to cluster formation. Section 5 presents the conclusion of the study.
\section{Observations}
G28.34 P1 was observed with Atacama Large Millimeter/Submillimeter Array (ALMA) on 2012 November 15 in its extended configuration with a total of 29 12-m antennas in the array (Project ID: 2011.0.00429.S). Including time for calibration, the observing session lasted about 1.5 hours. The actual time on-source is 34 mins. The precipitable water vapor (PWV) was about 1.5 mm, resulting in system temperatures of 80 to 100 K at the observing frequencies. The observations employed the Band 6 (230 GHz) receivers in dual polarization mode. The projected baselines range from 15m to 400m (11.5 - 308 k$\lambda$). The resulting synthesized beam is $0.8''$ when using a robust weighting parameter of 0.5. The FWHM primary beam of the ALMA 12-m antennas is approximately 27$''$ at the observing frequencies.
To maximize continuum sensitivity, we used all 4 spectral windows with a bandwidth of 1.875 GHz in each window. The correlator was set in the FMT mode which provides a uniform channel width of 488.3 kHz (0.62-0.67 \kms-1\ at the observing frequencies).
The frequency coverage of the data range from 218.07 to 219.95 GHz in SPW0, from 215.62 to 217.49 GHz in SPW1, from 230.18 to 232.06 GHz in SPW2, and from 232.82 to 234.70 GHz in SPW3, respectively. Quasars J1751+096 and J1830+063 were used for bandpass and time dependent gain calibration, respectively. The flux calibration was achieved by observations of Neptune. The visibility data were calibrated in CASA by the ALMA supporting staff. We construct continuum visibility data using the line free spectral channels for the science target G28.34 P1. The continuum emission was self calibrated in CASA to further improve the dynamical range in the maps. The gain solutions from the self calibration were applied to the spectral line data. We found that the improvement in dynamical range in the continuum is about 20\%. The continuum image reaches a $1\sigma$ rms noise of 0.075 mJy in a synthesized beam of $0''.85 \times 0''.64$. The spectral line sensitivity per 0.7 \kms-1\ channel is 2.5 mJy for SPW0, SPW1 and SPW3. The noise in SPW2 is a factor of 3 higher for unknown reasons. Thus we exclude the SPW2 data for the continuum image.
\section{Results}
\subsection{Continuum Emission}
Figure 2 presents the 1.3mm continuum emission of G28.34 P1. The ALMA image reveals 5 continuum emission peaks along the infrared dark filament. The peaks of the continuum emission coincide with the 1.3mm SMA continuum sources SMA1 through 5 reported by \citet{zhang2009}. There appears to be another continuum peak $5''$ southwest of SMA5. This dust peak is located at 10\% of the primary beam response of the ALMA 12-m antenna. With a primary beam corrected peak flux of 4.8 mJy, it is below the $3\sigma$ sensitivity limit of the previous SMA observations \citep{zhang2009}. Since this feature is at 10\% of the primary beam response, clean does not work well. We refrain from discussion of this feature.
The superior sensitivity of the ALMA data reveals additional features in the continuum emission. SMA1, a single continuum source in the 1.3mm and 0.8 mm SMA data \citep{zhang2009, wang2011}, becomes a group of 4 continuum peaks. The brightest one coincides with the SMA1 position. The other 3 continuum peaks are at fluxes of 4.0, 2.0, 1.9 mJy, respectively. In addition, spatially extended emission is detected around SMA2, SMA3 and SMA4. Although SMA5 is a single continuum peak in the SMA data, the ALMA image reveals another continuum peak $2''$ to the east of SMA5. Overall, ALMA image reveals fainter and spatially extended emission. The integrated fluxes in the ALMA continuum image is 228 mJy, which is about 60\% higher than the
integrated flux of 143 mJy in the SMA 1.3mm image reported in \citet{zhang2009}.
For convenience of cross referencing, as well as following the convention in the previous papers, we name the 5 groups of sources in the ALMA continuum image Core 1 through Core 5, corresponding to SMA1 through SMA5 in \citet{zhang2009}, respectively.
To identify structures in the 1.3mm continuum emission, we { employed} dendrogram algorithm to decompose the continuum emission. However, the decomposition misses some obvious emission features. We then resort to fitting elliptical Gaussian to the continuum image, but using the smallest features identified by dendrogram as a starting point of initial guesses for the Gaussian fitting. We identify a total of 38 components in the simultaneous Gaussian fit. The rms in the residual image is $6 \times 75 \mu$Jy, corresponding to a detection limit of about 0.4 M$_\odot$.
We report the coordinates, flux, the size of the objects in Table 1. The association with previous reported SMA continuum peaks is also listed in the table for cross referencing. The brightest components with peak fluxes $>$ 1.9 mJy~beam$^{-1}$ are also labeled in Figure 2.
\citet{wang2012} derived a gas temperature of 9 to 22K using the higher angular resolution $\rm{NH_3}$ (1,1) and (2,2) data.
Adopting the dust opacity law in \citet{hildebrand1983} and a dust
emissivity index of $\beta$ = 1.5, appropriate for
massive dense cores based on multi-wavelength observations at mm and submm
wavelengths \citep{beuther2007b}, we obtained gas masses of the objects
ranging from 0.5 to 16 M$_\odot$, assuming a gas-to-dust mass ratio of 100. These parameters are also listed in Table 1. The corresponding H$_2$ densities in these sources range from $10^6$ to
$10^7$ \cm3.
\subsection{Molecular Line Emission}
Previous arc-second resolution observations detected $\rm{NH_3}$ and $^{12}$CO emission in the G28.34-P1 region with the VLA and SMA, respectively \citep{wang2008, zhang2009, wang2011, wang2012}.
Besides CO, the SMA observations in the 230 GHz band did not detect line emission at a $1 \sigma$ rms noise of 100 mJy~beam$^{-1}$ (at a resolution of $1''.2$ and a spectral resolution of 1.3 \kms-1). The ALMA observations in the same band reveal line emission from 19 molecular species including C$^{18}$O, $^{13}$CS, N$_2$D$^+$, DCN, H$_2$S, SiO 5-4, \h2co, CH$_3$OH, and SO, at a level of $> 5 \sigma$ with a $1 \sigma$ rms noise of 2.5 mJy~beam$^{-1}$.
Figure 3 presents the line spectra from the SPW0 spectral window covering 215.7 through 217.5 GHz toward Components 9 and 38, the brightest continuum peaks in Core 2 and Core 5 (see Table 1), respectively. The fluxes are corrected for the ALMA primary beam attenuation for direct comparison. Despite the fact that the two cores have a similar flux in dust continuum, the molecular line emission from the two are very different. The line emission from Core 5 is much fainter than from Core 2. Of particular note is that the emission from C$^{18}$O and SO is nearly non detected in Core 5. A lack of C$^{18}$O emission is consistent with CO depletion in cold and dense environments at the very early stage of evolution as suggested in \citet{zhang2009}. The fact that we do not detect SO in Core 5 may be related to a lack of injection of ice mantles in the gas phase by thermal desorption, i.e., by an increase of temperature of dust in this core. The chemistry of SO is initiated by the injection of H$_2$S from mantles. H$_2$S is destroyed by H and H$_3$O$^+$ to form S and H$_3$S$^+$, which then react with O and OH to form SO \citep{charnley1997}. A lack of SO emission in Core 5 indicates that the protostar(s) embedded are at an even earlier stage of evolution than those in Core 2.
Figure 4 presents the integrated emission of C$^{18}$O, $^{13}$CS, N$_2$D$^+$, and H$_2$S lines. The line emission of these molecules is detected mostly near the dust cores. The C$^{18}$O emission is strongly detected toward Core 1 through Core 4. There is a faint emission toward Core 5. On the other hand, emissions of $^{13}$CS and H$_2$S are seen toward Core 2 through Core 4. The N$_2$D$^+$ emission is detected in the dense ridge along the filament. However, the emission appears to avoid the dust continuum peaks.
Besides the above mentioned molecules that mainly trace gas around dense cores,
\h2co, CH$_3$OH and SO are also present towards Cores 1 through 5 (see Figure 4). Strong emission from \h2co, CH$_3$OH and SO line wings $> 3$ \kms-1 from the cloud systemic velocity is detected outside of dust continuum emission. Their spatial coincidence with the outflows in CO 3-2 \citep{wang2011} and 2-1 (see Section 3.4) indicates their outflow origin. We will discuss outflows in the region based on the CO 2-1 and SiO 5-4 data in Section. 3.4. Cores 2, 3 and 4 are seen in C$^{18}$O, $^{13}$CS, N$_2$D$^+$, H$_2$S, \h2co, CH$_3$OH and SO, thus appear to be chemically more active than Cores 1 and 5.
\subsection {Core structure and dynamical state}
At a much higher sensitivity than the previous high resolution studies of \citet{zhang2009} and \citet{wang2011}, the 1.3mm continuum data from ALMA reveal additional fragments. Core 1, which is shown as a single dust peak in the SMA observations, exhibits three additional condensations. These structures are likely the outcome of continuing fragmentation upon the formation of cores along the filament. We investigate the { thermodynamical} properties from the parsec-scale clump to the condensations ($\sim$ 0.01pc). We measure the size of the clump, cores and condensations using a two dimensional Gaussian fit to the dust continuum emission. The fitting reports the integrated flux and the size of the structure. We then measure the line width at the same spatial scales. For the clump, we use the 1.3mm dust continuum data from the IRAM 30m telescope \citep{rathborne2006} and the $\rm{NH_3}$ data from the Effelsberg 100m telescope \citep{pillai2006b,wang2008}. For dense cores, we use the SMA 1.3mm continuum \citep{zhang2009}, and the $\rm{NH_3}$ data obtained from the VLA \citep{wang2008,wang2012}. At the scale of condensations, no spectral line emission was detected before the ALMA observations. In the ALMA data, a group of molecular lines, e.g., SO, \h2co and CH$_3$OH, is affected by protostellar outflows. Emission from C$^{18}$O, $^{13}$CS, N$_2$D$^+$ and H$_2$S is found toward the dust continuum emission. N$_2$D$^+$ is in general a reliable tracer of cold and dense gas. However, its emission is not present toward all condensations, and does not appear to correlate well with the dust continuum peaks. On the other hand, it appears that the C$^{18}$O emission coincides with the dust continuum emission well. We measure the line width using the C$^{18}$O data and found a typical FWHM of 1.7 \kms-1. This value is consistent with the line width of N$_2$D$^+$ in the vicinity of Core 3, the strongest emission in the map.
From the measurements described above, we compute the gas mass from the dust continuum emission and the virial mass for the clump (size $\sim$ 1 pc), cores (size $${\raisebox{-.9ex}{$\stackrel{\textstyle<}{\sim}$}}$ $ 0.1 pc) and condensations (size $${\raisebox{-.9ex}{$\stackrel{\textstyle<}{\sim}$}}$ $ 0.01 pc). The virial mass is computed following
$$M_{vir} = 3k {r \sigma_v^2 \over G}.$$
Here $r$ is the radius and $\sigma_v$ is the line-of-sight velocity dispersion, and G the gravitational constant. $k = {5-2a \over 3 - a}$ is a correction factor dependent on the density profile $\rho \propto r^{-a}$ \citep{macLaren1988}. For a constant density, $a = 0$, k= 5/3, the above equation can be rewritten as
$$M_{vir} = 210 ({r \over pc}) ({\Delta V_{FWHM} \over km~s^{-1}})^2 M_\odot. $$
Here $\Delta V_{FWHM}$ is the FWHM of the line width along the line of sight.
Table 2 lists gas mass, line width, radius and virial mass of the cloud features identified.
As shown in Table 2, the line width measured from the $\rm{NH_3}$ (1,1) line decreases from the clump scale of 0.6pc in diameter to 0.05pc in dense cores, and then increases at scales of 0.017pc at which the condensations are identified. The decrease of line width toward smaller spatial scales in this region is first reported by \citet{wang2008} when analyzing the $\rm{NH_3}$ line width obtained from the VLA. They found that the $\rm{NH_3}$ line width from the VLA alone is systematically smaller than the line width from the $\rm{NH_3}$ spectra from the combined VLA and the Effelsberg 100m telescope. In addition, \citet{wang2008} found that the $\rm{NH_3}$ line width is inversely correlated with the $\rm{NH_3}$ fluxes. The authors interpret the change of line width as indications of turbulence dissipation from the clump to core scales.
The ALMA observations reveal for the first time spectral line information in dust condensations identified with the SMA at 880 $\mu$m and ALMA at 1.3mm. The line width derived from C$^{18}$O in condensations are consistently larger than the $\rm{NH_3}$ line width in the cores. Since star formation has already taken place in these condensations, the line width can be broadened by infall and rotation in the envelope \citep[e.g.,][]{zhang1997,zhang1998a,zhang1998b}. The C$^{18}$O line width can also be enhanced due to an increase of turbulence thanks to the injection of energy from protostellar outflows (see next Section).
The virial parameter, $\alpha$, defined as $M_{vir}/M_{gas}$, is smaller than 1 in clump, cores as well as condensations for a constant density distribution. Previous observations of G28.34 found a density profile $\rho \propto r^{-a}$ with the power-law index, a=2 \citep{zhang2009,wang2011} { for detected cores}. It is reasonable to assume a similar density profile in condensations. With a power-law index of 2, the virial masses reported in Table 2 are reduced by a factor of 5/3. Applying this correction to the $\alpha$ values in Table 2 leads to $\alpha$ much smaller than 1. Our observations indicate that molecular gas is not in a virial equilibrium from the clump to condensations.
The virial analysis presented above does not include magnetic fields, which can in turn increase the virial mass. Magnetic fields provide additional pressure in the medium. Their contribution to the virial mass for a critical mass-to-flux ratio of { gravitational collapse} is given by $M_B= {\pi r^2 B \over \sqrt{4 \pi^2 G}}$. { Here $M_B$ is the contribution to the virial mass from magnetic fields}. There are no direct measurements of magnetic fields in G28.34 cores. However, recently studies of dust polarization in regions harboring high-mass protostellar objects found that magnetic fields play an important role in the fragmentation of molecular clumps \citep{zhang2014,koch2014}. Detailed analysis reports the plane-of-sky component of magnetic fields of order of 1-10 mG \citep{girart2009, tang2009b, girart2013, qiu2013, frau2014, qiu2014}, which can increase the virial mass significantly \citep[e.g.][]{frau2014}. Recently, \citet{pillai2015} reported a magnetic field strength of 0.27 mG in an IRDC clump G11.11 using the dust polarization data from JCMT. Assuming the same magnetic field flux in the G28.34 P1 clump, we find the mass for a critical mass-to-flux ratio of $1.6 \times 10^3$ M$_\odot$. The virial parameter including the effect of magnetic fields becomes 2 in the clump. We cannot evaluate virial parameters for { the cores detected here} since there is no direct estimate of magnetic fields in IRDC cores. { However, for the sake of argument we assume a magnetic field of 0.27 mG, the same as that reported for IRDC G11.11, the virial parameters derived for cores detected here are still smaller than unity. We therefore suggest, a field strength of 2 mG - 5 mG would be required to make virial parameters close to 1 for these cores.}
\subsection {Molecular outflows}
Molecular outflows are detected { using} several tracers including CO, SiO, \h2co, CH$_3$OH, and SO. Figure 5 presents CO 2-1 and SiO 5-4 emission in outflows. As shown in Figure 5, high velocity line emission is detected around Cores 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. There appears to be more than one outflow originating from Cores 1, 2, 3 and 4, consistent with the presence of multiple protostars indicated by multiple continuum peaks. We identify outflow pairs by inspecting the channel maps of the CO, SiO, \h2co, CH$_3$OH, and SO emission. A total of 10 outflows are identified in the region. Of them, three outflows (Outflows 3a, 3b and 4c) were not seen in the previous study by \citet{wang2011}. Table 3 lists the tracers through which they are identified. The CO emission is the most effective tracer for most outflows. However, outflows 1a and 4b exhibit much stronger emission in SiO, CH$_3$OH and \h2co emission. SiO and CH$_3$OH are heavily depleted with low abundances ($10^{-12}$ and $10^{-10}$, respectively) in cold and dense regions \citep{martin1992, jimenez2004}. Their abundances are significantly enhanced in protostellar outflows due to shocks { triggered by the interaction between protostellar wind and the ambient medium}, and release the Si and CH$_3$OH molecule off the dust grain. The enhanced SiO and CH$_3$OH are seen in both low-mass and high-mass protostellar outflows \citep[e.g. L1157,][]{zhang1995b,qiu2007}.
Some of the outflows in the region display remarkable collimation. In particular, outflow 2a associated with Core 2 extends more than 40$''$, or 1 pc in the sky. The full extent is not known since it is beyond the FWHM of the primary beam of the ALMA 12m antenna. The width of the CO outflow is 1$''$.1, yielding a collimation factor, defined as the ratio between the major and the minor axis, of more than 35. This outflow, reaching a velocity $\pm$ 50\kms-1\ from the cloud velocity, also has
a wide angle component seen in the CO V$_{LSR}$ velocities of 90 - 92 \kms-1. The component has an opening angle of 10$^\circ$. The outflow consists of a chain of CO knots appearing symmetrically with respect to the outflow origin, which is also seen in the CO 3-2 emission with the SMA \citep{wang2011}. The projected spacing of the CO knots are $2''.5$, or $1.2 \times 10^4$ AU. These knots likely correspond to an increase in mass ejection related to episodic accretion, as reported in both low-mass and high-mass protostars \citep[e.g.,][]{qiu2007,qiu2009b}. Assuming a jet velocity of 100 to 500 \kms-1, the time scale associated with the episodic ejection is $5 \times 10^2$ to $10^2$ years. The enhanced accretion/mass ejection can be due to disk instabilities triggered by interactions with a companion.
We derive mass, momentum and energy in molecular outflows identified in the CO following the prescription outlined in \citet{zhang2001,zhang2005a}. We assume that the CO emission is optically thin, and a CO to H$_2$ abundance of $10^{-4}$. We adopt an excitation temperature of 18K following \citet{wang2012}. When an outflow is seen in both CO and SiO, the outflow parameters are derived using the CO data only. For outflows that are seen in SiO only, we use the SiO data to derive outflow parameters assuming an optically thin approximation and a relative [SiO]/[H$_2$] abundance of $9.2 \times 10^{-10}$ \citep{sanhueza2012}. This abundance value of SiO yields consistent outflow masses computed from the SiO and the CO emission. The outflow parameters are given in Table 3.
The mass of the G28.34 outflows, without correcting for the optical depth, ranges from 0.054 to 2.8 M$_\odot$. Besides the outflow 1a, all other outflows are more massive than 0.15 M$_\odot$. These values are about one order of magnitude greater than the typical mass of outflows powered by low-mass protostars \citep{dunham2014}, and are one order of magnitude lower than the outflow mass associated with massive protostars \citep{zhang2005a}.
Protostellar outflows are connected to mass ejection during the accretion phase of young stellar objects \citep{shang2007}. High angular resolution observations provide spatially resolved images of massive outflows \citep{su2004,qiu2007,qiu2009b} associated with individual protostars. The inferred accretion rate from massive protostellar outflows is typically 10$^{-4}$ M$_\odot$~yr$^{-1}$ \citep{qiu2011}. For G28.34 P1, the accretion rate inferred from the outflow rate is around $10^{-5}$ M$_\odot$~yr$^{-1}$ for outflow 2a. In order to reach a star of 10 M$_\odot$, it takes $10^6$ years for a constant accretion. This time scale appears to be too long. Therefore, it is likely that the accretion rate increases with time as well as with the protostellar mass. { A variable rate of accretion} has been proposed in the theoretical model of massive star formation \citep[e.g.][]{mckee2002}, and is in agreement with observations that suggest mass infall rates increase with the protostellar mass \citep{zhang2005b}.
\subsection {Velocity structure along the main filament}
Filaments are dominant structures in the interstellar medium and molecular clouds. Recent galactic-wide surveys reinforce this scenario with findings of spectacular network of filaments in both nearby and more distant molecular clouds \citep{churchwell2009, molinari2010b}. The web-like filaments in massive star forming regions \citep{liu2012, galvan2010, galvan2013, busquet2013} could be part of the hub-filament structure \citep{myers2009b} that transports gas and dust to fuel massive star formation at the center the web.
G28.34 P1 is embedded in a filamentary infrared dark cloud that spans 6pc { on the plane of the sky}. We analyze the large scale $\rm{NH_3}$ data obtained with the VLA \citep{wang2008}. Figure 6 presents the peak velocity of the $\rm{NH_3}$ (1,1) emission in the region. There are complex velocity structures along the major axis of the filament as well as perpendicular to the filaments (near MM10). Toward clump P1, the line peak velocity varies from 78 to 80 \kms-1. To further examine the
gas velocity, we present in Figure 7 the position velocity plot of the $\rm{NH_3}$ (1,1) emission.
The cut of the pv diagram is along the main axis of the filament with a reference position $(0'', 10'')$ from Core 3, and a position angle of $44^\circ$. We also compute the centroid velocity using the main component of the $\rm{NH_3}$ (1,1) emission, following the formulation of the first moment $v_c = \int F(v) v dv / \int F(v) dv$. Here, $F(v)$ is the flux density, and $v$ is the line-of-sight velocity of the $\rm{NH_3}$ (1,1) emission. We used a flux threshold of $5 \sigma$ noise (10 mJy) when computing the moment data to avoid the contamination from the satellite hyperfines. The right panel of Figure 7 plots the line-of-sight velocity along the main axis. We also mark the spatial locations of the dust continuum sources. The filament spans a velocity range from 78 to 82 \kms-1, { which may arise from large scale gas motions in the filament.}
The position velocity diagram and the $\rm{NH_3}$ centroid velocity shown in Figure 7 display velocity shifts along the main axis of the filament. There are four mm continuum clumps along the filament, MM4, MM9, MM10 and MM14, reported in \citet{rathborne2010}. MM4, which is G28.34 P1, and MM10, MM14 are at velocities around 79 \kms-1, while MM9 are at velocity around 80 \kms-1. There is a large scale velocity gradient of 0.6 \kms-1 over an angular scale of $80''$ from MM10, MM14 to MM4. In addition, there is a sea-saw velocity pattern with a peak-to-peak amplitude of 0.4 \kms-1. Similarly, the filament near MM9 shows sea-saw velocity patterns with an amplitude of 1 \kms-1. The velocity pattern is consistent with gas flows along the filament toward the clumps and cores \citep[e.g.][]{hacar2011}
\section {Discussion}
\subsection {Fragmentation of massive molecular clumps and formation of massive cores}
High angular resolution observations of massive IRDC clumps { in the recent past} \citep{wang2008,zhang2009,swift2009,rathborne2011,zhang2011,wang2011,wang2012,wang2014,tan2013,sanhueza2013} reveal the physical and chemical state of massive star formation at { an early stage of protostar formation}. Despite typical source distances of kilo-parsecs, interferometric observations achieve sufficient linear resolution to spatially resolve the global thermal Jeans length in molecular clumps (0.15pc for a density of $3 \times 10^4$ \cm3 and a temperature of 15K \citep{pillai2006b,wang2008}). Dense cores revealed in dust continuum emission contain masses at least a factor of 10 larger than the global thermal Jeans mass in the clump\footnote{For cores with masses exceeding the thermal Jeans mass, we refer them as super Jeans cores.} \citep{zhang2009,rathborne2010,sadavoy2010,zhang2011,csengeri2011,wang2011,sanhueza2013, wang2014}, but { comparable} with the turbulent Jeans mass { of the clumps; the sound speed in this instance} is replaced by the turbulent line width. { Observations at higher angular resolution suggest that the detected cores themselves are sub-fragmented.} In IRDC G28.34 and IRDC G11.11, for example, dusty cores first identified at a resolution of 0.05pc were resolved into several continuum peaks { at a spatial resolution on the order of 0.01 pc} \citep{wang2011, wang2014}. These observations indicate that the super Jeans cores continue to fragment and lead to the formation of a group of stars. { However, this need not always be the case. Some super Jeans cores remain starless, but exhibit oscillations in the radial direction\citep[e.g.][]{anathpindika2013}, as demonstrated in hydrodynamic models for such cores \citep[see also,][]{keto2014}.}
A similar trend is also observed when examining the relation between the mass of fragments and the separation. \citet{wang2014} analysed observations of 4 IRDC clumps and found that the fragment mass and separation follow the turbulent Jeans fragmentation if the sound speed in the { Jeans formula is replaced by the turbulent line width. This fragmentation is significantly different to filaments typically observed in low-mass star-forming clouds. Prestellar cores along these filaments are usually separated by a thermal Jeans length \citep[see e.g.][]{arzoumanian2011}.}
These observations offer direct comparison to theoretical models on massive star and cluster
formation. Observations find that massive stars and clusters form in higher density
and more turbulent regions of molecular clouds as compared to their low-mass
counterparts. \citet{bonnell2002} propose in the competitive accretion model
that clouds fragment initially into cores of thermal Jeans mass. These cores subsequently form
low-mass protostars that accrete the distributed gas from a
reservoir of material in the molecular clump. Prototars located near
the center of the gravitational potential accrete at a
higher accretion rate because of a stronger gravitational pull,
thus, experience a faster mass growth. This competitive accretion
model reproduces the stellar IMF observed \citep{bonnell2004}.
Alternatively, \citet{mckee2002} put forward a turbulent core model, in
which stars form via a monolithic collapse of a massive core. In this model, cores are supported by turbulence in a virial equilibrium and have masses much larger than the thermal Jeans mass. Protostellar feedback such as
heating from the embedded protostars increases the gas temperature,
and thus, suppress fragmentation. Therefore, cores harboring massive stars { usually do not sub-fragment} significantly and form one or a few stars \citep{krumholz2005a, krumholz2007}.
{ Observations of typical cores found in IRDCs suggest that relatively massive cores could possibly sub-fragment to form smaller cores which then spawn protostars. The embedded protostars} continue to accrete material from their respective surrounding environment. This picture is similar to the competitive accretion model in that cores do not acquire all their mass before the birth of a protostar, but continue to gain mass during the protostellar accretion. { However}, massive cores contain super Jeans mass, unlike what is assumed in the competitive accretion model, but it is close to the turbulent core model. In the meantime, massive cores appear to fragment and form a group of stars, in contrast with the picture of monolithic collapse. The $\rm{NH_3}$ temperature measured in these cores are typically $< 20$ K,
indicating that protostellar heating is ineffective in suppressing fragmentation in the core \citep[see also][]{longmore2010}. While magnetic fields can potentially play an important role in suppressing fragmentation \citep{palau2013, palau2014, zhang2014},
turbulence provides significant support in these cores. The $\rm{NH_3}$ data from the VLA observations
\citep{wang2008} demonstrate that despite turbulence decay,
the line widths measured at $3'' - 4''$ scales appear to be large
enough to support the cores in G28.34 P1. Once the protostars are formed, outflows inject energy in to the immediate surrounding of protostars, and increase the line width as seen in the C$^{18}$O line width. This feedback provides additional support that may stop further fragmentation in the gas at the early stage of a cluster formation \citep{wang2010}.
{ One of the key assumptions in the monolithic collapse model is that cluster forming clumps are approximately in hydrostatic equilibrium \citep{mckee2002}. This is based on the observational fact that the time scale for star formation is typically several dynamical times (the free-fall time scale of the gas).} The virial analysis of the G28.34 P1 clump and cores and condensations within { the core} reveals that these entities are far from a virial equilibrium. The virial parameter, defined as $M_{vir}/M_{gas}$, is less than 0.47 from the clump to cores and condensations (See Table 2). This finding suggests that { molecular gas in the clump is not in a virial balance during star formation}. Similar findings of sub-viral parameters are also reported recently \citep{pillai2011,li2013, tan2013, lu2014}. However, a key component that is not accounted for in the virial analysis is magnetic fields. A moderate field of 0.5 mG or larger can bring the virial parameter to closer to 1. Although magnetic fields have not been measured directly in IRDC cores as present day interferometers lack the necessary sensitivity, such a field strength is reported in more evolved regions such as hot molecular cores \citep[e.g.][]{zhang2014}. As ALMA begins to offer continuum polarization capabilities now and line polarization in the future, it is expected that direct constraints on magnetic field strengths in regions at the early stages of cluster formation will become available in the next several years.
\subsection {Formation of massive stars through low- to intermediate-mass stages}
G28.34 P1 has a luminosity of $10^2$ \lsun, a gas temperature of $< 20$ K at a spatial scale of 0.1pc, and a relatively small line width of $<$ 1.7 \kms-1 in FWHM. In the same complex, G28.34 P2, a molecular clump of 880 M$_\odot$\ with a luminosity of $10^3$ \lsun\ and an $\rm{NH_3}$ temperature of 45 K, has embedded protostellar object(s) around 8 M$_\odot$ \citep{zhang2009}. The relatively moderate luminosity, low gas temperature and smaller line widths indicate that G28.34 P1 is at an earlier evolutionary stage than P2 which already has embedded massive protostars. The large reservoir of molecular gas in P1 demonstrates { its potential to form stars in future}. Based on the empirical mass-size relation \citep[e.g.,][]{kauffmann2010a}, G28.34 P1 will likely bear massive stars when accretion is complete.
While the comparison of physical properties between G28.34 P1 and P2 places P1 at an evolutionary stage prior to the presence of a massive protostar, the spectral line data from ALMA further constrains the evolutionary stage of P1. The SMA observations presented in \citet{zhang2009} did not detect molecular line emission besides the CO 2-1 line in the P1 clump at a sensitivity of 100 mJy~beam$^{-1}$ (or 0.4 K), in contrast to the line emission from complex organic molecules in G28 P2 \citep[see also][]{vasyunina2014}. The ALMA observations detect a plethora of spectral lines from 19 molecules at a $1 \sigma$ flux sensitivity of 2.5 mJy~beam$^{-1}$ (0.07K). The line emission includes molecules such as CH$_3$OH that has a low abundance of $\sim 10^{-10}$ in dense and cold environment thanks to its depletion to dust grains \citep{jimenez2005}. Protostellar heating and/or shocks from outflows release CH$_3$OH to the gas phase and enhance its chemical abundance. Likewise, SO and OCS abundances are enhanced as a consequence of the release of ice mantles into the gas phase by protostellar heating \citep{jimenez2012}. Therefore, the detection of complex organic and sulfur-bearing molecules serves as a valuable indicator of protostellar heating.
A detailed chemical modeling of the spectral lines detected in G28.34 P1 is beyond the scope of the present work and best left for a future article. In order to constrain its chemical evolution, we resort to observations of an intermediate-mass protostar ($L \sim 10^2$ \lsun) in the DR21 filament obtained with the SMA (Zhang et al., in preparation). The SMA data consist of compact and subcompact configurations with a synthesized beam of $3''$. We convolve the SMA data to the same linear resolution as that of the G28.34 spectra in Figure 3, and scale the fluxes according to $(1/D)^2$ to account for the distance difference between the two sources. Here, we adopt a distance of D=1.5 kpc for DR21 \citep{girart2013}. Figure 3 presents the template spectra of the intermediate-mass protostar in the DR21 filament after the flux scaling.
The template spectra reveal line emission from molecules C$^{18}$O, CH$_3$OH, \h2co, \hc3n and SO, indicative of protostellar heating in the core. The line fluxes in the template spectra match the observed fluxes in Core 2 well, but are stronger than the line emission in Core 5. This comparison indicates that Cores 2, 3 and 4 harbors intermediate-mass protostars, while Cores 1 and 5 are less active chemically, and may have low-mass protostars embedded or are at an earlier stage of evolution, although this may be inconsistent with the dynamical age of $10^4$ yrs of the outflow in Core 5.
\subsection {Formation of low-mass stars in a cluster}
The clump G28.34 P1, with a mass of $10^3$ M$_\odot$\ and an average density of $7 \times 10^4$ \cm3\ can potentially form a cluster of stars with a total mass of 100 to 300 M$_\odot$, assuming a 10\% to 30\% star formation efficiency. If the stars follow a Salpeter IMF, one expects 75 to 223 stars in the range of 0.5 to 20 M$_\odot$. Among these stars, about 10\% of them could possibly have stellar masses greater than 10 M$_\odot$, and 90\% of stars have stellar masses less than 10 M$_\odot$, and 60\% of stars have masses between 0.5 and 1 M$_\odot$.
The ALMA observations of G28.34 P1 reveal strong dust continuum emission along the ridge of the filament. The spectral line data and the presence of complex organic molecules indicate that these cores have embedded intermediate-mass protostars. In addition, some of the lower-mass fragments (see Table 1) may harbor low-mass stars. We use the dust continuum data presented in Figure 2 and Table 1 to construct the probability function of the mass distribution. { Figure 8 presents the cumulative mass function ($ N (>M) \sim M$, here $N$ is the number of sources in the mass range $ > M$) for the 38 objects identified.} The dashed line denotes the slope of the Salpeter IMF. As shown in Figure 8, if the cumulative mass function follows the shape of the stellar IMF, then there is a large deficit of lower-mass cores in G28.34 P1. In the mass range of 1-2 M$_\odot$\ the number of cores is more than 5 times lower than the expected Salpeter slope.
If low-mass stars in a cluster arise from thermal Jeans mass fragmentation \citep{larson2005, bonnell2002, palau2013}, G28.34 P1 has a global thermal Jeans mass of 2 M$_\odot$, and Jeans length of 0.1 pc.
The ALMA continuum image at 1.3mm reaches a $1 \sigma$ rms noise of 0.075 mJy~beam$^{-1}$. For an average temperature of 15 K derived from $\rm{NH_3}$ observations \citep{wang2012}, this flux corresponds to a mass of 0.065 M$_\odot$, assuming a dust opacity law of \citet{hildebrand1983}, a dust emissivity index of 1.5, and a dust to H$_2$ ratio of $1 : 100$.
The $1 \sigma$ rms noise in the ALMA 1.3mm continuum image is a factor of 30 times lower than the global thermal Jeans mass in the molecular clump. The linear resolution afforded by ALMA observations is 0.02 pc, much smaller than the Jeans length. Therefore, a lack of detection of cores 1-2 M$_\odot$\ is significant.
In order to examine the limitation of dynamic range in the ALMA image, we perform simulated observations using the clean model of the 1.3mm continuum image shown in Figure 2, derived from {\it clean} in CASA. To test the ability of recovering low-mass class 0 protostars at the distance of G28.34, we also include a low-mass protocluster NGC 1333 in the model. For NGC 1333, we use the 870 $\mu$m continuum data from the JCMT archive \citep{kirk2006} to derive the sky model at the 1.3mm dust continuum. While the 1.1mm continuum data for NGC 1333 are also available in the literature \citep{enoch2006}, and the data are closer to the frequency of the G28.34 continuum from ALMA, the 870 $\mu$m data are at a resolution of $19''.9$, which offer better spatially resolved structure for the sky model. Figure 9 presents the 870 $\mu$m continuum emission of NGC 1333. Marked in the figure are class 0 protostars identified by \citet{sadavoy2014}. The masses of these cores are 0.5 to 3 M$_\odot$.
To construct the sky model from the JCMT data, we first scale the 870 $\mu$m fluxes to 1.3mm by a factor of 3 derived from the comparison of CSO and JCMT data. This scaling factor corresponds to a dust emissivity index of approximately 1.5. In addition, we scale the fluxes of NGC 1333 by $(1/D)^2$ to account for the distance difference between the two sources. From a source distance of 235 pc for NGC 1333 to that of G28.34, the fluxes are reduced by a factor of 417, i.e., $(4800/235)^2$. The flux-scaled image is then deconvolved with a Gaussian beam with a FWHM of $19''.9$ to derive a sky model. The linear scale of $19''.9$ at the distance of NGC 1333 is approximately the linear resolution achieved by the ALMA observations at the distance of G28.34. Therefore, the JCMT data provide adequate source structures that match the ALMA observations.
We perform simulated observations in $casa$ using the sky model. In the simulation, we adopt an array configuration with a total of 29 antennas, a precipitable water vapor PWV = 1.5mm, and an on-source observing time of 34 min, the same parameters during the G28.34 observations. We also change the coordinates of the NGC1333 sky model to the pointing center of G28.34 so that the UV coverage is identical to the G28.34 data.
Figure 9 presents the simulated image using the clean components of G28.34 only, and the one using the clean components plus the sky model of a low-mass protocluster derived from NGC 1333. We reverse the East direction in the RA axis for NGC 1333 to avoid low-mass cores overlapping with the dust emission along the ridge in G28.34. As seen in Figure 9b, the simulated image reproduce the G28.34 image in Figure 2 well. In Figure 9c, the low-mass protostellar cores added to the model are also recovered robustly.
Studies of nearby young clusters \citep{kirk2011} reveal that massive stars are found toward the center of the cluster associated with an enhanced population of low-mass stars in their neighborhood. ALMA observations of G28.34 P1 reveal extended dust continuum along the ridge surrounding the compact sources detected with the SMA at 870 $\mu$m. It is possible that most low-mass protostellar cores form along the dusty ridge. Indeed, the ALMA image at 1.3mm reveals spatially extended emission that is not seen in the SMA image at the same wavelength. The difference in the integrated flux between the ALMA and SMA images is 80 mJy, which is sufficient to form 100 protostellar cores of 0.8 mJy, if assuming 100\% fragmentation.
While the spatially extended emission seen in the ALMA data can give rise to a population of low-mass protostars in the vicinity of massive stars, a lack of low-mass protostellar cores outside of dense ridge in the P1 region is intriguing. The absence of a distributed population of low-mass protostellar cores in the clump suggests several possibilities about low-mass star formation in a cluster environment: (1) Low-mass stars only form in the immediate neighborhood of massive stars; (2) The distributed low-mass population does not form in situ, but instead forms outside of the clump, and follows the global collapse and moves to the center of the cluster; and (3) The distributed low-mass protostellar cores have not formed yet in G28.34.
The first possibility can be discounted since it contradicts with the fact that most stellar clusters consist of a population of distributed lower mass stars \citep[e.g.,][]{qiu2007}. The second possibility has been reported in numerical simulations of cluster formation \citep[e.g.][]{smith2013}. In simulations of global collapse of molecular clumps, gas fragments and forms stars along the streams/filaments. These stars follow the gas flow and fall toward the center of the cluster. A similar observational picture was also proposed recently \citep{myers2009b,liu2011,lu2014}, as massive ptotostars are often found near the center of radial gas filaments. In G28.34, the parsec-scale velocity field derived from the $\rm{NH_3}$ (1,1) line appears to be consistent with gas flowing toward the center of the cluster. The velocity of the flow, without correcting for the projection effect is $< 0.5$ \kms-1. If the inflowing gas and protostars move at 0.5 \kms-1, it takes about $10^6$ yrs for the low-mass protostars to travel 0.5pc to the central area of the cluster. While we cannot rule out that this process may contribute to the formation of distributed low-mass stars in clusters, its effectiveness in the G28.34 clump is questionable. In particular, within a 2pc area of P1, the higher density gas is mostly distributed within the clump. It becomes counter intuitive that the lower density gas outside of the P1 clump would form stars while the higher density gas within the clump does not. Therefore, we propose that the third possibility is the likely scenario:
The outer regions of the P1 clump have not fragmented to form low-mass protostellar cores. The limit reached in the ALMA observations is 0.2 M$_\odot$\ at a $3 \sigma$ level. A lack of detection of low-mass cores suggests that in clustered star formation, low-mass cores and stars form at a later stage, after the formation of massive stars.
There have been discussions regarding when low-mass stars form relative to massive stars in a cluster \citep{myers2011}. Since massive protostars evolve in a relatively short dynamical time scale of $10^5$ yrs, their strong feedback through radiation and ionization may halt the growth of low-mass stars. With this consideration, low-mass stars should form prior to massive stars. Our observations of IRDC G28.34 P1 and other IRDC clumps indicate that massive stars undergo evolutionary stages of low- to intermediate-mass protostars, which extends their formation time scale. In addition, it appears that massive stars form first in a cluster. Regimes that reach high enough densities become gravitational unstable and proceed to star formation. The high density regimes are normally reached first toward the center of the clump. That explains why massive stars form at the center of a cluster. Thanks to a longer accretion time, protostars who have lower mass initially gain mass over time and become massive stars. Formation of low-mass stars in the clump follows as gas continues to condense while turbulence dissipates in the clump to reach a super critical state. Protostars formed early on in the clump benefit from a longer accretion, thus become massive stars. The accretion rates inferred from molecular outflows are typically $10^{-5}$ M$_\odot$~yr$^{-1}$. Should the rate be a constant, it takes more than $10^6$ years to form a 10 M$_\odot$\ star. Therefore, it is likely that mass accretion increases over time or accretion could be episodic\citep[e.g.][]{stamatellos2012}.
\section {Conclusion}
We present ALMA observations of a massive IRDC clump G28.34 P1. The clump has a mass of $10^3$ M$_\odot$\ at a spatial scale of 0.6pc in diameter, embedded in a long filament stretching over 6pc in the sky. We analyse the ALMA data in conjunction with the (sub)mm continuum data from the SMA and the $\rm{NH_3}$ data from the VLA to assess physical properties from the filament to the parsec-scale clump, to the 0.1pc dense cores and to the 0.01pc scale condensations. The main findings are:
(1) The IRDC filament exhibits a velocity pattern consistent with mass accretion along the filament toward clumps and dense cores.
(2) The 1.3mm continuum data from ALMA reveal 5 cores consistent with previous SMA observations. These cores are at least a factor of 10 more massive than the thermal Jeans mass, implying that turbulence and perhaps magnetic fields are important in supporting massive cores during the fragmentation.
(3) For the first time, the ALMA data reveal spectral line emission from 19 molecules including $^{12}$CO, C$^{18}$O, CH$_3$OH, $^{13}$CS, \h2co, N$_2$D$^+$ and SO in the dense cores. Comparison with spectral line data from nearby protostellar cores with embedded intermediate-mass stars indicates that G28.34 P1 undergoes active massive star formation currently at an intermediate-mass stage.
(4) The superior flux sensitivity in the ALMA continuum data reveals additional fragments with masses of a few M$_\odot$. Despite a $1\sigma$ mass sensitivity of 0.065 M$_\odot$, there is a lack of a wide spread low-mass protostellar population expected from thermal Jeans fragmentation. This finding indicates that low-mass protostars form after massive protostars in a protocluster.
(5) { Cores detected in this cloud have masses at least an order of magnitude larger than the thermal Jeans mass and appear to be mostly supported by a turbulent velocity field.}
This study indicates a successive star formation in a protocluster, with cores harboring massive stars form first as gas in these cores becomes super critical when gravity overcomes the internal support. Star formation spreads as gas in other parts of the clump become super critical and collapse to form stars.
\acknowledgements
We thank P. C. Myers for enlightening discussions. This paper makes use of the ALMA data. ALMA is a partnership of ESO (representing its member states), NFS (USA) and NINS (Japan), together
with NRC (Canada) and NSC and ASIAA (Taiwan), in cooperation with the Republic of Chile. The Joint ALMA Observatory is operated by ESO, AUI/NRAO and NAOJ. This research is partly supported by the National Science Foundation of China under Grant 11328301. K. W. acknowledges support from the ESO fellowship. X. L. acknowledges the support of Smithsonian Predoctoral Fellowship. I. J.-S. acknowledges funding received from the People Programme (Marie Curie Actions) of the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under REA grant agreement PIIF-GA-2011-301538. This study used observations made with the Spitzer Space Telescope, which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology under a contract with NASA.
\clearpage
\renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\alph{footnote}}
\begin{longtable}{rccccccccc}
\caption{Physical Parameters of Dense Gas Structure} \\
\hline \hline
Source & RA & DEC & T & $S_{Peak}^a$ & $S_{int}^a$ & Mass & size$^b$ & PA & Reference$^c$ \\
& (h:m:s) & (d:m:s) & K & mJy/bm & mJy & M$_\odot$\ & $'' \times ''$ & ($^\circ$) \\ \hline \endhead
1 & 18:42:51.21 & -04:03:05.2 & 22.2 & 1.9 & 4.2 & 2.6 & 1.2 $\times$ 0.3 & 137 & \\
2 & 18:42:51.13 & -04:03:06.06 & 18.5 & 2.0 & 10.5 & 7.7 & 1.8 $\times$ 1.2 & 60 & \\
3 & 18:42:51.26 & -04:03:06.5 & 19.5 & 4.0 & 5.4 & 3.7 & 0.5 $\times$ 0.4 & 76 & \\
4 & 18:42:51.19 & -04:03:07.3 & 17.9 & 9.3 & 16 & 12.1 & 0.7 $\times$ 0.6 & 87 & SMA1 \\ \hline
5 & 18:42:50.96 & -04:03:10.1 & 22.8 & 1.6 & 16.6 & 9.9 & 3.4 $\times$ 1.4 & 42 & SMA2d \\
6 & 18:42:50.84 & -04:03:10.5 & 18.6 & 1.7 & 1.7 & 1.2 & $-$ & $-$ & \\
7 & 18:42:50.92 & -04:03:11.3 & 24.3 & 0.9 & 0.9 & 0.5 & $-$ & $-$ & \\
8 & 18:42:51.20 & -04:03:11.3 & 12.3 & 0.7 & 1.4 & 1.6 & 1.4 $\times$ 0.3 & 93 & \\
9 & 18:42:50.86 & -04:03:11.5 & 20.7 & 7.6 & 9.8 & 6.4 & 0.5 $\times$ 0.1 & 20 & SMA2a \\
10 & 18:42:50.77 & -04:03:11.6 & 16.8 & 5.3 & 20.1 & 16.4 & 1.5 $\times$ 1.0 & 49 & SMA2b \\
11 & 18:42:50.81 & -04:03:12.5 & 18.2 & 2.2 & 2.2 & 1.7 & $-$ & $-$ & SMA2c \\
12 & 18:42:50.93 & -04:03:12.9 & 22.7 & 0.8 & 6.3 & 3.8 & 2.4 $\times$ 1.6 & 113 & \\
13 & 18:42:50.70 & -04:03:12.9 & 16.6 & 1.2 & 1.2 & 1.0 & $-$ & $-$ & \\
14 & 18:42:50.75 & -04:03:13.3 & 16.7 & 1.1 & 4.5 & 3.6 & 1.6 $\times$ 1.0 & 114 & \\
15 & 18:42:50.73 & -04:03:13.8 & 17.4 & 0.8 & 1.4 & 1.1 & 0.9 $\times$ 0.3 & 123 & \\
16 & 18:42:50.63 & -04:03:13.9 & 15.7 & 0.7 & 1.2 & 1.0 & 0.7 $\times$ 0.6 & 23 & \\ \hline
17 & 18:42:50.69 & -04:03:15.4 & 16.2 & 2.6 & 16 & 13.4 & 1.9 $\times$ 1.5 & 95 & \\
18 & 18:42:50.31 & -04:03:15.5 & 19.1 & 1.0 & 1.0 & 0.7 & $-$ & $-$ & \\
19 & 18:42:50.93 & -04:03:16.0 & 17.5 & 0.4 & 1.3 & 1.0 & 1.4 $\times$ 0.7 & 50 & \\
20 & 18:42:50.58 & -04:03:16.3 & 18.3 & 8.9 & 13.8 & 10.2 & 0.7 $\times$ 0.5 & 71 & SMA3 \\
21 & 18:42:50.61 & -04:03:17.0 & 18.3 & 2.8 & 10.1 & 7.5 & 1.7 $\times$ 0.7 & 29 & \\
22 & 18:42:50.74 & -04:03:17.2 & 15.6 & 1.1 & 2.9 & 2.5 & 1.5 $\times$ 0.5 & 73 & \\
23 & 18:42:50.51 & -04:03:17.2 & 17.2 & 1.2 & 19 & 15 & 3.3 $\times$ 2.3 & 169 & \\
24 & 18:42:50.70 & -04:03:18.2 & 14.9 & 0.8 & 1.5 & 1.3 & 0.9 $\times$ 0.4 & 72 & \\
25 & 18:42:50.53 & -04:03:18.2 & 17.1 & 0.9 & 0.9 & 0.7 & $-$ & $-$ & \\
26 & 18:42:50.80 & -04:03:18.7 & 12.5 & 1.3 & 4.5 & 4.9 & 1.4 $\times$ 1.0 & 125 & \\
27 & 18:42:50.20 & -04:03:19.1 & 17.8 & 0.6 & 1.7 & 1.3 & 2.2 $\times$ 0.3 & 99 & \\ \hline
\pagebreak
28 & 18:42:50.28 & -04:03:20.2 & 18.9 & 5.0 & 5.0 & 3.6 & $-$ & $-$ & SMA4a \\
29 & 18:42:50.23 & -04:03:20.3 & 18.9 & 6.5 & 19.4 & 14 & 1.4 $\times$ 0.7 & 87 & SMA4b \\
30 & 18:42:50.32 & -04:03:20.9 & 18.5 & 3.8 & 21.5 & 15.8 & 2.1 $\times$ 1.2 & 12 & SMA4c \\
31 & 18:42:50.39 & -04:03:21.0 & 18.7 & 3.5 & 10.6 & 7.7 & 1.5 $\times$ 0.7 & 113 & \\
32 & 18:42:50.39 & -04:03:22.5 & 17.1 & 1.7 & 10.7 & 8.5 & 1.8 $\times$ 1.6 & 6 & \\
33 & 18:42:50.49 & -04:03:22.9 & 16.9 & 0.8 & 1.4 & 1.1 & 1.0 $\times$ 0.1 & 173 & \\
34 & 18:42:50.73 & -04:03:22.9 & 11.4 & 0.5 & 0.8 & 0.9 & 0.9 $\times$ 0.3 & 92 & \\
35 & 18:42:50.33 & -04:03:23.1 & 15.3 & 0.6 & 0.6 & 0.5 & $-$ & $-$ & \\
36 & 18:42:50.30 & -04:03:23.8 & 14.8 & 0.6 & 3.6 & 3.3 & 2.0 $\times$ 1.2 & 134 & \\ \hline
37 & 18:42:49.91 & -04:03:25.2 & 11.6 & 3.1 & 10.9 & 12.8 & 1.7 $\times$ 0.8 & 98 & \\
38 & 18:42:49.82 & -04:03:25.5 & 9.2 & 13.9 & 18.2 & 27 & 0.4 $\times$ 0.4 & 37 & SMA5 \\
\hline
\footnotetext[1]{The fluxes reported here are primary beam corrected. The beam size is $0''.85 \times 0''.64$ at a positional angle of $89^\circ.82$.}
\footnotetext[2]{$-$ represents sources unresolved.}
\footnotetext[3]{Source names used in \citet{zhang2009, wang2011}}
\end{longtable}
\clearpage
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{Virial Parameters in the Dense Gas}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{lrrrrrrr} \hline \hline
Name & $M_{gas}$ & $\Delta V^a$ & r & M$_{vir}$ & $\alpha^b$ & M$_{B}$ & $\alpha_{total}^c$ \\
& (M$_\odot$) & (\kms-1) & (pc) & (M$_\odot$) & & (M$_\odot$) & \\ \hline
Clump G28-P1 & 1000.0 & 2.67 & 0.30 & 444 & 0.44 & 1637.9 & 2.08 \\ \hline
Core 1 & 28.0 & 1.2 & 0.030 & 6.93 & 0.25 & 9.79 & 0.60 \\
Core 2 & 21.0 & 1.5 & 0.021 & 9.91 & 0.47 & 8.199 & 0.86 \\
Core 3 & 22.0 & 0.94 & 0.023 & 4.28 & 0.19 & 9.90 & 0.64 \\
Core 4 & 43.00 & 1.10 & 0.028 & 7.07 & 0.16 & 14.44 & 0.50 \\
Core 5 & 20.0 & 1.70 & 0.01 & 6.34 & 0.32 & 2.03 & 0.42 \\ \hline
Condensation 4 & 12.1 & 1.70 & 0.0075 & 4.57 & 0.38 & 1.06 & 0.47 \\
Condensation 9 & 6.4 & 1.70 & 0.0026 & 1.58 & 0.253 & 0.126 & 0.27 \\
Condensation 20 & 10.2 & 1.70 & 0.0069 & 4.17 & 0.41 & 0.880 & 0.50 \\
Condensation 28 & 3.6 & 1.70 & 0.0012 & 0.705 & 0.20 & 0.0251 & 0.20 \\
Condensation 38 & 27.0 & 1.70 & 0.0047 & 2.82 & 0.10 & 0.402 & 0.12 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\tablenotetext{a}{The line width for cores is measured from the $\rm{NH_3}$ (1,1) data observed from the VLA \citep{wang2012}. Line widths in condensations are measured from the C$^{18}$O 2-1 data in this paper.}
\tablenotetext{b}{$\alpha = {M_{vir} \over M_{gas}}$.}
\tablenotetext{c}{$\alpha_{total} = {M_{vir} + M_B \over M_{gas}}$, where $M_B$ is the magnetic virial mass.}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{Outflows and their Physical Parameters$^a$}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{llcrrrrr} \hline \hline
Name & Tracers & Mass & Momentum & Energy & L & $t_{dyn}^c$ & $M_{out}$ (10$^{-5}$) \\
& & (M$_\odot$) & (M$_\odot$ \kms-1) & M$_\odot$ (\kms-1)$^{2}$ & pc & 10$^3$ yrs & M$_\odot$~yr$^{-1}$ \\ \hline
1a$^b$ & SiO & 0.054 & 0.28 & 1.1 & 2.2 & 6.8-6.1 & 0.78 \\
1b & CO,SiO & 0.65 & 6.7 & 38 & 0.49 & 16-27 & 4.0 \\ \hline
2a & CO,SiO & 3.8 & 75 & 830 & 1.0 & 11-14 & 32 \\
2b & CO,SiO & 0.15 & 2.3 & 22 & 0.17 & 5.6 & 2.6 \\ \hline
3a & CO,SiO & 0.15 & 0.73 & 2.3 & 0.16 & 13 & 1.1 \\
3b & CO,SiO & 2.1 & 29 & 270 & 0.90 & 4.5-9.5 & 16 \\ %
3c & CO,SiO & 1.2 & 23 & 253 & 0.74 & 9.2-32 & 12 \\ \hline %
4a & CO,SiO & 0.56 & 8.3 & 77 & 0.51 & 7.0-10 & 7.1 \\
4b$^b$ & SiO & 0.23 & 1.4 & 5.5 & 2.3 & 4.1-12 & 2.2 \\ \hline
5a & CO,SiO & 0.30 & 1.9 & 6.4 & 0.40 & 41 & 0.73 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\tablenotetext{a}{Parameters are obtained using CO 2-1 data unless stated otherwise. Data are not corrected for the inclination angle of outflows.}
\tablenotetext{b}{Assuming an SiO relative abundance of $9.2 \times 10^{-10}$ \citep{sanhueza2012}.}
\tablenotetext{c}{If both blue- and red-lobes are present, both dynamical time scales are listed.}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[h]
\figurenum{1a}
\special{psfile=G28_8_24_70.eps angle=0 hscale=70 vscale=70 hoffset=20 voffset=-550}
\caption{Three color Spitzer composite image
(red/green/blue = 70/24/8 $\mu$m) showing the IRDC G28.34+0.06. The circle close P1 marks the FWHM field of view observed with ALMA.}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\figurenum{1b}
\vskip 5in
\special{psfile=NH3_mom0_30m.ps angle=-90 hscale=100 vscale=100 hoffset=-180 voffset=510}
\caption{
The integrated intensity of the $\rm{NH_3}$ (1,1)
emission \citep{wang2008} in white solid contours overlaid on the 1.3mm continuum \citep{rathborne2010} in color scale. The $\rm{NH_3}$
image is contoured at
10\% of the peak (1 Jy~beam$^{-1}$ $\times$ km s$^{-1}$). The thin dotted lines indicates the
50\% and 100\% of the sensitivity level of the 7 pointing mosaic in $\rm{NH_3}$ from the VLA.
The $\rm{NH_3}$ data have a resolution of $5'' \times 3''$. The thick dashed
circle marks the P1 field that ALMA observed in this work. The color bar on the right-hand side of the plot denotes the 1.3mm continuum flux scales in Jy~beam$^{-1}$.
}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}
\figurenum{2}
\vskip 6in
\special{psfile=G28_P1_cont_ALMA.ps angle=-90 hscale=100 vscale=100 hoffset=-280
voffset=550}
\caption{1.3 mm Continuum image of IRDC G28.34 P1 obtained with ALMA. Data are plotted in logarithmic scale. The dashed-dotted circle outlines the FWHM of the primary beam of the ALMA 12m antenna. The shaded ellipse at the lower left corner of the panel marks the synthesized beam. The star symbols and numbers mark the brightest dust continuum components listed in Table 1. The wedge at the top of the panel displays the color scales corresponding to fluxes (Jy~beam$^{-1}$) in the logarithmic scale. Features toward the lower right of the image are at the 10\% response of the primary beam, thus are not robust due to inadequate clean.}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[h]
\figurenum{3}
\special{psfile=all_spec.ps angle=0 hscale=80 vscale=80 hoffset=-20
voffset=-700}
\caption{ALMA spectra from Cores 2 and 5 (Components 9 and 38 in Table 1, respectively) in G28.34. The flux scale is corrected for primary beam attenuation. Also shown are spectra for an intermediate-mass protostar in the DR 21 filament obtained from the SMA, scaled to the distance of G28.34 for comparison. }
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[h]
\figurenum{4a}
\special{psfile=C18O_mnt0.ps angle=0 hscale=80 vscale=80 hoffset=-20
voffset=-700}
\caption{Velocity integrated emission (Moment 0) of molecular lines from C$^{18}$O, $^{13}$CS, N$_2$D$^+$ and H$_2$S. The range of integration covers the entire velocity range of the line emission. The contours for C$^{18}$O, $^{13}$CS and N$_2$D$^+$ emission are plotted in equal increment of 10 mJy~\kms-1\ starting from 10 mJy~\kms-1. The contours for H$_2$S emission are plotted in equal increment of 6 mJy~\kms-1\ starting from 6 mJy~\kms-1. The star symbols denote the brightest dust continuum peaks in Table 1. }
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[h]
\figurenum{4b}
\special{psfile=H2CO_mnt0.ps angle=0 hscale=80 vscale=80 hoffset=-20
voffset=-700}
\caption{Velocity integrated emission (Moment 0) of molecular lines from SO, H$_2$CO, and CH$_3$OH. The range of integration covers the entire velocity range of the line emission. The contours for SO emission are plotting in equal increment of 20 mJy~\kms-1\ starting from 20 mJy~\kms-1. The contours for H$_2$CO, and CH$_3$OH emission are plotting in equal increment of 30 mJy~\kms-1\ starting from 30 mJy~\kms-1. The star symbols denote the brightest dust continuum peaks in Table 1.}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[h!]
\figurenum{5a}
\special{psfile=cont_CO.ps angle=-90 hscale=100 vscale=100 hoffset=-280 voffset=-100}
\caption{Molecular outflows detected in CO 2-1 and SiO 5-4 in the G28.34 P1 region. The blue and red-shifted outflows are plotted in blue and red contours, respectively. The data shown in color scales are 1.3mm continuum emission also shown in Figure 2. The black dashed lines mark the outflows identified in the region. The CO emission is integrated over a velocity range from 54 to 72 \kms-1 for the blue-shifted emission, and 96 to 112 \kms-1 for the red-shifted emission. The SiO emission is integrated over the velocity range from 65 to 76 \kms-1 for the blue-shifted emission,and 82 to 96 \kms-1 for the red-shifted emission.
The contours for the CO emission are plotting in equal increment of 0.5 Jy~\kms-1\ starting from 0.5 Jy~\kms-1. The contours for the SiO emission are plotting in equal increment of 0.02 Jy~\kms-1\ starting from 0.02 Jy~\kms-1. The star symbols denote the brightest dust continuum peaks in Table 1.}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[h!]
\figurenum{5b}
\special{psfile=cont_SiO.ps angle=-90 hscale=100 vscale=100 hoffset=-280
voffset=0}
\caption{}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[h]
\figurenum{6}
\special{psfile=NH3_mom1_30m.ps angle=-90 hscale=90 vscale=90 hoffset=-130
voffset=-50}
\caption{Shown in color scales is the centroid velocity (moment 1) map in the IR dark region of G28.34 derived from the $\rm{NH_3}$ (J,K)=(1,1) emission obtained from the VLA. The white contour outlines the 1.3mm continuum emission from the IRAM 30m Telescope \citep{rathborne2010}. The scale bar on the right-hand side of the plot denotes velocity in \kms-1. The $+$ symbol marks the five continuum peaks (SMA1 through SMA5) reported in \citet{zhang2009}.}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[h]
\figurenum{7}
\special{psfile=NH3_pv_filament.ps angle=-90 hscale=80 vscale=80 hoffset=-80
voffset=0}
\caption{{\bf Left:} Position velocity (PV) diagram of the $\rm{NH_3}$ (1,1) emission. The cut is along the main filament with an offset close to Core 3. {\bf Right:} The centroid velocity along the PV cut. The arrows mark the locations of dust continuum sources. }
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[h!]
\figurenum{8}
\special{psfile=core_mass_v2.ps angle=-90 hscale=70 vscale=70 hoffset=-20 voffset=0}
\caption{Cumulative mass function of the fragments identified in G28.34 P1. The data are plotted in logarithmic scales. The dashed line marks the slope of the Salpeter initial mass function.}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[h!]
\figurenum{9a}
\special{psfile=N1333_850.ps angle=-90 hscale=80 vscale=80 hoffset=-100 voffset=-90}
\caption{{\bf a):} Dust continuum image at 870 $\mu$m obtained from JCMT of the protocluster NGC 1333. The star symbol marks protostars reported in \citet{sadavoy2014}. {\bf b):} Simulated ALMA observations using the clean components of the 1.3mm continuum for G28.34. The simulation adopts the observing conditions and the on-source integration time of the ALMA project. The star symbol in panels b) and c) marks the brightest 1.3mm continuum peaks shown in Figure 2. {\bf c):} Simulated ALMA observations made from the clean components of G28.34 and the model from the NGC 1333 protocluster. The east-west direction in the NGC 1333 model image is reversed.}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[h!]
\figurenum{9b}
\special{psfile=G28_sim2_thresh.ps angle=-90 hscale=100 vscale=100 hoffset=-280 voffset=0}
\caption{}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[h!]
\figurenum{9c}
\special{psfile=G28_perA_ALMA_sim.ps angle=-90 hscale=100 vscale=100 hoffset=-280 voffset=0}
\caption{}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
|
\section{Introduction}
First, we introduce a notation and some definitions. The inner product in
$\RR^n$ is denoted by $\la \cdot , \cdot \ra$ and the norm induced
by the inner product by $\|\cdot\|$. We denote by $2^{C}$ the power set of $C$. For $X$ a nonempty, convex and
closed subset of $\RR^n$, we define the orthogonal projection of $x$
onto $X$ by $P_X(x)$, as the unique point in $X$, such that $\|
P_X(x)-y\| \le \|x-y\|$ for all $y\in X$. Let $N_X(x)$
be the normal cone to $X$ at $x\in X$, i.e.,
$N_X(x)=\{d\in \RR^n\, : \, \la d,x-y\ra\ge 0 \;\; \forall
y\in X\}$. Recall that an operator $T:\RR^n \rightarrow 2^{\RR^n}$
is monotone if, for all $(x,u),(y,v)\in Gr(T):=\{(x,u)\in
\RR^n\times \RR^n : u\in T(x)\}$, we have $\la x-y, u-v \ra \ge 0,$
and it is maximal if $T$ has no proper monotone extension in the
graph inclusion sense.
In this paper, we propose a modified algorithm for solving a system of splitting inclusion problem, for the sum of two operators. Given a finite family of pair of operators $\{ A_i,B_i \}_{i \in \mathbb{I}}$, with $\mathbb{I}=:(1,2,\cdots, m)$ and $m\in \NN$.
The system of inclusion problem consists in:
\begin{equation}\label{problema}
\mbox{Find} \ \ x\in \RR^n \ \ \mbox{such that} \ \ 0\in(A_i+B_i)(x) \ \ \mbox{for all} \ \ i\in \mathbb{I},
\end{equation}
where the operators $A_i:\RR^n \rightarrow \RR^n$ are point-to-point and monotone and the operators $B_i:\RR^n\rightarrow 2^{\RR^n}$ are point-to-set maximal monotone operators. The solution of the problem is given by the interception of the solution of each component of the system, i.e., $S_*=\cap_{i\in \mathbb{I}} S^i_*$, where $S^i_*$ is defined as $S^i_*:=\{x\in \RR^n: 0\in A_i(x)+B_i(x)\}$.
The problem \eqref{problema} is a generalization of the system of variational inequalities, introduced by I.V. Konnov in \cite{konnov1}, taking the operators $B_i = N_{C_i}$ for all $i\in \mathbb{I}$, which have been studied in \cite{konnov, gibali, gibali2, gibali3}. A generalization of this results have been studied in \cite{semenov,eslam}, where the hypothesis that all $A_i$ are Lipschitz continuous for all $i\in \mathbb{I}$, is assumed for the convergence analysis. In this paper we improve this result assuming only monotonicity for all operators $A_i$, and maximal monotonicity for the operators $B_i$. Also, we improve the linesearch proposed by Tseng in \cite{tseng}, calculating in each tentative of find the step size, the operator forward-backward only one time for each inclusion problem of the system. This improves the algorithm in the computational sense, because this operator is very expensive to compute. The idea for this manuscript was motivated from the works \cite{rei-yun, phdthesis}.
Problem \eqref{problema} have many applications in operations research, mathematical physics, optimization and differential equations. This kind of problem have been deeply studied and has recently received a lot attention, due to the fact that many nonlinear problems, arising within applied
areas, are mathematically modeled as nonlinear operator system of equations and/or inclusions, which each one are decomposed as sum of two operators.
\section{Preliminaries}
In this section, we present some definitions and results needed for the
convergence analysis of the proposed algorithm. First, we state two well-known facts
on orthogonal projections.
\begin{proposition}\label{proj}
Let $X$ be any nonempty, closed and convex set in $\RR^n$, and $P_X$ the orthogonal projection onto $X$. For all $x,y\in \RR^n$ and all $z\in X $ the following hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $ \|P_{X}(x)-P_{X}(y)\|^2 \leq \|x-y\|^2-\|(P_{X}(x)-x)-\big(P_{X}(y)-y\big)\|^2.$
\item $\la x-P_X(x),z-P_X(x)\ra \leq 0.$
\item $P_X=(I+N_X)^{-1}.$
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
(i) and (ii) see Lemma $1.1$ and $1.2$ in \cite{zarantonelo}. (iii) See Proposition $2.3$ in \cite{bauch}.
\end{proof}
In the following we state some useful results on maximal monotone operators.
\begin{lemma}\label{bound}
Let $T:dom(T)\subseteq \RR^n\rightarrow 2^{\RR^n}$ be a maximal monotone operator.
Then,
\begin{enumerate}
\item $Gr(T)$ is closed.
\item $T$ is bounded on bounded subsets of the interior of
its domain.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
\begin{enumerate}
\item See Proposition $4.2.1$(ii) in \cite{iusem-regina}.
\item See Lemma 5(iii) in \cite{yu-iu}.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\label{inversa}
Let $T:dom(T)\subseteq\RR^n \rightarrow 2^{\RR^n}$ be a point-to-set and maximal monotone operator. Given $\beta >0$ then the operator $(I+\beta\, T)^{-1}: \RR^n \rightarrow dom(T)$ is single valued and maximal monotone.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
See Theorem $4$ in \cite{minty}.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\label{parada}
Given $\beta>0$ and $A: dom(A)\subseteq \RR^n\to \RR^n$ be a monotone operator and $B: dom(B)\subseteq \RR^n\rightarrow 2^{\RR^n}$ be a maximal monotone operator, then
$$x=(I+\beta B)^{-1}(I-\beta A)(x),$$ if and only if, $0\in (A+B)(x)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
See Proposition $3.13$ in \cite{PhD-E}.
\end{proof}
\noindent Now we define the so called Fej\'er convergence.
\begin{definition}
Let $S$ be a nonempty subset of $\RR^n$. A sequence $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}\subset \RR^n$ is said to be Fej\'er convergent to $S$, if and only if, for all $x\in S$ there exists $k_0\ge 0$, such that $\|x^{k+1}-x\| \le \|x^k - x\|$ for all $k\ge k_0$.
\end{definition}
This definition was introduced in \cite{browder} and have been
further elaborated in \cite{IST} and \cite{borw-baus}. A useful result on Fej\'er sequences is the following.
\begin{proposition}\label{punto}
If $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$ is Fej\'er convergent to $S$, then:
\begin{enumerate}
\item the sequence $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$ is bounded;
\item the sequence $\{\|x^k-x\|\}_{k\in \NN}$ is convergent for all $x\in S;$
\item if a cluster point $x^*$ belongs to $S$, then the sequence $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$ converges to $x^*$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
(i) and (ii) See Proposition $5.4$ in \cite{librobauch}. (iii) See Theorem $5.5$ in \cite{librobauch}.
\end{proof}
\section{The Algorithm}\label{section3}
Let $A_i:\RR^n \rightarrow \RR^n$ and $B_i:\RR^n\rightarrow 2^{\RR^n} $ be maximal monotone operators, with $A_i$ point-to-point and $B_i$ point-to-set, for all $i\in \mathbb{I}$. Assume that $dom (B_i)\subseteq dom (A_i)$, for all $i \in \mathbb{I}:=\{1,2,3, \cdots, m\}$ with $m\in \NN$. Choose any nonempty, closed and convex set, $X \subseteq \cap_{i\in \mathbb{I}}dom (B_i)$, satisfying $X\cap S^*\ne \emptyset$. Thus, from now on, the solution set, $S^*$, is nonempty. Also we assume that the operators $B_i$ for all $i\in \mathbb{I}$ satisfies, that for each bounded subset $V$ of $dom(B_i)$ there exists $R>0$, such that $B_i(x)\cap B[0,R]\neq\emptyset$, for all $x\in V$ and $i\in \mathbb{I}$ where $B[0,R]$ is the closed ball centered in $0$ and radius $R$. We emphasize that this assumption holds trivially if $dom(B_i)=\RR^n$ or $V\subset int(dom(B_i))$ or $B_i$ is the normal cone in any subset of $dom(B_i)$.
Let $\{\beta_k\}_{k=0}^{\infty}$ be a sequence such that $\{\beta_k\}_{k\in \NN}\subseteq [\check{\beta},\hat{\beta}] $ with $0<\check{\beta} \leq \hat{\beta}<\infty$, $\theta, \delta\in(0,1)$, and be $\mathbb{I}=\{1,2,3, \cdots, m\}$, $R>0$ like assumption above. The algorithm is defined as follows:
\begin{center}
\fbox{\begin{minipage}[b]{\textwidth}
\begin{Calg}{A}\label{concep} Let $\{\beta_k\}_{k\in \NN}, \theta, \delta, R \mbox{ and } \mathbb{I}$ like above.
\begin{retraitsimple}
\item[] {\bf Step~0 (Initialization):} Take $x^0\in X$.
\item[] {\bf Step~1 (Iterative Step 1):} Given $x^k$, compute for all $i\in \mathbb{I}$,
\begin{equation}{\label{jota}}
J_i(x^k,\beta_{k}):=(I+\beta_{k}B_i)^{-1}(I-\beta_{k}A_i)(x^{k}).
\end{equation}
\item[]{\bf Step~2 (Stopping Test 1):} Define $\mathbb{I}_k^*:=\{i\in \mathbb{I}: x^k=J_{i}(x^k,\beta_k)\}$. If $\mathbb{I}_k^*=\mathbb{I}$ stop.
\item[] {\bf Step~3 (Inner Loop):} Otherwise, for all $i\in \mathbb{I}\setminus \mathbb{I}_k^*$ begin the inner loop over $j$.
Put $j=0$ and choose any $u_{(j,i)}^{k}\in B_i\big(\theta^{j}J_i(x^{k},\beta_k)+(1-\theta^{j})x^k\big)\cap B[0,R]$. If
\begin{equation}\label{jk}
\Big \la A_i \big(\theta^{j}J_i(x^{k},\beta_k)+(1-\theta^{j})x^k\big)+u^{k}_{(j,i)}, x^k-J_i(x^k,\beta_k)\Big \ra\geq \frac{\delta}{\beta_k}\|x^k -J_i(x^k,\beta_k)\|^2,
\end{equation}
then $j_i(k):=j$ and stop.
Else, $j=j+1$.
\item[] {\bf Step~4 (Iterative Step 2):} Set for all $i\in \mathbb{I}\setminus \mathbb{I}_k^*$
\begin{equation}{\label{alphak}}
\alpha_{k,i}:=\theta^{j_i(k)},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}{\label{ubar}}
\bar{u}_i^k:=u^k_{j_i(k)}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}{\label{xbar}}
\bar{x}_i^k:=\alpha_{k,i} J_{i}(x^k,\beta_k)+(1-\alpha_{k,i})x^k
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}{\label{Fk}}
x^{k+1}:=\mathcal{F}_A(x^k).
\end{equation}
\item[] {\bf Step~5 (Stop Criteria 2):} If $x^{k+1}=x^k$ then stop. Otherwise, set $k\leftarrow k+1$ and go to {\bf Step~1}.
\end{retraitsimple}
\end{Calg}\end{minipage}}
\end{center}
\noindent We consider three variants of this algorithm. Their main difference lies in the computation \eqref{Fk}:
\begin{align}
\mcF_{\rm\ref{A1}}(x^k) =&P_X\big(P_{H_k}(x^k)\big) ;\label{P112} \quad &{(\bf Variant\; \ref{A1})} \\
\mcF_{\rm\ref{A2}}(x^k) =&P_{X\cap H_k}(x^k) ;\label{P122} \quad &{(\bf Variant\; \ref{A2})}\\
\mcF_{\rm\ref{A3}}(x^k) =&P_{X\cap H_k\cap W(x^k)}(x^0) ;\label{P132} \quad & {(\bf Variant\; \ref{A3})}
\end{align}
where
\begin{equation}\label{hk} H_k:=\cap_{i\in \mathbb{I}\setminus \mathbb{I}_k^*}H_i( \bar{x}_{i}^{k},\bar{u}_i^k)\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{H(x)}
H_i(x,u) := \big\{ y\in \RR^n :\la A_i(x)+u,y-x\ra\le 0\big \}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{W(x)}
W(x) := \big\{ y\in \RR^n : \la y-x,x^0-x\ra\le 0\big \}.
\end{equation}
This kind of hyperplane have been used in some works, see \cite{yuniusem,sva}.
\section{Convergence Analysis}\label{section4}
In this section we analyze the convergence of the algorithms presented in the previous section. First, we present some general properties as well as prove the well-definition of the conceptual algorithm.
\begin{lemma}\label{propseq}
For all $(x,u)\in Gr(B_i)$, $S_i^*\subseteq H_i(x,u)$, for all $i\in \mathbb{I}$. Therefore $S^* \subset H_i(x,u)$ for all $i \in \mathbb{I}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Take $x^{*}\in S_i^*$. Using the definition of the solution, there exists $v^{*}\in B_i(x^{*})$, such that $0=A_i(x^{*})+v^{*}$. By the monotonicity of $A_i+B_i$, we have
$$\la A_i(x)+u -(A_i(x^{*})+v^{*}), x-x^{*}\ra\ge 0, $$
for all $(x,u)\in Gr(B_i)$.
Hence,
$$\la A_i(x)+u, x^{*}-x\ra \le 0$$
and by \eqref{H(x)}, $x^{*}\in H_i(x,u)$.
\end{proof}
\noindent From now on, $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$ is the sequence generated by the conceptual algorithm.
\begin{proposition}\label{propdef}
The conceptual algorithm is well-defined.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
By Proposition \ref{parada}, Stop Criteria $1$ is well-defined. The proof of the well-definition of $j_i(k)$ is by contradiction. Fix $i\in \mathbb{I}\setminus \mathbb{I}_k^*$ and assume that for all $j\ge0$ having chosen $u_{(j,i)}^{k}\in B_i\big(\theta^j J_i(x^k,\beta_k)+(1-\theta^j)x^k\big)\cap B[0,R]$,
\begin{equation*}
\Big\la A_i \big(\theta^{j}J_i(x^{k},\beta_k)+(1-\theta^{j})x^k\big)+u^{k}_{j}, x^k-J_i(x^k,\beta_k)\Big\ra < \frac{\delta}{\beta_k}\|x^k - J_i(x^k,\beta_k)\|^2.
\end{equation*}
Since the sequence $\{u^{k}_{(j,i)}\}_{j=0}^{\infty}$ is bounded, there exists a subsequence $\{u^{k}_{(\ell_j,i)}\}_{j=0}^{\infty}$ of $\{u^{k}_{(j,i)}\}_{j=0}^{\infty}$, which converges to an element $ u_i^k$ belonging to $B_i(x^k)$ by maximality. Taking the limit over the subsequence $\{\ell_j\}_{j\in \NN}$, we get
\begin{equation}{\label{lim}}
\big\la\beta_k A_i(x^k)+\beta_k u_i^k, x^k -J_i(x^k,\beta_k)\big \ra \le \delta \|x^k - J_i(x^k,\beta_k)\|^2.
\end{equation}
It follows from (\ref{jota}) that
\begin{equation*}{\label{res}}
\beta_k A_i(x^k)=x^k-J_i(x^k,\beta_k)-\beta_k v_i^k,
\end{equation*}
for some $ v_i^{k}\in B_i(J_i(x^k,\beta_k))$.\\
Now, the above equality together with (\ref{lim}), lead to
\begin{equation*}
\|x^k - J_i(x^k,\beta_k)\|^2\le\Big\la x^k-J_i(x^k,\beta_k)-\beta_k v_i^k+\beta_k u_i^k, x^k -J_i(x^k,\beta_k)\Big \ra \le \delta \|x^k - J_i(x^k,\beta_k)\|^2,
\end{equation*}
using the monotonicity of $B_i$ for the first inequality. So,
$$(1-\delta)\|x^k - J_i(x^k,\beta_k)\|^2\le 0,$$
which contradicts that $i\in \mathbb{I}\setminus \mathbb{I}_k^*$. Thus, the conceptual algorithm is well-defined.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\label{H-separa-x} $x^k \in H_k$ if and only if, $x^k\in S^*$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
If $x^k\in H_k$ then $x^k\in H_i(\bar{x}_i^k,\bar{u}_i^k)$ for all $i \in \mathbb{I}\setminus \mathbb{I}_k^*$ by definition of $H_k$. Now by Proposition (4.2) of \cite{rei-yun} we have that $x^k \in S_i^*$ for all $i \in \mathbb{I}$, then $x^k\in S^*$. Conversely, if $x^k \in S^*$ then $x^k\in S_i^*$ then $x^k\in H_i(\bar{x}_i^k,\bar{u}_i^k)$ for all $i \in \mathbb{I}$ using the same proposition, implying that $x^k\in H_k$.
\end{proof}
Finally, a useful algebraic property on the sequence generated by the conceptual algorithm, which is a direct consequence of the inner loop and \eqref{xbar}.
\begin{corollary}\label{coro}
Let $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$, $\{\beta_k\}_{k\in \NN}$ and $\{\alpha_{(k,i)}\}_{k\in \NN}$ be sequences generated by the conceptual algorithm. With $\delta$ and $\hat{\beta}$ as in the conceptual algorithm. Then,
\begin{equation}\label{desig-muy-usada}
\la A_i(\bar{x}_i^{k})+\bar{u}_i^{k},x^{k}-\bar{x}_i^{k} \ra \ge\frac{\alpha_{k,i}\delta}{\hat{\beta}}\|x^{k}-J_i(x^{k},\beta_{k})\|^2\geq0,
\end{equation}
for all $k$.
\end{corollary}
\subsection{Convergence analysis of Variant \ref{A1}}\label{sec-5.1}
In this section, all results are for {\bf Variant \ref{A1}}, which is summarized below.
\vspace*{-0.2in}
\begin{center}\fbox{\begin{minipage}[b]{\textwidth}
\begin{variant}{A.1}
\label{A1}$x^{k+1}=\mcF_{\rm\ref{A1}}(x^k)=P_X\big(P_{H_k}(x^k)\big)$
\end{variant}\end{minipage}}\end{center}
\begin{proposition}\label{stop1}
If {\bf Variant \ref{A1}} stops, then $x^k\in S^*$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
If Stop Criteria $2$ is satisfied, $x^{k+1}=P_X\big(P_{H_k}(x^k)\big)=x^k$. Using Proposition \ref{proj}(ii), we have
\begin{equation}\label{proyex}
\la P_{H_k}(x^k)-x^k, z-x^k\ra \leq 0,
\end{equation} for all $z\in X$. Now using Proposition \ref{proj}(ii),
\begin{equation}\label{proyeh}
\la P_{H_k}(x^k)-x^k, P_{H_k}(x^k)-z\ra \leq 0,
\end{equation} for all $z\in H_k$.
Since $X\cap H_k \neq \emptyset$ summing \eqref{proyex} and \eqref{proyeh}, with $z\in X\cap H_k$, we get
\begin{equation*}
\|x^k-P_{H_k}(x^k)\|^2=0.
\end{equation*}
Hence, $x^k=P_{H_k}(x^k)$, implying that $x^k\in H_k$ and by Proposition \ref{H-separa-x}, $x^k\in S^*$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop2}
\begin{enumerate}
\item The sequence $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$ is Fej\'er convergente to $S^*\cap X$.
\item The sequence $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$ is bounded.
\item $\lim_{k\to \infty}\|P_{H_k}(x^k)-x^k\|^2=0$.
\item $\lim_{k\to \infty}\|x^{x+1}-x^k\|^2=0$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
(i) Take $x^*\in S^*\cap X$. Using \eqref{P112}, Proposition \ref{proj}(i) and Lemma \ref{propseq}, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{fejer-des}\nonumber\|x^{k+1}-x^{*}\|^2&=&\|P_{X}(P_{H_k}(x^k))-P_{X}(P_{H_k}(x^{*}))\|^2\le \|P_{H_k}(x^k)-P_{H_k}(x^{*})\|^2\\&\leq& \|x^k-x^*\|^2-\|P_{H_k}(x^k)-x^k\|^2.\end{eqnarray} So, $\|x^{k+1}-x^{*}\|\le \|x^k-x^*\|$.
(ii) Follows immediately from item (i).
(iii)Take $x^* \in S^*\cap X$. Using \eqref{fejer-des} yields
\begin{equation}\label{ineq}
\|P_{H_k}(x^k)-x^k\|^2\le \|x^k-x^*\|^2-\|x^{k+1}-x^{*}\|^2.
\end{equation}
Now using Proposition \ref{punto} and item (i) we have that the right side of equation \eqref{ineq} go to zero. Obtaining the result.
(iv) Since the sequence $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$ belong to $X$, we have,
$$\|x^{k+1}-x^k\|^2=\|P_{X}(P_{H_k}(x^k))-P_{X}(x^k)\|^2\le \|P_{H_k}(x^k)-x^k\|^2.$$
Taking limits in the above equation and using the previous item we have the result.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}\label{cadai}
For all $i\in \mathbb{I}$ we have,
$$\lim_{k\to \infty}\la A_i(\bar{x}_i^k)+\bar{u}_i^k,x^k-\bar{x}_i^k \ra=0.$$
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
For all $i\in \mathbb{I}$. Using Proposition \ref{proj}(i) and the fact that $H_k \subset H(\bar{x}_i^k,\bar{u}_i^k)$ by \eqref{hk}, we have that,
\begin{align}\label{todoi}
\|x^{k+1}-x^*\|^2 =&\|P_{X}(P_{H_k}(x^k))-P_{X}(x^*)\|^2\le \|P_{H_k}(x^k)-x^*\|^2 \nonumber \\
=&\|P_{H_k}(x^k)-P_{H(\bar{x}_i^k,\bar{u}_i^k)}(x^k)+P_{H(\bar{x}_i^k,\bar{u}_i^k)}(x^k)-x^*\|^2\nonumber \\
\le& \|P_{H_k}(x^k)-x^k\|^2+\|P_{H(\bar{x}_i^k,\bar{u}_i^k)}(x^k)-x^*\|^2.
\end{align}
Now using Proposition \ref{proj}(i) and reordering \eqref{todoi}, we get,
$$\|P_{H(\bar{x}_i^k,\bar{u}_i^k)}(x^k)-x^k\|^2\leq \|x^k-x^*\|^2-\|x^{k+1}-x^*\|^2+\|P_{H_k}(x^k)-x^k\|^2.$$
Using the fact that,
$$P_{H(\bar{x}_i^k,\bar{u}_i^k)}(x^k)=x^k-\frac{\la A_i(\bar{x}_i^k)+\bar{u}_i^k,x^k-\bar{x}_i^k \ra}{\|A_i(\bar{x}_i^k)+\bar{u}_i^k\|^2}(A_i(\bar{x}_i^k)+\bar{u}_i^k),$$
and the previous equation, we have,
\begin{equation}\label{pasar al lim}
\frac{\big(\la A_i(\bar{x}_i^k)+\bar{u}_i^k,x^k-\bar{x}_i^k \ra\big)^2}{\|A_i(\bar{x}_i^k)+\bar{u}_i^k\|^2}\leq \|x^k-x^*\|^2-\|x^{k+1}-x^*\|^2+\|P_{H_k}(x^k)-x^k\|^2.
\end{equation}
By Proposition \ref{inversa} and the continuity of $A_i$ we have that $J_i$ is continuo, since $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$ and $\{\beta_k\}_{k\in \NN}$ are bounded then $\{J_i(x^k,\beta_k)\}_{k\in \NN}$ and $\{\bar{x}_i^k\}_{k\in \NN}$ are bounded, implying the boundedness of $\{\|A_i(\bar{x}_i^k)+\bar{u}_i^k\|\}_{k\in \NN}$ for all $i\in \mathbb{I}$.
\noindent Using Proposition \ref{punto}(ii) and (iii), the right side of \eqref{pasar al lim} goes to 0, when $k$ goes to $\infty$, establishing the result.
\end{proof}
\noindent Next we establish our main convergence result on {\bf Variant \ref{A1}}.
\begin{theorem}\label{teo1}
The sequence $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$ converges to some element belonging to $S^*\cap X $.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We claim that there exists a cluster point of $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$ belonging to $S^*$. The existence of the cluster points follows from Proposition \ref{prop2}(ii). Let $\{x^{j_k}\}_{k\in \NN}$ be a convergent subsequence of $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$ such that, for all $i\in \mathbb{I}$ the sequences $\{\bar{x}_i^{j_k}\}_{k\in \NN}, \{\bar{u}_i^{j_k}\}_{k\in \NN}, \{\alpha_{j_k,i}\}_{k\in \NN}$ and $\{\beta_{j_k}\}_{k\in \NN}$ are convergents, and $\lim _{k\to \infty}x^{j_k}= \tilde{x}$.\\
Using Proposition \ref{prop2}(iii) and taking limits in \eqref{desig-muy-usada} over the subsequence $\{j_k\}_{k\in \NN}$, we have for all $i\in \mathbb{I}$,
\begin{equation}\label{limite}
0=\lim_{k\to \infty}\la A_i(\bar{x}_i^{j_k})+\bar{u}_i^{j_k},x^{j_k}-\bar{x}_i^{j_k} \ra \ge \lim_{k\to \infty} \frac{\alpha_{j_k,i}\delta}{\hat{\beta}}\|x^{j_k}-J_i(x^{j_k},\beta_{j_k})\|^2\geq0.
\end{equation}
Therefore,
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{k\to \infty} \alpha_{j_k,i}\|x^{j_k}-J_i(x^{j_k},\beta_{j_k})\|=0.
\end{equation*}
Now consider the two possible cases.
(a) First, assume that $\lim_{k\to \infty}\alpha_{j_k,i}\ne 0$, i.e., $\alpha_{j_k,i}\ge \bar{\alpha}$ for all $k$ and some $\bar{\alpha}>0$. In view of (\ref{limite}),
\begin{equation}\label{limcero}
\lim_{k\to \infty}\|x^{j_k}-J_i(x^{j_k},\beta_{j_k})\|=0.
\end{equation}
Since $J_i$ is continuous, by the continuity of $A_i$ and $(I+\beta_k B_i)^{-1}$ and by Proposition \ref{inversa}, \eqref{limcero} becomes
\begin{equation*}
\tilde{x}=J_i(\tilde{x},\tilde{\beta}),
\end{equation*}
which implies that $\tilde{x}\in S_i^*$ for all $i\in \mathbb{I}$. Then $\tilde{x}\in S^*$ establishing the claim.
(b) On the other hand, if $\lim_{k\to \infty}\alpha_{j_k,i}=0$ then for $\theta \in (0,1)$ as in the conceptual algorithm, we have
$$\lim_{k\to\infty}\frac{\alpha_{j_k,i}}{\theta}=0.$$
Define
$$y^{j_k}_i:=\frac{\alpha_{j_k,i}}{\theta}J_i(x^{j_k},\beta_{j_k})+\Big(1-\frac{\alpha_{j_k,i}}{\theta}\Big)x^{j_k}.$$
Then,
\begin{equation}\label{ykgox}
\lim_{k\to\infty}y_i^{j_k}=\tilde{x}.
\end{equation}
Using the definition of the $j_i(k)$ and \eqref{alphak}, we have that $y_i^{j_k}$ does not satisfy \eqref{jk} implying
\begin{equation*}
\Big \la A_i (y^{j_k}_i)+u^{j_k}_{j_i(k)-1}-\frac{\delta}{\beta_k}(x^k -J_i\big(x^k,\beta_k)\big), x^k-J_i(x^k,\beta_k)\Big \ra > 0,
\end{equation*}
equivalent to
\begin{equation}\label{conse}
\Big \la A_i (y^{j_k}_i)+u^{j_k}_{j(j_k)-1,i}, x^k-J_i(x^k,\beta_k)\Big \ra > \frac{\delta}{\beta_k}\|x^k-J_i\big(x^k,\beta_k\big)\|^2,
\end{equation}
for $u^{j_k}_{j(j_k)-1,i}\in B_i(y^{j_k}_i)$ and all $k\in \NN$ and $i\in \mathbb{I}$.\\
Redefining the subsequence $\{j_k\}_{k\in \NN}$, if necessary, we may assume that $\{u^{j_k}_{j(j_k)-1,i}\}_{k\in \NN}$ converges to $\tilde{u}_i$. By the maximality of $B_i$, $\tilde{u}_i$ belongs to $B_i(\tilde{x})$. Using the continuity of $J_i$, $\{J(x^{j_k},\beta_{j_k})\}_{k\in \NN}$ converges to $J_i(\tilde{x},\tilde{\beta})$. Using \eqref{ykgox} and taking limit in (\ref{conse}) over the subsequence $\{j_k\}_{k\in \NN}$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{tiu}
\Big\la A_i(\tilde{x}) + \tilde{u}_i, \tilde{x}- J_i(\tilde{x},\tilde{\beta})\Big\ra \le \frac{\delta}{\tilde{\beta}}\|\tilde{x}-J_i(\tilde{x},\tilde{\beta})\|^2.
\end{equation}
Using (\ref{jota}) and multiplying by $\tilde{\beta}$ on both sides of (\ref{tiu}), we get
\begin{equation*}
\la \tilde{x}-J_i(\tilde{x},\tilde{\beta})-\tilde{\beta}\tilde{v}_i+\tilde{\beta}\tilde{u}_i, \tilde{x}-J_i(\tilde{x},\tilde{\beta})\ra \le \delta\| \tilde{x}-J_i(\tilde{x},\tilde{\beta})\|^2,
\end{equation*}
where $\tilde{v}_i\in B_i(J_i(\tilde{x},\tilde\beta))$. Applying the monotonicity of $B_i$, we obtain
$$\| \tilde{x}-J_i(\tilde{x},\tilde{\beta})\|^2 \le \delta \| \tilde{x}-J_i(\tilde{x},\tilde{\beta})\|^2,$$
implying that $\| \tilde{x}-J_i(\tilde{x},\tilde{\beta})\|\le 0$. Thus, $\tilde{x}=J_i(\tilde{x},\tilde{\beta})$ and hence, $\tilde{x}\in S_i^*$ for all $i\in \mathbb{I}$, thus $\tilde{x} \in S^*$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Convergence analysis of Variant \ref{A2}}\label{sec-5.2}
In this section, all results are for {\bf Variant
\ref{A2}}, which is summarized below.
\vspace*{-0.2in}
\begin{center}\fbox{\begin{minipage}[b]{\textwidth}
\begin{variant}{A.2}
\label{A2}$x^{k+1}=\mcF_{\rm\ref{A2}}(x^k)=P_{X\cap H_k}(x^k)$
\end{variant}\end{minipage}}\end{center}
\begin{proposition}\label{stop2}
If {\bf Variant \ref{A2}} stops, then $x^k\in S^*$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
If $x^{k+1}=P_{X\cap H_k}(x^k)=x^k$ then $x^k\in X\cap H_k$ and by Proposition \ref{H-separa-x}, $x^k\in S^*\cap X$.
\end{proof}
\noindent From now on assume that {\bf Variant \ref{A2}} does not stop.
\begin{proposition}\label{fe}
The sequence $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$ is F\'ejer convergent to $S^*\cap X$. Moreover, it is bounded and
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{k \to \infty} \|x^{k+1}-x^k\|=0.
\end{equation*}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Take $x^*\in S^*\cap X$. By Lemma \ref{propseq}, $x^*\in H_k\cap X$, for all $k$. Then using Proposition \ref{proj}(ii) and \eqref{P122}
\begin{equation*}
\|x^{k+1}-x^*\|^2-\|x^k-x^*\|^2+\|x^{k+1}-x^k\|^2=2\la x^*-x^{k+1},x^k-x^{k+1}\ra\leq 0,
\end{equation*}
we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{fejerc}
\|x^{k+1}-x^*\|^2\le \|x^k-x^*\|^2-\|x^{k+1}-x^k\|^2.
\end{equation}
The above inequality implies that $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$ is F\'ejer convergent to $S^*\cap X$. Hence by Proposition \ref{punto}(i) and (ii), $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$ is bounded and thus $\{\|x^k-x^*\|\}_{k\in \NN}$ is a convergent sequence. Taking limits in (\ref{fejerc}), we get
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{k \to \infty} \|x^{k+1}-x^k\|=0.
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}
The next proposition shows a relation between the projection steps in {\bf Variant \ref{A1}} and {\bf \ref{A2}}. This fact has a geometry interpretation, since the projection of {\bf Variant \ref{A2}} is done over a small set, improving the convergence of {\bf Variant \ref{A1}}. Note that this can be reduce the number of iterations, avoiding possible zigzagging of {\bf Variant \ref{A1}}.
\begin{proposition}Let $\{x^{k}\}_{k\in \NN}$ the sequence generated by {\bf Variant \ref{A2}}. Then,
\begin{enumerate}
\item $x^{k+1}=P_{X\cap H_k}(P_{H_k}(x^k))$.
\item For all $i\in \mathbb{I}$ we have, $\lim_{k\to \infty}\la A_i(\bar{x}_i^k)+\bar{u}_i^k,x^k-\bar{x}_i^k \ra=0$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
\noindent (i) Fix any $y\in X\cap H_k$. Since $x^k \in X$ but $x^k\notin H_k$ by Proposition \ref{H-separa-x}, there exists $\gamma \in [0,1]$, such that $\tilde{x}=\gamma x^k+(1-\gamma)y\in X\cap \partial H_k$. Hence,
\begin{eqnarray}
\|y-P_{H_k}(x^k)\|^2&\geq & (1-\gamma)^2\|y-P_{H_k}(x^k)\|^2\nonumber\\
&=& \|\tilde{x}-\gamma x^k-(1-\gamma) P_{H_k}(x^k)\|^2\nonumber\\
&=& \|\tilde{x}-P_{H_k}(x^k)\|^2+\gamma^2\|x^k-P_{H_k}(x^k)\|^2 -2\gamma\la\tilde{x}-P_{H_k}(x^k),x^k-P_{H_k}(x^k)\ra\nonumber\\
&\geq& \|\tilde{x}-P_{H_k}(x^k)\|^2,\label{zetabar}
\end{eqnarray}
where the last inequality follows from Proposition \ref{proj}(ii), applied with $X=H_k$, $x=x^k$ and $z=\tilde{x}\in H_k$. Furthermore, we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\|\tilde{x}-P_{H_k}(x^k)\|&\geq&\|\tilde{x}-x^k\|-\|x^k-P_{H_k}(x^k)\|\nonumber\\
&\geq& \|x^{k+1}-x^k\|-\|x^k-P_{H_k}(x^k)\|\nonumber\\
&\geq& \|x^{k+1}-x^k\|\nonumber\\
&\geq& \|x^{k+1}-P_{H_k}(x^k)\|\label{proye},
\end{eqnarray}
where the first equality follows by the triangle inequality, using the fact that $\tilde{x}\in X\cap H_k$ and $x^{k+1}=P_{X\cap H_k}(x^k)$ in the second inequality, the third one is trivial, and the last one inequality by the fact that $x^{k+1}\in H_k$ and Proposition \ref{proj}(i) with $X=H_k$. Combining (\ref{zetabar}) and (\ref{proye}), we obtain
\begin{equation*}
\|y-P_{H_k}(x^k)\|\geq \|x^{k+1}-P_{H_k}(x^k)\|,
\end{equation*}
for all $y\in X\cap H_k$.
Hence, $x^{k+1}=P_{X\cap H_k}(P_{H_k}(x^k))$.
\medskip
\noindent (ii) Take $x^*\in X\cap S^*$. By item (i), Lemma \ref{propseq} and Proposition \ref{proj}(i), we have
\begin{equation*}
\|x^{k+1}-x^*\|^2=\|P_{X\cap H_k}(P_{H_k}(x^k))-P_{X\cap H_k}(x^*)\|^2\leq \|P_{H_k}(x^k)-x^*\|^2.
\end{equation*}
\noindent The proof is similar to the proof of Proposition \ref{cadai}.
\end{proof}
\noindent Finally we present the convergence result for {\bf Variant \ref{A2}}.
\begin{theorem}\label{teo2}
The sequence $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$ converges to some point belonging to $S^*\cap X$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Repeat the proof of Theorem \ref{teo1}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Convergence analysis of Variant \ref{A3}}\label{sec-5.3}
In this section, all results are for {\bf Variant \ref{A3}}, which is summarized below.
\vspace*{-0.2in}
\begin{center}\fbox{\begin{minipage}[b]{\textwidth}
\begin{variant}{A.3}
\label{A3}$x^{k+1}=\mcF_{\rm\ref{A3}}(x^k)=P_{X\cap H_k\cap W(x^k)}(x^0)$
\end{variant}\end{minipage}}\end{center}
\begin{proposition}
If {\bf Variant \ref{A3}} stops, then $x^k\in S^*\cap X$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
If Stop Criteria 2 is satisfied then, $x^{k+1}=P_{X\cap H_k\cap W_k}(x^0)=x^k$. So, $x^k\in X\cap H_k\cap W_k\subset X\cap H_k $ and finally using Proposition \ref{H-separa-x}, $x^k\in S^*\cap X$.
\end{proof}
From now on we assume that {\bf Variant \ref{A3}} does not stop. Observe that, in virtue of their definitions, $W_k$ and $H_k$ are convex and closed sets, for each $k$. Therefore $X\cap H_k\cap W_k$ is a convex and closed set. So, if $X\cap H_k\cap W_k$ is nonempty, then the next iterate, $x^{k+1}$, is well-defined.
The following lemma guarantees this fact.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma:3} $S^*\cap X\subset H_k\cap W_k$, for all $k$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} We proceed by induction. By definition, $S^*\cap X \neq \emptyset $. By Lemma \ref{propseq}, $S^*\cap X\subset H_k$, for all $k$.
For $k=0$, as $W_0=\RR^n$, $S^*\cap X\subset H_0\cap W_0$.
Assume that $S^*\cap X\subset H_\ell \cap W_\ell$, for $\ell\leq k$.
Henceforth, $x^{k+1}=P_{X\cap H_k\cap W_k}(x^0)$ is well-defined.
Then, by Proposition \ref{proj}(ii), we have
\begin{equation}\label{x*ink+1}
\langle x^*-x^{k+1}\,,\, x^0-x^{k+1}\rangle=\langle x^*-P_{X\cap
H_k\cap W_k}(x^0)\,,\, x^0-P_{X\cap H_k\cap W_k}(x^0)\rangle\leq0,
\end{equation}
for all $x^*\in S^*\cap X$. The inequality follows by the induction hypothesis. Now, \eqref{x*ink+1} implies that
$x^*\in W_{k+1}$ and hence, $ S^*\cap X \subset H_{k+1}\cap W_{k+1}$.
\end{proof}
The above lemma shows that the set $X\cap H_k\cap W_k$ is nonempty and in consequence the projection step, given in \eqref{P132}, is well-defined.
\begin{corollary}\label{l:well-definedness} {\bf Variant \ref{A3}} is well-defined.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof} By Lemma \ref{lemma:3} , $ S^*\cap X\subset H_k\cap W_k$, for all $k$. Then, given $x^0$, the sequence $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$ is computable.
\end{proof}
Before proving the convergence of the sequence, we study its
boundedness. The next lemma shows that the sequence remains in a
ball determined by the initial point.
\begin{lemma}\label{l:limitacao} The sequence $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$ is bounded. Furthermore,
\begin{equation*}\label{eq:bolas}
\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}\subset B\left[\frac{1}{2}(x^0+\bar{x}),\frac{1}{2}\rho\right]\cap X,
\end{equation*}
where $\bar{x}=P_{S^*\cap X}(x^0)$ and $\rho={\rm dist}(x^0,
S^*\cap X)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
$S^*\cap X \subset H_k \cap W_k$ follows from Lemma \ref{lemma:3}. Moreover, from \eqref{P132}, we obtain that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:12}
\| x^{k+1}-x^0\| \leq\| z-x^0\|,
\end{equation}
for all $k$ and all $z\in S^*\cap X$. Henceforth, taking $z=\bar{x}$ in \eqref{eq:12},
\begin{equation}\label{eq:yunier}
\| x^{k+1}-x^0\|\leq\|\bar{x}-x^0\|=\rho,
\end{equation}
for all $k$. Thus, $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$ is bounded.
Define $z^{k}=x^{k}-\frac{1}{2}(x^0+\bar{x})$ and $\bar{z}=\bar{x}-\frac{1}{2}(x^0+\bar{x})$. It follows from the fact $\bar{x}\in W_{k+1}$, that
\begin{eqnarray*}
0&\geq& 2\la \bar{x}-x^{k+1},x^0-x^{k+1}\ra \\&=&2\left\la
\bar{z}+ \frac{1}{2}(x^0+\bar{x})-z^{k+1}-\frac{1}{2}(x^0+\bar{x}),z^0+\frac{1}{2}(x^0+\bar{x})-z^{k+1}-\frac{1}{2}(x^0+\bar{x})\right\ra\\&=&2\left\la
\bar{z}-z^{k+1},z^0-z^{k+1}\right\ra=\left\la
\bar{z}-z^{k+1},-\bar{z}-z^{k+1}\right\ra = \|z^{k+1}\|^2-\|\bar{z}\|^2,
\end{eqnarray*}
where we have used that $\bar{z}=-z^0$ in the third equality. So,
\begin{equation*}\label{eq:raio}
\left \|x^{k+1}-\frac{x^0+\bar{x}}{2}\right\|\leq\left\|\bar{x}-\frac{x^0+\bar{x}}{2}\right\|=\frac{\rho}{2},
\end{equation*}
for all $k$. Now, the result follows from the feasibility of $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$, which, in turn, is a consequence of \eqref{P132}.
\end{proof}
\noindent Now, we focus on the properties of the accumulation points.
\begin{lemma}\label{l:optimalidad} All accumulation points of $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$ belong to $S^*\cap X$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $x^{k+1}\in W_k$,
\begin{equation*}
0\geq 2 \la
x^{k+1}-x^k,x^0-x^k\ra=\|x^{k+1}-x^k\|^2-\|x^{k+1}-x^0\|^2+\|x^k-x^0\|^2.
\end{equation*}
Equivalently $$0\leq\|x^{k+1}-x^k\|^2\leq\|x^{k+1}-x^0\|^2-\|x^k-x^0\|^2,$$ establishing that the sequence $\{\|x^k-x^0\|\}_{k\in \NN}$ is monotone and nondecreasing.
From Lemma \ref{l:limitacao}, we get that $\{\|x^k-x^0\|\}_{k\in \NN}$ is bounded, and thus, convergent. Therefore,
\begin{equation}\label{xk+1-xk-va-cero}
\lim_{k\rightarrow\infty}\| x^{k+1}-x^k\|=0.
\end{equation}
Since $x^{k+1}\in H_k$, we get for all $i\in \mathbb{I}$ that,
\begin{equation}\label{ptos-in-s*}
\la A_i(\bar{x}_i^{k})+\bar{u}_i^{k},x^{k+1}-\bar{x}_i^{k}\ra\le 0,
\end{equation}
with $\bar{u}_i^k$ and $\bar{x}_i^k$ as \eqref{ubar} and \eqref{xbar}.
\noindent Using \eqref{xbar} and \eqref{ptos-in-s*}, we have
\begin{equation*}
\la A_i(\bar{x}_i^{k})+\bar{u}_i^{k},x^{k+1}-x^{k}\ra + \alpha_{k,i}\big{\la} A_i(\bar{x}_i^{k})+\bar{u}_i^{k},x^{k}-J_i(x^{k},\beta_{k})\big{\ra}\le 0.
\end{equation*}
Combining the above inequality with the stop criteria of Inner Loop, given in \eqref{jk}, we get for all $i\in \mathbb{I}$
\begin{equation}\label{eq}
\la A_i(\bar{x}_i^{k})+\bar{u}_i^{k},x^{k+1}-x^{k}\ra+\frac{\alpha_{k,i}\delta}{\hat{\beta}}\|x^{k} - J_i(x^{k},\beta_{k})\|^2\leq 0.
\end{equation}
Choosing a subsequence $\{j_k\}_{k\in \NN}$ such that the subsequences $\{x^{j_k}\}_{k\in \NN}$, $\{\beta_{j_k}\}_{k\in \NN}$ and $\{\bar{u}_i^{j_k}\}_{k\in \NN}$ converge to $\tilde{x}$, $\tilde{\beta}$ and $\tilde{u}_i$ respectively. This is possible by the boundedness of $\{\bar{u}_i^k\}_{k\in \NN}$, by hypothesis on $B_i$, bounded of $\{x^{k}\}_{k\in \NN}$ and $\{\beta_{k}\}_{k\in \NN}$. Taking limits in \eqref{eq}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{zero}
\lim_{k\to \infty}\alpha_{j_k,i}\|x^{j_k} - J_i(x^{j_k},\beta_{j_k})\|^2=0.
\end{equation}
Now we consider two cases, $\lim_{k\to \infty} \alpha_{j_k,i}=0$ or $\lim_{k\to \infty} \alpha_{j_k,i}\neq 0$ (taking a subsequence again if necessary).
(a) $\lim_{k\to\infty} \alpha_{j_k,i} \neq 0$, i.e., for all $i\in \mathbb{I}$, $\alpha_{j_k,i}\geq \tilde{\alpha_i}$ for all $k$ and some $\tilde{\alpha_i}>0$. By \eqref{zero},
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{k\to \infty}\|x^{i_k} - J(x^{i_k},\beta_{i_k})\|^2=0.
\end{equation*}
By continuity of $J_i$, we have $\tilde{x}=J_i(\tilde{x},\tilde{\beta})$ and hence by Proposition \ref{parada}, $\tilde{x}\in S_i^*$ for all $i\in \mathbb{I}$, therefor $\tilde{x}\in S_*$.
(b) $\lim_{k\to\infty} \alpha_{j_k,i} = 0$, then $\lim_{k\to \infty}\frac{\alpha_{j_k,i}}{\theta}=0$. It follows in the same, manner as in the proof of Theorem \ref{teo1}(b).
\end{proof}
\noindent Finally, we are ready to prove the convergence of the sequence $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$ generated by {\bf Variant \ref{A3}}, to the solution closest to
$x^0$.
\begin{theorem} Define $\bar{x}=P_{S^*\cap X}(x^0)$. Then, $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$ converges to $\bar{x}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} By Lemma \ref{l:limitacao}, $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}\subset B\left[\frac{1}{2}(x^0+\bar{x}),\frac{1}{2}\rho\right]\cap X$, so it is bounded. Let
$\{x^{j_k}\}_{k\in \NN}$ be a convergent subsequence of $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$,
and let $\hat{x}$ be its limit. Evidently $\hat{x}\in B\left[\frac{1}{2}(x^0+\bar{x}),\frac{1}{2}\rho\right]\cap X$. Furthermore, by Lemma \ref{l:optimalidad}, $\hat{x}\in S^*\cap X$.
Then, $$\hat{x}\in S^* \cap X \cap B \left[\frac{1}{2}(x^0+\bar{x}),\frac{1}{2}\rho\right]=\{\bar{x}\},$$ implying that $\hat{x}=\bar{x}$, hence $\bar{x}$ is the
unique limit point of $\{x^k\}_{k\in \NN}$. Thus,
$\{x^{k}\}_{k\in \NN}$ converges to $\bar{x}\in S^*\cap X$. \end{proof}
\section{Conclusions}
In this paper, we present a variant of forward-backward splitting methods for solving a system o inclusion problems composed by the sum of two operators. A conceptual algorithm have been proposed containing three variants with different projections steps. A linesearch, for relax the hypothesis of Lipschitz continuity on forwards operators, have been proposed. The convergence analyse of three variant are discussed. The results presented here, improve the previous in the literature by relaxing the hypothesis.
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
Given the finite age of the Universe, the first asymptotic giant
branch stars that formed now live as
$\log$~($L/{\rm L}_{\odot}$)~=~$-$4.5 white dwarfs
\citep[WDs;][]{mestel52,iben84,winget87,liebert88,fontaine01}. Such WDs have
temperatures below 4000~K (hence classified as ultracool) and they
have been observed in deep {\em Hubble Space Telescope} ($HST$) images
of the halo globular clusters M4 and NGC~6397
\citep{hansen04,hansen07}. The oldest WDs in these two clusters are
$\approx$11.5~Gyr old.
Large-scale surveys such as the Sloan Digital Sky Survey
\citep[SDSS;][]{gates04,harris06,harris08,kilic06a,kilic10a,vidrih07,hall08},
the UKIRT Infrared Deep Sky Survey
\citep[UKIDSS;][]{leggett11,catalan12,tremblay14} and SuperCOSMOS
\citep{hambly99,rowell08} have identified the analogues of these
ultracool WDs in the field. Since these field WDs are relatively
bright compared to the globular cluster WDs, optical and infrared
photometry in several bands can be easily obtained from ground-based
telescopes, enabling us to model their spectral energy distributions
(SEDs) accurately. This is important for understanding the different
opacity sources in these stars, deriving reliable temperatures and
ages, and also calibrating the faint WD sequences of globular clusters
that usually rely on two filter photometry.
The spectra of hydrogen-rich cool and ultracool WDs differ from those
of their warmer counterparts because they show the effects of the
red-wing of the Ly$\alpha$ opacity in the blue \citep{kowalski06} and
the collision-induced absorption (CIA) due to molecular hydrogen in
the near-infrared \citep{hansen99}. The latter shifts the peak of the
SEDs of ultracool WDs back to the optical wavelengths. Unfortunately,
there are only three ultracool WDs in the field with parallax
measurements. These are WD~0346+246\footnote{We note that this object
is also known as WD~0343+247.}, SDSS~J110217.48+411315.4
\citep[hereafter J1102;][and references therein]{kilic12} and
LHS~3250 \citep{bergeron02}. The first two stars have SEDs that peak
near 1~$\mu$m. On the other hand, the LHS~3250 SED peaks at
0.6~$\mu$m, representing an extreme case of CIA flux deficit in the
optical and infrared. \citet{bergeron02} performed a detailed model
atmosphere analysis of LHS~3250 and demonstrated that LHS~3250 has a
helium-rich composition, it is overluminous, and undermassive. The
best-fitting model and the parallax measurement indicate a mass of only
0.23~\msun\ \citep{bergeron02}. This is somewhat problematic as all
previously known low-mass WDs are DAs with hydrogen-rich atmospheres.
\citet{gates04} and \citet{harris08} as well as several other groups
have identified about a dozen stars with SEDs similar to LHS~3250. In
this paper, we present parallax measurements and a model atmosphere
analysis of 54 cool WDs, including half a dozen ultracool WDs and
several other cool WDs with significant infrared flux deficits. Our
targets were selected from the cool and ultracool WD samples of
\citet{gates04}, \citet{vidrih07}, \citet{harris08} and
\citet{kilic10a}, and are biased towards WDs with significant infrared
flux deficits. Parallax measurements allow us to accurately determine
the distances, masses and consequently the cooling ages for these
stars. Section 2 outlines our observations including a description of
our Bayesian approach to estimating distances. Section 3 describes the
models used in our analyses followed by our results in Section 4. In
Section 5, we discuss the ages and membership of the WDs in our sample
as well as the implications of our results towards our understanding
of WD evolution and we conclude in Section 6.
\section{Observations}
\subsection{Parallax}
All our parallax data are from the 2.4m Hiltner telescope at Michigan-Dartmouth-MIT (MDM)
Observatory on Kitt Peak, Arizona. We used a thinned SITe CCD (named
`echelle'); at the $f 7.5$ focus, each $24\ \mu$m pixel subtended
0.275 arcsec, giving a field of view 9.4 arcmin$^{2}$. For all our
parallax data, we used a 4-inch-square Kron--Cousins $I$-band filter,
which did not vignette the CCD. Exposure times varied with the
brightness of the object, but were typically a few hundred seconds.
Our data were taken on numerous observing runs between 2007 and 2011.
Table~\ref{tab:obs} gives the epochs that each star was observed, and
the number of exposures at each epoch.
\begin{table*}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{0.975\textwidth}
\caption{Journal of parallax observations.}
\begin{tabular}{@{}lrrrl@{}}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
SDSS & $N_{\rm ref}$ & $N_{\rm meas}$ & $N_{\rm pix}$ & \multicolumn{1}{c}{Epochs} \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
J0045+1420 & 30 & 57 & 50 & 2007.73(4), 2007.82(3), 2008.69(11), 2008.88(16), 2008.97(8), 2009.72(8) \\
J0121$-$0038 & 15 & 48 & 115 & 2007.73(8), 2008.05(10), 2008.69(16), 2008.88(17), 2008.97(9), 2009.73(13), 2009.86(18), \\
& & & & 2010.01(10), 2011.75(9), 2011.94(5) \\
J0146+1404 & 35 & 54 & 107 & 2007.73(8), 2008.05(8), 2008.69(12), 2008.88(18), 2008.97(8), 2009.73(12), 2009.86(16), \\
& & & & 2010.01(12), 2011.75(3), 2011.94(10) \\
J0256$-$0700 & 15 & 41 & 149 & 2007.74(33), 2007.81(12), 2008.05(8), 2008.69(13), 2008.88(14), 2009.03(10), 2009.73(8), \\
& & & & 2009.86(12), 2010.02(7), 2011.75(10), 2011.93(22) \\
J0301$-$0044 & 25 & 58 & 102 & 2007.73(7), 2007.82(6), 2008.06(8), 2008.69(10), 2008.88(17), 2008.97(8), 2009.73(12), \\
& & & & 2009.86(13), 2010.01(12), 2011.75(9) \\
J0309+0025 & 17 & 47 & 126 & 2007.74(8), 2007.81(10), 2008.05(8), 2008.69(1), 2008.88(14), 2008.97(7), 2009.72(8), \\
& & & & 2009.86(16), 2010.02(13), 2011.75(16), 2011.93(25) \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
\multicolumn{5}{@{}p{\textwidth}@{}}{($Note.$ This table is available in its entirety
in a machine-readable form in the online journal. A portion is shown here for
guidance regarding its form and content.)} \\
\label{tab:obs}
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.575,bb=90 32 542 769]{f01.eps}
\caption{Comparison between the proper motions measured at MDM
Observatory and those from the SDSS+USNO-B catalogue \citep{munn04}
for 42 of the 54 WDs in the current sample. We compare the absolute
value of the proper motion in right ascension ($|\mu_{\rm RA}|$,
top) and in declination ($|\mu_{\rm DEC}|$, bottom). The dotted line
represents the 1:1 correlation. The dashed lines represent the
$\pm$~10~mas~yr$^{-1}$ range.}
\label{fg:pm}
\end{figure}
Our reduction and analysis procedures differed only slightly from
those described by \citet{thor03} and \citet{thor08}. As in the
previous work, we corrected our raw parallaxes to absolute using
colour-based distance estimates for the reference stars, and estimated
uncertainties using the formal errors of the fit and the scatter of
the references stars. In order to correct for differential colour
refraction (DCR), we need to know the colour of both the programme star
and the reference stars. In previous work we measured the colours, but
for this work we used SDSS $g - i$ colours and adjusted the DCR
correction factor slightly to account for this. \citet{thor03}
describes a Bayesian procedure used to estimate distances from the
available data, which combines the parallax measurement with an
assumed space velocity distribution and absolute magnitude range. We
used a similar approach here, but modified the prior information to be
appropriate to the present sample. For the velocities, we used a
composite distribution consisting of 60 per cent thin disc with $(U,
V, W) = (39, 20, 20)\ {\rm km\ s^{-1}}$, 30 per cent thick disc with
$(U, V, W) = (46, 50, 35)\ {\rm km\ s^{-1}}$ \citep{chiba00}, and a 10
per cent probability of a still larger dispersion $(U, V, W) = (100,
75, 50)\ {\rm km\ s^{-1}}$. The absolute magnitudes of these WDs
are likely to be in the range 11--18, so the absolute
magnitudes were assumed to be drawn from a Gaussian centred on $M_{\rm g} =
15$ with a standard deviation of 4 mag. In most cases our
parallaxes were accurate enough that the Bayesian adjustments were
fairly minor. Furthermore, we have four targets in common with the USNO
Parallax programme and the parallax measurements are in good agreement
(Harris, private communication).
There is only one target in our parallax sample, J1547+0523
(NLTT~41210), that does not display significant parallax. This object
was identified as a high proper motion target by \citet{lepine05}, and
included in our sample as a WD candidate. We measure relative proper
motions of $-150.5 \pm 1.1$ and $-133.9 \pm 1.1$ mas yr$^{-1}$ in RA
and DEC, respectively. These are consistent with the proper motion
measurements by \citet{lepine05}. We also measure a parallax of 1.9
$\pm$ 1.4 mas, which indicates that NLTT~41210 is not a WD.
\subsection{Proper Motion}
In Fig.~\ref{fg:pm}, we compare our measured proper motions, as
listed in Table~\ref{tab:astro}, for the 42 WDs in our sample that
also have measured proper motions in the SDSS+USNO-B catalogue
\citep{munn04}. We expect disagreement at the 10~mas~yr$^{-1}$ level
since our proper motions are relative to the particular reference
stars used in the reduction. Fig.~\ref{fg:pm} shows that the vast
majority of our WDs do indeed fall within the range of
$\pm$~10~mas~yr$^{-1}$ when compared with the SDSS+USNO-B
measurements.
This disagreement arises due to two main factors. First, we make no
attempt to reduce proper motions to an inertial frame. Any systematic
trend due to e.g., Galactic rotation or solar motion, is still
present. Secondly, reference stars often have detectable proper motions
of their own, so in $\mu_{\rm RA}$~versus~$\mu_{\rm DEC}$ space they form
a cloud of points around the origin. Because there are typically only
a couple of dozen reference stars, the centre of this cloud is
statistically uncertain, typically of the order of 5~mas~yr$^{-1}$.
\setlength{\extrarowheight}{1pt}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{5.5pt}
\begin{table*}
\scriptsize
\centering
\begin{minipage}{0.99\textwidth}
\caption{Astrometry of cool WDs.}
\begin{tabular}{@{}lccr@{ $\pm$ }l*{2}{S[table-format=3.0]}r@{}lr@{ $\pm$ }lr@{ $\pm$ }lr@{ $\pm$ }lr@{ $\pm$ }l}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
SDSS & RA (J2000) & Dec. (J2000) & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$\pi_{\rm abs}$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\mu_{\rm RA}$} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\mu_{\rm DEC}$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$D$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$v_{\rm tan}$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$U^{a}$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$V$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$W$} \\
& (h:m:s) & (d:m:s) & \multicolumn{2}{c}{(mas yr$^{-1}$)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(mas yr$^{-1}$)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{(mas yr$^{-1}$)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{(pc)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{(km s$^{-1}$)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{(km s$^{-1}$)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{(km s$^{-1}$)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{(km s$^{-1}$)} \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
J0045+1420 & 00:45:21.89 & +14:20:45.3 & 15.9 & 1.1 & 251 & -52 & 66 & $^{+6}_{-5}$ & 80 & 6 & $-$46 & 5 & $-$37 & 4 & $-$5 & 2 \\
J0121$-$0038 & 01:21:03.00 & $-$00:38:33.6 & 9.6 & 1.9 & 107 & 61 & 118 & $^{+29}_{-21}$ & 69 & 14 & $-$46 & 12 & 4 & 5 & 27 & 4 \\
J0146+1404 & 01:46:29.01 & +14:04:38.2 & 11.0 & 1.5 & 255 & 65 & 90 & $^{+14}_{-10}$ & 112 & 14 & $-$82 & 13 & $-$37 & 8 & 49 & 6 \\
J0256$-$0700 & 02:56:41.62 & $-$07:00:33.8 & 16.4 & 1.5 & 348 & -193 & 61 & $^{+6}_{-5}$ & 115 & 10 & $-$17 & 3 & $-$96 & 10 & 34 & 3 \\
J0301$-$0044 & 03:01:44.09 & $-$00:44:39.5 & 13.4 & 1.3 & 107 & -538 & 74 & $^{+7}_{-6}$ & 192 & 16 & 83 & 7 & $-$155 & 17 & $-$60 & 7 \\
J0309+0025 & 03:09:24.87 & +00:25:25.3 & 21.2 & 1.6 & -10 & -102 & 49 & $^{+4}_{-4}$ & 24 & 1 & 23 & 2 & $-$3 & 3 & $-$4 & 2 \\
J0310$-$0110 & 03:10:49.53 & $-$01:10:35.3 & 7.1 & 1.9 & -28 & -77 & 164 & $^{+58}_{-35}$ & 64 & 18 & 47 & 11 & $-$14 & 10 & $-$25 & 10 \\
J0747+2438N$^{b}$ & 07:47:21.56 & +24:38:47.7 & 18.4 & 1.0 & 139 & -69 & 55 & $^{+3}_{-3}$ & 40 & 2 & 29 & 2 & $-$13 & 3 & 32 & 3 \\
J0747+2438S$^{b}$ & 07:47:23.50 & +24:38:23.7 & 18.4 & 1.0 & 139 & -69 & 55 & $^{+3}_{-3}$ & 40 & 2 & 29 & 2 & $-$13 & 3 & 32 & 3 \\
J0753+4230 & 07:53:13.28 & +42:30:01.6 & 36.2 & 1.0 & 108 & -388 & 27 & $^{+1}_{-1}$ & 53 & 1 & 10 & 1 & $-$40 & 2 & 10 & 1 \\
J0805+3833 & 08:05:57.62 & +38:33:44.1 & 47.6 & 1.0 & -628 & -552 & 21 & $^{+1}_{-1}$ & 83 & 1 & $-$24 & 1 & $-$30 & 1 & $-$55 & 2 \\
J0817+2822 & 08:17:51.52 & +28:22:03.1 & 19.6 & 1.5 & 69 & -197 & 52 & $^{+4}_{-4}$ & 51 & 3 & 25 & 2 & $-$36 & 4 & 9 & 2 \\
J0821+3727 & 08:21:08.18 & +37:27:38.3 & 12.8 & 3.2 & 167 & -146 & 86 & $^{+29}_{-19}$ & 90 & 25 & 44 & 8 & $-$50 & 16 & 50 & 11 \\
J0825+5049 & 08:25:19.70 & +50:49:20.1 & 20.4 & 1.3 & -331 & -326 & 49 & $^{+3}_{-3}$ & 108 & 6 & $-$48 & 4 & $-$51 & 5 & $-$57 & 4 \\
J0854+3503 & 08:54:43.33 & +35:03:52.7 & 15.7 & 1.5 & -144 & -172 & 64 & $^{+7}_{-6}$ & 68 & 6 & $-$14 & 3 & $-$37 & 6 & $-$32 & 4 \\
J0909+4700 & 09:09:14.56 & +47:00:17.5 & 16.6 & 1.7 & -124 & -172 & 61 & $^{+7}_{-6}$ & 61 & 6 & $-$17 & 3 & $-$36 & 6 & $-$16 & 3 \\
J0942+4437 & 09:42:44.96 & +44:37:43.1 & 11.7 & 1.2 & -144 & -182 & 87 & $^{+10}_{-8}$ & 96 & 9 & $-$30 & 5 & $-$66 & 9 & $-$23 & 4 \\
J1001+3903 & 10:01:03.42 & +39:03:40.5 & 11.6 & 2.1 & -291 & -175 & 87 & $^{+19}_{-13}$ & 140 & 25 & $-$73 & 16 & $-$75 & 16 & $-$60 & 12 \\
J1107+4855 & 11:07:31.38 & +48:55:23.0 & 20.9 & 1.7 & -730 & -69 & 48 & $^{+4}_{-4}$ & 167 & 13 & 128 & 12 & $-$56 & 6 & $-$53 & 5 \\
J1115+0033 & 11:15:36.97 & +00:33:15.3 & 20.2 & 2.5 & 56 & -246 & 51 & $^{+7}_{-6}$ & 61 & 7 & 50 & 5 & $-$27 & 5 & $-$14 & 3 \\
J1117+5010 & 11:17:08.63 & +50:10:33.9 & 21.3 & 1.7 & 176 & -126 & 48 & $^{+4}_{-4}$ & 49 & 4 & 51 & 4 & 1 & 2 & 31 & 2 \\
J1158+0004 & 11:58:14.52 & +00:04:58.3 & 28.9 & 1.7 & -25 & 183 & 35 & $^{+2}_{-2}$ & 31 & 1 & $-$7 & 2 & 33 & 2 & 20 & 1 \\
J1203+0426 & 12:03:28.64 & +04:26:53.6 & 22.8 & 2.1 & -253 & 154 & 45 & $^{+5}_{-4}$ & 63 & 6 & $-$50 & 6 & 13 & 2 & 10 & 1 \\
J1204+6222 & 12:04:39.54 & +62:22:16.4 & 18.3 & 2.5 & -29 & -154 & 58 & $^{+10}_{-7}$ & 43 & 6 & 16 & 2 & $-$22 & 5 & 28 & 3 \\
J1212+0440 & 12:12:07.01 & +04:40:12.0 & 16.0 & 2.6 & -280 & -48 & 64 & $^{+13}_{-9}$ & 86 & 14 & $-$54 & 11 & $-$38 & 9 & $-$11 & 3 \\
J1238+3502 & 12:38:12.85 & +35:02:49.1 & 10.0 & 2.0 & -146 & -123 & 110 & $^{+26}_{-19}$ & 100 & 20 & $-$18 & 7 & $-$73 & 18 & 12 & 1 \\
J1251+4403 & 12:51:06.12 & +44:03:03.1 & 22.9 & 5.3 & 22 & -136 & 63 & $^{+29}_{-16}$ & 41 & 14 & 30 & 5 & $-$8 & 5 & 15 & 2 \\
J1345+4200 & 13:45:32.92 & +42:00:44.2 & 27.3 & 1.0 & -190 & 128 & 36 & $^{+1}_{-1}$ & 40 & 1 & $-$28 & 2 & 8 & 2 & 9 & 1 \\
J1349+1155 & 13:49:02.33 & +11:55:11.8 & 35.3 & 1.6 & 176 & -524 & 28 & $^{+1}_{-1}$ & 74 & 3 & 69 & 3 & $-$28 & 2 & $-$17 & 1 \\
J1422+0459 & 14:22:25.73 & +04:59:39.7 & 16.7 & 2.1 & -272 & -50 & 61 & $^{+9}_{-7}$ & 80 & 10 & $-$34 & 6 & $-$49 & 8 & 28 & 3 \\
J1424+6246 & 14:24:29.52 & +62:46:17.1 & 21.1 & 2.0 & -269 & -42 & 48 & $^{+5}_{-4}$ & 62 & 5 & $-$23 & 4 & $-$31 & 5 & 33 & 3 \\
J1436+4332 & 14:36:42.78 & +43:32:35.7 & 37.1 & 1.2 & -316 & 498 & 27 & $^{+1}_{-1}$ & 75 & 2 & $-$63 & 3 & 25 & 1 & 9 & 1 \\
J1437+4151 & 14:37:18.15 & +41:51:51.5 & 16.0 & 2.2 & -153 & -68 & 66 & $^{+12}_{-8}$ & 52 & 7 & $-$3 & 3 & $-$30 & 6 & 29 & 3 \\
J1447+5427 & 14:47:01.85 & +54:27:44.6 & 21.3 & 3.5 & -237 & 34 & 51 & $^{+11}_{-8}$ & 58 & 10 & $-$27 & 7 & $-$19 & 5 & 27 & 4 \\
J1452+4522 & 14:52:39.00 & +45:22:38.3 & 11.4 & 1.4 & -46 & 74 & 95 & $^{+15}_{-11}$ & 39 & 5 & $-$25 & 6 & 17 & 4 & 9 & 2 \\
J1458+1146 & 14:58:48.52 & +11:46:55.9 & 17.0 & 1.6 & -124 & -96 & 60 & $^{+6}_{-5}$ & 45 & 4 & 7 & 2 & $-$31 & 5 & 16 & 2 \\
J1534+4649 & 15:34:51.02 & +46:49:49.5 & 33.1 & 1.8 & -468 & 226 & 30 & $^{+1}_{-1}$ & 75 & 4 & $-$49 & 4 & $-$17 & 2 & 40 & 2 \\
J1606+2547 & 16:06:19.81 & +25:47:02.9 & 22.6 & 1.7 & -226 & -119 & 45 & $^{+4}_{-3}$ & 54 & 4 & 13 & 2 & $-$33 & 4 & 35 & 3 \\
J1615+4449 & 16:15:44.67 & +44:49:42.5 & 12.1 & 3.7 & 46 & -231 & 89 & $^{+47}_{-20}$ & 99 & 37 & 100 & 27 & $-$12 & 8 & 1 & 3 \\
J1632+2426 & 16:32:42.23 & +24:26:55.2 & 22.9 & 1.2 & -12 & -336 & 44 & $^{+2}_{-2}$ & 70 & 3 & 65 & 3 & $-$30 & 3 & $-$5 & 2 \\
J1704+3608 & 17:04:47.70 & +36:08:47.4 & 21.1 & 1.7 & 183 & -172 & 48 & $^{+4}_{-4}$ & 57 & 4 & 52 & 4 & 20 & 2 & $-$31 & 4 \\
J1722+5752 & 17:22:57.78 & +57:52:50.7 & 17.8 & 1.8 & -37 & 395 & 56 & $^{+6}_{-5}$ & 105 & 10 & $-$94 & 11 & 16 & 2 & 11 & 2 \\
J1728+2646 & 17:28:07.27 & +26:46:19.2 & 17.2 & 1.8 & -41 & -248 & 59 & $^{+7}_{-6}$ & 70 & 7 & 67 & 6 & $-$28 & 5 & $-$1 & 3 \\
J2041$-$0520 & 20:41:28.99 & $-$05:20:27.7 & 15.8 & 1.6 & -152 & -21 & 65 & $^{+8}_{-6}$ & 47 & 5 & 41 & 4 & 3 & 3 & 41 & 4 \\
J2042+0031 & 20:42:59.23 & +00:31:56.6 & 16.0 & 1.3 & -76 & -241 & 63 & $^{+6}_{-5}$ & 75 & 6 & 60 & 5 & $-$42 & 5 & $-$8 & 3 \\
J2045$-$0710 & 20:45:57.53 & $-$07:10:03.5 & 12.0 & 1.4 & -74 & -125 & 86 & $^{+12}_{-9}$ & 59 & 7 & 49 & 5 & $-$31 & 6 & 10 & 3 \\
J2118$-$0737 & 21:18:05.21 & $-$07:37:29.1 & 14.5 & 2.0 & 109 & -127 & 72 & $^{+12}_{-9}$ & 57 & 8 & 3 & 3 & $-$23 & 6 & $-$34 & 6 \\
J2147+1127 & 21:47:25.17 & +11:27:56.1 & 18.9 & 2.0 & 103 & -248 & 54 & $^{+7}_{-5}$ & 69 & 7 & 26 & 3 & $-$28 & 5 & $-$45 & 6 \\
J2222+1221 & 22:22:33.89 & +12:21:43.0 & 24.4 & 1.3 & 703 & 192 & 41 & $^{+2}_{-2}$ & 142 & 6 & 121 & 7 & 7 & 1 & $-$44 & 3 \\
J2239+0018A$^{b}$ & 22:39:54.12 & +00:18:47.3 & 12.2 & 2.9 & -12 & 122 & 107 & $^{+42}_{-26}$ & 62 & 19 & $-$8 & 6 & 49 & 9 & 31 & 6 \\
J2239+0018B$^{b}$ & 22:39:54.07 & +00:18:49.2 & 12.2 & 2.9 & -12 & 122 & 107 & $^{+42}_{-26}$ & 62 & 19 & $-$8 & 6 & 49 & 9 & 31 & 6 \\
J2242+0048 & 22:42:06.19 & +00:48:22.8 & 14.8 & 1.7 & 133 & -76 & 70 & $^{+9}_{-7}$ & 51 & 5 & $-$13 & 4 & $-$17 & 4 & $-$24 & 4 \\
J2254+1323 & 22:54:08.64 & +13:23:57.2 & 24.2 & 1.6 & 326 & -192 & 42 & $^{+3}_{-3}$ & 75 & 5 & $-$24 & 3 & $-$28 & 3 & $-$44 & 4 \\
J2330+0028 & 23:30:55.20 & +00:28:52.3 & 18.3 & 2.3 & 137 & 104 & 59 & $^{+9}_{-7}$ & 48 & 6 & $-$33 & 6 & 19 & 2 & 9 & 1 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
\multicolumn{17}{@{}p{\textwidth}@{}}{$^{a}$ Since we do not have
any radial velocity measurements for our targets, the $U$ component
has been computed assuming $v_{\rm rad}$~=~0~\kms.} \\
\multicolumn{17}{@{}p{\textwidth}@{}}{$^{b}$ For these two binary
systems, a weighted mean was adopted in the determination of their
astrometric measurements.}\\
\label{tab:astro}
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Optical and Infrared Photometry}
We have obtained the available $ugriz$ photometry from the SDSS Data
Release 10 \citep[DR10,][]{ahn14} for the 54 WDs in our sample.
These data are listed in columns two through six in Table~\ref{tab:phot}
along with their uncertainties. The majority of our targets also have
near-infrared photometry available from \citet{kilic10a}, and are also
listed in Table~\ref{tab:phot}. For the six WDs without near-infrared
photometry from \citet{kilic10a}, we adopt the near-infrared photometry
from the UKIDSS Large Area Survey (ULAS) Catalog \citep{lawrence07},
and the Two Micron All Sky Survey \citep[2MASS;][]{skrut06}; see the
notes at the bottom of Table~\ref{tab:phot}.
\subsection{Optical Spectroscopy}
The majority of our targets were selected from the cool WD samples of
\citet{kilic06a,kilic10a}, hence they have optical
spectroscopy obtained at the McDonald Observatory 2.7m telescope,
Hobby-Eberly Telescope, or the Multiple-Mirror Telescope. The ultracool
WDs and a few other cool WDs have spectroscopy available in the SDSS or
the literature \citep{leggett11,giam12,tremblay14}. There are only eight
DA WDs in our sample, with the rest of the stars classified as DC due to
the absence of \halpha\ absorption. This overabundance of DC WDs is due
to our selection bias for targeting cool and ultracool WDs.
\setlength{\extrarowheight}{0pt}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{5pt}
\begin{table*}
\scriptsize
\centering
\begin{minipage}{\textwidth}
\caption{Optical and near-infrared photometry of cool WDs.}
\begin{tabular}{@{}lr@{ $\pm$ }lr@{ $\pm$ }lr@{ $\pm$ }lr@{ $\pm$ }lr@{ $\pm$ }lr@{ $\pm$ }lr@{ $\pm$ }lr@{ $\pm$ }lr@{ $\pm$ }l@{}}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
SDSS & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$u$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$g$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$r$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$i$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$z$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$Y$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$J$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$H$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$K$} \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
J0045+1420 & 20.64 & 0.08 & 19.20 & 0.03 & 18.45 & 0.03 & 18.20 & 0.03 & 18.10 & 0.03 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.24 & 0.04 & 16.99 & 0.04 & 16.89 & 0.04 \\
J0121$-$0038$^{a}$ & 22.82 & 0.28 & 20.79 & 0.03 & 19.74 & 0.03 & 19.38 & 0.03 & 19.18 & 0.04 & 18.47 & 0.06 & 18.23 & 0.08 & 18.05 & 0.09 & 18.10 & 0.19 \\
J0146+1404 & 21.37 & 0.11 & 20.00 & 0.03 & 19.39 & 0.02 & 19.27 & 0.03 & 19.79 & 0.11 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 19.56 & 0.05 & 20.07 & 0.12 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J0256$-$0700 & 20.74 & 0.08 & 19.00 & 0.02 & 18.13 & 0.02 & 17.79 & 0.03 & 17.69 & 0.03 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 16.71 & 0.05 & 16.62 & 0.05 & 16.48 & 0.06 \\
J0301$-$0044 & 22.23 & 0.34 & 20.43 & 0.03 & 19.38 & 0.02 & 18.99 & 0.02 & 18.92 & 0.04 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.96 & 0.04 & 17.73 & 0.04 & 17.68 & 0.08 \\
J0309+0025 & 19.15 & 0.03 & 18.19 & 0.02 & 17.72 & 0.02 & 17.53 & 0.02 & 17.50 & 0.02 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 16.64 & 0.04 & 16.54 & 0.04 & 16.87 & 0.04 \\
J0310$-$0110 & 22.71 & 0.30 & 20.89 & 0.04 & 20.18 & 0.03 & 19.91 & 0.03 & 19.75 & 0.08 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 18.94 & 0.02 & 18.73 & 0.02 & 18.58 & 0.02 \\
J0747+2438N & 21.01 & 0.08 & 19.29 & 0.02 & 18.59 & 0.02 & 18.23 & 0.01 & 18.14 & 0.02 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.16 & 0.04 & 16.99 & 0.04 & 16.85 & 0.04 \\
J0747+2438S & 19.49 & 0.03 & 18.37 & 0.01 & 17.91 & 0.01 & 17.73 & 0.01 & 17.69 & 0.02 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 16.78 & 0.04 & 16.58 & 0.04 & 16.53 & 0.04 \\
J0753+4230 & 19.97 & 0.04 & 18.09 & 0.01 & 17.19 & 0.01 & 16.87 & 0.01 & 16.75 & 0.02 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 15.69 & 0.04 & 15.49 & 0.04 & 15.47 & 0.04 \\
J0804+2239 & 19.73 & 0.03 & 18.30 & 0.02 & 17.59 & 0.01 & 17.39 & 0.01 & 17.33 & 0.02 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 16.71 & 0.04 & 16.92 & 0.04 & 17.29 & 0.06 \\
J0805+3833$^{b}$ & 19.00 & 0.02 & 17.31 & 0.01 & 16.56 & 0.02 & 16.27 & 0.02 & 16.20 & 0.02 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 15.34 & 0.05 & 15.19 & 0.08 & 14.90 & 0.09 \\
J0817+2822 & 21.59 & 0.16 & 19.49 & 0.02 & 18.61 & 0.01 & 18.30 & 0.01 & 18.22 & 0.03 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.33 & 0.04 & 17.01 & 0.04 & 16.91 & 0.09 \\
J0821+3727 & 20.68 & 0.06 & 19.14 & 0.02 & 18.43 & 0.01 & 18.15 & 0.02 & 18.04 & 0.02 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.25 & 0.04 & 17.00 & 0.04 & 16.85 & 0.05 \\
J0825+5049 & 21.09 & 0.09 & 19.34 & 0.02 & 18.43 & 0.02 & 18.09 & 0.02 & 18.00 & 0.03 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.08 & 0.04 & 16.83 & 0.04 & 16.74 & 0.04 \\
J0845+2257 & 15.57 & 0.01 & 15.73 & 0.01 & 16.08 & 0.01 & 16.35 & 0.02 & 16.61 & 0.02 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 16.24 & 0.11 & 15.96 & 0.00 & 16.48 & 0.00 \\
J0854+3503 & 23.57 & 0.67 & 20.53 & 0.03 & 19.39 & 0.02 & 19.09 & 0.03 & 18.95 & 0.05 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 18.44 & 0.04 & 18.23 & 0.04 & 17.98 & 0.04 \\
J0909+4700 & 20.64 & 0.15 & 19.29 & 0.03 & 18.74 & 0.02 & 18.50 & 0.02 & 18.42 & 0.05 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 18.11 & 0.04 & 18.62 & 0.07 & 19.10 & 0.10 \\
J0942+4437 & 21.37 & 0.09 & 19.47 & 0.02 & 18.58 & 0.01 & 18.22 & 0.02 & 18.05 & 0.02 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.15 & 0.04 & 16.97 & 0.04 & 16.86 & 0.04 \\
J1001+3903 & 21.36 & 0.10 & 20.05 & 0.02 & 19.60 & 0.02 & 20.02 & 0.03 & 20.61 & 0.17 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 20.65 & 0.06 & 21.05 & 0.07 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J1107+4855 & 21.50 & 0.12 & 19.49 & 0.03 & 18.54 & 0.02 & 18.23 & 0.02 & 18.11 & 0.03 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.05 & 0.05 & 16.95 & 0.07 & 16.86 & 0.07 \\
J1115+0033$^{a}$ & 19.50 & 0.04 & 17.92 & 0.01 & 17.22 & 0.02 & 16.99 & 0.01 & 16.90 & 0.02 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 15.78 & 0.08 & 15.65 & 0.18 & 15.59 & 0.26 \\
J1117+5010 & 21.17 & 0.10 & 19.34 & 0.03 & 18.57 & 0.03 & 18.30 & 0.02 & 18.16 & 0.03 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.24 & 0.04 & 17.07 & 0.04 & 16.97 & 0.05 \\
J1158+0004 & 20.86 & 0.11 & 18.89 & 0.04 & 17.85 & 0.02 & 17.54 & 0.01 & 17.34 & 0.03 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 16.36 & 0.04 & 16.31 & 0.05 & 16.18 & 0.05 \\
J1203+0426 & 19.57 & 0.03 & 18.18 & 0.02 & 17.50 & 0.02 & 17.21 & 0.01 & 17.12 & 0.02 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 16.39 & 0.01 & 16.49 & 0.02 & 16.92 & 0.06 \\
J1204+6222 & 20.91 & 0.09 & 19.25 & 0.02 & 18.43 & 0.02 & 18.14 & 0.02 & 18.06 & 0.03 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.07 & 0.04 & 16.86 & 0.04 & 16.80 & 0.04 \\
J1212+0440 & 22.07 & 0.21 & 20.04 & 0.03 & 19.09 & 0.02 & 18.79 & 0.02 & 18.66 & 0.04 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.67 & 0.04 & 17.50 & 0.04 & 17.50 & 0.05 \\
J1238+3502 & 24.74 & 0.81 & 21.77 & 0.09 & 20.31 & 0.06 & 19.88 & 0.05 & 20.37 & 0.15 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 21.19 & 0.06 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J1251+4403 & 21.46 & 0.09 & 20.17 & 0.03 & 20.39 & 0.03 & 20.72 & 0.04 & 20.92 & 0.17 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 21.78 & 0.08 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J1345+4200$^{b}$ & 19.70 & 0.03 & 17.85 & 0.02 & 17.01 & 0.01 & 16.69 & 0.02 & 16.54 & 0.01 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 15.61 & 0.06 & 15.43 & 0.11 & 15.00 & 0.00 \\
J1349+1155 & 20.55 & 0.06 & 18.64 & 0.02 & 17.84 & 0.01 & 17.42 & 0.02 & 17.20 & 0.02 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 16.43 & 0.01 & 16.29 & 0.02 & 16.26 & 0.02 \\
J1422+0459 & 20.98 & 0.10 & 19.44 & 0.03 & 18.58 & 0.02 & 18.27 & 0.02 & 18.18 & 0.03 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.15 & 0.05 & 17.10 & 0.08 & 17.02 & 0.05 \\
J1424+6246 & 20.38 & 0.05 & 18.83 & 0.01 & 18.15 & 0.03 & 17.89 & 0.02 & 17.71 & 0.02 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J1436+4332 & 19.83 & 0.04 & 18.04 & 0.02 & 17.19 & 0.01 & 16.85 & 0.03 & 16.75 & 0.03 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 15.78 & 0.04 & 15.62 & 0.04 & 15.51 & 0.04 \\
J1437+4151 & 20.06 & 0.04 & 19.03 & 0.01 & 18.45 & 0.02 & 18.23 & 0.03 & 18.12 & 0.02 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.43 & 0.04 & 17.76 & 0.05 & 18.42 & 0.08 \\
J1447+5427 & 21.23 & 0.12 & 19.46 & 0.04 & 18.64 & 0.02 & 18.36 & 0.02 & 18.25 & 0.04 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.26 & 0.07 & 17.20 & 0.07 & 17.07 & 0.06 \\
J1452+4522 & 21.55 & 0.10 & 20.01 & 0.02 & 19.39 & 0.02 & 19.31 & 0.02 & 19.36 & 0.06 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 18.60 & 0.02 & 18.43 & 0.02 & 18.37 & 0.02 \\
J1458+1146 & 20.62 & 0.08 & 18.85 & 0.02 & 18.02 & 0.02 & 17.72 & 0.02 & 17.64 & 0.02 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 16.63 & 0.04 & 16.47 & 0.05 & 16.31 & 0.06 \\
J1534+4649 & 20.90 & 0.08 & 18.76 & 0.02 & 17.74 & 0.02 & 17.36 & 0.02 & 17.19 & 0.02 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 16.17 & 0.04 & 16.12 & 0.04 & 16.04 & 0.05 \\
J1547+0523 & 19.96 & 0.04 & 18.05 & 0.01 & 17.13 & 0.00 & 16.75 & 0.00 & 16.51 & 0.01 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 15.38 & 0.00 & 14.95 & 0.00 & 14.77 & 0.01 \\
J1606+2547 & 20.99 & 0.08 & 19.24 & 0.02 & 18.45 & 0.02 & 18.17 & 0.02 & 18.07 & 0.04 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.07 & 0.04 & 17.09 & 0.06 & 16.84 & 0.06 \\
J1615+4449 & 21.18 & 0.10 & 19.59 & 0.02 & 18.84 & 0.02 & 18.57 & 0.02 & 18.52 & 0.04 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.44 & 0.04 & 17.24 & 0.05 & 17.26 & 0.07 \\
J1632+2426 & 21.47 & 0.10 & 19.60 & 0.02 & 18.73 & 0.02 & 18.49 & 0.02 & 18.40 & 0.03 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.67 & 0.02 & 18.10 & 0.02 & 18.04 & 0.02 \\
J1704+3608 & 20.50 & 0.05 & 18.72 & 0.01 & 17.94 & 0.01 & 17.66 & 0.01 & 17.55 & 0.02 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 16.62 & 0.04 & 16.34 & 0.04 & 16.32 & 0.06 \\
J1722+5752 & 20.39 & 0.06 & 19.28 & 0.02 & 18.79 & 0.02 & 18.56 & 0.03 & 18.50 & 0.03 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.74 & 0.04 & 17.84 & 0.05 & 18.75 & 0.12 \\
J1728+2646 & 19.18 & 0.03 & 18.14 & 0.02 & 17.68 & 0.01 & 17.51 & 0.01 & 17.46 & 0.02 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J2041$-$0520 & 20.95 & 0.08 & 19.27 & 0.01 & 18.51 & 0.01 & 18.24 & 0.01 & 18.14 & 0.03 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.25 & 0.04 & 16.97 & 0.04 & 16.93 & 0.04 \\
J2042+0031 & 21.67 & 0.14 & 19.95 & 0.02 & 19.05 & 0.01 & 18.73 & 0.01 & 18.61 & 0.03 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.65 & 0.04 & 17.45 & 0.04 & 17.36 & 0.05 \\
J2045$-$0710 & 21.03 & 0.09 & 19.33 & 0.02 & 18.60 & 0.01 & 18.33 & 0.01 & 18.15 & 0.03 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.32 & 0.04 & 17.10 & 0.04 & 17.03 & 0.04 \\
J2118$-$0737 & 23.38 & 0.95 & 20.70 & 0.03 & 19.48 & 0.03 & 19.01 & 0.02 & 18.76 & 0.04 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.90 & 0.04 & 17.82 & 0.04 & 17.81 & 0.05 \\
J2147+1127 & 20.83 & 0.09 & 19.19 & 0.02 & 18.43 & 0.02 & 18.13 & 0.02 & 18.01 & 0.03 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.14 & 0.04 & 16.84 & 0.04 & 16.79 & 0.04 \\
J2222+1221 & 21.74 & 0.11 & 19.48 & 0.02 & 18.37 & 0.02 & 17.88 & 0.02 & 17.67 & 0.02 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J2239+0018A$^{a}$ & 21.27 & 0.08 & 20.14 & 0.04 & 19.59 & 0.03 & 19.48 & 0.05 & 20.28 & 0.16 & 19.57 & 0.10 & 19.69 & 0.19 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J2239+0018B$^{a}$ & 23.13 & 0.36 & 20.79 & 0.04 & 19.88 & 0.03 & 19.49 & 0.03 & 19.24 & 0.06 & 18.66 & 0.05 & 18.34 & 0.06 & 17.98 & 0.10 & 18.48 & 0.27 \\
J2242+0048 & 22.11 & 0.22 & 19.63 & 0.02 & 18.65 & 0.02 & 18.28 & 0.01 & 18.16 & 0.03 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 18.06 & 0.04 & 18.72 & 0.07 & 19.16 & 0.10 \\
J2254+1323 & 21.57 & 0.17 & 19.51 & 0.02 & 18.49 & 0.02 & 18.14 & 0.01 & 18.00 & 0.02 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.04 & 0.04 & 16.88 & 0.04 & 16.85 & 0.04 \\
J2330+0028 & 21.85 & 0.24 & 19.88 & 0.02 & 18.95 & 0.02 & 18.66 & 0.02 & 18.53 & 0.04 & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} & 17.63 & 0.04 & 17.36 & 0.04 & 17.32 & 0.04 \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
\multicolumn{19}{@{}p{\textwidth}@{}}{$^{a}$ IR photometry from UKIDSS} \\
\multicolumn{19}{@{}p{\textwidth}@{}}{$^{b}$ IR photometry from 2MASS} \\
\label{tab:phot}
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}
\end{table*}
\section{THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK}
Our model atmospheres and synthetic spectra are derived from the local
thermodynamic equilibrium (LTE) model atmosphere code originally
described in \citet{bergeron95} and references therein, with recent
improvements discussed in \citet{tb09}. In particular, we now rely on
their improved calculations for the Stark broadening of hydrogen lines
with the inclusion of non-ideal perturbations from protons and electrons
-- described within the occupation probability formalism of \citet{hm88}
-- directly inside the line profile calculations. Convective energy
transport is taken into account following the ML2/$\alpha$~=~0.7
prescription of the mixing length theory. Non-LTE effects are also
included at higher effective temperatures but these are irrelevant for
the purpose of this work. More details regarding our helium-atmosphere
models are provided in \citet{bergeron11}.
Our model grid covers a range of effective temperature between
\Te\ =~1500 and 45,000~K in steps of 500~K for \Te\ $<$~15,000~K,
1000~K up to \Te\ =~18,000~K, 2000~K up to \Te\ =~30,000~K and by
steps of 5000~K above. The \logg\ ranges from 6.5 to 9.5 by steps of
0.5 dex, with additional models at \logg\ =~7.75 and 8.25. We also
calculated mixed hydrogen and helium atmosphere models with
\loghe\ =~$-$2.0 to 5.0, in steps of 1.0 dex.
Since the photometric technique described below relies heavily on the
flux at the $u$ and $g$ bandpasses, we now include in our models the
opacity from the red wing of Ly$\alpha$ \citep{kowalski06}, which
significantly affects the flux in the ultraviolet.
\section{PHOTOMETRIC ANALYSIS}
\subsection{General Procedure}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.475,angle=-90,bb=22 16 606 784]{f02.eps}
\caption{Location of the WDs in our sample in a $M_{r}$ versus $r-i$
(left) and $r-z$ (right) colour-magnitude diagram. The black dots
correspond to the WDs with H-rich atmospheres while the white dots
represent the He-rich WDs. The red dots represent the 15 cool and
ultracool WDs with mixed atmospheres. The solid and dashed black
lines represent pure H and pure He tracks, respectively, for masses
$M$ =~0.3, 0.6, and 0.9 \msun, from right to left. The solid blue
lines represent the predictions from mixed model atmospheres for $M$
= 0.2~\msun. The mixed atmosphere model tracks are labelled with
their He abundance \loghe\ = $-$2 and 2. LHS~3250 and J1102 are
shown as a green triangle, and a blue square, respectively.
\label{fg:color}}
\end{figure*}
Atmospheric parameters, \Te\ and \logg, and chemical compositions of
cool WDs can be measured accurately using the photometric
technique developed by \citet{brl97}. We first convert optical and
infrared photometric measurements into observed fluxes and compare the
resulting energy distributions with those predicted from our model
atmosphere calculations. To accomplish this task, we first transform
every magnitude $m$ into an average flux $f^{m}_{\lambda}$. Since
$ugriz$ photometry is defined on the AB magnitude system, we first
calculate $f^{m}_{\nu}$ using the equation
\begin{equation}
m = -2.5\log f^{m}_{\nu} - 48.60
\end{equation}
\noindent and then $f^{m}_{\nu}$ is converted to $f^{m}_{\lambda}$
following $f^{m}_{\lambda} = f^{m}_{\nu}c/\lambda^{2}$, where
$\lambda$ is the central wavelength of the given filter. For the
near-infrared photometry, we obtain $f^{m}_{\lambda}$ using the
equation
\begin{equation}
m = -2.5\log f^{m}_{\lambda} + c_{m},
\label{eq:mag}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $c_{m}$ is a constant to be determined for each
filter, as described below. In general,
\begin{equation}
f^{m}_{\lambda} = \frac{\int^{\infty}_{0}f_{\lambda}S_{m}(\lambda)\lambda {\rm d}\lambda}{\int^{\infty}_{0}S_{m}(\lambda)\lambda {\rm d}\lambda}
\label{eq:avg}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $S_{m}(\lambda)$ is the transmission function of the
corresponding bandpass, $f_{\lambda}$ is the monochromatic flux from
the star received at Earth. For the $ugriz$ photometry, a slightly
different definition of the above Equation~(\ref{eq:avg}) is required
\citep[see Equation (3) of][for instance]{hb06}. The transmission
functions for the $ugriz$ system are described in \citet{hb06} and
references therein. The transmission functions for the $JHK$ or
$JHK_{S}$ filters on the MKO photometric system are taken from
\citet{tokunaga02}.
The constants $c_{m}$ in Equation (\ref{eq:mag}) for each passband are
determined using the improved calibration fluxes from \citet{hb06},
defined with the $HST$ absolute flux scale of Vega \citep{bohlin04},
and appropriate magnitudes on a given system.
For each star in Table~\ref{tab:phot}, a minimum set of five average
fluxes $f^{m}_{\lambda}$ is obtained, which can be compared with model
fluxes. Since the observed fluxes correspond to averages over given
bandpasses, the monochromatic fluxes from the model atmospheres need
to be converted into average fluxes, $H^{m}_{\lambda}$, by
substituting $f_{\lambda}$ in Equation (\ref{eq:avg}) for the
monochromatic Eddington flux, $H_{\lambda}$. We can then relate the
average observed fluxes $f^{m}_{\lambda}$ and the average model fluxes
$H^{m}_{\lambda}$ -- which depend on \Te, \logg and chemical
composition -- by the equation
\begin{equation}
f^{m}_{\lambda} = 4{\pi} (R/D)^{2} H^{m}_{\lambda}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $R/D$ defines the ratio of the radius of the star to
its distance from Earth. We then minimize the $\chi^{2}$ value defined
in terms of the difference between observed and model fluxes over all
bandpasses, properly weighted by the photometric uncertainties. Our
minimization procedure relies on the non-linear least-squares method of
Levenberg--Marquardt \citep{press86}, which is based on a steepest
decent method. Only \Te\ and the solid angle $\pi(R/D)^{2}$ are
considered free parameters, while the uncertainties of both parameters
are obtained directly from the covariance matrix of the fit.
For stars with known trigonometric parallax measurements, we first
assume a value of \logg\ =~8.0 and determine the effective temperature
and the solid angle, which combined with the distance $D$ obtained
from the trigonometric parallax measurement, yields directly the
radius of the star $R$. The radius is then converted into mass using
evolutionary models similar to those described in \citet{fontaine01}
but with CO cores, $q$(He) $\equiv \log M_{\rm He}/M_{\star} =
10^{-2}$ and $q$(H)~=~10$^{-4}$, which are representative of
hydrogen-atmosphere WDs, and $q$(He)~=~10$^{-2}$ and
$q$(H)~=~10$^{-10}$, which are representative of helium-atmosphere
WDs. After the first iteration, if $M <$~0.406~\msun, we
switch to the evolutionary models of \citet{althaus01}, appropriate
for low-mass He-core WDs. In general, the \logg\ value obtained from
the inferred mass and radius $(g = GM/R^{2})$ will be different from
our initial guess of \logg\ =~8.0, and the fitting procedure is thus
repeated until an internal consistency in \logg\ is reached.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4565,bb=20 87 567 687]{f03a.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.4565,bb=20 87 567 687]{f03b.eps}
\caption{Fits to the observed energy distributions with pure hydrogen
models (filled circles) and with pure helium models (open circles)
for the eight WDs that exhibit, or potentially exhibit, absorption
at \halpha. Adopted atmospheric parameters are emphasized in
red. Here and in the following figures, the photometric observations
are represented by error bars while the filled and open circles
represent the model fluxes for the pure H and pure He solution,
respectively. In the right-hand panels we show the observed normalized
spectra together with the synthetic line profiles calculated with
the atmospheric parameters corresponding to the pure hydrogen
solutions. \label{fg:DA}}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Results}
Fig.~\ref{fg:color} presents the colour-magnitude diagram for our
parallax sample along with the evolutionary tracks for
0.3--0.9~\msun\ pure H, pure He, and 0.2~\msun\ mixed H/He atmosphere
models. Note that all the evolutionary tracks plotted in
Fig.~\ref{fg:color} represent the evolution of CO-core WDs. Two
other ultracool WDs with parallax measurements and SDSS photometry,
LHS 3250 and J1102 \citep{harris99,bergeron01,hall08,kilic12}, are
also included for comparison.
Interestingly, the majority of the targets in our sample fall above
the evolutionary tracks for 0.6~\msun\ WDs, indicating that they are
low-mass objects. Some of these WDs are even brighter than the
0.3~\msun\ WD sequence, implying masses as low as $\approx$~0.2~\msun.
A significant fraction of the stars in our sample are IR-faint WDs
that suffer from CIA from molecular hydrogen. The CIA affects the
redder optical bands and the infrared. Hence, most of these IR-faint
objects lie to the left of the pure H and pure He model
sequences. Note that our sample was selected to include as many
IR-faint WDs as possible. Therefore, these are overrepresented in
this figure. It is clear from this figure that the colour-magnitude
distribution of our sample is well matched by WD models with masses
$\approx$~0.2--0.9~\msun\ with a variety of compositions, including
pure H, pure He and mixed H/He atmospheres. Below we discuss the DA,
DC and ultracool WD samples separately.
\subsubsection{DA WDs}
Fig.~\ref{fg:DA} displays the best-fitting pure-hydrogen models to the
SEDs of the eight WDs classified as DA. Both the observed SEDs and the
\halpha\ line profiles are reproduced fairly well by our pure H
models. Given our parallax measurements, the best-fitting radii for these
eight targets range from 0.011 to 0.022~\rsun\ ($R>{\rm R}_{\earth}$),
indicating that they are relatively low-mass WDs. In fact, half of
these WDs have masses below 0.45~\msun, and therefore are likely
He-core WDs. The majority of low-mass WDs are in short-period ($P
\lesssim$ 1 d) binary systems \citep{marsh95,brown11}. Therefore,
J0045+1420, J0821+3727, J1115+0033, and J1728+2646 are likely
unresolved binary WDs. Table 4 provides WD cooling age estimates for
these DA WDs, as well as the rest of our parallax sample. For
$M<0.45$~\msun\ WDs, we provide cooling ages for both CO and He core
composition based on the evolutionary tracks of \citet{fontaine01} and
\citet{althaus01}, respectively. Regardless of the core composition,
these eight DA WDs have cooling ages of less than 8~Gyr.
It is necessary to note an important caveat regarding the four
potential binaries listed above. If they are indeed unresolved binaries,
then the WDs in these systems will be more massive than implied by our
fits assuming a single star. Hence, their actual cooling ages will be
larger for a given \Te. Our estimates for the cooling ages of these
potential binaries should therefore be regarded, at best, as lower
limits.
\subsubsection{DC WDs}
Fig.~\ref{fg:DC} shows our model fits to the SEDs of the 31 DC WDs
that are best explained by pure H or pure He atmosphere models. In all
cases, the optical spectra are featureless near the
\halpha\ region. Hence, the choice of a pure H or pure He composition
is based solely on the fits to the optical and infrared photometry. In
most cases, the atmospheric parameters from both the pure H and pure
He solution agree within the uncertainties. Our model fits indicate
that all of these WDs have \Te\ $<$~5000~K. The ratio of the H to He
atmosphere WDs is 13/18. However, all DC WDs with temperatures below
\Te\ =~4530~K are best explained by H-rich atmosphere models
\citep[see also][]{kowalski06,giam12}.
Just like the DA sample discussed above, about half of the DCs in this
sample are low-mass objects. The two coolest stars, J2118$-$0737 and
J2222+1221, have \Te~=~3920~$\pm$~60 and 4010~$\pm$~80~K, and
$M$~=~0.31~$\pm$~0.09~\msun\ and 0.37~$\pm$~0.03~\msun, respectively.
Assuming He-cores, these temperatures correspond to cooling ages of
7.7 and 9.4 Gyr, respectively. If these are short-period, unresolved
binary systems, then the companions would be fainter and more massive
WDs. Due to the unknown prior history of such binary systems and
without an estimate on their initial masses, their total ages,
including the main-sequence + WD cooling ages, cannot be reliably
calculated.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.58,angle=-90,bb=25 107 587 707]{f04a.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.58,angle=-90,bb=25 107 587 707]{f04b.eps}
\caption{Fits to the observed energy distributions with pure hydrogen
models (filled circles) and with pure helium models (open circles)
for the 31 DC WDs. All objects have featureless spectra near the
\halpha\ region, and the SEDs are best explained with pure model
atmospheres. Adopted atmospheric parameters are emphasized in
red. \label{fg:DC}}
\end{figure*}
\addtocounter{figure}{-1}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.58,angle=-90,bb=25 107 467 707]{f04c.eps}
\caption{ -- {\it continued}}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{DC WDs with Mixed H/He Atmospheres}
\citet{gates04}, \citet{harris08} and \citet{kilic10a} have
identified several IR-faint WDs that were originally thought to be
ultracool WDs with \Te\ $<$~4000~K. It turns out that some of these
IR-faint WDs are relatively warm. There are nine IR-faint, DC WDs in
our sample that are best-fitted with \Te\ $>$~4500~K mixed H/He
atmospheres models. The main opacity source in these mixed models is
the H$_{2}$--He CIA in the infrared. Since cool He-rich WDs have lower
opacities and higher atmospheric pressures, the CIA becomes effective
at higher temperatures \citep[\Te\ $>$~4000~K,][]{bergeron02}.
Fig.~\ref{fg:mix} shows the SEDs for these nine DC WDs with mixed
composition. The mixed models with $\log{({\rm He/H})} = -0.4$ to 2.3
fit the observed SEDs (over the 0.3--2.2 $\mu$m region) fairly
well. The best-fitting parameters for some of these stars are markedly
different than the parameters presented in \citet{kilic10a}. However,
the analysis presented in this paper is superior to earlier work since
we now include all available photometry in our analysis (including the
$u$-band data) and we also have parallax measurements available.
J1632+2426 is the most-massive and the oldest WD (in terms of the WD
cooling age) in this sample, with a mass of 0.82~$\pm$~0.04~\msun\ and
a cooling age of 7.7~Gyr.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.615,angle=-90,bb=20 87 587 707]{f05.eps}
\caption{Fits to the SEDs of the nine IR-faint, DC WDs in our sample,
excluding the ultracool WDs. All objects have featureless spectra
near the \halpha\ region, and the SEDs are best explained with mixed
model atmospheres. Note that the measured abundances are quoted
relative to the dominant atmospheric constituent.\label{fg:mix}}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.62,angle=-90,bb=100 87 507 707]{f06.eps}
\caption{Fits to the SEDs of the six ultracool DC WDs in our
sample. All objects have featureless spectra near the
\halpha\ region, and the SEDs are best explained with mixed model
atmospheres. Note that the measured abundances are quoted relative
to the dominant atmospheric constituent.\label{fg:UC}}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Ultracool WDs}
We originally selected 12 ultracool WD candidates for follow-up
parallax observations: J0854+3503 and J1001+3903 from \citet{gates04};
J0121$-$0038, J0301$-$0044, J2239+0018 and J2242+0048 from
\citet{vidrih07}; J0146+1404, J0310$-$0110, J1238+3502, J1251+4403,
J1452+4522 and J1632+2426 from \citet{harris08}. Our detailed model
atmosphere analysis using parallax data shows that only half of these
stars are actually ultracool WDs with \Te\ $<$~4000~K. The rest of the
ultracool candidates are best explained by pure H/He or mixed
atmosphere models with \Te\ $>$~4000~K.
Fig.~\ref{fg:UC} shows the SEDs and our model fits to the six
ultracool WDs in our sample. The best-fitting parameters are given in each
panel and at the end of Table 4. Note that prior to this work, there
were only three ultracool WDs with parallax observations
available. Hence, the ultracool WD sample presented here is a
significant addition to this sample. The six ultracool WDs presented
here are best explained by mixed H/He atmospheres with
\Te\ =~2710--3760~K and $\log{({\rm
He/H})}$~=~0.65--2.96. Interestingly, all six of these ultracool
WDs are too bright for average mass WDs. Instead, the observed
parallaxes require relatively large radii ($R$~=~0.015--0.023~\rsun)
and low masses ($M$~=~0.17--0.39~\msun). Assuming He-cores, the WD
cooling ages range from 4.5 to 9.7~Gyr. They are located within
63--110~pc of the Sun and they display tangential velocities of
40--140~\kms. Hence, these ultracool WDs likely belong to the
Galactic disc.
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{6pt}
\setlength{\extrarowheight}{1.5pt}
\begin{table*}
\scriptsize
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.85\textwidth}
\caption{Properties of cool WDs.}
\begin{tabular}{@{}lr@{ $\pm$ }rr@{ $\pm$ }lr@{ $\pm$ }lr@{ $\pm$ }lcr@{ $\pm$ }lr@{}lr@{}l}
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
SDSS & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\Te} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\logg} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$M$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$R$} & Comp. & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$M_{\rm g}$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$\tau_{\rm cool, CO}$} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{$\tau_{\rm cool, He}$} \\
& \multicolumn{2}{c}{(K)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{(cm s$^{-2}$)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{(\msun)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{(\rsun)} & ($\log$ He/H) & \multicolumn{2}{c}{(mag)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{(Gyr)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{(Gyr)} \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\multicolumn{16}{c}{DA}\\
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
J0045+1420 & 5090 & 60 & 7.73 & 0.15 & 0.43 & 0.07 & 0.015 & 0.001 & H & 15.10 & 0.18 & 2.7 & $^{+0.9}_{-0.6}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J0747+2438S & 5590 & 40 & 7.92 & 0.09 & 0.54 & 0.05 & 0.013 & 0.001 & H & 14.67 & 0.12 & 2.5 & $^{+0.5}_{-0.3}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J0821+3727 & 5050 & 50 & 7.27 & 0.50 & 0.27 & 0.15 & 0.020 & 0.006 & H & 14.47 & 0.59 & 1.6 & $^{+1.0}_{-1.3}$ & 3.1 & $^{+2.4}_{-1.1}$ \\
J1115+0033 & 4910 & 40 & 7.05 & 0.27 & 0.21 & 0.07 & 0.022 & 0.003 & H & 14.38 & 0.28 & 1.4 & $^{+0.4}_{-0.7}$ & 2.9 & $^{+0.6}_{-0.6}$ \\
J1424+6246 & 4970 & 60 & 7.88 & 0.16 & 0.51 & 0.09 & 0.014 & 0.001 & H & 15.42 & 0.20 & 4.4 & $^{+1.7}_{-1.4}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J1606+2547 & 4860 & 60 & 8.18 & 0.12 & 0.69 & 0.08 & 0.011 & 0.001 & H & 15.97 & 0.17 & 7.9 & $^{+0.6}_{-1.1}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J1728+2646 & 5600 & 50 & 7.65 & 0.17 & 0.42 & 0.07 & 0.016 & 0.002 & H & 14.29 & 0.24 & 1.6 & $^{+0.4}_{-0.2}$ & 3.5 & $^{+0.8}_{-0.6}$ \\
J2147+1127 & 4920 & 60 & 7.90 & 0.18 & 0.52 & 0.10 & 0.013 & 0.002 & H & 15.53 & 0.24 & 4.9 & $^{+1.8}_{-1.8}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\multicolumn{16}{c}{DC}\\
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
J0121$-$0038 & 4560 & 50 & 7.31 & 0.39 & 0.28 & 0.13 & 0.019 & 0.004 & He & 15.43 & 0.46 & 2.2 & $^{+1.1}_{-1.2}$ & 4.6 & $^{+3.2}_{-1.6}$ \\
J0256$-$0700 & 4780 & 40 & 7.39 & 0.15 & 0.30 & 0.05 & 0.018 & 0.002 & He & 15.07 & 0.20 & 2.2 & $^{+0.3}_{-0.3}$ & 4.6 & $^{+1.4}_{-0.9}$ \\
J0301$-$0044 & 4530 & 50 & 7.79 & 0.16 & 0.45 & 0.08 & 0.014 & 0.001 & He & 16.08 & 0.19 & 4.8 & $^{+1.6}_{-1.2}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J0310$-$0110 & 4990 & 50 & 7.48 & 0.47 & 0.34 & 0.17 & 0.018 & 0.005 & He & 14.82 & 0.59 & 2.1 & $^{+2.1}_{-1.1}$ & 4.7 & $^{+3.2}_{-2.0}$ \\
J0747+2438N & 4780 & 40 & 7.83 & 0.10 & 0.47 & 0.05 & 0.014 & 0.001 & He & 15.59 & 0.12 & 4.5 & $^{+1.1}_{-0.9}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J0753+4230 & 4580 & 40 & 7.80 & 0.05 & 0.46 & 0.03 & 0.014 & 0.001 & H & 15.89 & 0.06 & 5.1 & $^{+0.6}_{-0.6}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J0805+3833 & 4890 & 40 & 8.02 & 0.03 & 0.59 & 0.02 & 0.012 & 0.001 & H & 15.70 & 0.05 & 6.4 & $^{+0.3}_{-0.4}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J0817+2822 & 4660 & 50 & 7.90 & 0.13 & 0.51 & 0.08 & 0.013 & 0.001 & He & 15.91 & 0.17 & 5.6 & $^{+1.5}_{-1.3}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J0825+5049 & 4660 & 40 & 7.86 & 0.11 & 0.49 & 0.06 & 0.014 & 0.001 & He & 15.89 & 0.14 & 5.2 & $^{+1.3}_{-1.0}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J0942+4437 & 4770 & 40 & 7.10 & 0.21 & 0.22 & 0.06 & 0.022 & 0.002 & He & 14.77 & 0.23 & 1.6 & $^{+0.3}_{-0.6}$ & 3.3 & $^{+0.6}_{-0.5}$ \\
J1107+4855 & 4510 & 70 & 7.88 & 0.14 & 0.50 & 0.08 & 0.014 & 0.001 & H & 16.08 & 0.18 & 6.3 & $^{+1.5}_{-1.6}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J1117+5010 & 4870 & 60 & 8.17 & 0.12 & 0.69 & 0.08 & 0.011 & 0.001 & H & 15.93 & 0.18 & 7.8 & $^{+0.8}_{-1.1}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J1158+0004 & 4320 & 70 & 7.72 & 0.11 & 0.42 & 0.05 & 0.015 & 0.001 & H & 16.16 & 0.13 & 5.2 & $^{+1.1}_{-1.0}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J1204+6222 & 4800 & 40 & 7.73 & 0.23 & 0.44 & 0.11 & 0.015 & 0.003 & He & 15.43 & 0.31 & 7.2 & $^{+4.3}_{-2.0}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J1212+0440 & 4530 & 80 & 7.85 & 0.29 & 0.49 & 0.16 & 0.014 & 0.003 & H & 16.01 & 0.37 & 5.9 & $^{+2.5}_{-2.8}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J1345+4200 & 4690 & 20 & 7.25 & 0.06 & 0.26 & 0.02 & 0.020 & 0.001 & He & 15.02 & 0.08 & 2.0 & $^{+0.1}_{-0.1}$ & 4.0 & $^{+0.3}_{-0.3}$ \\
J1422+0459 & 4800 & 50 & 7.71 & 0.24 & 0.41 & 0.11 & 0.015 & 0.002 & He & 15.51 & 0.29 & 3.5 & $^{+2.2}_{-1.0}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J1436+4332 & 4630 & 30 & 7.88 & 0.05 & 0.50 & 0.03 & 0.013 & 0.001 & He & 15.88 & 0.07 & 5.4 & $^{+0.6}_{-0.6}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J1447+5427 & 4750 & 60 & 8.04 & 0.30 & 0.59 & 0.18 & 0.012 & 0.003 & He & 15.92 & 0.40 & 6.9 & $^{+0.5}_{-3.5}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J1458+1146 & 4810 & 40 & 7.35 & 0.15 & 0.29 & 0.05 & 0.019 & 0.002 & He & 14.96 & 0.20 & 2.1 & $^{+0.3}_{-0.3}$ & 4.2 & $^{+1.3}_{-0.8}$ \\
J1534+4649 & 4270 & 60 & 7.82 & 0.09 & 0.47 & 0.05 & 0.014 & 0.001 & H & 16.35 & 0.12 & 6.4 & $^{+1.0}_{-1.0}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J1615+4449 & 4930 & 60 & 7.41 & 0.57 & 0.31 & 0.18 & 0.018 & 0.007 & H & 14.84 & 0.74 & 2.0 & $^{+1.9}_{-1.1}$ & 4.3 & $^{+3.3}_{-2.3}$ \\
J1704+3608 & 4760 & 40 & 7.64 & 0.13 & 0.40 & 0.06 & 0.016 & 0.001 & He & 15.31 & 0.18 & 2.9 & $^{+0.9}_{-0.4}$ & 6.8 & $^{+1.2}_{-1.1}$ \\
J2041$-$0520 & 4870 & 40 & 7.67 & 0.17 & 0.42 & 0.07 & 0.016 & 0.002 & He & 15.20 & 0.23 & 2.8 & $^{+1.1}_{-0.6}$ & 6.4 & $^{+1.5}_{-1.3}$ \\
J2042+0031 & 4660 & 50 & 7.91 & 0.15 & 0.52 & 0.09 & 0.013 & 0.001 & He & 15.95 & 0.19 & 5.7 & $^{+1.5}_{-1.6}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J2045$-$0710 & 4950 & 40 & 7.30 & 0.21 & 0.28 & 0.06 & 0.019 & 0.003 & He & 14.66 & 0.26 & 1.8 & $^{+0.4}_{-0.4}$ & 3.5 & $^{+1.4}_{-0.6}$ \\
J2118$-$0737 & 3920 & 60 & 7.42 & 0.25 & 0.31 & 0.09 & 0.018 & 0.003 & H & 16.41 & 0.32 & 3.4 & $^{+1.8}_{-0.8}$ & 7.7 & $^{+3.6}_{-2.3}$ \\
J2222+1221 & 4010 & 80 & 7.56 & 0.08 & 0.37 & 0.03 & 0.017 & 0.001 & H & 16.42 & 0.11 & 4.2 & $^{+0.9}_{-0.6}$ & 9.4 & $^{+1.3}_{-1.3}$ \\
J2239+0018B & 4420 & 90 & 7.46 & 0.55 & 0.33 & 0.19 & 0.018 & 0.006 & H & 15.64 & 0.66 & 2.9 & $^{+3.9}_{-2.2}$ & 6.3 & $^{+7.2}_{-3.4}$ \\
J2254+1323 & 4350 & 70 & 7.95 & 0.12 & 0.54 & 0.07 & 0.013 & 0.001 & H & 16.39 & 0.16 & 7.5 & $^{+1.1}_{-1.3}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J2330+0028 & 4650 & 80 & 7.98 & 0.22 & 0.57 & 0.13 & 0.013 & 0.002 & H & 16.03 & 0.29 & 6.9 & $^{+1.7}_{-2.7}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\multicolumn{16}{c}{Mixed}\\
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
J0309+0025 & 5610 & 70 & 7.98 & 0.13 & 0.56 & 0.08 & 0.013 & 0.001 & 1.30& 14.74 & 0.18 & 3.4 & $^{+1.1}_{-0.8}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J0854+3503 & 4550 & 80 & 8.22 & 0.15 & 0.71 & 0.10 & 0.011 & 0.001 &$-$0.23& 16.50 & 0.22 & 7.6 & $^{+0.2}_{-0.1}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J0909+4700 & 4510 & 110 & 7.79 & 0.19 & 0.45 & 0.10 & 0.014 & 0.002 & 2.31 & 15.36 & 0.23 & 4.8 & $^{+2.0}_{-1.4}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J1203+0426 & 5010 & 40 & 7.65 & 0.16 & 0.41 & 0.07 & 0.016 & 0.002 & 1.08 & 14.91 & 0.22 & 5.6 & $^{+1.0}_{-1.0}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J1349+1155 & 4710 & 40 & 8.30 & 0.06 & 0.76 & 0.04 & 0.010 & 0.001 &$-$0.40& 16.37 & 0.10 & 7.5 & $^{+0.1}_{-0.1}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J1437+4151 & 5000 & 70 & 7.75 & 0.24 & 0.45 & 0.11 & 0.015 & 0.003 & 1.97 & 14.93 & 0.32 & 6.2 & $^{+4.9}_{-1.6}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J1452+4522 & 5580 & 70 & 8.25 & 0.20 & 0.73 & 0.13 & 0.011 & 0.002 & 0.71 & 15.12 & 0.30 & 5.5 & $^{+0.6}_{-1.5}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J1632+2426 & 4650 & 70 & 8.39 & 0.06 & 0.82 & 0.04 & 0.010 & 0.001 & 0.55 & 16.38 & 0.10 & 7.7 & $^{+0.1}_{-0.1}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
J1722+5752 & 5230 & 80 & 8.34 & 0.14 & 0.79 & 0.09 & 0.010 & 0.001 & 1.49 & 15.54 & 0.21 & 6.7 & $^{+0.1}_{-0.5}$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{--} \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\multicolumn{16}{c}{Ultracool}\\
\hline
\noalign{\smallskip}
J0146+1404 & 3600 & 140 & 7.59 & 0.22 & 0.38 & 0.09 & 0.016 & 0.003 & 2.82 & 15.23 & 0.29 & 3.7 & $^{+1.7}_{-1.0}$ & 9.2 & $^{+3.1}_{-3.2}$ \\
J1001+3903 & 2710 & 150 & 7.06 & 0.24 & 0.20 & 0.09 & 0.022 & 0.004 & 2.93 & 15.35 & 0.39 & 2.9 & $^{+2.3}_{-0.7}$ & 7.6 & $^{+4.2}_{-1.7}$ \\
J1238+3502 & 2900 & 210 & 7.13 & 0.42 & 0.22 & 0.11 & 0.021 & 0.004 & 0.65 & 16.77 & 0.44 & 3.6 & $^{+3.2}_{-0.1}$ & 9.7 & $^{+6.8}_{-5.0}$ \\
J1251+4403 & 2750 & 180 & 7.67 & 0.69 & 0.39 & 0.28 & 0.015 & 0.006 & 2.91 & 16.17 & 0.73 & 9.1 & $^{+1.4}_{-4.9}$ & 9.1 & $^{+1.3}_{-5.0}$ \\
J2239+0018A & 3510 & 220 & 6.95 & 0.34 & 0.20 & 0.09 & 0.025 & 0.008 & 2.88 & 14.99 & 0.66 & 2.0 & $^{+1.8}_{-0.9}$ & 5.2 & $^{+3.7}_{-1.5}$ \\
J2242+0048 & 3770 & 90 & 7.00 & 0.13 & 0.20 & 0.03 & 0.023 & 0.003 & 0.89 & 15.41 & 0.25 & 1.9 & $^{+0.8}_{-1.2}$ & 4.8 & $^{+1.1}_{-0.6}$ \\
\noalign{\smallskip}
\hline
\label{tab:tg}
\end{tabular}
\end{minipage}
\end{table*}
\section{Discussion}
\subsection{Nearby WDs}
The local WD population is complete to within 13~pc, and there remains
a significant number of WDs to be discovered in the solar neighbourhood
\citep{holberg08,giam12}. Through our parallax observations, here we
have uncovered WDs with distances ranging from 21 to
$\approx$100~pc. \citet{sion14} present 224 WDs within 25~pc of the
Sun. With a distance of 21~$\pm$~1~pc, J0805+3833 (WD~0802+387) is a
new addition to this sample. There are also four other WDs,
J0753+4230, J1349+1155, J1436+4332 and J1534+4649, with distances
$\leq$~30~pc. Since parallax observations on individual targets is
time consuming, significant progress on creating a complete sample of
WDs in the solar neighbourhood has to wait until astrometric data from
large scale surveys such as $GAIA$ \citep{perryman01} and the Large
Synoptic Survey Telescope \citep[LSST;][]{ivezic08} become available.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.55,angle=-90,bb=102 136 496 684]{f07.eps}
\caption{Similar to Fig.~\ref{fg:UC} but for the ultracool WD
LHS~3250.
\label{fg:LHS}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.55,angle=-90,bb=102 136 496 684]{f08.eps}
\caption{Similar to Fig.~\ref{fg:DC} but for the ultracool WD
J1102+4113 where we show the pure H solution only.
\label{fg:J1102}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{The Nature of Ultracool WDs}
The colour-magnitude diagram presented in Fig.~\ref{fg:color} shows
that the faintest WDs in our sample have $M_r \leq 16.4$ mag. This
magnitude limit corresponds to WD cooling ages of 11 Gyr for
0.6~\msun\ CO-core and pure H atmosphere WDs. There are six ultracool
WDs in our sample with best-fitting temperatures of $<$~4000~K.
Constraining the nature, including the total ages of these stars, has
been problematic.
Previously, \citet{oppen01}, \citet{bergeron01}, and \citet{kilic12}
presented detailed model atmosphere analysis of three ultracool WDs
with parallax measurements. WD~0346+246 is a 3650~K, \logg\ =~8.3
mixed atmosphere WD with $\log{{(\rm He/H)}}$~=~0.43, whereas J1102 is
best explained by a pure H atmosphere model with \Te\ =~3830~K and
\logg\ =~8.08 \citep{kilic12}. These two ultracool WDs have masses of
0.77 and 0.62~\msun, respectively. Their total main-sequence + WD
cooling ages and their kinematic properties indicate Galactic halo
membership. LHS~3250 stands out in this sample. \citet{bergeron02}
find a best-fitting solution of \Te\ =~3042~K, \logg\ =~7.27, and
$\log{({\rm H/He})}=-2.7$. Fig.~\ref{fg:LHS} shows our model fits
to the LHS 3250 SED. Including the red wing of the Ly$\alpha$ opacity
\citep{kowalski06}, we now derive slightly different parameters of
\Te\ =~3064~K, \logg\ =~7.38, and $\log{({\rm H/He})}=-3.1$. Even
though the models predict deep absorption features around 0.8 and
1.1~$\mu$m, these features have never been observed in the actual
spectra of cool and ultracool WDs. Clearly, the models have problems
(likely due to problems with CIA calculations). Nevertheless,
LHS~3250 is too bright compared to the pure H atmosphere models for
ultracool WDs (see Fig.~\ref{fg:color}), but its location in the
colour-magnitude diagram and its SED are consistent with low surface
gravity, mixed H/He atmosphere WDs.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.6,angle=-90,bb=62 16 576 784]{f09.eps}
\caption{Masses of all stars in our sample as a function of
effective temperature. The black dots correspond to the WDs with
H-rich atmospheres while the white dots represent the He-rich
WDs. The red dots represent the 15 cool and ultracool WDs with mixed
atmospheres. Also shown are theoretical isochrones with their ages
labelled in Gyr; solid lines correspond to WD cooling ages
only, while the dotted lines also include the main-sequence
lifetime.
\label{fg:iso}}
\end{figure*}
Fig.~\ref{fg:J1102} shows our model fits to the J1102 SED using pure
H atmosphere models. We find \Te\ =~3921~K and \logg\ =~8.16 for this
ultracool WD. These parameters are consistent with the analysis based
on the \citet{kowalski06} models within the errors
\citep{kilic12}. Both \citet{kowalski06} and \citet{bergeron95} models
underpredict the flux in the $i$ and $z$ bands for this star. Addition
of He provides a significantly better fit to the SED. The best-fitting
mixed atmosphere model has trace amounts of helium with \Te\ =~3327~K,
\logg\ =~7.64, and $\log{({\rm He/H})}=-3.51$. Based on this, all
three of the previously analysed ultracool WDs with parallax
measurements would be best explained by mixed H/He atmosphere models.
The six ultracool WDs in our sample (see Fig.~\ref{fg:UC}) are all
similar to LHS~3250. They are overluminous compared to pure H
atmosphere WDs, and their SEDs and locations in colour-magnitude
diagrams are matched fairly well by mixed H/He atmosphere WD
models. The models have problems matching the peaks of the energy
distributions and they predict absorption features at 0.8 and 1.1
$\mu$m that are not observed, but the overall fits are quite
reasonable. Based on these, all nine (including the six in our sample)
ultracool WDs with parallax measurements are best explained with
H-rich (mixed) atmospheres. In addition, seven of the nine are
low-mass objects with He-cores. These low-mass objects are about twice
as large (see Table 4), and therefore four times as bright, as typical
0.6~\msun\ WDs. Hence, their overabundance in the SDSS sample is not
surprising.
\subsection{Common Proper Motion Pairs}
There are three common proper motion pairs in our sample. These
include two WD + WD pairs (J0747+2438 and J2239+0018) and one WD + K
dwarf (J0045+1420). The latter was reported as a common proper motion
binary by \citet{luyten87} and \citet{lepine07}. LSPM J0045+1421
(BD+13 99) is a G8V star 62.5 arcsec away from LSPM J0045+1420. We
confirm that both the WD (J0045+1420) and the G8 dwarf are at the same
distance, making it a Sirius-like binary. Such binary systems can be
used to constrain the initial--final mass relation. However,
J0045+1420 is a 0.43~$\pm$~0.07~\msun\ low mass WD with a cooling age
of 2.7 Gyr. Due to its low-mass, J0045+1420 may itself be an
unresolved binary, and it is impossible to constrain its total age or
the mass of its progenitor star.
The remaining two WD + WD systems are also very useful as they provide
a test of our cooling age estimates. J0747+2438 contains a
$2.5^{+0.5}_{-0.3}$~Gyr old, 0.54~$\pm$~0.05~\msun\ DA WD and a
$4.5^{+1.1}_{-0.9}$~Gyr old, 0.47~$\pm$~0.05~\msun\ DC WD that is
best-fitted by a pure He atmosphere model. The separation between the two
WDs is $\approx$~2000~au; it is safe to assume that both stars evolved
independently. The cooling ages of the two stars differ by $\approx
2\sigma$, and this difference could be due to a difference in the mass
of the progenitor main-sequence stars, though the lower mass star
(J0747+2438N) is also the older star in this system. The progenitor
stars of these relatively low-mass WDs were likely Sun-like stars that
lived for 10 Gyr, and J0747+2438 is probably a very old binary system
in the Galactic thick disc (it has a tangential velocity of only $38
\pm 2$~\kms).
J2239+0018 consists of a \Te\ =~4420~$\pm$~90~K cool WD with a
\Te\ =~3510~$\pm$~220~K ultracool WD companion. The two WDs are
separated by only 1.85 arcsec, which corresponds to a physical
separation of 155~au. Unfortunately, the relatively large error in
our parallax measurement translates into a large error in mass and
cooling age estimates for this binary. J2239+0018B has a cooling age
of $6.3^{+7.2}_{-3.4}$~Gyr, whereas the ultracool WD J2239+0018A has a
cooling age of $5.2^{+3.7}_{-1.5}$~Gyr. Given the large errors, these
two estimates are consistent within the errors. Further insight into
understanding similar binary systems will require more accurate distance
measurements than those currently available.
\subsection{Disc versus halo}
Fig.~\ref{fg:iso} shows the mass versus temperature distribution of our
parallax sample along with the theoretical isochrones for WDs with CO
core compositions and thick envelopes, i.e., $q({\rm He}) = 10^{-2}$
and $q({\rm H}) = 10^{-4}$. \citet{bergeron01} explain the observed
trend in the isochrones. The general trend is that low-mass WDs evolve
(cool) faster than their counterparts, except that the onset of
crystallization in the most massive WDs shortens the cooling times
considerably. This leads to the parabola shaped isochrones. We also
show the corresponding isochrones for the total main-sequence + WD
cooling ages for $\tau \geqslant 2$~Gyr. We simply assume $t_{\rm
MS}$~=~10$(M_{\rm MS}/M_{\odot})^{-2.5}$~Gyr and $M_{\rm
MS}/M_{\odot}$~=~8$\ln[(M_{\rm WD}/M_{\odot})/0.4]$
\citep{wood92,leggett98}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.475,bb=45 177 592 729]{f10.eps}
\caption{The tangential velocity, $v_{\rm tan}$, plotted as a function
of the WD cooling age. The black dots correspond to the WDs with
H-rich atmospheres while the white dots represent the He-rich
WDs. The red dots represent the 15 cool and ultracool WDs with mixed
atmospheres.
\label{fg:age}}
\end{figure}
The oldest globular clusters in the halo are currently producing
0.53~\msun\ WDs \citep{hansen07}. There are several WDs in our sample
with $M\approx$~0.53~\msun. J1436+4332 is an excellent example of a
potentially very old star. This DC WD is a \Te\ =~4630~$\pm$~30~K,
\logg\ =~7.88, $M$~=~0.50~$\pm$~0.03~\msun\ He-atmosphere WD with a
WD cooling age of $5.4 \pm 0.6$ Gyr. Its progenitor main-sequence star
was most likely a Sun-like star, with a main-sequence lifetime of 10
Gyr. Hence, the total main-sequence + WD age of J1436+4332 could be as
much as the age of the Universe.
Fig.~\ref{fg:iso} demonstrates that WDs with $M <$~0.5~\msun\ cannot
have CO cores and also form through single star evolution within the
lifetime of the Universe. Hence, they must be either He-core WDs or
unresolved double degenerate systems. In fact, the majority of the
targets in our parallax programme, including all of the ones with
\Te\ $\leq$~4300~K, seem to be low-mass WDs with $M <$~0.5~\msun. The
isochrones shown in this figure are not appropriate for these low-mass
WDs. Based on the \citet{althaus01} models, they have cooling ages
ranging from 2.9 to 9.7 Gyr. Since the prior evolution of these
systems, including the masses of their main-sequence progenitors, is
unknown, their total ages cannot be estimated. However, some of the
low-mass ultracool WDs are clearly very old.
Tables~\ref{tab:astro} and~\ref{tab:tg} and Fig.~\ref{fg:age}
present tangential velocities and cooling ages for our parallax
sample. The cooling ages range from about 2 to 10~Gyr, whereas the
tangential velocities of all but two of the targets are less than
150~\kms. The only targets that display halo kinematics are
J0301$-$0044 and J1107+4855 (hereafter J0301 and J1107,
respectively). J0301 and J1107 have tangential velocities of
167--192~\kms, \Te\ $\approx$~4500~K, $M$~=~0.45--0.50~\msun and WD
cooling ages of 5--6~Gyr. If both stars are single CO core WDs, their
progenitors would be Sun-like stars with main-sequence lifetimes of
10~Gyr. Hence, their total main-sequence + WD cooling ages would be
$\sim$14~Gyr, which is consistent with a halo origin.
In Table~\ref{tab:astro}, the last three columns list the $(U,V,W)$
components of the space velocities for each WD. These space velocities
have been computed by combining the observed parallaxes and proper
motions for each WD using the prescription of \citet{johnson87}. Since
we do not have any radial velocity measurements for our WDs, we assume
a radial velocity $v_{\rm rad}$~=~0~\kms\ in the calculation of
$U$. In Fig.~\ref{fg:UVW}, we plot the resulting $W$ versus $V$ (top),
and $U$ versus $V$ (bottom) velocity distributions. We also include the
2$\sigma$ contours for the Galactic thin disc (dotted), thick disc
(dashed) and stellar halo populations (solid) \citep{chiba00}. It is
clear from Figure~\ref{fg:UVW} that both J0301 and J1107 are most
likely halo WDs. The distribution of the remaining sample, including
the IR-faint (the DC WDs with mixed H/He atmospheres) and ultracool
WDs, is consistent with disc membership. The ratio of thick to thin
disc WDs is 18/34. If we assume that J0301 and J1107 are indeed bona
fide members of the halo, the observed velocity distribution suggests
63 per cent/33 per cent/4 per cent proportions for the contribution of
thin disc, thick disc and halo WDs for our sample.
We note that this is the first time a large number of ultracool WDs
have distance and tangential velocities available, and in contrast to
the expectations, they all seem to be members of the disc. These WDs
provide an independent constraint on the thick disc population; the
Galactic thick disc is at least 10~Gyr old.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.425,bb=30 167 592 679]{f11b.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.425,bb=30 117 592 679]{f11a.eps}
\caption{\emph{W} versus \emph{V} (top) and \emph{U} versus \emph{V}
(bottom) velocity distributions for the 54 WDs in our sample. The
ellipsoids denote the 2$\sigma$ contours for the Galactic thin-disc
(dotted), thick-disc (dashed) and stellar halo populations (solid).
The black dots correspond to the WDs with H-rich atmospheres while
the white dots represent the He-rich WDs. The red dots represent the
15 cool and ultracool WDs with mixed atmospheres.
\label{fg:UVW}}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
We present parallax observations of 54 cool and ultracool WDs. Our
sample includes one new WD within the local 25~pc sample and five
stars within 30 pc. All but two of them have tangential velocities
smaller than 150~\kms. J0301$-$0044 and J1107+4855 are the only
objects in our sample with kinematics and ages that are consistent
with halo WDs. The rest of the objects, including the ultracool WDs,
are members of the Galactic thick disc. The oldest WDs in this sample
have WD cooling ages of 10 Gyr, providing a firm lower limit to the
age of the thick disc. Many of our targets are low-mass WDs. These are
either single He-core WDs or unresolved double degenerates. It appears
that we have detected the brighter population of cool and ultracool
WDs in the solar neighbourhood, and the fainter, normal CO core
ultracool WDs remain to be discovered in large numbers. Future and
upcoming astrometric surveys such as the LSST will find those
fainter and more massive ultracool WDs.
\section*{Acknowledegments}
We would like to thank the anonymous referee for a careful reading
of our manuscript and several constructive comments that helped improve
this paper. We thank Hugh C. Harris for useful discussions and suggestions. AG
acknowledges support provided by NASA through grant number
HST-GO-13319.01 from the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is
operated by AURA, Inc., under NASA contract NAS 5-26555. MK gratefully
acknowledges support from the NSF and NASA under grants AST-1312678
and NNX14AF65G, respectively. JRT acknowledges support from the
NSF under grants AST-0708810 and AST-1008217. This work was supported
in part by the NSERC Canada and by the Fund FRQ-NT (Qu\'ebec). This
research makes use of the SAO/NASA Astrophysics Data System
Bibliographic Service. This project makes use of data products from
the SDSS, which has been funded by the Alfred
P. Sloan Foundation, the Participating Institutions, the National
Science Foundation, and the US Department of Energy Office of
Science.
\bibliographystyle{mn2e}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec1}
Research in directed transport has been steadily evolving since the main idea re-emerged in the 60's
\cite{Feynman} to consolidate into a well established field nowadays \cite{Reimann,Kohler,Denisov}.
Out of equilibrium spatiotemporal periodic systems are at the heart of these investigations,
where the second law of thermodynamics no longer applies. Many disciplines have found the concept
of ratchet transport very useful, they include such different areas as biology \cite{biology} on
one end and nanotechnology \cite{nanodevices} on the other. In chemistry, for example isomerization
reactions have been recently characterized by directed transport properties \cite{chemistry}.
Cold atoms \cite{CAexp,AOKR} and also Bose-Einstein condensates have been transported, these latter
by means of quantum ratchet accelerators \cite{BECratchets}, where
the current has no classical counterpart \cite{purelyQR} and
the energy grows ballistically \cite{QR2,coherentControl}. This short list is incomplete and
many other theoretical and experimental areas have been omitted here.
Breaking all spatiotemporal symmetries leading to momentum inversion \cite{origin} allows
a net current. In particular, we are interested in deterministic ratchets with dissipation
which have been historically associated with a classical asymmetric chaotic attractor \cite{Mateos}.
Dissipative quantum ratchets, interesting for cold atoms experiments
have been introduced in \cite{qdisratchets}. In recent works, the parameter space of the classical
counterpart of this system has been studied in detail \cite{Celestino}. These new results have pointed
out that not only chaotic attractors, but also several families of isoperiodic stable
structures (ISSs, which are Lyapunov stable islands of different periods grouped into
structures in parameter space, sometimes called ``shrimps'' due to their shape) have a
fundamental role in understanding the current behavior. Moreover,
they have been identified as a means to obtain optimal ratchet transport which is temperature
resistant \cite{Manchein}. It is worth noticing that these ISSs are a common feature,
found in generic dissipative dynamical systems. In fact, some of their properties have recently
been studied in the dissipative kicked rotator model \cite{Robnik}.
Their quantum manifestations, the so-called QISSs have been
investigated in \cite{Carlo}. There it has been found that the
QISSs look like the quantum chaotic attractors at their vicinity
in parameter space (these corresponding to values of the
parameters where the classical counterparts are already chaotic),
with the exception of comparatively few cases. Recently,
a complete parameter space picture has been obtained
for the quantum system \cite{Ermann}. It was also shown in \cite{Carlo} that a
thermal coarse-graining of the classical dynamical equations
(i.e., adding thermal noise of the order of $\hbar_{\rm eff}$) is
sufficient to obtain a good approximation for the QISSs. In this
paper we carry out a detailed spectral study of both the
Perron-Frobenius operators associated with the classical evolution
with thermal noise and the quantum superoperators without it,
finding a great similarity between them. A
known result in the decoherence literature \cite{nonnen} states
that diffusive noise makes the quantum mechanical spectrum
converge to that of the coarse grained Perron-Frobenius, the
diffusive process being applied to both the classical and the
quantum cases. Here, we find that for dissipative systems an
effective way to reach the classical to quantum correspondence
consists in applying a thermal (diffusive-like) noise solely at
the classical level. We underline that this is not meant to be an
example of the emergence of classicality \cite{Zurek}. It is
important to say that in this work all the possible representative
asymptotic cases have been considered, i.e. those in which the
classical limiting set is either simple (in its main forms) or
chaotic. Nevertheless a systematic study is left for the future.
Finally, we study the similarities
and differences of relevant eigenvectors with the help of
Weyl-Wigner distributions in phase space. Thanks to this we are
able to identify the limits of this correspondence mechanism.
This paper is organized as follows: In Sec. \ref{sec2} we present the system under
study, i.e. a modified kicked rotator with dissipation and the methods we use to
investigate it from the classical to quantum correspondence perspective. We
introduce the Perron-Frobenius operator and the quantum superoperator. In Sec. \ref{sec3}
we analyze their spectra, showing the classical to quantum correspondence details.
In Sec. \ref{sec4} we look at the behavior at the phase space level
by means of the Weyl-Wigner distributions of the eigenvectors. Finally,
in Sec. \ref{sec5} we present our conclusions.
\section{Model and calculation methods}
\label{sec2}
We investigate the paradigmatic dissipative ratchet system given by the map \cite{qdisratchets,Manchein}
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
\overline{n}=\gamma n +
k[\sin(x)+a\sin(2x+\phi)],
\\
\overline{x}=x+ \tau \overline{n},
\end{array}
\right.
\label{dissmap}
\end{equation}
where $n$ is the momentum variable conjugated to $x$, $\tau$ is the period of the map
and $\gamma$ is the dissipation parameter.
This represents a particle moving in one dimension
[$x\in(-\infty,+\infty)$] under the influence of a periodic kicked asymmetric potential:
\begin{equation}
V(x,t)=k\left[\cos(x)+\frac{a}{2}\cos(2x+\phi)\right]
\sum_{m=-\infty}^{+\infty}\delta(t-m \tau),
\end{equation}
where $\tau$ is the kicking period, also having a dissipation
given by $0\le \gamma \le 1$. When $\gamma=0$ the particle is in
the overdamped regime and when $\gamma=1$ the evolution is
conservative. Breaking the spatial ($a \neq 0$ and $\phi \neq m
\pi$) and temporal ($\gamma \neq 1$) symmetries allows the net
current generation. As is customary in this model the classical
dynamics can be made dependent on the parameter $K=k \tau$ by
means of introducing the rescaled momentum $p=\tau n$. In order to
consider a thermal noise of the order of $\hbar_{\rm eff}$,
the effective Planck constant which will be introduced in the
quantum version, we simply change $\overline{n}' \rightarrow
\overline{n}$ in Eq. \ref{dissmap}, where
$\overline{n}'=\overline{n} + \xi$. We can associate the noise
variable $\xi$ with a temperature $T$ by means of the relation $
<\xi^2> =2 (1-\gamma) k_B T$, where $k_B$ is the Boltzmann
constant (which we take equal to 1). The factor $(1-\gamma)$ has
been taken to avoid having noise in the conservative limit,
however many other choices are possible. Finally we have that $T
\simeq \hbar_{\rm eff}/[2 (1-\gamma)]$.
Quantizing this model (without thermal noise) is straightforward:
$x\to \hat{x}$, $n\to \hat{n}=-i (d/dx)$ ($\hbar=1$).
Since $[\hat{x},\hat{p}]=i \tau$, the effective Planck constant
is $\hbar_{\rm eff}=\tau$. The classical limit corresponds to
$\hbar_{\rm eff}\to 0$, while $K=\hbar_{\rm eff} k$ remains constant.
Dissipation at the quantum level is introduced by means of the
master equation \cite{Lindblad} for the density operator $\hat{\rho}$ of the
system
\begin{equation}
\dot{\hat{\rho}} = -i
[\hat{H}_s,\hat{\rho}] - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{\mu=1}^2
\{\hat{L}_{\mu}^{\dag} \hat{L}_{\mu},\hat{\rho}\}+
\sum_{\mu=1}^2 \hat{L}_{\mu} \hat{\rho} \hat{L}_{\mu}^{\dag} \equiv \Lambda \rho.
\label{lindblad}
\end{equation}
Here $\hat{H}_s=\hat{n}^2/2+V(\hat{x},t)$ is the system
Hamiltonian, \{\,,\,\} is the anticommutator, and $\hat{L}_{\mu}$ are the Lindblad operators
given by \cite{Dittrich}
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{l}
\hat{L}_1 = g \sum_n \sqrt{n+1} \; |n \rangle \, \langle n+1|,\\
\hat{L}_2 = g \sum_n \sqrt{n+1} \; |-n \rangle \, \langle -n-1|,
\end{array}
\end{equation}
with $n=0,1,...$ and $g=\sqrt{-\ln \gamma}$ (due to the Ehrenfest theorem).
The classical densities in phase space evolve with the
Perron-Frobenius operator arising from the Liouville equation
corresponding to the map (1). A coarse grained approximation to
the Perron-Frobenius is obtained by means of the Ulam method,
based on a discretization of the phase space. To construct the
Ulam matrix $S$, the phase space is divided into $M^2$ cells and
then $n_{\rm tr}$ random points from each cell $j$ are propagated
according to the classical map. The elements $S_{ij}$ of the $M^2
\times M^2 $ matrix $S$ are given by $ S_{ij} = {n_{ij} \over
n_{\rm tr}}$, where $n_{ij}$ is the number of trajectories
arriving to cell $i$ from the cell $j$. This discretization
introduces an effective diffusive noise of order $h_{\rm eff}^{\rm
PF} \propto {1 \over M}$ . For homogeneous systems and
sufficiently large values of $M$ the Ulam method is expected to
converge to the spectrum of the continuous system. When
thermal noise is included in the classical calculation we have
checked that the results obtained from the diagonalization
are independent of the value of $h_{\rm
eff}^{\rm PF}$ as long as $h_{\rm eff}^{\rm PF} \le h_{\rm eff}$,
i.e., the coarse graining inherent to the Ulam procedure is
smaller than the thermal fluctuations. In the following we will
refer to the Perron-Frobenius operator but the calculations are
understood to be done with its Ulam approximation.
In the quantum case the evolution of the density matrix is given by $\rho_{t+1} = e^ {\Lambda} \rho_{t}$,
where $e^ {\Lambda}$ is a non-unital superoperator of dimension $N^2 \times N^2$ constructed
by numerical integration of Eq. \ref{lindblad}. Here $h_{\rm eff} \propto {1 \over N}$.
For the diagonalization of $S$ (with and without thermal noise) and $e^
{\Lambda}$ we have used the Arnoldi method, which allowed us to go
to large dimensions, corresponding to $0.15 < h_{\rm eff}^{\rm
PF} < 0.247$ for the classical matrix and $0.082 <h_{\rm eff}
<0.247$ for the quantum one. We should point out that these values
mean diagonalizing matrices of a maximum size of
$160\;000\;\times\;160\;000$ for the classical case (which takes
longer to construct) and of $531\;441\;\times\;531\;441$ for the
quantum case. Of course, we have compared similar $\hbar_{\rm
eff}^{\rm (PF)}$ sizes in both cases, expecting to improve the
construction time for the classical matrix in the future, in order
to compare with the already obtained quantum results.
\section{Classical to quantum correspondence from spectra}
\label{sec3}
We will first look at the properties of the spectra of the Perron-Frobenius operator
for the representative cases studied in \cite{Carlo}. In Fig. \ref{fig1} a) we show
the $B_{1}$ case ($k= 8.2$, $\gamma = 0.2$), in b) the $C_{-1}$ case ($k=5.6$, $\gamma = 0.64$),
in c) the $D_{-1}$ case ($k=11.9$, $\gamma =0.29$), and in d) the chaotic attractor case
($k=11.9$, $\gamma = 0.26$). We take $a=0.5$ and $\phi=\pi/2$ throughout this work.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{fig1.eps}
\caption{(Color online) 100 largest eigenvalues of the
Perron-Frobenius operator $ S $ for the a) $B_{1}$, b) $C_{-1}$,
c) $D_{-1}$, and d) chaotic attractor cases. (Red) gray squares
correspond to $\hbar_{\rm eff}^{\rm PF}=0.15$, while black dots to
$\hbar_{\rm eff}^{\rm PF}=0.247$.} \label{fig1}
\end{figure}
By construction of $S$ these spectra are contained in the unit
circle and have a non-degenerate eigenvalue $\lambda_0=1$
\cite{Brin}. We compare the eigenvalues obtained for $\hbar_{\rm
eff}^{\rm PF}=0.15$ with those for $\hbar_{\rm eff}^{\rm
PF}=0.247$.
The first important thing we notice is that the eigenvalues that
are closer to the unit circle remain approximately fixed as
$\hbar_{\rm eff}^{\rm PF}$ decreases.
Moreover, we have checked that for $\hbar=0.15$ the right eigenvectors corresponding to
$\lambda_0$ reproduce the structure of the asymptotic classical
distributions (see Figs. 1 and 2 in \cite{Carlo}) in the cases a),
b) and c) which are point like ISSs, and the fractal chaotic
attractor in d). This strongly suggests that the actual classical dynamics
is already reasonably captured. It is interesting to notice that for the largest
$\hbar_{\rm eff}^{\rm PF}=0.247$, this does not happen in the case $D_{-1}$,
where the expected point like structure is slightly embedded in
a distribution resembling the neighboring chaotic attractor case.
This indicates that in this region of the parameter space the greater
coarse graining is still not sufficient to resolve neighboring
maps with different properties.
For the ISSs cases, $\lambda_1$ (the eigenvalue following
$\lambda_0$ in decreasing order of their moduli) is very close to
$1$ in accordance with the very long times required for the
equilibration of these structures. As can be seen from Table
\ref{TableEquilibrationTimes} the decay times
$t_{\lambda_1}$ given essentially by the value of the spectral gap
$1-|\lambda_1|$, are in fairly good agreement with the
equilibration times obtained in \cite{Carlo} by means of the
ratchet currents.
\begin{table}[ht]
\begin{tabular}{l|cc|cc|cc|}
\cline{2-7}
&\multicolumn{2}{|c|}{$PF$} &\multicolumn{2}{|c|}{$PF_{\rm th}$} &\multicolumn{2}{|c|}{$QM$} \\
\cline{2-7}
& $\lambda_1$ & $t_{\lambda_1}$ & $\lambda_1$ & $t_{
\lambda_1}$ & $\lambda_1$ & $t_{\lambda_1}$ \\
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{$B_{-1}$} & 0.900 & 43.7 & 0.840 & 26.4 & 0.818 & 22.9 \\
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{$C_{-1}$} & 0.994 & 765.2 & 0.727 & 14.4 & 0.701 & 13.0 \\
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{$D_{-1}$} & 0.992 & 573.3 & 0.449 & 5.7 & 0.376 & 4.7 \\
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{attr} & 0.523 & 7.1 & 0.452 & 5.8 & 0.410 & 5.2 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Perron-Frobenius $\lambda_1$ values and equilibration
times $t_{\lambda_1}$ (defined by $\lambda_1^{t_{\lambda_1}}=0.01
$) are shown in columns 1 and 2 for all 4 cases analyzed in the
main text. Columns 3 and 4 show the same for the Perron-Frobenius
with thermal noise, and columns 5 and 6 for the quantum mechanical
case. We take $\hbar_{\rm eff}^{\rm (PF)}=\hbar_{\rm eff}= 0.15$.}
\label{TableEquilibrationTimes}
\end{table}
Again, we notice that in the $D_{-1}$ case the time $t_{\lambda_1}$
characterizing the decay towards the complex invariant state,
although large, is substantially shorter than the equilibration
time of about $700$ steps obtained with the exact classical dynamics \cite{Carlo}.
On the other hand, as can be checked with the help of Fig.
\ref{fig2} which displays the corresponding quantum spectra, the
bare coarse graining (even the greatest one $\hbar_{\rm eff}^{\rm
PF}=0.247$) involved in the Ulam procedure is not enough to
reproduce the quantum features in any of the studied ISSs, not
even in the $D_{-1}$ nor in the attractor case. In this Figure, the
quantum spectra for $\hbar_{\rm eff}=0.15$ ((red) gray squares)
are shown together with the classical results obtained from the
diagonalization of the Peron Frobenius operator with a thermal
noise satisfying $<\xi^2> = \hbar_{\rm eff}$ (black dots).
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{fig2.eps}
\caption{(Color online) 100 largest eigenvalues for the
quantum superoperator $e^ {\Lambda}$ and for the Perron-Frobenius
operator with thermal noise $ S^{\rm thermal} $ for the a)
$B_{1}$, b) $C_{-1}$, c) $D_{-1}$, and d) chaotic attractor cases.
(Red) gray squares correspond to the quantum model, while black
dots to the classical one. $\hbar_{\rm eff}^{\rm (PF)}=\hbar_{\rm
eff}=0.15$.} \label{fig2}
\end{figure}
It is clear that with the help of the temperature the classical
spectra dramatically change in all cases and become remarkably
similar to those of the quantum system for the set of eigenvalues
of modulus closer to $1$. Even so, it should be noticed that the
quantum dynamics is more contractive in spectral terms than the
classical one. In fact, a huge fraction of the quantum eigenvalues
have absolute values very close to 0. This was already pointed out
in \cite{baker} for the dissipative baker map, where the
differences between a full quantization and a discretization
procedure were studied.
In all cases the spectral gap ``jumps'' to the ``correct'' quantum
mechanical one. This is a highly non-trivial effect that
underlines the classical and quantum similarities. The chaotic
attractor case presents a singular property, this being that the
value of the quantum mechanical $\lambda_1$ is in good agreement
with its classical counterparts, with or without thermal noise.
Therefore the $t_{\lambda_1}$ is about the same in all cases (see
last row of Table \ref{TableEquilibrationTimes}) confirming the
results of Fig. 4 of \cite{Carlo} which shows that in the case of
the chaotic attractor, classical and quantum currents have similar
equilibration times. For the remaining eigenvalues the
correspondence is not exact, but the similarities are evident.
We observe that the spectra of $D_{-1}$ and the chaotic attractor
cases are very close. This deepens on the hypothesis that chaotic
attractors could be approximated by neighboring ISSs, suggesting
that the approximation could be extended to the superoperator
itself. As a matter of fact, from these results we can conjecture
that the correspondence is at the (super) operator level and that
there should exist an approximate formal equivalence between them,
at least in their long-lived sector, i.e. the block associated to
the largest eigenvalues. In the following we will identify some
limits to this conjecture.
\section{The phase space picture}
\label{sec4}
In order to give a complementary point of view to analyze this
classical to quantum correspondence mechanism we study the
phase space behavior. We will compare the right
eigenvectors of the Perron-Frobenius operator with thermal noise, with the
Weyl-Wigner symbol for the right eigenvectors of the
quantum superoperator. Regarding the former it is worth noting
that the invariant eigenstates (with $\lambda=1$) are real and
non negative, in agreement with the Perron-Frobenius theorem, and
can be interpreted as probability distributions in phase space. The
remaining eigenvectors are real (although non positive) for
eigenvalues on the real axis and complex otherwise.
In the quantum case the invariant eigenstates
have the property of being density matrices with $Tr(\hat{R}_{\lambda_0})=1$,
while the remaining ones are traceless.
The Weyl-Wigner representation improves on previous results
obtained by using Husimi distributions \cite{Carlo}, since we are
able to appreciate interference fringes (coherences) and finer
details of the quantum eigenvectors. Weyl-Wigner symbols for a $N$
dimensional Hilbert space are defined in a redundant $2N\times2N$
discrete phase space \cite{opetor}. This is formed by the grid of
points $x=\frac{1}{N}(a,b)$ with $a$ and $b$ semi integer numbers
running from $0$ to $N-1/2$. In this way, the Weyl-Wigner symbol
$R(x)$ of the operator $\hat{R}$ is obtained from its
matrix elements in the coordinate representation as
\[
R(x)=\sum_{n=0}^{N-1}<q_{2b-n}|\hat{R}|q_{n}>\exp\left(\frac{i2\pi}{N}2a(b-n)\right).
\]
In order to get rid of redundancies and ``ghost images'' derived essentially from
the cylindrical topology of our phase space, we use a method that
has been developed by Arg\"uelles and Dittrich \cite{Ditt} consisting of
Fourier transforming the Weyl-Wigner symbol to its symplectic analogue,
known as the ``chord symbol''. Then, after performing a cut off for the
longer chords and antifourier transforming, the new Weyl-Wigner symbol with the
desired properties is obtained. This latter is supported by a $N\times N$ discrete phase space formed by
points $x=\frac{1}{N}(i,j)$ where now $i$ and $j$ are integer numbers
running from $0$ to $N-1$. This is the symbol we use in the following.
It is important noticing that the eigenvectors are defined within a global phase factor.
For the invariant eigenstates the
property of being a density matrix ensures that the Weyl-Wigner symbol is real.
However, differently from the classical case, the quantum symbols display
negative values due to interference fringes.
For the remaining traceless eigenvectors, adjusting the phase factor,
we obtained that, in accordance with the classical case, the Weyl-Wigner
symbols are real for eigenvalues on the real axis and complex otherwise.
The complex eigenvalues come in complex conjugated pairs.
Their corresponding eigenvectors form pairs of complex conjugated
distributions in phase space also, both for the classical and the quantum case.
In Table \ref{TableOverlaps} we compare the overlaps between the
Weyl-Wigner symbol of the eigenvectors of the quantum
superoperator with the corresponding eigenvectors of the
Perron-Frobenius operator with thermal noise. We do this up to the
5th pair in decreasing order of the moduli of their corresponding
eigenvalues. To calculate these overlaps we take into account that
any state $\hat{R}$ can be represented by $R(x)$ with $x=(p,q)$ a
point in phase space. For the classical states, $R(x)$ stands for
the right eigenvector, while for the quantum ones, $R(x)$ is the
Weyl-Wigner symbol. Hence, given any two states $\hat{R_{1}}$ and
$\hat{R_{2}}$ , their overlap is defined as:
\[
O(\hat{R_{1}},\hat{R_{2}})=Tr\left(\hat{R_{1}}\hat{R_{2}}\right)/\sqrt{
\left[Tr\left(\hat{R_{1}^{2}}\right)Tr\left(\hat{R_{2}^{2}}\right)\right]}=
\]
\[
\sum_{x}R_{1}(x)R^{*}_{2}(x)/\sqrt{\left[\left(\sum_{x}|R_{1}(x)|^{2}\right)
\left(\sum_{x}|R_{2}(x)|^{2}\right)\right]},
\]
where $R^{*}(x)$ and $|R(x)|$ stand respectively for the complex
conjugate and absolute value of $R(x)$. The overlap defined above
is a complex magnitude, its modulus is invariant even though its
argument depends on the relative phase between the eigenvectors.
Also, when this relative phase is null
$O(\hat{R_{1}},\hat{R_{2}})$ is real. In all cases the value of
the overlap is about 0.9 for the invariant states and
progressively decreases as we go to smaller $|\lambda|$.
\begin{table}[ht]
\begin{centering}
\par\end{centering}
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|c|c|c|}
\hline
& $B_{-1}$ \, & \, $C_{1}$ \, & \, $D_{1}$ \, & Attr\tabularnewline
\hline
\hline
\, $\lambda_{0}$ \, & $0.9449$ & $0.9349$ & $0.8697$ & $0.8654$ \tabularnewline
\, $\lambda_{1}$ \, & $0.9441$ & $0.8132$ & $0.5422$ & $0.5186$ \tabularnewline
\, $\lambda_{2}$ \, & $0.5622$ & $0.8504$ & $0.6381$ & $0.6689$\tabularnewline
\, $\lambda_{3}$ \, & $0.5681$ & $0.8505$ & $0.6382$ & $0.6689$\tabularnewline
\, $\lambda_{4}$ \, & $0.4421$ & $0.8141$ & $0.5190$ & $0.4178$\tabularnewline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Overlaps of the first 5 eigenvectors of the quantum
superoperator with the corresponding eigenvectors of the
Perron-Frobenius operator with thermal noise, for all cases.}
\label{TableOverlaps}
\end{table}
In the following Figures we display the phase space portraits of selected eigenvectors
of the Perron-Frobenius operator with thermal noise and the Weyl-Wigner symbols of the
corresponding eigenvector of the quantum superoperator.
We first analyze the $B_{1}$ ISS. This is the only case where the
invariant distributions shown in Fig.\ref{fig3} a) and b)
correspond to point-like attractors, even though some traces of
the chaotic basin of attractor are visible in both panels. As can
be seen from Fig.\ref{fig3} a) a smearing out of the order of
$h_{\rm eff}$ is enough to turn the classical points
corresponding to the ISS into a distribution of exactly the same
shape of the quantum one depicted in Fig.\ref{fig3} b). The
quantum-classical similarity is also striking for the 2nd
eigenvector pair displayed in Fig.\ref{fig3} c) and d) . Despite
both having a negative image of the basin of attraction these
states behave in a very similar way to the invariant pair.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{fig3.eps}
\caption{Phase space portraits of two eigenvectors of the
Perron-Frobenius with thermal noise (left panels) and the
Weyl-Wigner symbols for the corresponding quantum eigenstates
(right panels), for the $B_{1}$ ISS. In a) and b) we show the
eigenvectors associated with $\lambda_0$, while in c) and d) the
ones corresponding to $\lambda_1$ ($\lambda_1=0.840$ in the
classical spectrum and $\lambda_1=0.818 $ in the quantum one). In
all cases $\hbar_{\rm eff}^{\rm (PF)}=0.15$.} \label{fig3}
\end{figure}
For the next case corresponding to the $C_{-1}$ ISS, we have
chosen to show the details of the eigenvectors associated with
complex $\lambda_2$. The real parts shown in Fig. \ref{fig4} a)
and b) are different from the imaginary ones shown in Fig.
\ref{fig4} c) and d), and again the coincidence between classical
and quantum phase space portraits is remarkable. This is also
clearly reflected in the value of the overlap. The main
difference is in the presence of interference fringes in the
quantum case which do not have enough weight to spoil the overlap
in a significant way.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{fig4.eps}
\caption{Phase space portrait of the eigenvector associated with
the complex eigenvalue $\lambda_2$ ($\lambda_2 = 0.388 + {\rm i}
0.500 $ in the classical spectrum and $\lambda_2=0.396+ {\rm i}
0.501$ in the quantum one) of the Perron Frobenius with thermal
noise (left panels) and the Weyl-Wigner symbols for the
corresponding quantum eigenstates (right panels) for the $C_{-1}$
ISS. In a) and b) we show the real part of the distributions while
in c) and d) the imaginary one. In all cases $\hbar_{\rm eff}^{\rm
(PF)}=0.15$.} \label{fig4}
\end{figure}
The next two cases are better analyzed together since they belong to the same region of the
parameter space. It can be seen that they coincide, having very similar invariant
states shown in Figs. \ref{fig5} and \ref{fig6}, panels a) and b).
The differences are only present through interference fringes at the quantum level.
But they are clearly not very relevant, both looking at these representations and
also at the values of the overlaps.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{fig5.eps}
\caption{Phase space portraits of two eigenvectors of the
Perron-Frobenius with thermal noise (left panels) and the
Weyl-Wigner symbols for the corresponding quantum eigenstates
(right panels), for the $D_{-1}$ ISS. In a) and b) we show the
eigenvectors associated with $\lambda_0$, while in c) and d) the
ones corresponding to $\lambda_4$ ($\lambda_4=0.391$ in the
classical spectrum and $\lambda_4=0.313 $ in the quantum one). In
all cases $\hbar_{\rm eff}^{\rm (PF)}=0.15$.} \label{fig5}
\end{figure}
On the other hand, we show the eigenvectors corresponding to the worst performing overlaps
in both cases in Figs. \ref{fig5} and \ref{fig6}, panels c) and d).
They show that in these cases the coherences have a greater weight. Anyway if we look carefully
at the distributions they are quite alike for the remaining of the distributions.
This puts a limit on the previously mentioned hypothesis consisting of approximating the
long lived block of the quantum superoperators with the Perron-Frobenius ones with thermal noise.
A quantitative study is left for the future.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{fig6.eps}
\caption{Phase space portraits of two eigenvectors of the
Perron-Frobenius with thermal noise (left panels) and the
Weyl-Wigner symbols for the corresponding quantum eigenstates
(right panels), for the chaotic attractor. In a) and b) we show
the eigenvectors associated with $\lambda_0$, while in c) and d)
the ones corresponding to $\lambda_4$ ($\lambda_4=-0.471$ in the
classical spectrum and $\lambda_4=-0.391 $ in the quantum one). In
all cases $\hbar_{\rm eff}^{\rm (PF)}=0.15$.} \label{fig6}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec5}
By studying the behavior of the spectra and eigenvectors of both
the Perron-Frobenius operators with thermal noise and the quantum mechanical
superoperators associated with the ISSs and chaotic attractors
typical of a paradigmatic model for dissipative directed
transport, we were able to identify a novel mechanism of classical
to quantum correspondence hinted in \cite{Carlo} (just looking at
the ratchet currents and asymptotic distributions).
The remarkable coincidence of both sets of eigenvalues is
indicative of an approximate formal equivalence between the
classical and quantum realms. In the following we raise
some important points derived from this result.
Firstly, it is interesting to link our approach with previous
works. In \cite{Braun} the dissipative kicked top model was
analyzed, with a special focus in the case where it decays to a
chaotic attractor. There it was found that the quantum invariant
state closely follows the structure of the classical attractor,
without the finer details. It was also shown that in the
semiclassical limit the leading eigenvalues of the quantum
spectrum converge to the ones of the Perron-Frobenius, thus
implying that the quantum mechanical time scales become
independent of $h_{\rm eff}$ and coincide with time scales set by
the Ruelle resonances. In the present work the classical to
quantum correspondence is investigated in representative regions
of the parameter space of a paradigmatic dissipative ratchet
system, corresponding to chaotic attractors and to ISSs as well.
Besides, we put the accent on small but finite $\hbar_{\rm eff}$
values, for which we find a correspondence mechanism based on
adding thermal noise at the classical level only. Our approach is
also clearly distinct from the usual way in which the quantum to
classical correspondence is treated in the decoherence literature
where the procedure consists in applying a diffusive noise to both
the classical and the quantum equations in order for the spectra
to converge to each other \cite{nonnen}.
On the other hand, the consequences of this finding are relevant
not only to directed transport but to dissipative systems in
general. A very promising one is the possibility to approximate the quantum
asymptotic state in the chaotic case by the classical dynamics with thermal
noise corresponding to a simple attractor in its vicinity. This was
previously conjectured in \cite{Carlo} but now with the help of the Weyl-Wigner
distributions we are able to show that this is indeed possible. As a matter
of fact, the differences due to coherences are minor.
Moreover, it is worth noticing that even when having a classical chaotic
attractor the addition of thermal noise at this level is necessary in
order to find a spectrum similar to the quantum one. Hence,
studying these effects could be interesting for many applications
as for example in superconducting quantum interference devices (SQUIDs)
\cite{Everitt}.
Finally, we would like to point out that the long-lived sector of the quantum
superoperators corresponding to any kind of structure in parameter space
could be well approximated by
means of Perron-Frobenius operators with thermal noise.
This conclusion can be drawn from the remarkable similarity among the spectra for all
the cases shown in Sec. \ref{sec3}. However, in our way to devise a classical approximation
we have found a problem hardly visible using just Husimi distributions as in
\cite{Carlo}. Thanks to the Weyl-Wigner representations of Sec. \ref{sec4} we have found
that the eigenvectors, even some long-lived ones, can have differences due to
the coherences remaining in the quantum system.
Despite this, their weight seems to be not so important.
This keeps our hopes to find an effective approximation theory in the future.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
Support from CONICET is gratefully acknowledged.
\vspace{3pc}
|
\section{Introduction}
Toric codes \cite{kitaev03} proposed by Kitaev are one of the most studied classes of
topological quantum codes and of fundamental importance in fault tolerant quantum
computing. Although toric codes and their generalization--surface codes, have many
attractive features (such as local stabilizer generators, low complexity decoders, efficient fault tolerant protocols, a high circuit threshold \cite{dennis2002,poulin10,raussen07}), they have a limited set of transversal gates.
On other hand, a class of topological color codes can implement the entire Clifford
group transversally \cite{bombin06}. This might suggest that color codes are inequivalent
to toric codes. However, in a very surprising development, Bombin et al. \cite{bombin2012} showed that
translationally invariant 2D color codes can be mapped to a finite number of copies of Kitaev's toric code.
However, the result in \cite{bombin2012}, as well the subsequent papers \cite{yoshida11,bombin14} which explore the equivalence between stabilizer codes and
toric codes in great detail, have one important qualifier, namely translational invariance.
For 2D color codes, Delfosse \cite{delfosse2014} relaxed the constraint on translation invariance and mapped a 2D color code to three surface codes.
In this paper, we propose an alternate map based on linear algebra.
We
map arbitrary color codes, including those that are not translationally invariant, onto two copies of a surface code.
The main differences between the proposed map (and its variations) and that of \cite{bombin2012} are: first, the map therein requires local translation symmetry. Second, in the map in \cite{bombin2012}, the number of toric codes onto which the color code is mapped need not always be two. On the other hand, our map always gives exactly two surface codes. These surface codes need not be copies of the toric code on the square lattice. Third, the proposed map does not require any ancilla qubits, as may be the case for some codes under the map in \cite{bombin2012}. Even for arbitrary color codes, our map is efficiently computable locally and we compute the images for all the single qubit errors on the color code in closed form.
On the other hand,
the results in \cite{bombin2012} go beyond color codes and include all local translationally invariant 2D stabilizer codes and certain subsystem codes.
Our work differs from that of \cite{delfosse2014} in the following aspects.
The map in \cite{delfosse2014} projects onto three copies of surface codes.
Therefore, our map leads to a lower decoding complexity compared to \cite{delfosse2014}. Furthermore, unlike our map which is a bijective map onto the surface codes, the map in \cite{delfosse2014} is not bijective, although it is injective. This has a bearing in the context of decoding. In some cases, a decoder using the map in \cite{delfosse2014} may not be able to lift an error (estimate) from surface codes to (the parent) color code. This will not occur with a decoder using our map.
Following the submission of our paper, we became aware of the work by Kubica, Yoshida, and Pastawski \cite{kubica15} who showed equivalence between color codes and toric codes for all dimensions $D\geq 2$.
In 2D, for color codes without boundaries, their result is similar to ours but there are substantial differences.
First, they map the color code onto two {\em different} surface codes, we map
onto two copies of the {\em same} surface code. Second, we use linear algebra to study these equivalences, which is simpler than the approach taken in \cite{kubica15} (or \cite{bombin2012,delfosse2014}).
One immediate application of our results, as in \cite{bombin2012,delfosse2014, kubica15}, is an alternate decoding scheme for color codes via surface codes.
\section{Preliminaries}
We assume that the reader is familiar with stabilizer codes \cite{calderbank98,gottesman97} and topological codes \cite{kitaev03}.
The Pauli group on $n$ qubits is denoted $\mc{P}_n$.
We denote the vertices of a graph $\Gamma$ by $\mathsf{V}(\Gamma)$, and the edges by $\mathsf{E}(\Gamma)$. The set of edges incident on a vertex $v$
is denoted as $\delta(v)$ and the edges in the boundary of a face by $\partial(f)$. Assuming that $\Gamma$ is embedded on a suitable surface we use $\mathsf{F}(\Gamma)$ to denote the faces of the embedding and do not always make explicit reference to the surface.
A surface code on a graph $\Gamma$ is a stabilizer code where the qubits are placed on the edges of $\Gamma$ and whose stabilizer $S$ is given by
\begin{align}
S &= \langle A_v , B_f \mid v\in \mathsf{V}(\Gamma), f\in \mathsf{F}(\Gamma) \rangle,
\label{eq:stab-sc
\end{align}
where $A_v = \prod_{e\in \delta(v) }X_e \mbox{ and } B_f =\prod_{e\in \partial(f)}Z_e$.
The Pauli group on the qubits of a surface code is denoted as $\mc{P}_{\mathsf{E}(\Gamma)}$.
A 2-colex is a trivalent, 3-face-colorable complex.
A stabilizer code is defined on a 2-colex by attaching qubits to every vertex
and defining the stabilizer $S$ as
\begin{eqnarray}
S = \langle B_f^X, B_f^Z \mid v\in \mathsf{F}(\Gamma) \rangle \mbox{ where } B_f^\sigma = \prod_{v\in f }\sigma_v. \label{eq:stab-tcc}
\end{eqnarray}
We denote the Pauli group on these qubits as $\mc{P}_{\mathsf{V}(\Gamma)}$; the $c$-colored faces of $\Gamma$ by $\mathsf{F}_c(\Gamma)$ and the $c$-colored edges of $\Gamma$ by $\mathsf{E}_c(\Gamma)$.
We restrict our attention to 2-colexes which do not have boundaries or multiple edges (the surface codes could contain multiple edges though).
This is not a severe restriction because a 2-colex with multiple edges can be modified to another 2-colex without such edges but encoding the same number of qubits and possessing the same error correcting capabilities (in terms of distance).
All embeddings are assumed to be 2-cell embeddings
i.e. faces are homeomorphic to unit discs.
There are four types of topological charges on a surface code: i) electric charge (denoted $\epsilon$) localized on the vertices, ii) magnetic charge (denoted $\mu$) living on the plaquettes, iii) the composite electric and magnetic charge denoted $\epsilon \mu$ which resides on both the plaquettes and vertices, and iv) the vacuum denoted $\iota$. Of these, only two charges are independent. We shall take this pair to be the electric and magnetic charges.
A charge composed with another charge of the same type gives the vacuum i.e. $c\times c =\iota$. The electric charges are created by $Z$-type errors and magnetic charges by $X$-type errors on the surface code.
On a color code, the topological charges live on the faces. In addition to being electric and/or magnetic, they also carry a color depending on which face they are present. Let us denote the electric charge on a $c$-colored face as $\epsilon_c$, the magnetic charge as $\mu_c$ and the composite charge as $\epsilon_c\mu_{c}$. The electric charges are not all independent \cite{bombin06}. Any pair (two out of three colors) of them can be taken as the independent set of electric charges. Similarly, only two magnetic charges are independent. As for surface codes, electric (magnetic) charges are created by $Z$ ($X$) errors on the color code.
A hopping operator is any element of the Pauli group that moves the charges. On a surface code, we can move the electric charges from one vertex to another by means of a $Z$-type Pauli operator. We denote by $H_{u\leftrightarrow v}^{\epsilon}$ the operator that moves $\epsilon$ from vertex $u$ to $v$ and vice versa.
If we consider the magnetic charges, then the movement can be accomplished by means of an $X$-type Pauli operator. The operator that moves a magnetic charge from face $f$ to $f'$ (or vice versa) is denoted by $H_{f\leftrightarrow f'}^{\mu}$.
Elementary hopping operators are those which move charges from one vertex to an adjacent vertex or from one plaquette to an adjacent plaquette. Let $e=(u,v)$ be the edge incident on the vertices $u$, $v$. We denote the elementary hopping operator along $e$ as $H_e^{\epsilon}$, where $ H_e^{\epsilon} = Z_{e}$. It is a specific realization of $H_{u\leftrightarrow v}^{\epsilon}$. Similarly, the elementary operator that moves $\mu $ across $e$ is denoted as $H_e^\mu$. Let $e$ be the edge shared by the faces $f$ and $f'$, then $H_{f\leftrightarrow f'}^{\mu}$ can be realized by $H_e^{\mu }$ where $H_e^{\mu }=X_{e}$. Observe that $H_{u\leftrightarrow v}^{\epsilon}$ and $H_{f\leftrightarrow f'}^{\mu}$ anti-commute when they act along the same edge, while operators for the same type of charges commute. In general, $H_{u\leftrightarrow v}^{\epsilon}$ and $H_{f\leftrightarrow f'}^{\mu}$ commute if and only if they cross an even number of times.
Similarly, we can define hopping operators for color codes. Let $f, f' \in \mathsf{F}_c(\Gamma)$ be two plaquettes connected by an edge $(u,v)$ where $u\in f$
and $v\in f'$. Then $H_{f\leftrightarrow f'}^{\epsilon_c}$ and $H_{f\leftrightarrow f'}^{\mu_c}$ are the operators that move $\epsilon_c$ and $\mu_c$ from $f$ to $f'$. A realization of these operators along $(u,v)$ is $H_{u,v}^{\epsilon_c} = Z_{u}Z_{v} $ and $H_{u,v}^{\mu_c}=X_{u}X_{v}$.
An element of the stabilizer can be viewed as a combination of hopping operators which move a charge around and bring it back to the original location. Since this movement cannot be detected, we can always adjoin an element of the stabilizer to the hopping operators.
\section{Mapping a color code to two copies of a surface code}
\subsection{Color codes to surface codes---Constraints}\label{ssec:constraints}
Our goal is to find a map between a color code and some related surface codes. We shall denote this map by $\pi$ for the rest of the paper.
We shall first describe the construction of $\pi$ in an informal fashion, emphasizing the principles underlying the map, and then rigorously justify all the steps.
The key observation, due to \cite{bombin2012}, is that there are four types of charges on a surface code and sixteen types of charges on a color code. This is the starting point for relating the color code to surface codes. The two pairs of independent charges on the color code i.e. $\{\epsilon_c, \mu_{c'} \}$ and $\{\epsilon_{c'}, \mu_{c} \}$ suggest that we can decompose the color code into a pair of toric codes by mapping $\{\epsilon_c, \mu_{c'} \}$ charges onto one toric code and $\{\epsilon_{c'}, \mu_{c} \}$ onto another.
However, charge ``conservation'' is not the only constraint.
We would like a map that preserves in some sense the structure of the color code and allows us to go back and forth between the color code and the surface codes. We shall impose some conditions on this map keeping in mind that we would like to use it in the context of decoding color codes.
First, observe that the electric charges on the surface codes live on the vertices while the magnetic charges live on the plaquettes. But, if we consider the pair of charges
$\{\epsilon_c, \mu_{c'} \}$, they both live on plaquettes---one on the $c$-colored plaquettes and another on $c'$-colored
plaquettes. A natural way to make the association to a surface code is to contract all the $c$-colored plaquettes in the embedding of $\Gamma$. This will give rise to a new graph $\tau_c(\Gamma)$. We can now place the charges $\epsilon_c$ and $\mu_{c'}$ on the vertices and plaquettes of $\tau_c(\Gamma)$ respectively. Similarly, the charges
$\{\mu_{c}, \epsilon_{c'} \}$ can live on the vertices and plaquettes of {\em another} instance of $\tau_c(\Gamma)$.
We impose the following (desirable) constraints on the map $\pi$. It must be
{(i) linear,
(ii) invertible,
(iii) local,
(iv) efficiently computable,
(v) preserve the commutation relations between the (Pauli) error operators on $\mathsf{V}(\Gamma)$ i.e. $\mc{P}_{\mathsf{V}(\Gamma)}$,
and (vi) consistent in the description of the movement of charges on the color code and surface codes.
}These constraints are not necessarily independent and in no particular order. It is possible to relax some of the constraints above.
\subsection{Deducing the map---A linear algebraic approach }
The maps proposed in \cite{bombin2012} are based on the following ideas: i) conservation of
topological charges ii) identification of the hopping operators and iii) preserving the commutation relations between the hopping operators.
These ideas are central to our work as well. However, we take a simpler linear algebraic approach
to find the map.
Suppose we have a 2-colex $\Gamma$. Then, upon contracting all the $c$-colored faces including their boundary edges, we obtain another complex. We denote this operation as $\tau_c$ and the resulting complex as $\tau_c (\Gamma)$ (see Fig.~\ref{fig:tau}). We suppress the subscript if the context makes it clear and just write $\tau$.
There is a one-to-one correspondence between the $c$-colored faces of $\Gamma$ and the vertices of $\tau(\Gamma)$, so we can label the vertices of $\tau(\Gamma)$ by $f\in \mathsf{F}_c(\Gamma)$. We also label them by $\tau(f)$ to indicate that the vertex was obtained by contracting $f$. Similarly, the edges of $\tau(\Gamma)$ are in one-to-one correspondence with the $c$-colored edges of $\Gamma$, so an edge $\tau(\Gamma)$ is labeled the same as the parent edge $e=(u,v)$ in $\Gamma$.
The faces which are not in $\mathsf{F}_c(\Gamma)$ are mapped to faces of $\tau(\Gamma)$. Therefore, we label the faces as
$f$ or more explicitly as $\tau(f)$, where $f\not\in \mathsf{F}_c(\Gamma) $. Thus, the complex $\tau(\Gamma)$ has the vertex set $\mathsf{F}_c(\Gamma)$,
edge set $\mathsf{E}_c(\Gamma)$ and faces $\mathsf{F}_{c'}(\Gamma)\cup \mathsf{F}_{c''}(\Gamma)$. Since every vertex $v$ in
$\Gamma$ has a unique $c$-colored edge incident on it, we can associate to it an edge in $\tau(\Gamma)$ as $\tau(v)$.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\subfigure{
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{contrac_color_final}\label{fig:tcc}
}
\subfigure{
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{contrac_surface_final}\label{fig:sc}
}
\caption{Illustrating the contraction of a color code via $\tau_c$ and the resultant surface code. Only portions of the codes are shown. The $c$-colored faces are vertices in $\tau_c(\Gamma)$. The faces $f \not\in \mathsf{F}_c(\Gamma)$ remain faces in $\tau_c(\Gamma)$ and are also labeled $f$ in $\tau_c(\Gamma)$, while the $c$-colored edge $e=(u,v)$ in $\Gamma$ is mapped to an edge in $\tau_c(\Gamma)$, so we retain the label $e$. Every vertex in $\Gamma$ is incident on a unique $c$-colored edge, so we can also extend $\tau_c$ to vertices $u$, $v$ and edges unambiguously by defining $\tau_c(u)=\tau_c(v)=\tau_c(u,v)=e$.}\label{fig:tau}
\end{figure}
Now, each $c$-colored face in $\Gamma$ can host $\epsilon_c$ and $\mu_c$. With respect to $\tau_c(\Gamma)$, they both reside on the vertices of $\Gamma_c$. So we shall place them on two different copies of $\tau_c(\Gamma$) denoted $\Gamma_1$ and $\Gamma_2$.
Then, the charges $\epsilon_c$ and $\mu_c$ will play the role of an electric charge on $\Gamma_1$ and $\Gamma_2$, respectively. So, we shall make the identification $\epsilon_c \equiv \epsilon_1$ and $\mu_c\equiv \epsilon_2$. The associated magnetic charges on $\Gamma_i$ will have to reside on $\mathsf{F}(\Gamma_i)$. Possible candidates for these charges must come from $\epsilon_{c'}$, $\epsilon_{c''}$ and $\mu_{c'}$, $\mu_{c''}$. The following lemma addresses these choices.
\begin{lemma}[Charge mapping] \label{lm:charge-pairing}
Let $c,c',c''$ be three distinct colors. Then, $\{\epsilon_c,\mu_{c'}\}$ and $\{ \epsilon_{c'},\mu_c \}$ are permissible pairings of the charges so that the color code on $\Gamma$ can be mapped to a pair of surface codes on $\Gamma_i=\tau_c(\Gamma)$. In other words, $\epsilon_1\equiv \epsilon_c$, $\mu_1\equiv \mu_{c'}$, $\epsilon_2\equiv \mu_c$ and $\mu_1\equiv \epsilon_{c'}$, where $\epsilon_i$ and $\mu_i$ are the electric and magnetic charges of the surface code on $\Gamma_i$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} First, observe that operators that move the electric charges $\epsilon_c$ and $\epsilon_{c'}$ are both $Z$-type,
therefore they will always commute. This means that if $\epsilon_c$ is identified with the electric charge on a surface code,
$\epsilon_{c'}$ cannot be the associated magnetic charge. That leaves either $\mu_{c}$ and $\mu_{c'}$. Of these, observe
that any operator that moves $\mu_{c}$ will always overlap with any operator that moves $\epsilon_c$ an even number of times.
Therefore, this leaves only $\mu_{c'}$. The operators that move $\epsilon_c$ and $\mu_{c'}$ commute/anti-commute when they overlap an even/odd number of times just as the electric and magnetic charges of a surface code justifying the association $\epsilon_1\equiv \epsilon_c$ and $\mu_1\equiv \mu_{c'}$. A similar argument shows the validity of the equivalence $\epsilon_2\equiv \mu_c$ and $\mu_2\equiv \epsilon_{c'}$.
\end{proof}
Let $\Gamma$ have $n$ vertices and $F_c$ vertices of color $c$. Then, $\Gamma_i$ has $F_c$ vertices, $n/2$ edges and $F_{c'}+F_{c''}$ faces. Together $\Gamma_1$ and $\Gamma_2$ have $n$ qubits. We desire that $\pi$ accurately reflect the movement of the independent charges on the color code and the surface codes. So, $\pi$ must map the hopping operators of the charges of the color code on $\Gamma$ to the hopping operators of the surface code on $\Gamma_i$. As mentioned earlier,
$H_{u,v}^{\epsilon_c}$ moves electric charges on $c$-colored plaquettes and
$H_{u,v}^{\epsilon_{c'}}$ electric charges on $c'$-colored plaquettes. But, although these charges may appear to be independent, due to the structure of the color code they are not.
A $c''$-colored plaquette on the color code is bounded by edges whose color alternates between $c$ and $c'$.
The $Z$-type stabilizer associated to this plaquette, i.e. $B_f^Z$, can be viewed as being composed of $H_{u,v}^{\epsilon_c}$ hopping operators that move
$\epsilon_c$, in which case we would expect to map $B_f^Z$ onto $\Gamma_1$. But, $B_f^Z$ can also be viewed as
being composed of $H_{i,j}^{\epsilon_{c'}}$. Thus, we see that there are two possible combinations of hopping operators that give the same plaquette stabilizer; one composed entirely of hopping operators of $c$-colored charges and the other of hopping operators of $c'$-colored charges. This suggests that there are dependencies among the hopping operators and some of them, while ostensibly acting on only one kind of charge, could still be moving the other type of charges. However, the overall effect on the other charge must be trivial, i.e. it must move the charge back to where it started. A similar argument can be made for $B_f^X$ which moves the magnetic charges. The next lemma makes precise these dependencies.
\begin{lemma}[Dependent hopping operators]\label{lm:dep-ops}
Let $f \in \mathsf{F}_{c''}(\Gamma)$ and ${1},\ldots, {2{\ell_f}}$ be the vertices in its boundary so that
$({2i-1},{2i}) \in \mathsf{E}_c(\Gamma)$, $({2i},{2i+1}) \in \mathsf{E}_{c'}(\Gamma)$
for $1\leq i\leq {\ell_f}$ and $2{\ell_f}+1 \equiv 1$. If $\pi$ is invertible, then
$\pi(B_f^\sigma)\neq I$ and there are $4{\ell_f}-2$ independent
elementary hopping operators along the edges of $f$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The stabilizer generator $B_f^Z$ is given as
\begin{align}
B_f^Z& = \prod_{i=1}^{2{\ell_f}}Z_i = \prod_{i=1}^{\ell_f} Z_{2i-1} Z_{2i}=Z_1Z_{2{\ell_f}}\prod_{i=1}^{{\ell_f}-1} Z_{2i} Z_{2i+1}\\
&=\prod_{i=1}^{\ell_f} H_{2i-1, 2i}^{\epsilon_c} =H_{1, 2{\ell_f}}^{\epsilon_{c'}}\prod_{i=1}^{{\ell_f}-1} H_{2i, 2i+1}^{\epsilon_{c'}}.
\end{align}
We see that $B_f^Z$ can be expressed as the product of ${\ell_f}$ hopping operators of type $H_{u,v}^{\epsilon_c}$ or type $H_{u,v}^{\epsilon_{c'}}$. Further, we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\pi(B_f^Z)& =&\prod_{i=1}^{\ell_f} \pi(H_{2i-1, 2i}^{\epsilon_c}) =\pi( H_{1, 2{\ell_f}}^{\epsilon_{c'}})\prod_{i=1}^{{\ell_f}-1} \pi(H_{2i, 2i+1}^{\epsilon_{c'}})\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
If $\pi(B_f^Z)=I$, then $\ker(\pi)\neq I$ which means that $\pi $ is not invertible and it would not be possible to preserve the information about the syndromes, as
$\pi(B^Z_f)$ would commute with all the error operators. So, we require that $\pi(B_f^Z)\neq I$.
This means that only one of these hopping operators is dependent and there are $2{\ell_f}-1$ independent hopping operators. The linear independence
of the remaining $2{\ell_f}-1$ operators can be easily verified by considering their support.
Similarly, $B_f^X$ also implies that there are another $2{\ell_f}-1$ independent hopping operators, giving us $4{\ell_f}-2$ in total.
\end{proof}
We are now ready to define the action of $\pi$ on elementary hopping operators. Without loss of generality we can assume if $f\in \mathsf{F}_{c''}(\Gamma)$ has $2{\ell_f}$ edges, then the dependent hopping operators of $f$ are $H_{1,2{\ell_f} }^{\epsilon_{c'}}$ and
$H_{2m,2m+1 }^{\mu_{c'}}$ i.e. $Z_1Z_{2{\ell_f}}$ and $X_{2m}X_{2m+1}$, where $1\leq m\leq {\ell_f}$ and $2{\ell_f}+1\equiv 1$.
\begin{lemma}[Elementary hopping operators]\label{lm:hopping}
Let $f, f' \in \mathsf{F}_c(\Gamma)$ where the edge $(u,v)$ is incident on $f$ and $f'$.
Then, the following choices reflect the charge movement on $\Gamma$ onto the surface codes on $\Gamma_i$.
\begin{eqnarray}
\pi(H_{u, v}^{\epsilon_c}) & = & \left[Z_{\tau(u)}\right]_1 = \left[Z_{\tau(v)}\right]_1 \label{eq:elec-hopper1}\\
\pi(H_{u , v}^{\mu_c}) & = & \left[Z_{\tau(u)} \right]_2= \left[Z_{\tau(v)}\right]_2,\label{eq:mag-hopper1}
\end{eqnarray}
where $[ T ]_i$ indicates the instance of the surface code on which $T$ acts.
Now if $f, f' \in \mathsf{F}_{c'}(\Gamma)$ and $(u,v)\in \mathsf{E}_{c'}(\Gamma)$ such that $u\in f$ and $v\in f'$ and
$H_{u,v}^{\epsilon_{c'}}$ and $H_{u,v}^{\mu_{c'}}$ are chosen to be independent hopping operators of $f$, then
\begin{eqnarray}
\pi(H_{u, v}^{\epsilon_{c'}}) = \left[X_{\tau(u)} X_{\tau(v)}\right]_2
\mbox{; } \pi(H_{u , v}^{\mu_{c'}}) = \left[X_{\tau(u)} X_{\tau(v)} \right]_1. \label{eq:mag-hopper2}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We only prove for $H_{u, v}^{\epsilon_c}$ and $H_{u , v}^{\mu_{c'}}$. Similar reasoning can be employed for $H_{u,v}^{\mu_c}$
and $H_{u, v}^{\epsilon_{c'}}$.
(i) $H_{u, v}^{\epsilon_c}$: This operator moves $\epsilon_c$ from $f$ to $f'$ in $\Gamma$. These
faces are mapped to adjacent vertices in $\tau(\Gamma)$. By Lemma~\ref{lm:charge-pairing}, $\epsilon_c$ is mapped to $\epsilon_1$, so $\pi(H_{u, v}^{\epsilon})$ should move $\epsilon_1$ from the vertex $\tau(f)$ to the vertex $\tau(f')$ on $\Gamma_{1}$.
Many hopping operators can achieve this; choosing the elementary operator gives $\pi(Z_u Z_v)= [Z_{\tau(u,v)}]_1$. Since
$\tau(u,v)=\tau(u)=\tau(v)$, Eq.~\eqref{eq:elec-hopper1} follows.
(ii) $H_{u, v}^{\mu_{c'}}$: This operator moves $\mu_{c'}$ from $f$ to $f'$. Since $\mu_{c'}$ is mapped to $\mu_1$, $ \pi(H_{u, v}^{\mu_{c'}})$ should move $\mu_1$ from the plaquette $\tau(f)$ to $\tau(f')$ on $\Gamma_{1}$. The operator on the first surface code which achieves this is an $X$-type operator on qubits $\tau(u)$ and $\tau(v)$ in $\Gamma_1$, i.e. $[X_{\tau(u)}X_{\tau(v)}]_1$. In both cases we choose the hopping operators to be of minimum weight.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure{
\includegraphics[scale=0.25,angle=-90]{map_elec_color}
}
\subfigure{
\includegraphics[scale=0.22
,angle=-90]{map_elec_surf}
}
\caption{Mapping the independent hopping operators $H_{u,v}^{\epsilon_r}=H_{f_1 \leftrightarrow f_2}^{\epsilon_r}=Z_u Z_v$ and
$H_{u',v'}^{\epsilon_b}=H_{f \leftrightarrow f'}^{\epsilon_b}=Z_{u'}Z_{v'}$ on $\Gamma$
onto two copies of $\tau(\Gamma)$ i.e. $\Gamma_1$ and $\Gamma_2$;
$\pi(H_{f_1 \leftrightarrow f_2}^{\epsilon_r}) = [Z_{\tau(u)}]_1 $ acts only on $\Gamma_1$ while
$H_{f \leftrightarrow f'}^{\epsilon_b} = [X_{\tau(u')}X_{\tau(v')}]_2$ acts only on $\Gamma_2$.}
\end{figure}
Lemma~\ref{lm:hopping} does not specify the mapping for the dependent hopping operators but it can be obtained as a linear combination of the independent ones.
Alternative choices to those given in Lemma~\ref{lm:hopping} exist for $\pi$. These choices are essentially alternate hopping operators on the surface codes which accomplish the same charge movement.
Such operators can be obtained by adding stabilizer elements to those given in
Eqs.~\eqref{eq:elec-hopper1}--\eqref{eq:mag-hopper2}.
In this paper we explore the choice when the operators $H_{1,2{\ell_f} }^{\epsilon_{c'}}$ and $H_{2m,2m+1 }^{\mu_{c'}}$ are dependent.
The $c''$-faces form a covering of all the vertices of $\Gamma$ and they are non-overlapping.
The elementary hopping operators along the edges on such plaquette do not interact with the elementary hopping operators of other plaquettes in $\mathsf{F}_{c''}(\Gamma)$. So we can consider each $f\in \mathsf{F}_{c''}(\Gamma)$ independently. This also makes sense from our constraint to keep $\pi$ local. Based on Lemmas~\ref{lm:dep-ops}~and~\ref{lm:hopping}, we can map the independent elementary hopping operators of $f$ along $c$-colored edges.
They map elementary hopping operators on $\Gamma$ to elementary hopping operators on $\Gamma_i$.
\begin{align}
\pi (Z_{2i-1}Z_{2i} ) = [Z_{\tau(2i)}]_1 &\mbox{ and }
\pi (X_{2i-1}X_{2i} ) = [Z_{\tau(2i)}]_2 \label{eq:cedge}
\end{align}
Next, we consider the hopping operators that involve the $c'$-colored edges. Without loss of generality we assume that the edge $Z_1 Z_{2{\ell_f}}$ is the one which carries the dependent hopping operator and $X_{2m}X_{2m+1}$ carries the other dependent hopping operator. Then letting $2{\ell_f}+1\equiv 1$ we have
\begin{align}
\pi(Z_{2i}Z_{2i+1}) &= [X_{\tau(2i)}X_{\tau(2i+1)}]_2 \mbox{ ; } 1\leq i < {\ell_f} \label{eq:zz-diag}\\
\pi(X_{2i}X_{2i+1}) &= [X_{\tau(2i)}X_{\tau(2i+1)}]_1 \mbox{ ; } 1\leq i\neq m \leq {\ell_f}.
\label{eq:xx-diag}
\end{align}
All these operators and their images under $\pi$ are linearly independent as can be seen from their supports.
From Lemma~\ref{lm:hopping} we obtain the images for the dependent hopping operators:
\begin{align}
\pi(H_{1,2{\ell_f} }^{\epsilon_{c'}})&= [X_{\tau(1)} X_{\tau(2{\ell_f})}]_2\prod_{i=1}^{\ell_f} [Z_{\tau(2i)}]_1 \\
\pi(H_{2m,2m+1 }^{\mu_{c'}}) &= [X_{\tau(2m)}X_{\tau(2m+1)}]_1
\prod_{i=1}^{\ell_f} [Z_{\tau(2i)}]_2
\end{align}
To complete the map it remains to find the action of $\pi$ for two more independent errors on the color code. One choice is any pair of single qubit operators $X_i$ and $Z_j$, where $1\leq i,j\leq 2{\ell_f}$. Or we can consider the images under $\pi$. We can see
from Eqs.~\eqref{eq:cedge}--\eqref{eq:xx-diag} that the images are also linearly independent and only single qubit $X$-type of errors remain to be generated. One choice is any $[X_{\tau(i)}]_1$ on $\Gamma_1$ and $[X_{\tau(j)}]_2$ on $\Gamma_2$, where $1\leq i,j\leq 2{\ell_f}$. That is, we need to find $E,E'$ such that $\pi(E)=[X_{\tau(i)}]_1$ and $\pi(E')=[X_{\tau(j)}]_2$ respect the commutation relations.
Lemma~\ref{lm:split} addresses this choice.
\begin{lemma}[Splitting]\label{lm:split}
The following choices lead to an invertible $\pi$ while respecting the commutation relations with hopping operators in Eqs.~\eqref{eq:cedge}--\eqref{eq:xx-diag}.
\begin{align}
\pi(g X_1 ) &=[X_{\tau(1)}]_1 \mbox{ where } g\in \{I,B_f^X, B_f^Y, B_f^Z \}\label{eq:z-split}\\
\pi(g Z_{2m} ) &=[X_{\tau(2m)}]_2 \mbox{ where } g\in \{I,B_f^X \}\label{eq:x-split}
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Each face $f\in \mathsf{F}_{c''}(\Gamma)$ accounts for $2\ell_f$ qubits i.e. $4\ell_f$ independent operators.
Now $[X_{\tau(1)}]_1$ and $[X_{\tau(2m)}]_2$ form a linearly independent set of size $4{\ell_f}$ along with the images of the independent elementary hopping operators on $f$.
Thus, the elementary hopping operators and the preimages of $[X_{\tau(1)}]_1$ and $[X_{\tau(2m)}]_2$
account for all the $4\ell_f$ operators on qubits on $f$.
Considering all faces in $\mathsf{F}_{c''}(\Gamma)$, we have $\sum_f 4\ell_f=2n$ operators
which generate $\mc{P}_{\mathsf{V}(\Gamma)}$. Since their images are independent and
$\Gamma_1 \cup \Gamma_2$ has exactly as many qubits as $\Gamma$, $\pi$ must be invertible.
Next, we prove these choices respect the commutation relations as stated.
Consider $[X_{\tau(1)}]_1$: this error commutes with all the operators in Eq.~\eqref{eq:cedge}--\eqref{eq:xx-diag}
except $\pi(Z_1 Z_2) = [Z_{\tau(1)} ]_1$. There are $4\ell_f-3$ such hopping operators on
$f$ with which $\pi^{-1}([X_{\tau(1)}]_1)$ must commute. As a consequence of the rank-nullity theorem there are $2^{{4\ell_f}-(4\ell_f-3)}$ such operators.
It can be verified that $\langle X_1, B_f^X, B_f^Z\rangle $ account for these operators. But
$\pi^{-1}([X_{\tau(1)}]_1)$ must also anti-commute with $Z_1Z_2$. This gives the choices in
Eq.~\eqref{eq:z-split} since operators in $\langle B_f^X, B_f^Z\rangle$ commute with $Z_1Z_2$.
Now let us determine $\pi^{-1}([X_{\tau(2m)}]_2)$. Once again with reference to
Eq.~\eqref{eq:cedge}--\eqref{eq:xx-diag} we see that it must commute with
$4\ell_f-3$ hopping operators on $f$. It also commutes with $\pi^{-1}([X_{\tau(1)}]_1)$
since $[X_{\tau(2m)}]_2$ commutes with $[X_{\tau(1)]_1}$. Again, due to a dimensionality argument there are $2^{4\ell_f-(4\ell_f-2)}$ choices for $\pi^{-1}([X_{\tau(2m)}]_2)$. Since
$[X_{2m}]_2$ anti-commutes with $[Z_{\tau(2m)}]_2$
its preimage must anti-commute with $\pi^{-1}([Z_{\tau(2m)}]_2)=X_{2m-1}X_{2m}$ giving two choices $Z_{2m}$ and $Z_{2m}B_f^X$. We can check that $Z_{2m}$ satisfies all the required commutation relations as does the choice $Z_{2m} B_f^X$.
\end{proof}
\noindent
In Lemma~\ref{lm:split} we first assigned $\pi^{-1}([X_\tau(1)]_1)$ followed by
$\pi^{-1}([X_{\tau(2m)}]_2) $. Changing the order restricts $g$ to $\{I,B_f^X\}$ in Eq.~\eqref{eq:zz-diag} while $g\in \{I,B_f^X, B_f^Y, B_f^Z \}$ in Eq.~\eqref{eq:xx-diag}.
\begin{lemma}[Preserving commutation relations]\label{lm:commutation}
The map $\pi$ preserves commutation relations of error operators in $\mc{P}_{\mathsf{V}(\Gamma)}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{lemma}[Preserving code capabilities]\label{lm:stabilizers}
Under $\pi$, stabilizers of the color code on $\Gamma$ are mapped to stabilizers on the surface codes
on $\Gamma_1$ and $ \Gamma_2$.
\end{lemma}
\renewcommand{\algorithmicrequire}{\textbf{Input:}}
\renewcommand{\algorithmicensure}{\textbf{Output:}}
\begin{algorithm
\caption{{\ensuremath{\mbox{ Mapping a 2D color code to surface codes}}}}\label{alg:tcc-projections}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\REQUIRE {A 2-colex $\Gamma$ without parallel edges; $\Gamma$ is assumed to have a 2-cell embedding.}
\ENSURE {
$\pi: \mc{P}_{\mathsf{V}(\Gamma)}\rightarrow \mc{P}_{\mathsf{E}(\Gamma_1)}\otimes \mc{P}_{\mathsf{E}(\Gamma_2)}$, where
$\Gamma_i=\tau_c(\Gamma)$.}
\STATE Pick a color $c\in \{r,g,b\}$ and contract all edges of $\Gamma$ that are colored $\{r,g,b\}\setminus c$ to obtain $\tau(\Gamma)$. Denote two instances of $\tau(\Gamma)$ as $\Gamma_1$ and $\Gamma_2$.
\STATE Choose charges $\epsilon_{c}$, $\mu_{c}$, $\epsilon_{c'}$ and $\mu_{c'}$ on $\Gamma$, where $c' \neq c$.
\STATE Set up correspondence between charges on $\Gamma$ and $\Gamma_{i}$ as follows:
$\epsilon_1 \equiv \epsilon_c $, $\mu_1 \equiv \mu_{c'}$, $\epsilon_2 \equiv \mu_c$
and $\mu_2 \equiv \epsilon_{c'}$ .
\FOR { each $c''$-colored face $f$ in $\mathsf{F}(\Gamma)$}
\STATE Let the boundary of $f$ be $v_1$, \ldots $v_{2{\ell_f}}$.
\STATE Choose a pair of $c'$-colored edges in $\partial(f)$, say $(v_{2{\ell_f}},v_1)$ and $(v_{2m},v_{2m+1})$. Let $[ T ]_i$ denote that $T$ acts on $\Gamma_i$.
\begin{align}
\pi(Z_{v_1}) &= \left[ X_{\tau(v_1)}\right]_2 \prod_{i=1}^{m} \left[ Z_{\tau(v_{2i})} \right]_1
\end{align}
\STATE For $1 \leq j\leq {\ell_f} $ compute the mapping (recursively) as
\begin{align}
\pi(Z_{v_{2j}}) &= \pi (Z_{v_{2j-1}}) \left[ Z_{\tau(v_{2j})}\right]_1\\
\pi(Z_{v_{2j-1}}) &= \pi (Z_{v_{2j-2}}) \left[X_{\tau(v_{2j-2})} X_{\tau(v_{2j-1})}\right]_2
\end{align}
\STATE For $1 \leq j\leq m$ compute the mapping as
\begin{align}
\pi(X_{v_1}) &= \left[ X_{\tau(v_1)}\right]_1\\
\pi(X_{v_{2j}}) &= \pi (X_{v_{2j-1}}) \left[ Z_{\tau(v_{2j})}\right]_2\\
\pi(X_{v_{2j-1}}) &= \pi (X_{v_{2j-2}}) \left[ X_{\tau(v_{2j-2})} X_{\tau(v_{2j-1})}\right]_1
\end{align}
\STATE For $m+1 \leq j\leq {\ell_f}$ compute the mapping as
\begin{align}
\pi(X_{v_{2{\ell_f}}}) &= \left[ X_{\tau(v_{2{\ell_f}})}\right]_1\\
\pi(X_{v_{2j-1}}) &= \pi (X_{v_{2j}}) \left[ Z_{\tau(v_{2j})}\right]_2\\
\pi(X_{v_{2j}}) &= \pi (X_{v_{2j+1}}) \left[ X_{\tau(v_{2j})} X_{\tau(v_{2j+1})}\right]_1
\end{align}
\ENDFOR
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\noindent
\begin{theorem}\label{th:tcc-map}
Any 2D color code (on a 2-colex $\Gamma$ without parallel edges) is equivalent to a pair of surface codes $\tau(\Gamma)$ under the map $\pi$ defined as in Algorithm~\ref{alg:tcc-projections}.
\end{theorem}
{
\begin{proof}[Proof Sketch]
By charge conservation we require two copies of $\tau(\Gamma)$ to represent the color code using surface codes.
Lines 2--3 follow from Lemma~\ref{lm:charge-pairing}. Since $c''$-colored faces in $\mathsf{F}_{c''}(\Gamma)$ cover all the qubits of the color code, we account for all the single qubit operators on the color code by the {$\mathsf {for}$}-loop in lines 4--10.
The closed form expressions for single qubit errors in lines 6--9 are a direct consequence of Lemmas~\ref{lm:hopping}, \ref{lm:split} and the choices given in Eqs.~\eqref{eq:cedge}--\eqref{eq:xx-diag} and Eqs.~\eqref{eq:z-split}--\eqref{eq:x-split}.
By considering the images of the stabilizers of the color code, we can show that they are mapped to the stabilizers of the surface codes on $\Gamma_i$ (see Lemma~\ref{lm:stabilizers}). From Lemma~\ref{lm:commutation},
the commutation relations among the hopping operators on the color code in Eq.~\eqref{eq:cedge}--\eqref{eq:xx-diag} and the single qubit operators in Eq.~\eqref{eq:z-split}--\eqref{eq:x-split} are preserved.
Hence, the errors corrected by the color code are the same as those corrected by the surface codes on $\Gamma_i$.
Thus the color code is equivalent to two copies of $\tau(\Gamma)$.
\end{proof}
}
\noindent{\em Acknowledgment.} This research was supported by the Centre for Industrial Consultancy \& Sponsored Research.
We thank the referees for helpful comments and references.
{
\def$'${$'$}
|
\section{ \textbf{ I. INTRODUCTION} }
\textit{Introduction:} The superconductivity in a multi-band electronic system can be extremly rich and complex. Many recently discovered correlated electron systems belong to this category of multi-band superconductors. For example, iron-based superconductors discovered six years ago\cite{Hosono2008} have multiple Fermi surfaces and their bands near the Fermi level are attributed to all five $d-$orbitals. These materials exhibit a variety of intriguing properties associated with all of the degrees of freedom including charge, orbital, spin and lattice\cite{Johnston2010}, which can, in principle, lead to many possible novel superconducting states\cite{Mazin2011}.
While theoretically, a multi band structure is a fertile ground for new physics, in experiments, it is still very difficult to detect them and determine their mechanisms because of the involvement of the multi-degrees of freedom. Many experimental observations can be subject to multiple interpretations; for example, in iron-based superconductors \cite{Stewart2011}, the interplay among electronic nematicity, magnetism and orbital ordering is still a subject of active research\cite{Schmalian2014,Dagotto2012}. The pairing symmetry of the superconducting state, arguably the most important property, is still controversial and highly debated\cite{Mazin2011}. While the magnitude of the superconducting order parameter can be directly probed by many experimental techniques, such as angle-resolved photoemission spectra (ARPES) and scanning tunneling microscopy(STM), there are few good direct probes to the phase distribution of the superconducting order parameter across their multiorbital Fermi surface. In particular, when the phase distribution is not enforced by the symmetry of the superconducting state, as the case stands in many theoretically proposed states in iron-based superconductors, the phase sensitive junction techniques\cite{Harlingen1995} that determined the $d-$wave pairing symmetry in cuprates is also not applicable.
Since the last couple of decades, ultrafast pump-probe spectroscopy has played an increasing role in probing the superconducting ground state, with the high $T_c$ Cuprates having grabbed much of the attention \cite{Eckstein2005,Parmigiani2009,Rubhausen2009,Wolf2007,Zewail2008,Onellion2002,Kurz1992,Mihailovic2008,Ryan2005,Sugai2005,Lee2007, Mihailovic2005,Liang2013,Evetts1997,Hardy2004,Hardy2002,Hardy2003,Mihailovic1999,Mihailovic2002,Mihailovic1999-PRL}, along with a few experiments performed on multiorbital iron superconductors \cite{Ferdeghini2013, Vasiliev2012, Vasiliev2012-PRL, Taylor2010,Sood2012, Marsi2010,Marsi2009, Mihailovic2009, Nakamura2011} as well. The primary focus of most of these experiments has been the measurement of relaxation times that can be extracted from the behavior of the change in reflectivity $\frac{\Delta R}{R}$ of the probe pulse as a function of the delay time $\delta$ between the pump and the probe. From this, one can indirectly obtain information about the strength of the electron-phonon couplings and their anisotropies \cite{Wolf2007,Zewail2008}, density of photoexcited quasiparticles \cite{Mihailovic2005, Mihailovic1999}, pseudo and superconducting gaps \cite{Mihailovic1999}, and signatures of the origin of the superconducting interaction \cite{Mihailovic2008}. However, even though coherent phonon oscillations in ultrafast experiments have been generated \cite{Kurz1992, Nakamura2011} and studied \cite{Marsi2009,Sood2012} for a while now, only a few experimental works address the role of the superconducting phase on these oscillations and no theoretical background has been laid.
In this Letter, we show that the phase of these coherent phonon oscillations contains useful information about the superconducting phase and its pairing symmetry; in particular, we show that the difference in the phase of the oscillations between the normal and superconducting state is proportional to the superconducting gap, and in certain scenarios, can help distinguish the sign change of superconducting orders on different bands. Thus, the coherent phonons can act as a new experimental probe of superconducting symmetries.
The coherent phonon amplitude mode with wave vector $q$ is described by the driven harmonic oscillator\cite{Merlin1997,Sabbah2007}
\begin{equation}
\frac{d^2 Q_q}{dt^2} + 2 \beta \frac{dQ_q}{dt} + \Omega^2 Q_q = F(t)
\end{equation}
where $Q_q$ is the amplitude of the phonon mode, $\Omega$ is the frequency of the oscillator, $\beta$ is the damping parameter and $F(t)$ is the driving force. The solution to the above equation is given by
\begin{equation}
Q_q(t) = \mathcal{A} e^{-\beta t} cos(\tilde{\Omega} t + \Gamma_{ph})
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{\Omega} = \sqrt{\Omega^2 - \beta^2}$ and $\mathcal{A}$ is the amplitude of the oscillation which is proportional to the magnitude of the driving force $F$. For simplicity, we will ignore any effect of damping. In such a case, the phase of the phonon oscillation $\Gamma_{ph}$ is given by \cite{Sabbah2007}
\begin{equation}
Tan(\Gamma_{ph}) = \frac{Im(i F(-\Omega))}{Re(i F(-\Omega))}.
\end{equation}
The driving force $F(t)$ can be derived microscopically under reasonable approximations. Consider a general Hamiltonian that describes the physical processes in an ultrafast pump-probe experiment given by
\begin{equation}
H = H_e + H_p + H_{e-p} + H_{e-l}(t),
\end{equation}
where $H_e$, $H_p$, $H_{ep}$ and $H_{el}(t)$ are electronic, phononic, electron-phonon coupling and electron-pulse interaction parts respectively\cite{Merlin1997}. In a superconducting state, the electronic part, $H_e$, is given by the general BCS form
\begin{eqnarray}
H_e &=& \sum_{k\sigma\alpha\beta} \epsilon_{k\sigma\alpha\beta} c_{k\sigma\alpha}^{\dagger}c_{k\sigma\beta} + \sum_{k\alpha} \Delta_{k\alpha} c_{k\alpha\uparrow}^{\dagger}c_{-k\alpha\downarrow}^{\dagger}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\alpha $ and $\sigma$ are the orbital and spin index. We take the standard form for $H_p = \frac{1}{2}\sum_{q} (P_q^2 + \Omega_q^2 Q_q^2) $ and $
H_{ep} = \sum_{kq\alpha\alpha'} \xi_{\alpha\alpha'} Q_q c_{k\alpha}^{\dagger}c_{k+q\alpha'}+ h.c$ where $Q_q$ and $P_q$ are the canonical coordinates and momenta. The time dependent electron-laser pulse interaction is given by $H_{el}(t)= \sum_{kq\alpha\alpha'}V_{\alpha\alpha'}(t) c_{k\alpha}^{\dagger}c_{k+q\alpha'}+ h.c. $ with $V_{\alpha \alpha'}(t) = \frac{e}{m}\int dr_i \phi_{\alpha}(r_i)^* [\vec{A}(t)\cdot\vec p_i] \phi_{\alpha'}(r_i) $. As the coherent phonons are generated at $q=0$ and the momentum of the light is much smaller than the electron momentum, we can set $q=0$ in all above Hamiltonians.
We consider parameters in a typical femtosecond pump-probe experiment. The pump pulse (central frequency $\omega_o \sim 375 THz$) has a width of $\tau \sim 80 fs$ and a relatively broad spectral width of the order of $\Delta \nu\sim 5-10 THz$. Such a spectral width is just enough to excite the lowest energy optical phonon mode whose energy is around $\Omega\sim 5 THz$. To ensure that the phonon oscillations are properly resolved in time, the width of the pump laser pulse satisfies the condition $\tau<< \Omega^{-1}$.
The average force driving the coherent phonon oscillations is given by $F(t) = - \partial \langle H_{e-p} \rangle(t)/ \partial Q_{\vec q}$.
\begin{comment}
\begin{equation}
F(z) = \frac{Tr[T_c\{ e^{-i \int_{\gamma}d\bar{z} H_{el}(\bar{z}) } H_{ep}(z) \}] }{Tr[T_c\{ e^{-i \int_{\gamma}d\bar{z} H_{el}(\bar{z}) } \}]}
\end{equation}
\end{comment}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\caption{\label{Scattering}A cartoon plot showing the toy band structure used to illustrate the scattering between superconducting bands close to the Fermi level. A quasiparticle is light scattered (solid wavy line) from an occupied band state $a$ to an empty state in band state $b$ and light scattered again from band state $b$ to another band state $c$. Finally the quasiparticle makes a transition back to the band state $a$ by scattering with a phonon (dashed-dotted line). The energy scale on the vertical axis is of the order of the superconducting gap. }
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{Scattering}
\end{figure}
Here, $\langle ...\rangle$ denotes an ensemble average over eigen states of $H - H_{e-l}(t)$ time evolving in $H_{e-l}(t)$ perturbatively.
\begin{comment}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\caption{Plot of the Keldysh contour in the adiabatic approximation \cite{Rammer-Book2007, Kamenev-Book2011, Stefanucci-Book2013}. $z_1', z_2'$ are integration variables on the $\gamma_-$ contour while $z_1,z_2$ are integration variables on the $\gamma_+$ contour. The time variable $z$ is placed on the $\gamma_-$ contour. The sum of the two contours $\gamma_- \oplus\gamma_+$ is denoted by $\gamma$.}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{Contour}
\end{figure}
\end{comment}
In lines with the authors in ref \cite{Sabbah2007}, we assume that the electric field is spatially homogeneous and a gaussian centered around $\omega_o$. Thus the electric field product $E(\omega)E(\omega+\Omega)$ is strongly peaked at $\omega_o - \Omega/2$. This leads to an expression for the driving force\cite{Merlin1997, Sabbah2007}
\begin{eqnarray}\nonumber
F(\Omega) &=& \frac{-C}{\left(\omega_o - \frac{\Omega^2}{4}\right)}\sum_{\vec k m n} \Biggl(\frac{\tilde{\xi}_{In}\tilde{V}_{nm}(\vec k)\tilde{V}_{mI}(\vec k)}{(\omega_{nI} - \Omega - i g)(\omega_{mI} - \omega_o - i g)} \\ \label{DrivingForce}
&&+ \frac{\tilde{\xi}_{nI}\tilde{V}_{mn}(\vec k) \tilde{V}_{Im}(\vec k)}{(\omega_{nI} + \Omega + i g)(\omega_{mI} - \omega_o + i g)} \Biggr).
\end{eqnarray}
Here $n,m,I$ are band states, $C$ is an unimportant constant, $g$ contributes to the optical absorption, and $\vec k$ is the crystal momentum. We have defined $\omega_{nI} \equiv \omega_{nI}(\vec k) = \omega_n - \omega_I$, where $\omega_n$ is the energy of band $n$ with momentum $\vec k$. The tilde sign above the matrix elements denotes the respective quantities written in the band basis. In the expression for $F(\Omega)$, we have assumed that the laser frequency is the largest energy scale in the problem. Therefore, we have chosen to keep the most resonant terms by ignoring a third term which has a denominator proportional to $\omega_o^2$.\\
\newline
\begin{comment}
\begin{figure}[H]
\caption{A cartoon plot showing the toy band structure used to illustrate the sign change effect on the driving force. We have used three bands in the superconducting state similar to the model used by Daghofer et. al \cite{Daghofer2010} The vertical scale is energy and the horizontal scale is momentum. The numbers label the bands used in the text. }
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{3Bands}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[H]
\centering
\caption{\label{tab:5/tc}Table showing the various possible electron quasiparticle like transitions contributing to the average driving force. $I$ is the initial and final band states and $m,n$ are the intermediate band states. There are totally eighteen electron quasiparticle like contributions of which nine are shown. The rest are obtained by swapping $m$ and $n$.}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
$I$ (Initial and final) & Intermediate $m$ & Intermediate $n$ \\
\hline
0&5 &4 \\
\hline
0&5 &3 \\
\hline
0&4 &3 \\
\hline
1&5 &4 \\
\hline
1&5 &3 \\
\hline
1&4 &3 \\
\hline
2&5 &4 \\
\hline
2&5 &3 \\
\hline
2&4 &3 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\end{comment}
\textit{a) Two band case - analytic result}: Our goal in this section is to study the phase of the coherent phonon oscillations ($\Gamma_{ph}$) across $T_c$ for a generic two orbital model. Our model comprises intraorbital hoppings $\epsilon_{1}(\vec k), \epsilon_{2}(\vec k)$, and the interorbital hopping $\epsilon_{12}(\vec k)\equiv m_k $. For analytic simplicity, we choose the two orbitals to have the same complex gap order parameter $|\Delta| e^{i \phi}$. This condition will be relaxed in the next section where we apply numerics. For the electron phonon couplings, we only keep non-zero matrix elements
for the coupling between the two different orbitals ($\xi'$) and coupling between superconducting particle-hole bands ($ \xi e^{i \phi}$).
\begin{comment}
\begin{align}
\hat{\xi}=
\begin{pmatrix}
0 \hfill & \xi' \hfill & \xi e^{i \phi} \hfill & 0 \hfill \\
\xi' \hfill & 0 \hfill & 0 \hfill & \xi e^{i \phi} \hfill \\
\xi e^{-i \phi} \hfill & 0 \hfill & 0 \hfill & -\xi' \hfill \\
0 \hfill & \xi e^{- i\phi} \hfill & -\xi' \hfill & 0 \hfill \\
\end{pmatrix},
\end{align}
\end{comment}
As the electronic response to the laser pulse is a very fast process, we can assume that the phonon is not activated during the laser pulse excitation. Such an approximation is easy to justify considering that the fast moving electrons have a larger effect on the slow moving nuclei than the other way around$-$ an analogue of the Born-Oppenheimer approximation in atomic physics. In this case, the lowest order effect of the electron-phonon coupling is in the form of the driving force, $F(t) = - \partial \langle H_{e-p} \rangle(t)/ \partial Q_{\vec q}$.
\begin{comment}
\begin{align}
U =
\begin{pmatrix}
-e^{i \phi}c_{\theta}s_{\beta-} \hfill & -e^{i \phi} s_{\theta}s_{\beta+} \hfill & e^{i \phi} s_{\theta}c_{\beta+} \hfill & e^{i \phi} c_{\theta}c_{\beta-} \hfill \\
e^{i \phi}s_{\theta}s_{\beta-} \hfill & -e^{i \phi} c_{\theta}s_{\beta+} \hfill & e^{i \phi} c_{\theta}c_{\beta+} \hfill & -e^{i \phi} s_{\theta}c_{\beta-} \hfill \\
c_{\theta}c_{\beta-} \hfill & s_{\theta}c_{\beta+} \hfill & s_{\theta}s_{\beta+} \hfill & c_{\theta}s_{\beta-} \hfill \\
-s_{\theta}c_{\beta-} \hfill & c_{\theta}c_{\beta+} \hfill & c_{\theta}s_{\beta+} \hfill & -s_{\theta}s_{\beta-} \hfill \\
\end{pmatrix},
\end{align}
\end{comment}
\begin{comment}
\begin{eqnarray*}
tan2\theta_k &=& \frac{2 m_k}{\epsilon_{2k} - \epsilon_{1k}}\\
sin \beta_{\pm}&=& \sqrt{\frac{1}{2} \left(1 - \frac{\epsilon_{\pm}(\vec k)}{E_{\pm}(\vec k)}\right)}\\
\epsilon_{\pm}(\vec k)&=& \frac{1}{2}\left[\epsilon_{1k} + \epsilon_{2k} \pm \sqrt{(\epsilon_{1k} - \epsilon_{2k})^2 + 4 m_k^2}\right]\\
E_{\pm}(\vec k) &=& \sqrt{\Delta^2 + \epsilon_{\pm}(\vec k)^2}.
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{comment}
\newline
\newline
We now proceed with our calculation of the average driving force $F(t)$. To bring out the physics essential for our discussion, we consider a scattering process illustrated in the cartoon in Fig \ref{Scattering}. A quasiparticle in the state $a$ is scattered by a photon to the empty state $b$ above the Fermi level, and then scattered again into another empty state $c$ by a second photon. Finally, the quasiparticle is scattered back to its original state $a$ through a phonon or a series of phonons.
\begin{comment}
\begin{equation}
F(\Omega) \approx \frac{-2 C}{(\omega_o^2 - \frac{\Omega^2}{4})}\sum_{\vec k} \left[\frac{\tilde{\xi}_{ac}\tilde{V}_{cb}(\vec k)\tilde{V}_{ba}(\vec k)}{(\omega_{ca} - \Omega - i g)(\omega_{ba} - \omega_o - i g)} \right],
\end{equation}
\end{comment}
\begin{comment}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\caption{ Comparison of the experimental (red dots) and theoretical fit (solid line) of the coherent phonon phase $\Gamma$ (in radians) as a function of temperature below the critical temperature $T_c$. The theoretical formula used is \textbf{missing eq. numer} eq.\ref{} with a BCS type temperature dependence of the gap having the same value on all the bands, but with second order terms (with coefficients $\gamma_1$ and $\gamma_2$ ) added in the driving force. The fit parameters are chosen as $\alpha_1=1.25,\alpha_2=1.19, \beta_1 = \beta_2 = -2.77, \gamma_1 =1.609,\gamma_2 =1.63 $. Note that we have defined the phase in \textbf{missing eq. numter} eq. \ref{}in units of $\pi$. }
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{ExptVsTh}
\end{figure}
\end{comment}
We explicitely evaluate the matrix element product $\tilde{\xi}_{ac}\tilde{V}_{cb}(\vec k)\tilde{V}_{ba}(\vec k)$ for such a process so that other similar scattering processes can be determined analogously. To do this, we first have to perform an unitary transform into the orbital basis and then use the formulas described in \cite{Pedersen2001} for tight binding matrix elements. We can write the above matrix element product as
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde{\xi}_{ac}\tilde{V}_{cb}(\vec k)\tilde{V}_{ba}(\vec k) &=& \Delta\frac{f(\theta_k)}{x_+^2 x_-^4} (\mathscr{E_+} + \mathscr{E_-})(\mathscr{E_+} \mathscr{E_-} - \Delta^2)\\
&& \times \left[\xi (\mathscr{E_-}^2 - \Delta^2) + \xi' sin 2\theta_k (2 \Delta \mathscr{E_-})\right],\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $f(\theta_k) = -(\partial m_k)^2 cos^2 2 \theta_k $, $x_{\pm} = \sqrt{\Delta^2 + \mathscr{E}_{\pm}^2}$, $\mathscr{E}_\pm = \epsilon_{\pm}(\vec k) + E_{\pm}(\vec k)$,
with the band angle $tan 2\theta_k = 2 m_k/(\epsilon_{1k} - \epsilon_{2k})$, $\epsilon_{\pm}(\vec k)$ the band energies, and $E_{\pm}(\vec k) = \sqrt{\Delta^2 + \epsilon_{\pm}(\vec k)^2}$.
From the above expression for the matrix element product, we can separate the most dominant contributions from different regions of the Brillouin zone. We consider three different cases: (1) contributions from momentum space points far away from the fermi surface where $\epsilon_{\pm}(\vec k) >> |\Delta|> 0$, (2) on the Fermi surface $\epsilon_+(\vec k) = 0<|\Delta|<< \epsilon_-(k)$ and finally, (3) on the Fermi surface $\epsilon_-(\vec k) = 0<|\Delta|<< \epsilon_+(k)$. We find that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Result}
\tilde{\xi}_{ac}\tilde{V}_{cb}(\vec k)\tilde{V}_{ba}(\vec k) &=&\\
&&\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!f(\theta_k)\times\begin{cases}
\xi \frac{|\Delta|}{\tilde{\epsilon}} \left( 1+ \frac{2 |\Delta|}{\mathscr{E_-}}\frac{\xi'}{\xi} s_ {2\theta}\right)& \text {$\epsilon_{\pm} >> |\Delta|> 0$} \nonumber\\
\frac{ \xi }{2} \left( 1+ \frac{2 |\Delta|}{\mathscr{E_-}}\frac{\xi'}{\xi} s_{2\theta}\right)& \text{$\epsilon_->> |\Delta|>0=\epsilon_+$}\nonumber\\
\frac{\xi'}{2} s_{2\theta}& \text{$\epsilon_+>> |\Delta|>0=\epsilon_-$},
\end{cases}
\end{eqnarray}
where we have defined the effective band energy $\tilde{\epsilon} = \frac{\mathscr{E_+} \mathscr{E_-}}{\mathscr{E_+}+ \mathscr{E_-}}$ and $s_{2\theta} \equiv sin 2\theta_k$. Similar expressions can be obtained for the other scattering processes. The energy denominators appearing in the expression for the driving force in eq \ref{DrivingForce} depend quadratically on the energy gap. From this, along with the expression for the matrix element product (written in eq.\ref{Result}), we arrive at the central result of this section $-$ \textit{the coherent phonon phase encodes the behavior of the superconducting order parameter.} For small $\Delta$, the phase can be written very generally as $\Gamma_{ph} = \alpha_1 + \alpha_2 \Delta(T)$, where $\alpha_1$ and $ \alpha_2$ are constants independent of temperature. As a result, the phase difference between the superconducting and normal state is proportional to the pairing gap. We also additionally conclude that the contribution to the average driving force from the momentum points far away from the Fermi surface is of $O(\Delta/\tilde{\epsilon})$ smaller than the contribution from those close to the Fermi surfaces. However, all the regions in the Brillouin zone contribute to the phase of the oscillation to the same order. This naturally implies that for a significant driving force to be generated, we would require the frequency of the phonon mode excited ($\sim 5 -10 THz$) to be of the order of the superconducting gap. This is a condition that is hard to attain in classic BCS superconductors, but is comfortably satisfied by high $T_c$ Cuprates and iron based superconductors.
\textit{b) Three band case}: To further test the above results, we consider a more realistic band model that describes iron based superconductors and study the pairing symmetry dependence. We also examine any signatures that can capture the inter-orbital sign change contained in the phase of coherent phonon oscillation. To illustrate our numerical results and maintain analytical tractability, we choose the three band model proposed by Daghofer et.al \cite{Daghofer2010}. Fig \ref{PhasevsT} shows our result for the temperature dependence plot of the phase difference $\Gamma_{S} - \Gamma_{N}$ between the superconducting and normal states across $T_c$. The phase is a constant above $T_c$ and varies below it due to the development of a superconducting gap on the Fermi surfaces.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\caption{\label{PhasevsT}Plot showing the variation of the phase($\Gamma_{ph}$) difference between superconducting(S) and normal(N) state as a function of temperature across $T_c$. (Left) Phase as a function of magnitude of a constant $s-$wave gap on all the three bands. (Right) Phase for different pairing forms of the gap, all the same on the three bands. The values of the electron phonon coupling is chosen as $\xi' = 0.4 eV$ for interobital, $\xi'/4$ for $xz/yz$ and $\xi'/2$ for $xy$ intraorbital coupling and the damping coefficient is chosen as $g = 0.3 eV$. The laser and phonon frequencies are fixed at $2eV$ and $0.2 eV$ respectively. }
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{PhasevsT}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\caption{\label{FvsgvsTWithPhaseJump} Plot showing the variation of the real part of the driving force $i F$ as a function of temperature (vertical axis) and the damping constant $g$ (horizontal axis) in the three orbital model of ref \cite{Daghofer2010}. Top row Left (Right): case where the signs of the gap on the $xz,yz$ orbitals is the same (opposite) as that on the $xy$ orbital. The color scale represents the real part of the driving force $i F$). Center row (left and right): Cuts along different chosen values of $g$ for the corresponding color plots above them. Bottom row: The corresponding phases as a function of temperature for the $g=0.2$ case. The values of the electron phonon couplings, laser and phonon frequencies are chosen same as in fig \ref{PhasevsT}.}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{FvsgvsTWithPhaseJump}
\end{figure}
For a simple constant $s-$ wave pairing (Fig \ref{PhasevsT} (Left)), the variation of the phase in the SC state is maximum at $T=0$ (for small values of the gap) and follows a $linear$ dependence on $\Delta$, as was analytically derived in the previous section. However, on increasing the magnitude of $\Delta$, the change in phase develops a maximum at a temperature $0<T<T_c$ and then falls off at $T=0$ due to higher order contributions of $\Delta$. Fig. \ref{PhasevsT} (Right) shows the plot of the phase of the oscillation as a function of temperature for different pairing symmetries. For the $s-$ wave cases, there is a substantial change in the phase between $T=0$ and $T=T_c$, whereas for the $d-$ wave cases there is little phase change between $T=0$ and $T=T_c$. In the $d-$ wave scenario, the phase sharply plunges on entering into the superconducting state. \\
\newline
\begin{comment}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\caption{ Plot of the phonon phase as a function of temperature. (Left) All the three orbitals $xz,yz,xy$ have the same sign of the gap and (Right) the $xy$ orbital has the opposite sign. The parameters chosen are $\xi = 0.4 eV$, $g=0.2$. The laser and phonon frequencies are chosen as $2eV$ and $0.3 eV$ respectively. }
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{PhaseJump}
\end{figure}
\end{comment}
Fig \ref{FvsgvsTWithPhaseJump} (top row) shows a color plot of the real part of $iF$ as a function of temperature and the absorption coefficient $g$. The left column corresponds to the case where the sign of the gap on all the three orbitals is the same (+++ case), while that on the right has a gap on the $xy$ orbital opposite in sign to that of the $xz$ and $yz$ orbitals (++- case). Fig \ref{FvsgvsTWithPhaseJump} (center row) shows cuts corresponding to different values of $g$ for both these cases. Clearly, below $T_c$, the slope of the real part of $iF$ has an opposite sign for the (+++) and (++-) cases. More specific to the three orbital model, the real part of $iF$ goes through a zero for the (++-) case and, therefore, has a $\pi$ discontinuity in the phase. On the other hand, in the (+++) scenario, the real part of $iF$ does not change sign and results in a smooth variation of phase with temperature (see fig \ref{FvsgvsTWithPhaseJump} (bottom row)).\\
\newline
To get the physics governing the numerics above, we consider the three band model with a definite sign of the gap on the $xz$ and $yz$ orbitals (denoted by $\Delta_1 = \Delta$ and $\Delta_2 = \Delta$) and an arbitrary gap $\Delta_3$ on the $xy$ orbital. We find that for small values of $\Delta_3$, the driving force on the phonons can be written as $F(T) = \sum_{\vec{k} } \left(\tilde{\alpha}_1 (k) + sgn(\Delta \Delta_3) \tilde{\beta}_1 (k) |\Delta_3 (T)|\right) + i \left(\tilde{\alpha}_2 (k) + sgn(\Delta \Delta_3) \tilde{\beta}_2 (k) |\Delta_3 (T)|\right)$.
Here, $\tilde{\alpha}_i$ and $\tilde{\beta_i}$ are band structure dependent functions which can be determined for a given model. For the above model, we find that $\sum_{\vec k} \tilde{\alpha}_2(\vec k)$ and $\sum_{\vec k} \tilde{\beta}_2(\vec k)$ are both negative. This implies that when all the three orbitals have the same sign of the gap, the real part of $iF(T)$ is negative. On the other hand, if the sign change exists among the third orbitals, the denominator becomes zero for a critical temperature and results in an observable $\pi$ phase jump.
The above results can be applied to investigate the pairing symmetries in multi-orbital superconductors. Here we specifically discuss its applications to iron-based superconductors. Different pairing symmetries, including s-wave\cite{Mazin2008,Kuroki2008,Chubukov2008,Hu2008,Hu2011,Onari2010} and d-wave pairing symmetries\cite{Bernevig2011-dwave, Scalapino2011}, were proposed for different families of iron-based superconductors. Even within the s-wave pairing symmetry, there are a variety of possibilities on the internal sign changes, including the sign changes between different pockets (so called $s^\pm$\cite{Mazin2008,Kuroki2008,Chubukov2008,Hu2008}) and between bands featured by different orbitals(so called orbital-dependent $S^\pm$ or antiphase-$s^\pm$\cite{Hu2012-Xiaoli,Hu2014,Hu2013-OddParity,Kotliar2014}). Our results suggest that the phase of coherent phonons should have distinct behaviors with respect to the $s\pm$, antiphase-$s^\pm$ and d-wave states. In particular, as shown in fig \ref{FvsgvsTWithPhaseJump}, if a phase jump can be observed below $T_c$, it should be a smoking-gun signature for the antiphase-$s^{\pm}$ state.
\textit{Conclusions}: We have shown that coherent phonon oscillations can be an experimental probe of the superconducting state and its pairing symmetry. The phase of the coherent phonon carries intrinsic information of superconducting order parameters and can be applied to determine the pairing symmetries in complex multi-orbital superconductors.
\begin{comment}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\caption{Plot showing the variation of the real part of the driving force $i F$ as a function of temperature (vertical axis) and the electron-phonon coupling constant $\xi$ (horizontal axis) in the three orbital model in \cite{Daghofer2010}. (Left Top) Case where the signs of the gap on the $xz,yz$ orbitals is the same as that on the $xy$ orbital. The color scale represents the real part of the driving force $i F$. (Right Top) Case where the signs of the gap on the $xz,yz$ orbitals is opposite to that on the $xy$ orbital. (Left and Right bottom) Cuts along different chosen values of $\xi$ for the corresponding color plots above them. The damping $g$ is fixed at $0.3 eV$. The laser and phonon frequencies are fixed at $2eV$ and $0.3 eV$ respectively. }
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{FvsXivsT}
\end{figure}
\end{comment}
\newline
\newline
JPH acknowledges support from grants: MOST of China (2012CB821400,2015CB921300), NSFC(11190020,91221303,11334012) and ``Strategic Priority Research Program (B)" of the Chinese Academy of Sciences( XDB07020200). JMZ is supported by NSFC (11274372) and MOST of China (2012CB821402).
\bibliographystyle{apsrev4-1
|
\section{Introduction}
After the publication of M. Kac's work (1956) [8], there was a renewed interest for the results of E. Wild (1951) [15]. This interest was mainly focused on the random matching of a large population of particles forming a diluted Maxwell gas. Here we develop an approach inspired by this body of work. To do so, we start with a
sequence of dynamical sets of interacting components, one for each integer
$N.$ For these dynamical systems we can show that when $N$ is large the
probability is very small that a component has interacted more than once,
directly or indirectly, up to time $t,$ with any other component. Thanks to
this fundamental property, we can link the microscopic and macroscopic levels
using results from the theory of continuous-time Markov chains.
The Wild sum is a series construction which gives the solution of a given
evolution equation in the statistical physics of gases as first appeared in
the work of E. Wild [15]. Note that the classical expression of a Wild sum is described by binary
trees. Inspired by these ideas, S. Tanaka [12] and H. Tanaka [11] defined an
extension of Wild's sum for solving certain non-linear differential equations
of spaces of measures, so the expression of this sum is described by appropriate
trees. However, the problem of showing the existence of these sums remains
wide open in general.
The recursive time relaxed Monte Carlo methods of Trazzi, Pareschi and
Wennberg [14] are based on generalized Wild sums. However, the lack of
explicit formulas for these sums constitutes a handicap for the efficiency of the above
\bigskip
\noindent$\overline
\begin{array}
[c]{l
\text{{\small Dated 7 March 2015.}}\\
^{\ast}:\text{{\small D\'{e}partement de finance, Universit\'{e} de
Sherbrooke,}
\end{array}
}$\\
\noindent{\small Sherbrooke, Canada, J1K 2R1. E-mails:
<EMAIL>,\\
<EMAIL>, <EMAIL>}\\
{\small \noindent}\noindent{\small AMS classifications:\ 60G55, 34A34,
82C31.\\}
{\small \noindent}\noindent{\small Keywords: Large interacting sets, Ordinary
Differential Equations, continuous-time Markov chains.}
\newpage \noindent{ methods as well as others also based on extended Wild sums
(see [13], for instance).}
Carlen et al [4] obtain Wild sum formulas which are quite explicit for the solution of
the Kac equation. Their binary trees are obtained, in the spirit of McKean,
from commutator formulas for Lie algebras, leading them to groupings of
interaction trees. Consequently, our more general interaction trees are
different form theirs even in the binary case.
The aim of this paper is to propose a combinatorial formula for extended Wild
sums which are solutions of certain evolution equations and more precisely in
the context of interactions involving $m$ components, $m\geq2$.
In section 3 of B\'{e}langer-Giroux [1], the explicit formulas for the Wild sums were used to obtain the convergence of the solution of the evolution equation to a steady state. This is one of the important applications permitted by the tractability of our explicit formulas.
The article is organized as follows. In section 2, we introduce the types of
combinatorial trees which are going to be useful in the expression of the
solution of the evolution equation in terms of interaction trees. In section 3
and 4 we consider interactions involving $m$ components, for $m\geq2,$ and we
suppose that the intensities of these dynamics have an adequate dependence on
$N$. Our techniques enable us to obtain an explicit formula for the solution of the associated
system of differential equations. In section 4, we show how to retain the
explicit formulation of the solutions in the case of OTC market models
described by two kernels.
\section{\bigskip Combinatorial trees}
We assume that the reader is familiar with the basic definitions of trees. A
rooted tree is a tree with a designated node called the root. A rooted tree in
which the rooted node has one child is a planted tree. An $m$-ary tree is a
rooted tree where each of its node is either a leaf (that is, it has no child)
or it has exactly $m$ children. The leafs are called external nodes and those
nodes with $m$ children, internal nodes. Note that we do not consider the root of the tree as an internal node.\newline An ordered tree is a rooted
tree in which the children of each node are assigned a fixed ordering.\newline
A rooted tree is called an $(m,1)$-ary tree if each internal node has either
one child or exactly $m$ children. In this article, we will work with ordered
$m$-ary trees and ordered $(m,1)$-ary trees.
Let $\mathbb{A}_{n}$ denote the set of $m$-ary ordered
trees with $n$ internal nodes. Each tree in $\mathbb{A}_{n}$ has $(m-1)n+1$ leaves and each tree can be obtained by adding an internal node on a leaf of a tree in $\mathbb{A}_{n-1}$ (taking into account the order). Hence the number of trees in $\mathbb{A}_{n}$ is
$\#_{m}(n)$ $
{\displaystyle\prod\limits_{k=1}^{n-1}}
((m-1)k+1)$.
\section{The dynamics}
Let $N$ be the (large) number of interacting components. Let $m$ ($m\geq2$) be
the fixed number of components involved in each interaction. We suppose that
all components take their values in a measurable space, $(E,\mathcal{E}),$
(one can think of (
\mathbb{R}
^{d},B
\mathbb{R}
^{d})$ or simply a finite set$)$ and their interactions are given by a
symmetric probability kernel $Q$ on the product space ($E^{m},\mathcal{E
^{\otimes m}$ ) $.$ That is, the function $Q(x_{1},x_{2},...x_{m};C_{1
\times\cdot\cdot\cdot\times C_{m})$: is measurable in $(x_{1},x_{2},...x_{m});$
is a probability measure in ($C_{1}\times\cdot\cdot\cdot\times C_{m});$ and
satisfies $Q(x_{1},x_{2},...x_{m};C_{1}\times\cdot\cdot\cdot\times
C_{m})=Q(x_{\sigma(1)},x_{\sigma(2)},...x_{\sigma(m)};C_{\sigma(1)}\times
C_{\sigma(2)}\times\cdot\cdot\cdot\times C_{\sigma(m)})$ for any permutation
$\sigma$ of $\{1,2,...,m\}.$
In the following example, we simplify the model of Duffie-G\^{a}rleanu-Pedersen [6] by keeping only their binary interacting kernel.
\begin{example}
.\ Investors in this model have two liquidity
states denoted $h,$ for high, and $l$, for low. Moreover,there is an asset of common interest to these investors who either own
the asset (denoted by $o)$ or don't (denoted by $n$).\ So $E=\mathbb{\{(}l,n),(l,o),(h,n),(h,0)\}$ describes the state space. The kernel
is defined by $Q_{2}(\cdot,\cdot;C_{1}\times C_{2})=0$ except for
\[
Q_{2}((h,n),(l,o);C_{1}\times C_{2})=Q_{2}((l,o),(h,n);C_{2}\times
C_{1})=\delta_{(h,o)}(C_{1})\delta_{(l,n)}(C_{2})
\]
where $\delta_{z_{0}}$ is the Dirac function $\delta_{z_{0}}(z)=1$ iff
$z=z_{0}$ and $\delta_{z_{0}}(z)=0$ otherwise. The binary kernel implements
the trading of the asset whenever a low liquidity investor who owns the asset
meets a high liquidity investor who does not yet hold it.
\end{example}
The interactions occur at each jump of a Poisson process with intensity
$\lambda\frac{N}{m}$. \ Groups are undistinguishable so each group has a
probability of $\binom{N}{m}^{-1}$ of being involved in a given interaction.
The kernel $Q$ allows us to describe the macroscopic evolution of the system
with an associated system of non-linear differential equations via the
evolution of the law of a component. This probability law, denoted $\mu_{t}, $
evolves with time and is in fact the solution of the Cauchy problem
\[
\frac{d\mu_{t}}{dt}=\lambda (\mu_{t}^{\circ_{m}}-\mu_{t})\;;\mu_{0}=\mu
\]
where
\bigski
\[
\mu^{\circ_{m}}(C)\triangle
{\displaystyle\int\limits_{\mathbb{R} ^{m}}}
\mu(dx_{1})\mu(dx_{2})...\mu(dx_{m})Q(x_{1},x_{2},...x_{m};C\times
E^{m-1})\text{ for }C\in\mathcal{E}.
\]
$\ $ The probability law $\mu^{\circ_{m}}$is the law of a component after the
interaction of $m$ i.i.d. components with law $\mu.$ We can think of it as the
law at the root of the $m$-ary tree with only one interaction. We will look at
all the trees representing the interaction history of a component up to time
$t$. So for a tree, $A$, with more than one interaction, we divide the tree in
$m$ subtrees at that last interaction and continue recursively up to time 0 to
define $\mu^{\circ_{m}A}$ . (Please see figure 1 for a simple example of an
interaction tree.) Let $\mathbb{A}_{n}$ be the set of all trees with $n$
interactions (a.k.a. nodes), each node producing $m$ branches. If $A_{n
\in\mathbb{A}_{n}$, then $\mu^{\circ_{m}A_{n}}$ denotes the law obtained by
iteration of $\mu^{\circ_{m}}$ through the successive nodes of the tree when
we place the law $\mu$ on each leaf of $A_{n}.
\begin{figure}
[ptb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[
natheight=4.249700in,
natwidth=5.416300in,
height=4.3016in,
width=5.4743in
{DessinOTCTreeSimples.png
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\bigskip
\bigskip
\bigskip
We have shown B\'{e}langer-Giroux [1] that the Cauchy problem has a unique
solution which can be expressed, by conditioning on the number of interactions
up to time $t,$ and then by the component's history. Such conditionings give u
\[
\mu_{t}
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{n\geq0}}
p_{n}(t)\frac{1}{\#_{m}(n)
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{A_{n}\in\mathbb{A}_{n}}}
\mu^{\circ_{m}A_{n}}\text{ \ \ \ \ \ \ }(1)
\]
where $\#_{m}(n)$ $
{\displaystyle\prod\limits_{k=1}^{n-1}}
((m-1)k+1)$ is the number of trees with $n$ nodes, taking into account their
branching orders; and $p_{n}(t)$ $=\frac{\#_{m}(n)}{(m-1)^{n}n!
e^{-\lambda t}(1-e^{-(m-1)\lambda t})^{n}$ is the probability of having $n$ branchings up to
time $t.$
\begin{remark}
We call the law $\mu_{t}
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{n\geq0}}
e^{-\lambda t}(1-e^{-(m-1)\lambda t})^{n}\frac{1}{(m-1)^{n}n!
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{A_{n}\in\mathbb{A}_{n}}}
\mu^{\circ_{m}A_{n}}$ an explicit extended Wild sum [15] and note that the
convex combination we obtain for the case $m=2$ is indeed the Wild sum,
$\mu_{t}
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{n\geq0}}
e^{-\lambda t}(1-e^{-\lambda t})^{n}\frac{1}{n!
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{A_{n}\in\mathbb{A}_{n}}}
\mu^{\circ_{m}A_{n}}$, now well-known in the statistical physics of gases
since the work of Kac (1956) [8].
\end{remark}
\subsection{\bigskip Using interaction trees to go from the microscopic to the
macroscopic.}
In all our cases, we have an underlying market structure which is a Kac walk
with interactions involving $m$ agents$.$ We add exponential times to obtain a
marked Poisson process whose marks are horizontal lines linking the agents
participating in a given interaction. This enabled us, in B\'elanger-Giroux [1], to describe the limit
law of an agent, under an appropriate conditioning, as a countable convex
combination on trees which is, as we have shown in section 3 of that article, the global
solution of the associated differential equation on the space of probability laws.
Here we first explain how we came to that convex combination since it serves as a tool to study the other models which follow. It is the tool that enables us, for instance, to state proposition 5. Its proof follows the lines of the proof of the main result in B\'elanger-Giroux [1].
We start our study by
an analysis of the dynamics of the intrinsic structure of the large set of
interacting agents when the number of agents increases. We assume that each
interaction involves $m$ agents, $m\geq2$. More specifically, we consider a
set of $N$ agents whose interactions happen at unexpected times so these
interactions' occurrences follow a Poisson process$.$ Since agents are
interchangeable, each group has an equal probability of meeting of $\left(
\begin{array}
[c]{c
N\\
m
\end{array}
\right) ^{-1}.$ If we suppose the intensity of the meetings to be $\frac
{N}{m}$ then each agent has a meeting rate $\lambda$ which can be assumed to
equal $1$ under a time change. We will make this assumption, $\lambda=1$, all throughout section 3.
For $N$ fixed and starting at time $0$, we assign a vertical position to each
agent. The down movement represents the passage of time, see figure 1 on page
4. Each time a group of agents interacts, we draw a horizontal line between
those agents and we draw a vertical line at each agent's position connecting
$0$ to the horizontal line just drawn, so we see a random graph being formed.
When we stop this graph at time $t$, we obtain the finite graph of all
interactions that have taken place. Moreover, the history up to time $t$ of a
given agent, call it $P$, is described by the random graph connecting all
agents who have interacted directly or indirectly with $P$.
\begin{figure}
[ptb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[
natheight=4.249700in,
natwidth=5.416300in,
height=4.3016in,
width=5.4743in
{DessinOTCCycleSimple.png
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The number of meetings is random but we can condition on it. The law of the
finite graph is reversible since the meeting times are uniform on $[0,t]$. We
want to show that a random graph representing the history of $P$ can be
replaced by a random tree as the number of agents, $N$, grows. If we look at
figure 2, we see that the inclusion in the second meeting of one of the
investors having participated in the first one would create a cycle in
our graph. As $N$ grows though, the chance of meeting an investor
previously encountered directly or indirectly tends to zero.
To see this, let us consider the graph of $P$'s history up to time $t$.
Starting at time $t,$ \ we pursue each one of the encountered vertical lines
in $P$'s history backward in time until we reach the next horizontal line. If
the inclusion of the horizontal line in our graph does not create a cycle
(i.e. no pair of investors were involved directly or indirectly in a previous
meeting) we include the line, if not we remove it. Proceeding in this fashion
up to time $0$ we get a tree with $n$ internal nodes, say, which has the same law
as the law of a tree obtained by a pure-birth process. The tree obtained by a
sample history of $P$'s interactions is an $m$-ary tree.
These trees grow randomly in time: each time a new node appears, corresponding
to the occurrence of a meeting of investors at that time. We recall that $\mathbb{A}_{n}$ denotes the set of $m$-ary ordered trees with $n$ internal nodes. Then $\mathbb{A}_{n}$ constitutes a set of random trees if we
assume that every $m$- ary tree in $\mathbb{A}_{n}$ is equally likely, namely
of probability $\frac{1}{\#_{m}(n)}.$
The tree starting at $P^{\prime}$s vertical line at time $t$ with
intensity $1$ and which at time $0$ has intensity $(m-1)n+1$ and that same
number of leaves. Between two branchings of this process a graph representing
$P$'s meeting history can have a random number of additional horizontal lines
following a Poisson law of parameter at most $\frac{N}{m}\left( \left(
\begin{array}
[c]{c
(m-1)n+1\\
2
\end{array}
\right) \left(
\begin{array}
[c]{c
N\\
m
\end{array}
\right) ^{-1}\right) $. We will now bound the expectation of these
supplementary horizontal lines by a majorant which tends to $0$ as $N$
increases. Indeed, since the mean number of redundant lines when there are $n
$ branchings up to time $t$ is at most $\frac{N}{m}\left( \left(
\begin{array}
[c]{c
(m-1)n+1\\
2
\end{array}
\right) \left(
\begin{array}
[c]{c
N\\
m
\end{array}
\right) ^{-1}\right) ,$ we have that the mean number of redundant horizontal
lines is bounded above by
\
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{n\geq0}}
\frac{N}{m}\left( \left(
\begin{array}
[c]{c
(m-1)n+1\\
2
\end{array}
\right) \left(
\begin{array}
[c]{c
N\\
m
\end{array}
\right) ^{-1}\right) p_{N,n}(t),
\]
where $p_{N,n}(t)$ is the probability of having $n$ branchings up to time $t$
of the pure birth process with successive branching waiting times following
exponential laws of parameter
\[
\lambda_{N,n}=\frac{N}{m}(\left( m-1)n+1\right) \left(
\begin{array}
[c]{c
N-((m-1)n+1)\\
m-1
\end{array}
\right) \left(
\begin{array}
[c]{c
N\\
m
\end{array}
\right) ^{-1}
\]
\bigskip Since
\begin{align*}
& \frac{N}{m}(\left( m-1)n+1\right) \left(
\begin{array}
[c]{c
N-((m-1)n+1)\\
m-1
\end{array}
\right) \left(
\begin{array}
[c]{c
N\\
m
\end{array}
\right) ^{-1}\\
& =\frac{((m-1)n+1)\binom{N-((m-1)n+1)}{m-1}}{\binom{N-1}{m-1}}\text{
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ }(2)\\
& \leq(m-1)n+1
\end{align*}
then $p_{N,n}(t)$ is stochastically smaller than the law obtained with the
intensities $\lambda_{n}=(m-1)n+1,$ which in turn are less than the
intensities $\overline{\lambda}_{n}=m(n+1).$ Its transition kernel is then
obtained by solving Kolmogorov's affine system of equations
\begin{align*}
\frac{d\overline{p}_{t}(0)}{dt} & =-m\overline{p}_{t}(0)\text{
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
\ \text{\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ }\\
\frac{d\overline{p}_{t}(n)}{dt} & =mn\overline{p}_{t}(n-1)-m(n+1)\overline
{p}_{t}(n)\text{ \ ; }n\geq1\text{.
\end{align*}
Thus the latter intensities give us a geometric law $\overline{p
_{t}(n)=e^{-mt}(1-e^{-mt})^{n}\
=e^{-m(n+1)t}(e^{mt}-1)^{n}$. Since geometric laws have finite moments of
all orders, the mean number of redundant horizontal lines is bounded above by
a quantity converging to $0$.
For more details on Kolmogorov systems of equations for pure birth processes
we refer the reader to Lefebvre [10], for instance.
Thus, after having specified the initial agents' states and their interaction
kernels, we can approximate $P^{\prime}s$ law using the tree obtained from
removing all redundant horizontal lines from its graph. We will use this fact
in the next sub-section.
\subsection{Limit countable convex combination}
\bigskip We will now show that these random trees whose branching intensities
depend on $N$ can be approximated by trees with branching intensities
independent of $N$. Taking into account that $P$'s tree history is random with
intensities depending on $N,$ we could write $P$'s law, denoted by $\mu
_{t}^{\ast,N},$ with complex formulae depending on $N.$ Since our markets have
a large number of investors, it is preferable instead to work with the limit
of these laws. We note from $(2)$ above that for each $n$, $\lambda_{N,n}\rightarrow
((m-1)n+1)$ as an increasing sequence in $N$.
\bigskip Let $p_{n}(t)$ $(\triangleq p_{t}(n))$ be the solution of the affine
Kolmogorov system of equations:
\begin{align*}
\frac{dp_{t}(0)}{dt} & =-p_{t}(0)\text{
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ }(3)\\
\frac{dp_{t}(n)}{dt} & =((m-1)(n-1)+1)p_{t}(n-1)-((m-1)n+1)p_{t}(n)\text{
\ ; }n\geq1\text{.
\end{align*}
Recall fron the first section that $\mu_{t}
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{n\geq0}}
p_{n}(t)\frac{1}{\#_{m}(n)
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{A_{n}\in\mathbb{A}_{n}}}
\mu^{\circ_{m}A_{n}}$.
\begin{proposition}
The sequence of \ laws $\mu_{t}^{\ast,N}$ converges to $\mu_{t}$ as $N$ increases.
\end{proposition}
\bigskip
\begin{proof}
By Kurtz [9], we have that $p_{N,n}(t)\rightarrow p_{n}(t)$ as $N$ increases.
But $(p_{n}(t))_{n\geq0}$ is a probability law, so for $\epsilon>0,$ there
exists $n(\epsilon)$ such that
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{n\geq n(\epsilon)}}
p_{n}(t)<\epsilon.$ Now let $N(\epsilon)$ be such that $N>N(\epsilon)$ implies
that $|p_{N,n}(t)-p_{n}(t)|<\frac{\epsilon}{n(\epsilon)}$ for $0\leq n\leq
n(\epsilon).$We then have for $C\in\mathcal{E}$ and $N>N(\epsilon)
\[
|\mu_{t}^{\ast,N}(C)-\mu_{t}(C)|\le
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{n=0}^{n(\epsilon)}}
|p_{N,n}(t)-p_{n}(t)|+2\epsilon\leq3\epsilon
\]
since $\frac{1}{\#_{m}(n)
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{A_{n}\in\mathbb{A}_{n}}}
\mu^{\circ_{m}A_{n}}(C)\leq1$ and ($p_{N,n}(t))_{n\geq0}$ are probability
laws. Our claim is proved.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
$p_{t}(n)=\frac{\#_{m}(n)}{(m-1)^{n}n!}e^{-t}(1-e^{-(m-1)t})^{n}$
\end{lemma}
\bigskip
\begin{proof}
\bigskip We need to solve the affine Kolmogorov system of equations $(3)$.
Proceeding by induction we have:\bigski
\begin{align*}
\frac{dp_{t}(0)}{dt} & =e^{-t}\\
\frac{dp_{t}(n)}{dt} & =((m-1)(n-1)+1)e^{-(n(m-1)+1)t
{\displaystyle\int\limits_{0}^{t}}
e^{(n(m-1)+1)s}p_{s}(n-1)ds\text{ \
\end{align*}
To prove the lemma it suffices to note that $\#_{m}(n)=\#_{m
(n-1)((n-1)(m-1)+1)$ and that $e^{(n(m-1)+1)s}e^{-s}(1-e^{-(m-1)s
)^{n-1}=e^{(m-1)s}(e^{(m-1)s}-1)^{n-1}$ is the derivative of $\frac{1
{(m-1)n}(e^{(m-1)s}-1)^{n}.$
\end{proof}
And this shows that the limit law of $P$ is indeed the extended\ Wild sum
which we have shown (in [1]) to be the solution of the ODE associated to the
interacting system.
\section{\bigskip Explicit formulas for other OTC market models}
In many applications, it is more convenient to work with more than one kernel
to describe the dynamics of the system. It is the case for instance in the
models of Duffie-G\^{a}rleanu-Pedersen [6] and their extensions in
B\'{e}langer-Giroux-Moisan [2] and in B\'{e}langer-Giroux-Ndoun\'{e} [3].
In the simplest such model on $E=\mathbb{\{(}l,n),(l,o),(h,n),(h,0)\}$ we have
the binary kernel we described at the beginning of section 3 and we have the
autonomous changes of liquidity of an investor. Let $\gamma_{u}$ and $\gamma_{d}$ resp. be the intensity of the up movements
(resp. down movements) in liquidity. We will first assume that these intensities are equal (we will remove this assumption at the end of the section) and we let
$\gamma=\gamma_{u}=\gamma_{d}.$ Then $q_{p}(t)=e^{-\gamma t}\frac{(\gamma
t)^{p}}{p!}$ is the probability of having $p$ autonomous movements up to time
$t.$
The 1-ary kernel can then be defined by
\begin{align*}
Q_{1}((l,n);C) & =\delta_{(h,n)}(C);Q_{1}((l,o);C)=\delta_{(h,o)}(C);\\
Q_{1}((h,n);C) & =\delta_{(l,n)}(C);Q_{1}((h,o);C)=\delta_{(l,0)}(C);
\end{align*}
an
\[
\nu^{\circ_{1}}(C)=\nu(l,n)\delta_{(h,n)}(C)+\nu(l,o)\delta_{(h,o)
(C)+\nu(h,n)\delta_{(l,n)}(C)+\nu(h,o)\delta_{(l,0)}(C)
\]
for $C\subset E.$
It is possible to modify the 1-ary kernel into a binary kernel with the
addition of a ``witness" investor who is completely unaffected by the change of
liquidity of the other investor. We then symmetrize that kernel and replace
the two binary kernels with a convex combination of the two kernels to be left
with only one kernel as in the situation we dealt with in the preceding
sections. So all the formalism developed so far is still valid. The drawbacks
of this approach though are that the symmetrization operation gives us a
slightly different dynamics, and more importantly, that we lose the explicit
formulas for the extended Wild sums. The objective of this section is to show
how we can retain them.
Let $\mathbb{K}_{n}^{p}$ denote the set of all arrangements of $p$
undistinguishable objects in $n$ boxes, where a box may contain arbitrarily
many objects. Then $|\mathbb{K}_{n}^{p}|=\binom{n+p-1}{n-1}.$ Let
$\mathbb{A}_{n}$ denote, as before, the set of all random trees with $n$
$m-$ary interactions (the investors meetings). If $A_{n}\in\mathbb{A}_{n}$
then $A_{n}$ has $(m-1)n+1$ leaves which in turn gives $mn+1$ branches.
Let $p$ denote the number of $1-$ary interactions (i.e. the number of
autonomous changes of position). For $\sigma\in\mathbb{K}_{mn+1}^{p},$ let
$A_{n}^{\sigma}$ denote the tree obtained by placing the 1-ary interactions on
each branch of the tree according to the arrangement $\sigma.$ Let
$\widetilde{\mathbb{A}}_{n,p}$ denote the set of trees with $n$ $m$-ary
interactions and $p$ 1-ary ones. Then $\rho:\mathbb{K}_{mn+1}^{p
\times\mathbb{A}_{n}\rightarrow\widetilde{\mathbb{A}}_{n,p}:(\sigma
,A_{n})\mapsto A_{n}^{\sigma}$ defines a bijection. Please see figure 2 for simple examples of trees in $\widetilde{\mathbb{A}}_{2,1}.$ Moreover, if we call $\{\sigma^{i}\}_{i=1}^{7}$ the 7 configurations of figure 3,
then $(\nu^{\circ_{3}A_{2}})^{\circ_{1}}= \sum_{i=1}^{7}\nu^{\circ_{3}A_{2}^{\sigma^{i}}}.$
The set $\widetilde{\mathbb{A}}_{n,p}$ of $(m,1)$-ary ordered trees
with $n$ $m$-ary internal nodes and $p$ 1-ary nodes has the cardinality equal to
$\#_{m}(n)\binom{mn+p}{mn}.$ Then $\widetilde{\mathbb{A}}_{n,p}$ constitutes a
set random trees if we assume that every $(m,1)$-ary tree in $\widetilde
{\mathbb{A}}_{n,p}$ is equally likely, namely with probability $\frac{1
{\#_{m}(n)\binom{mn+p}{mn}}.$
\begin{figure}
[ptb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[
natheight=1.100000in,
natwidth=5.074700in,
height=1.1338in,
width=5.1301in
{DessinOTCTreeWithMovements.png
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{proposition}
\bigskip The probability measur
\[
\nu_{t}
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{n\geq0}}
p_{n}(t)\frac{1}{\#_{m}(n)
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{A_{n}\in\mathbb{A}_{n}}}
\left[
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{p=0}^{\infty}}
\frac{q_{p}(t)}{\binom{mn+p}{mn}
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\sigma\in\mathbb{K}_{mn+1}^{p}}}
\nu^{\circ_{m}A_{n}^{\sigma}}\right] \text{\ \ \
\]
is the solution of the Cauchy problem:
\[
\frac{d\nu_{t}}{dt}=\lambda(\nu_{t}^{\circ_{m}}-\nu
_{t})+\gamma\;(\nu_{t}^{\circ_{1}}-\nu_{t});\nu_{0
=\nu.
\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $\mu_t$ be the solution (1) above. Since $|\nu_t|\leq |\mu_t|$ and $\mu_t$ is uniformly summable, the convex
sum $\nu_t$ can be differentiated term by term to obtain:\\
$\frac{d\nu_{t}}{dt}=-\lambda \nu_{t}+$
\[
\lambda e^{-m\lambda t}{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{n\geq1}}
(1-e^{-(m-1)\lambda t})^{n-1}\frac{1}{(m-1)^{n-1}(n-1)!
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{A_{n}\in\mathbb{A}_{n}}}
\left[
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{p=0}^{\infty}}
\frac{q_{p}(t)}{\binom{mn+p}{mn}
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\sigma\in\mathbb{K}_{mn+1}^{p}}}
\nu^{\circ_{m}A_{n}^{\sigma}}\right]\text{\ \ \
\]
\[
-\gamma \nu_{t}
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{n\geq0}}
p_{n}(t)\frac{1}{\#_{m}(n)
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{A_{n}\in\mathbb{A}_{n}}}
\left[
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{p=1}^{\infty}}
\frac{e^{-\gamma t}(\gamma t)^{p-1}}{(p-1)! \binom{mn+p}{mn}
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\sigma\in\mathbb{K}_{mn+1}^{p}}}
\nu^{\circ_{m}A_{n}^{\sigma}}\right] \text{\ \ \
\]
Now using the combinatorial results of the proof of theorem 1 in B\'{e}langer-Giroux
[1], we have that $\nu_{t}^{\circ_{m}}$ is equal to the expression
\[
\lambda e^{-m\lambda t}{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{n\geq1}}
(1-e^{-(m-1)\lambda t})^{n-1}\frac{1}{(m-1)^{n-1}(n-1)!
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{A_{n}\in\mathbb{A}_{n}}}
\left[
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{p=0}^{\infty}}
\frac{q_{p}(t)}{\binom{mn+p}{mn}
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\sigma\in\mathbb{K}_{mn+1}^{p}}}
\nu^{\circ_{m}A_{n}^{\sigma}}\right]\text{\ \ \
.\]
Otherwise, the expression
\[
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{n\geq0}}
p_{n}(t)\frac{1}{\#_{m}(n)
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{A_{n}\in\mathbb{A}_{n}}}
\left[
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{p=1}^{\infty}}
\frac{e^{-\gamma t}(\gamma t)^{p-1}}{(p-1)! \binom{mn+p}{mn}
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\sigma\in\mathbb{K}_{mn+1}^{p}}}
\nu^{\circ_{m}A_{n}^{\sigma}}\right] \text{\ \ \
\] is equal to the quantity
\[
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{n\geq0}}
p_{n}(t)\frac{1}{\#_{m}(n)
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{A_{n}\in\mathbb{A}_{n}}}
\left[
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{p=0}^{\infty}}
\frac{e^{-\gamma t}(\gamma t)^{p}}{p! \binom{mn+p+1}{mn}
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\sigma\in\mathbb{K}_{mn+1}^{p+1}}}
\nu^{\circ_{m}A_{n}^{\sigma}}\right]. \text{\ \ \
\]
But
$
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\sigma\in\mathbb{K}_{mn+1}^{p+1}}}
\nu^{\circ_{m}A_{n}^{\sigma}} \text{\ \ \
=
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\sigma'\in\mathbb{K}_{mn+1}^{p}}}
(\nu^{\circ_{m}A_{n}^{\sigma'}})^{\circ_{1}} \text{\ \ \ }
$
And then
\[
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{n\geq0}}
p_{n}(t)\frac{1}{\#_{m}(n)
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{A_{n}\in\mathbb{A}_{n}}}
\left[
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{p=0}^{\infty}}
\frac{e^{-\gamma t}(\gamma t)^{p}}{p! \binom{mn+p+1}{mn}
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\sigma'\in\mathbb{K}_{mn+1}^{p}}}
(\nu^{\circ_{m}A_{n}^{\sigma'}})^{\circ_{1}}\right]=\nu_{t}^{\circ_{1}}. \text{\ \ \
\]
Hence we get that $\frac{d\nu_{t}}{dt}$ has the desired form and the proof of the proposition
is now complete.
\end{proof}
We note that if $p=0,$ that is, if no investor changes its liquidity position, the
above solution does indeed become the solution $(1).$
\begin{remark}
In the specific context of the DGP model we have a binary kernel which simplifies the first part of the formula. But without the assumption $\gamma_u=\gamma_d$, we have to consider the up movements and the down movements separately, and this makes for a more complicated second part of the formula. Let $\gamma=\gamma_u+\gamma_d$,
the solution becomes
\[
\nu_{t}
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{n\geq0}}
\frac{e^{-t}(1-e^{-t})}{n!
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{A_{n}\in\mathbb{A}_{n}}}
\left[
{\displaystyle\sum\limits_{p=0}^{\infty}}
\frac{e^{-\gamma t}}{p!\binom{p}{k}\binom{mn+p+1}{mn}
\left[ {\displaystyle\sum\limits_{k=0}^{p}}(\gamma_{u})^{k}(\gamma_{d})^{p-k} {\displaystyle\sum\limits_{\underset{\sigma_{d}\in\mathbb{K}_{mn+1}^{p-k}}{\sigma_{u}\in\mathbb{K}_{mn+1}^{k}}}}
\nu^{\underset{m}\circ A_{n}^{\sigma_{u}\cup \sigma_{d}}}\right] \right] \text{\ \ \
\]
where $\sigma_{u}$ (resp $\sigma_{d}$) denotes the arrangements of up movements (resp. down movements) on the branches of the tree and $\sigma_{u}\cup \sigma_{d}$ is the arrangement obtained from both arrangements of up and down movements.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
We can obtain similar explicit formulas for OTC models where the interactions involve $m>2$ investors. In the information percolation model of Duffie-Malamud-Manso[7], for instance, the state space, $E=\mathbb{N}$ represents the potential levels of information acquired by an investor through meetings with other investors. The $m$-ary interaction is the perfect sharing of information which means that each investor in the meeting comes out with the sum of the information levels of all participating investors. The unary kernel is a regression force which replaces an investor of level $n$ say, by an investor with level $\pi(n)$ sampled from a given distribution $\pi$ on $\mathbb{N}$.
\end{remark}
\bigskip
\textbf{Acknowledgement:} This research is supported in part by a team grant
from Fonds de Recherche du Qu\'{e}bec - Nature et Technologies (FRQNT grant no. 180362).
\section{References}
\begin{enumerate}
\item B\'{e}langer, A. and Giroux, G., (2013), Some new results on information
percolation, Stochastic Systems, vol. 3, 1-10.
\item B\'{e}langer, A., Giroux, G. and Moisan-Poisson, M. (2013),
Over-the-Counter Market Models with Several Assets, Arxiv 1308.2957v1.
\item B\'{e}langer, A., Giroux, G. and Ndoun\'{e}, N. (2014), Existence of
Steady States for Over-the-Counter Market Models with Several Assets, Arxiv 1126039.
\item Carlen, E., Carvalho, M.C. and Gabetta, E. (2005), On the relation
between rates of relaxation and convergence of Wild sums for solutions of the
Kac equation, Journal of Functional Analysis, 220, no. 2, 362-387.
\item Duffie, D. (2012). Dark Markets: Asset Pricing and Information
Percolation in Over-the-Counter Markets. Princeton Lecture Series.
\item Duffie, D., G\^{a}rleanu, N. and Pedersen, L.H. (2005), Over-the-counter
markets, Econometrica 73, 1815-1847.
\item Duffie, D., Malamud, S. and Manso, G. (2009), Information percolation with equilibrium search dynamics, Econometrica 77, 1513-1574.
\item Kac, M. (1956). Foundations of kinetic theory. Proceedings of the Third
Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability, 1954--1955,
vol. \textbf{III}, pp. 171--197. University of California Press, Berkeley and
Los Angeles.
\item Kurtz, T. G.(1969). A Note on sequences of continuous parameter Markov
chains. Ann. Math. Statist., \textbf{40}, 1078-1082.
\item Lefebvre, M. (2006). Applied Stochastic Processes. Springer.
\item Tanaka, H. (1969), Propagation of Chaos for Certain Markov Processes of
Jump Type with Nonlinear Generators II, Pro. Japan Acad. 45, 598-600
\item Tanaka,\ S. (1968), An extension of Wild's Sum for Solving Certain
Non-Llinear Equation of Measures, Proc. Japan Acad. 44, 884-889.
\item Pareschi, L., Caflischt, R.E. and Wennberg, B. (1999), An Implicit Monte
Carlo Method for Rarefied Gas Dynamics, J.Comput.Physics. 154, 90-116.
\item Trazzi, S., Pareschi, L. and Wennberg, B. (2009), Adaptive and Recursive
Time Relaxed Monte Carlo Methods for Rarefied Gas Dynamics, SIAM J.Sci.Comput.
31(2), 1379-1398.
\item Wild, E (1951). On the Boltzmann equation in the kinetic theory of
gases. Proc. Cambridge Phil. Soc. \textbf{47}, 602-609.\bigskip
\begin{array}
[c]{l
\text{Alain B\'{e}langer, Gaston Giroux, Ndoun\'{e} Ndoun\'{e}}\\
\text{D\'{e}partement de finance,}\\
\text{Universit\'{e} de Sherbrooke,}\\
\text{2 500 boul. de l'Universit\'{e},}\\
\text{Sherbrooke, Canada, J1K 2R1}\\
\text{E-addresses: <EMAIL>}\\
\text{<EMAIL>, <EMAIL>
\end{array}
$
\end{enumerate}
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}
Compensation for uncertain fading phenomena is one of the most challenging issues in wireless communications.
In order to improve link reliability and radio resource efficiency against such uncertainty, a \emph{hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ)} technique has been proposed in physical~(PHY) layer \cite{p_IBM70_Rocher,p_TC85_Chase,p_TC83_Wang}.
Meanwhile, in medium access control (MAC) layer, \emph{dynamic link adaptation} \cite{p_TC98_Goldsmith,p_JSAC99_Balachandran} and \emph{user scheduling} \cite{b_WirelCommun_Goldsmith,b_FundWirelCommun_Tse} techniques have been exploited by using channel state information (CSI) at the transmitter for point-to-point and multi-user environments, respectively. There have existed many studies on link adaptation considering HARQ for various fading channel models in point-to-point communications \cite{p_TWC08_Kim,p_ICC08_Narasimhan,p_TC10_Wu,p_TWC11_Kim,p_ICC11_Kim}. Moreover, several user scheduling algorithms considering HARQ have been proposed for multi-user environments in single-cell networks \cite{p_TWC05_Huang,p_TWC05_Zheng,p_TWC08_Rui,p_ISCIT12_Kim,p_TVT13_Kim}.
Through these studies considering HARQ techniques, the resource efficiency of wireless communications has been improved.
By the way, inter-cell interference (ICI) is another key factor to determine overall system performances in multi-cell networks. In traditional CDMA-based cellular networks \cite{s_UMTS}, the ICI was regarded as an additional source that deteriorates the performance in addition to intra-cell interference among users, which is typically managed by spectrum spreading (i.e., interference averaging) and power control techniques \cite{s_UMTS_SM}. In OFDM-based cellular networks like 3GPP LTE \cite{s_LTE}, however, it has been observed that the ICI significantly degrades the system performance, and thus, many techniques are being proposed in order to mitigate the ICI for OFDM-based cellular networks~\cite{p_CST13_Tafazolli}.
Especially in heterogeneous network environments, there may exist dominant interferers which significantly affect adjacent cells~\cite{p_WC11_Damnjanovic}.
Therefore, the ICI needs to be carefully managed in the OFDM-based multi-cell networks through efficient link adaptation and user scheduling algorithms.
Recently, there have been several studies on HARQ-based multi-user systems in the presence of interference. Narasimhan analyzed throughput performance of the two-user interference channel with receiver cooperation~\cite{p_ICC10_Narasimhan}. Denic proposed a robust HARQ-incremental redundancy (IR) scheme in the presence of unknown interference such as jamming~\cite{p_ISIT11_Denic}.
For multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO)-based HARQ systems, several HARQ techniques were proposed by taking into account inter-carrier interference
and inter-antenna interference \cite{p_TVT09_Juang,p_TWC10_Ait-Idir,p_WC07_Park}.
R\'{a}cz \emph{et al.} investigated an inter-cell interference coordination (ICIC) technique in the uplink 3GPP LTE system, considering HARQ techniques~\cite{p_GC08_Racz}.
Makki \emph{et al.} \cite{p_CL14_Makki} proposed a coordinated HARQ scheme which reallocates the spectrum of a successfully transmitted user to a user requiring subsequent retransmissions in cooperative multi-cell networks.
Shirani-Mehr \emph{et al.} proposed an optimal scheduling algorithm based on game theory in a multi-user (MU)-MIMO system with HARQ technique in the presence of ICI~\cite{p_TC11_Shirani-Mehr}. They investigated a joint optimization of user scheduling and transmit beamforming with HARQ in a distributed manner.
To the best of our knowledge, however, there has been no such study that jointly investigates link adaptation and user scheduling with the HARQ technique in a multi-cell environment.
In this paper, we investigate a joint link adaptation and user scheduling problem in a multi-cell downlink network, taking both HARQ and ICI into account.
Main contributions of the paper are summarized as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item A novel approximation model on the aggregated ICI at each user is proposed for enabling each base station (BS) to determine the optimal transmission rate, which assumes the dominant interfering terms at each user have identical path-loss statistics. Thus, we call it identical path-loss approximation (IPLA) method. The effectiveness of IPLA is examined by comparing it with the conventional approximation method, i.e., Gaussian approximation (GA).
\item An optimal rate selection algorithm with IPLA is proposed for maximizing the expected throughput of a single link in the multi-cell environment. Then, a simple but effective cross-layer framework is also proposed, which jointly combines link adaptation and user scheduling with the HARQ technique for the multi-cell environments.
\item The performance of the proposed cross-layer framework is evaluated in terms of cell throughput and user fairness through extensive system-level simulations.
\end{itemize}
From the performance evaluation, it is shown that the well-known GA on ICI is not accurate in link adaptation and user scheduling with HARQ for multi-cell environments with some dominant interferers, while the proposed IPLA is highly accurate on the aggregated ICI and thus, it provides an efficient joint link adaptation and user scheduling policy.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section~\ref{SEC:ICI:System_Model}, the system model is introduced. In Section~\ref{SEC:ICI:LA}, we propose an optimal link adaptation~(transmission rate selection) algorithm for a single link by considering both the HARQ technique and the ICI. In Section~\ref{SEC:ICI:Sch}, we propose a cross-layer framework jointly combining link adaptation and user scheduling and compares the proposed framework with the conventional strategies. In Section~\ref{SEC:ICI:Numerical_Results}, we show the performance of the proposed framework in terms of cell throughput and fairness among users. Finally, we present concluding remarks in Section~\ref{SEC:ICI:Conclusions}.
\section{System Model}\label{SEC:ICI:System_Model}
Fig.~\ref{fig:sys_model} illustrates the system model considered in this paper. We take into account a multi-cell downlink network where there exist $(K+1)$ base stations (BSs) with $M$ transmit antennas and $N$ users with a single receive antenna in each cell. Each BS is assumed to selects a single user for data transmission in this paper for simplicity. In Fig.~\ref{fig:sys_model}, the BS in the center, called home cell, is denoted by superscript $(0)$ and BSs in other cells are denoted by superscript $(k)$, $k \in \{1,\ldots,K\}$. Each BS selects a user within its coverage at each time slot (or scheduling interval), and transmits data with a \emph{random beamforming (RBF)} technique which is also called \emph{opportunistic beamforming (OBF)}
\cite{p_TIT02_Viswanath, p_TIT05_Sharif}. As known in the literature, the RBF technique can achieve the system throughput with \emph{true beamforming}
when sufficiently large number of users exist in a cell, while it can significantly reduce the signalling overhead such as full CSI feedback for the true beamforming.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{./fig/fig_sys_model.eps}
\caption{System Model}
\label{fig:sys_model}
\end{figure}
The scheduled user in each cell receives a desired signal from its corresponding BS and the ICI signals from $K$ other cell BSs. We focus on the user in the home cell without loss of generality.
The received signal of the scheduled user in the home cell (i.e., $k=0$) is expressed as
\begin{align}
y_{u_0}^{(0)} &= \mathbf{h}_{u_0}^{(0)} \mathbf{v}_{u_0}^{(0)} x_{u_0}^{(0)} + \sum_{k=1}^{K} \mathbf{g}_{u_0}^{(k)} \mathbf{v}_{u_k}^{(k)} x_{u_k}^{(k)} + n_{u_0}^{(0)},
\label{eq:received_signal}
\end{align}
where $u_k$ denotes the index of the selected user in the $k$-th cell. $\mathbf{h}_{u_0}^{(0)}$ and $\mathbf{g}_{u_0}^{(k)}$ denote the channel vectors of the desired signal from the home cell (i.e., $k=0$) and interference signal from the $k$-th cell, respectively. $\mathbf{v}_{u_k}^{(k)}$ indicates the RBF vector for user $u_k$ in the $k$-th cell and $x_{u_k}^{(k)}$ represents the source data symbol of user $u_k$ in the $k$-th cell, and $n_{u_0}^{(0)}$ denotes the additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN), i.e., $n_{u_0}^{(0)} \sim \mathcal{CN}(0,N_0)$ where $N_0$ denotes the noise variance.
In Eq.~(\ref{eq:received_signal}), $\mathbf{h}_{u_0}^{(0)}$ and $\mathbf{g}_{u_0}^{(k)}$ denote the MISO channel vectors including large-scale and small-scale fading components, i.e.,
\begin{align}
\mathbf{h}_{u_0}^{(0)} &\triangleq \left[\sqrt{L_{u_0}^{(0)}}h_{u_0,1}^{(0)}, \sqrt{L_{u_0}^{(0)}}h_{u_0,2}^{(0)}, \cdots, \sqrt{L_{u_0}^{(0)}}h_{u_0,M}^{(0)} \right], \\
\mathbf{g}_{u_0}^{(k)} &\triangleq \left[\sqrt{L_{u_0}^{(k)}}g_{u_0,1}^{(k)}, \sqrt{L_{u_0}^{(k)}}g_{u_0,2}^{(k)}, \cdots, \sqrt{L_{u_0}^{(k)}}g_{u_0,M}^{(k)} \right],
\end{align}
where $h_{u_0,m}^{(0)}$ and $g_{u_0,m}^{(k)}$ denote the small-scale fading signal term of user $u_0$ from the $m$-th antenna of the home BS and the $k$-th BS, respectively, and they are assumed to follow a circular symmetric complex Gaussian distribution with zero mean and unit variance, i.e., $h_{u_0,m}^{(0)}\sim\mathcal{CN}(0,1)$ and $g_{u_0,m}^{(k)}\sim\mathcal{CN}(0,1)$ for $m=\{1,\ldots,M\}$. We assume a slowly varying channel condition and, thus, $h_{u_0,m}^{(0)}$ and $g_{u_0,m}^{(k)}$ are quasi-static during a single HARQ retransmission process. $L_{u_0}^{(0)}$ and $L_{u_0}^{(k)}$ denote the large-scale fading power terms regarded as path-loss of user $u_0$ from the home BS and the $k$-th BS, respectively.
$L_{u_0}^{(k)}$ is given by $10^{-\frac{\text{PL}_0}{10}}\cdot\left(d_0/d_{u_0}^{(k)}\right)^{\alpha}$, $(k=0,\ldots,K)$
where PL$_0$ denotes the path-loss in dB at reference distance $d_0$, $\alpha$ denotes the path-loss exponent, and $d_{u_0}^{(k)}$ represents the distance between user $u_0$ and the $k$-th BS. When user and BS locations in the home cell are given by $(r,\theta)$ and $(D^{(k)},\psi^{(k)})$, $d_{u_0}^{(k)}$ can be calculated by $\sqrt{r^2 + (D^{(k)})^2 - 2rD^{(k)}\cos(\theta - \psi^{(k)})}$, $(k=0,\ldots,K)$
where $D^{(0)}=0$ (i.e., $d_{u_0}^{(0)}=r$).
In general, since BSs are deployed at fixed locations in advance, the home BS can easily know the location information of neighboring BSs. Additionally, we assume that the home BS also knows the user location information through periodic measurement or feedback from the user.
The 3GPP LTE system has been already supporting several user positioning methods even if global positioning system (GPS) signal is unavailable \cite{s_3GPP_36305}. Since we assume the perfect positioning in this paper, the performance can be degraded when the estimated user location is imperfect. The effect of position estimation error is beyond scope of this paper.
Since the RBF scheme is considered as in \cite{p_TIT02_Viswanath}, the beamforming vectors in Eq.~(\ref{eq:received_signal}) are obtained by $\mathbf{v}_{u_k}^{(k)} = \left[ v_{u_k,1}^{(k)}, v_{u_k,2}^{(k)}, \ldots, v_{u_k,M}^{(k)} \right]^T$, $(k=0,\ldots,K)$
where $[\cdot]^T$ denotes the transpose of a vector, $v_{u_k,m}^{(k)} = \sqrt{a_m}e^{j\theta_m}$ where $a_m \in [0, 1]$, $\theta_m \sim \text{Uniform}[-\pi, \pi]$, and $\|\mathbf{v}_{u_k, m}^{(k)}\|^2=\sum_{m=1}^{M}a_m=1$.
Through a property of the RBF scheme, the second term in Eq.~(\ref{eq:received_signal}), the sum of ICI terms, is derived by
\begin{align}\label{eq:ICI}
&\mathcal{I} = \sum_{k=1}^{K} \mathbf{g}_{u_0}^{(k)} \mathbf{v}_{u_k}^{(k)} x_{u_k}^{(k)} \nonumber\\
&= \sum_{k=1}^{K} \sqrt{L_{u_0}^{(k)}} \left( g_{u_0,1}^{(k)} v_{u_k,1}^{(k)} + \cdots + g_{u_0,M}^{(k)}v_{u_k,M}^{(k)} \right) x_{u_k}^{(k)} \nonumber\\
&= \sum_{k=1}^{K} \sqrt{L_{u_0}^{(k)}} \left( \underbrace{ \sqrt{\alpha_1} e^{j\theta_1} g_{u_0,1}^{(k)} + \cdots + \sqrt{\alpha_M} e^{j\theta_M} g_{u_0,M}^{(k)} }_{\sim \mathcal{CN}(0,1)} \right) x_{u_k}^{(k)} \nonumber\\
&= \sum_{k=1}^{K} \sqrt{L_{u_0}^{(k)}} w_{u_0}^{(k)} x_{u_k}^{(k)},
\end{align}
where $w_{u_0}^{(k)}\sim\mathcal{CN}(0,1)$ and the last equality is derived from an isotropic property of complex Gaussian random variable \cite{b_FundWirelCommun_Tse}.
Consequently, the received SINR of the scheduled user in the home cell is
\begin{align}
\gamma = \frac{ s }{\mathcal{X}+ 1/\rho},
\end{align}
where $s=\| \mathbf{h}_{u_0}^{(0)} \mathbf{v}_{u_0}^{(0)} \|^2=L^{(0)}_{u_0}|w^{(0)}_{u_0}|^2$, $\mathcal{X} = \sum_{k=1}^{K} L_{u_0}^{(k)} |w_{u_0}^{(k)}|^2$, and $\rho=\frac{P_x}{N_0}$ where $\mathbb{E}[|x^{(k)}_{u_k}|^2]=P_x$ for $k=\{0,\ldots,K\}$. Here, $L_{u_0}^{(0)}$ is a known constant based on user location information at the home BS and we assume that the effective channel power gain of $u_0$, $|w_{u_0}^{(0)}|^2$, is perfectly known at the transmitter (i.e., home BS). It is reasonable because the home BS knows the RBF vector (i.e., $\mathbf{v}_{u_0}^{(k)}$) for user $u_0$ in advance and we consider a quasi-static channel condition where it is possible to estimate the effective channel power gain perfectly for the desired signal channel (i.e., $\mathbf{h}_{u_0}^{(0)}$). Hence, the desired signal power term $s$ is a known constant at the transmitter. Furthermore, the inverse of transmit SNR term is negligible in interference-limited regime (i.e., high SNR regime).
Throughout this paper, we consider the Chase combining based HARQ (HARQ-CC) protocol, in which every retransmitted information is same as the one at the initial transmission.
The HARQ-CC protocol is simple but obtains a sufficient benefit of HARQ from the combined power gain. Thus, it is widely used in practical wireless communication systems.
\section{Optimal Rate Selection for a Single Link}\label{SEC:ICI:LA}
In this section, we first mathematically formulate the effective SINR and delay-limited throughput (DLT) which represents an expected throughput under a given maximum allowable number of transmissions in HARQ-based systems \cite{p_TWC11_Kim, p_TWC08_Kim, p_ICC08_Narasimhan,p _ISIT08_Narasimhan}.
Then, we consider a well-known Gaussian approximation (GA) on the ICI with noise at users.
Finally, we propose an identical path-loss approximation (IPLA) on the aggregated ICI term at users.
We also obtain the optimal transmission rate maximizing the DLT for both approximation methods.
\subsection{Effective SINR and Delay-Limited Throughput}
First of all, the effective SINR after the $n$-th transmission attempt after HARQ-CC\footnote{The HARQ-CC has been widely adopted in 3GPP HSPA \cite{s_HSDPA}, WiMAX \cite{s_WiMAX}, 3GPP LTE \cite{s_LTE}, and their evolutions.} combining becomes
\begin{align}
\gamma(n) = \sum_{i=1}^{n} \gamma_i = \sum_{i=1}^{n}\frac{s}{\mathcal{X}_i + 1/\rho },
\end{align}
where $\gamma_i$ represents the received SINR at the $i$-th transmission, $\mathcal{X}_i$ denotes the ICI power at the $i$-th transmission, which is expressed as $\mathcal{X}_i = \sum_{k=1}^{K} L_{u_0}^{(k)}|w_{u_0}^{(k)}(t_i)|^2$ where $t_i$ indicates the time slot index of the $i$-th transmission, and $s=L^{(0)}_{u_0}|w^{(0)}_{u_0} (t_i)|^2=L^{(0)}_{u_0}|w^{(0)}_{u_0} (t_1)|^2$ denotes the desired signal power. Since the RBF vector is kept during retransmissions and the desired signal channel is quasi-static during retransmissions, $s$ is a known constant for every (re)transmission of a single packet. In contrast, beamforming vectors (i.e., $\mathbf{v}_{u_k}^{(k)}$) in other cells are independently varying according to scheduling decisions by other-cell BSs although interference channel vectors $\mathbf{g}_{u_0}^{(k)}$ are quasi-static during their own retransmission processes.
More specifically, new users can be scheduled after their own transmission successes in other cells during retransmissions in the home cell. This causes asynchronous scheduling among different cells, which implies that different cells suffer from different user scheduling instances.
Accordingly, the aggregated ICI term is independently varying for every (re)transmission due to the independently varying other-cell beamforming vectors.
Next, the distribution of the effective SINR needs to be analyzed for transmission rate selection. We start to derive the distribution of the effective SINR based on numerical inversion of characteristic function from the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}[Inversion formula of Gil-Pelaez \cite{p_Biom51_Gil-Pelaez}] Let $\phi(t)=\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{jtx} dF(x)$ be a characteristic function (CF) of the one-dimensional distribution function $F(x)$.
For $x$ being the continuity point of the distribution, the following inversion formula holds true:
\begin{align}
F(x) &= \frac{1}{2} - \frac{1}{\pi} \int_{0}^{\infty} \left( \frac{e^{-jtx} \phi(t) - e^{jtx} \phi(-t)}{2jt} \right) dt \nonumber\\
&= \frac{1}{2} - \frac{1}{\pi} \int_{0}^{\infty} \mathcal{I}m\left( \frac{e^{-jtx} \phi(t)}{t} \right) dt.
\label{eq:cdf}
\end{align}
where $\mathcal{I}m\{\cdot\}$ denotes the imaginary part of a complex number.
\begin{proof}
Refer to \cite{p_Biom51_Gil-Pelaez}.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}\vspace{0.2in}
By using Lemma~1, if we know the CF of the effective SINR after the $n$-th (re)transmission which is denoted by $\phi_{\gamma(n)}(t)$, we can obtain the cumulative distribution function (CDF), $F_{\gamma(n)}(x)$.
Assuming the information-theoretic capacity-achieving channel coding scheme, the outage probability after the $n$-th (re)transmission is defined by
\begin{align}
P_{out} (n, R) \triangleq \text{Pr} \left\{ \log_2 \left( 1 + \gamma(n) \right) < R \right\} = F_{\gamma(n)} \left( 2^R - 1 \right),
\label{eq:pout}
\end{align}
where $R$ denotes the required transmission source rate.
Then, the DLT is obtained by \cite{p_TWC11_Kim}
\begin{align}
S(R) \triangleq \sum_{i=1}^{N_{max}} \frac{R}{i} \Big[ P_{out}(i-1, R) - P_{out}(i, R) \Big],
\label{eq:dlt}
\end{align}
where $N_{max}$ denotes the maximum allowable number of transmissions in an HARQ retransmission process.
Substituting Eqns.~\eqref{eq:cdf} and \eqref{eq:pout} for Eq.~(\ref{eq:dlt}), the DLT is finally rewritten by
\begin{align}
S(R) &= \sum_{i=1}^{N_{max}} \frac{R}{i\cdot\pi}\cdot \nonumber\\
&\quad \int_{0}^{\infty} \bigg[ \mathcal{I}m \Big\{ \frac{e^{-jt(2^R-1)}}{t} \cdot\left( \phi_{\gamma(i)}(t) - \phi_{\gamma(i-1)}(t) \right)\Big\} \bigg] dt.
\label{eq:dlt_general}
\end{align}
\subsection{Link Adaptation with Gaussian Approximation (GA)}
Traditionally, the sum of ICI terms is widely approximated as a Gaussian distribution by the well-known central limit theorem (CLT) for even six interference components considering 7-cell structured cellular networks \cite{p_TWC07_Choi,p_JSAC11_Zhu}. Therefore, we investigate a rate selection scheme assuming that the ICI plus noise term follows a Gaussian distribution as a conventional link adaptation scheme.
Through the GA, the effective SINR after HARQ-CC combining can be approximated by
\begin{align}
\gamma(n) = \sum_{i=1}^{n} \,\, \frac{s}{\mathcal{X}_i + 1/\rho } &\approx \sum_{i=1}^{n} \tilde{\gamma}_i = \sum_{i=1}^{n}\frac{s}{|Z_i|^2 }
\end{align}
where $Z_i$ denotes a complex Gaussian random variable with zero mean and variance of the sum of ICI and noise powers, i.e., $Z_i \sim \mathcal{CN}\left(0, \sigma_{Z}^2\right)$ where $\sigma_{Z}^2=\sum_{k=1}^{K} L_{u_0}^{(k)} + 1/\rho$, and $s=L^{(0)}_{u_0}|w^{(0)}_{u_0} (t_1)|^2$. Here, $\tilde{\gamma}_i$ is an inverted Gamma random variable with shape parameter 1 and scale parameter $s/\sigma_{Z}^2$, $\tilde{\gamma}_i$ $\sim$ Inv-Gamma$\left(1, s/\sigma_{Z}^2 \right)$.
First of all, the PDF of $\tilde{\gamma}_i$ by the GA is
\begin{align}
f_{\tilde{\gamma}_i}(x) = \left(s/\sigma_{Z}^2\right) x^{-2} e^{-s/(\sigma_{Z}^2 x)}.
\end{align}
To derive the distribution of sum of $\tilde{\gamma}_i$ (i.e., $\gamma(n)$), the CF of $\tilde{\gamma}_i$ is derived first as follows: \cite{p_Kyb01_Witkovsky}
\begin{align}
\phi_{\tilde{\gamma}_i}(t) &= \sqrt{-\frac{4jst}{\sigma_{Z}^2}} K_{1}\left( \sqrt{-\frac{4jst}{\sigma_{Z}^2}} \right),
\end{align}
where $K_{\nu}(\cdot)$ denotes the modified Bessel function of the second kind.
Since $\tilde{\gamma}_i$'s are identically and independently distributed (i.i.d.) random variables due to independently varying $\mathcal{X}_i$, the CF of $\gamma(n)$ is obtained by
\begin{align}
\phi_{\gamma(n)}(t) &= \prod_{i=1}^{n} \phi_{\tilde{\gamma}_i}(t) = \left[ \sqrt{-\frac{4jst}{\sigma_{Z}^2}} K_{1}\left( \sqrt{-\frac{4jst}{\sigma_{Z}^2}} \right) \right]^n.
\label{eq:cf_ga}
\end{align}
By substituting Eq.~(\ref{eq:cf_ga}) for Eq.~(\ref{eq:dlt_general}), the DLT of the conventional GA is obtained by
\begin{align}
S_{\textrm{GA}}(R) &= \sum_{i=1}^{N_{max}} \frac{R}{i\cdot\pi} \cdot \nonumber\\
&\quad \int_{0}^{\infty} \bigg[ \mathcal{I}m \Big\{ \Psi_{\textrm{GA}}(t;i, R) - \Psi_{\textrm{GA}}(t;i-1,R) \Big\} \bigg] dt,
\label{eq:dlt_ga}
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
\Psi_{\textrm{GA}}(t;i,R) = \frac{ e^{-jt(2^R-1)} }{ t } \left[ \sqrt{ - \frac{ 4jst }{ \sigma_{Z}^2 } } K_{1} \left( \sqrt{ - \frac{ 4jst }{ \sigma_{Z}^2 } } \right) \right]^k. \nonumber
\end{align}
Finally, the optimal source rate for maximizing the DLT through the conventional GA is determined by
\begin{align}
R_{\textrm{GA}}^* &= { \mathrm{argmax}\atop{\scriptstyle{R \geq 0}} }~ \sum_{i=1}^{N_{max}} \frac{R}{i\cdot\pi} \cdot \nonumber\\
&\quad \int_{0}^{\infty} \bigg[ \mathcal{I}m \Big\{ \Psi_{GA}(t;i, R) - \Psi_{GA}(t;i-1,R) \Big\} \bigg] dt.
\label{eq:ra_ga}
\end{align}
\subsection{Link Adaptation with Identical Path-Loss Approximation (IPLA)}
Assuming the interference-limited regime (i.e., $\rho \gg 1$), the effective SINR after HARQ-CC combining can be approximated by
\begin{align}
\gamma(n) &\approx \sum_{i=1}^{n}\frac{s}{\mathcal{X}_i } = \sum_{i=1}^{n}\frac{s}{\sum_{k=1}^{K} L_{u_0}^{(k)} |w_{u_0}^{(k)} (t_i) |^2},
\label{eq:sir}
\end{align}
where $t_i$ denotes the time slot index of the $i$-th transmission and $s=L^{(0)}_{u_0}|w^{(0)}_{u_0} (t_1)|^2$. The sum of ICI terms in the denominator of Eq.~\eqref{eq:sir} is a weighted sum of Gamma random variables since $w_{u_0}^{(k)} (t_i)\sim\mathcal{CN}(0,1)$ and $L_{u_0}^{(k)} \neq L_{u_0}^{(l)}$ for $k\neq l \in \{1,\ldots,K\}$.
Note that there exist no closed-form expression for such distribution even though there have been some efforts to develop computational methods \cite{Mat82AISM,MC84CMA}.
Furthermore, the distribution of the effective SINR after the $n$-th transmission attempt, $\gamma(n)$, which is the sum of inverse of the weighted sum of Gamma random variables, has a much more complicated form and therefore it is intractable to derive its CF mathematically. Since only the contribution of the aggregated ICI rather than individual ICIs is interested in the effective SINR and even non-dominant interferers cannot be simply negligible\footnote{To validate this statement, we examine the expected throughput of taking three dominant interferers among whole interferers, compared with the exact one in Section~\ref{SEC:link_throughput}}, we propose to approximate all path-loss terms from other-cell BSs to be identical as their average value. Then, the effective SINR can be approximated by
\begin{align}
\gamma(n) \approx \sum_{i=1}^{n}\tilde{\gamma}_i= \sum_{i=1}^{n}\frac{s}{ \sum_{k=1}^{K} \bar{L} |w_{u_0}^{(k)} (t_i) |^2},
\end{align}
where $\bar{L}=\frac{1}{K}\sum_{k=1}^{K}L_{u_0}^{(k)}$ denotes the average value of all path-loss terms from other cells.
It is worth noting that the proposed IPLA preserves the average statistics of the aggregated ICI since for a given user, $\mathbb{E}\big[\sum_{k=1}^{K} \bar{L} |w_{u_0}^{(k)} (t_i) |^2\big]=\bar{L}\mathbb{E}\big[\sum_{k=1}^{K} |w_{u_0}^{(k)} (t_i) |^2\big]=\bar{L}\sum_{k=1}^{K}\mathbb{E}\big[ |w_{u_0}^{(k)} (t_i) |^2\big]=\bar{L}K=\sum_{k=1}^{K}L_{u_0}^{(k)}$, while $\mathbb{E}\big[\sum_{k=1}^{K} L_{u_0}^{(k)} |w_{u_0}^{(k)} (t_i) |^2\big]=\sum_{k=1}^{K} L_{u_0}^{(k)} \mathbb{E}\big[ |w_{u_0}^{(k)} (t_i) |^2\big]=\sum_{k=1}^{K}L_{u_0}^{(k)}$ because $L_{u_0}^{(k)}$'s are deterministic for the given user.
Now, the sum of ICI terms becomes the sum of i.i.d. Gamma random variables and it also follows a Gamma distribution. After all, the approximated SINR at the $i$-th transmission, $\tilde{\gamma}_i$, follows an inverted Gamma distribution, i.e., $\tilde{\gamma}_i$ $\sim$ Inv-Gamma$(K,s/\bar{L})$.
Hence, the probability density function (PDF) of $\tilde{\gamma}_i$ is
\begin{align}
f_{\tilde{\gamma}_i}(x) = \frac{\left(s/\bar{L}\right)^{K}}{(K-1)!} x^{-K-1} e^{-s/(\bar{L}x)}.
\end{align}
Then, the CF of $\tilde{\gamma}_i$ and $\gamma(n)$ are derived, respectively, as follows: \cite{p_Kyb01_Witkovsky}
\begin{align}
\phi_{\tilde{\gamma}_i}(t) &= \frac{2(-\frac{jst}{\bar{L}})^{\frac{K}{2}}}{(K-1)!} K_{K}\left( \sqrt{-\frac{4jst}{\bar{L}}} \right),\\
\phi_{\gamma(n)}(t) &= \prod_{i=1}^{n} \phi_{\tilde{\gamma}_i}(t)
= \left[ \frac{2(-\frac{jst}{\bar{L}})^{\frac{K}{2}}}{(K-1)!} K_{K}\left( \sqrt{-\frac{4jst}{\bar{L}}} \right) \right]^n,
\label{eq:cf_ipla}
\end{align}
where $K_{\nu}(\cdot)$ denotes the modified Bessel function of the second kind.
By substituting Eq.~(\ref{eq:cf_ipla}) for Eq.~(\ref{eq:dlt_general}), the DLT by the proposed IPLA is
\begin{align}
S_{\textrm{IPLA}}(R) &= \sum_{i=1}^{N_{max}} \frac{R}{i\cdot\pi} \cdot\nonumber\\
& \int_{0}^{\infty} \bigg[ \mathcal{I}m \Big\{ \Psi_{\textrm{IPLA}}(t;i, R) - \Psi_{\textrm{IPLA}}(t;i-1,R) \Big\} \bigg] dt,
\label{eq:dlt_ipla}
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
\Psi_{\textrm{IPLA}}(t;i,R) = \frac{ e^{-jt(2^R-1)} }{ t } \left[ \frac{ 2\left( - \frac{ jst }{ \bar{L} } \right)^{ \frac{ K }{ 2 } } }{ (K-1)! } K_{K} \left( \sqrt{ - \frac{ 4jst }{ \bar{L} } } \right) \right]^i.\nonumber
\end{align}
Eventually, the optimal source rate based on the proposed IPLA for maximizing the DLT is determined by
\begin{align}
R_{\textrm{IPLA}}^* &= { \mathrm{argmax}\atop{\scriptstyle{R \geq 0}} }~ \sum_{i=1}^{N_{max}} \frac{R}{i\cdot\pi} \cdot\nonumber\\
&\quad \int_{0}^{\infty} \bigg[ \mathcal{I}m \Big\{ \Psi_{\textrm{IPLA}}(t;i, R) - \Psi_{\textrm{IPLA}}(t;i-1,R) \Big\} \bigg] dt.
\label{eq:ra_ipla}
\end{align}
The above optimal source rate can be easily found by a grid search or a Golden section search with range between zero and a proper upper limit, since the DLT has a shape of quasi-concave function with respect to the source rate as shown numerically in Section~\ref{SEC:link_throughput}, although it cannot be analytically proved due to a sophisticated form of the DLT formula.
\section{Joint Link Adaptatin and User Scheduling: Cross-Layer Framework}\label{SEC:ICI:Sch}
\subsection{Overall Procedure}
We first propose a simple cross-layer framework to perform both link adaptation and user scheduling considering HARQ and ICI.
The cross-layer framework consists of three main components: \emph{rate selection}, \emph{effective rate mapping}, and \emph{scheduler}. The roles of components are described as in the following.
\subsubsection{Rate Selection (RS)}
The RS plays a role to determine an optimal transmission source rate $R_u^*(t)$ for the $u$-th user at initial transmission instance of the HARQ-based system. In this paper, we consider RS schemes to maximize the DLT of each user considering HARQ retransmission and ICI statistics as presented in the previous section.
\subsubsection{Effective Rate Mapping (ERM)}
The transmission source rate is different from the achievable rate in HARQ-based systems due to uncertain retransmissions. Therefore, an effective rate, which is close to the achievable rate, needs to be taken into account for user scheduling if it is available.
The ERM determines an effective rate $R_{\text{eff},u}(t)$ for the $u$-th user as a function of the optimal source rate $R_u^*(t)$, i.e., $R_{\text{eff},u}(t)=f(R_u^*(t))$, in order to adjust the scheduling priority of each user. Through such ERM, the instantaneous rate $R_u(t)$ in the scheduler is replaced by the effective rate $R_{\text{eff},u}(t)$.
After all, the scheduler selects a user with the highest utility value substituted into the effective rate.
\subsubsection{Scheduler}
The scheduler determines which user is the best at every scheduling instance. There are three representative scheduling algorithms: \emph{Round Robin (RR)}, \emph{Max C/I}, and \emph{Proportional Fair (PF)}.
In this paper, we take into account the PF scheduler for an asymmetric user distribution scenario where users have different distances from the BS, in order to consider user fairness.
The PF scheduler is simply expressed as:
\begin{align}
u^* = \underset{u\in\Pi}{\mathrm{argmax}}~\frac{R_u(t)}{T_u(t)},
\end{align}
where $\Pi$ denotes the set of users in a cell, $R_u(t)$ denotes the achievable rate of the $u$-th user at time slot $t$, and $T_u(t)$ denotes the average throughput of the $u$-th user at time slot $t$, which is updated as $T_u(t+1) = (1-\frac{1}{t_c})\cdot T_u(t) + \frac{1}{t_c} \cdot R_u(t) \cdot \mathbb{I}\{u=u^*\}$
where $t_c$ denotes the pre-determined windowing interval for moving averaging and $\mathbb{I}\{x\}$ denotes the indication function which is one if $x$ is true and zero otherwise.
In the HARQ-based systems, $R_u(t)$ should be modified considering the HARQ retransmission process and it can be done by the ERM in this cross-layer framework.
The operating procedure according to the proposed cross-layer framework is illustrated as follows:\\\\
\begin{tabular}{|l|}
\hline
(Step~1) $[$\textbf{Rate Selection}$]$: Determine $R_u^*(t)$\\
(Step~2) $[$\textbf{Effective Rate Mapping}$]$: \\
\quad\quad\quad\quad Determine $R_{\text{eff},u}(t)=f\left(R_u^*(t)\right)$\\
(Step~3) $[$\textbf{Scheduler}$]$: Determine $u^* = \underset{u\in\Pi}{\mathrm{argmax}}~\frac{R_{\text{eff},u}(t)}{T_u(t)}$\\
(Step~4) $[$\textbf{HARQ Transmission}$]$\\
\quad\, -- $u^*$ transmits with $R_u^*(t)$ until successful transmission \\
\quad\,\quad or maximum transmission limit.\\
\quad\, -- Go to (Step~1) for all users after the end of the \\
\quad\,\quad (re)transmissions of the scheduled user $u^*$.\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\subsection{Proposed Cross-Layer Policy and Other Candidates}
In this subsection, we propose an IPLA-based cross-layer policy. We also introduce two reference and two conventional policies for the performance comparison in next section. Hereafter, each cross-layer policy is denoted by the rate selection and effective rate mapping, i.e., $\mathcal{P}$\{RS, ERM\}, since all policies employ the same PF scheduler.
\subsubsection{Proposed IPLA-based Policy, $\mathcal{P}$\{$\mathrm{RS}$-$\mathrm{IPLA}$, $S_{\mathrm{IPLA}}(R_{\mathrm{IPLA}}^*)$\}}
The proposed IPLA-based policy is based on RS through the IPLA on the aggregated ICI term (so called RS-IPLA).
According to the RS-IPLA proposed in the previous section, the transmission source rate of the $u$-th user is determined by Eq.~(\ref{eq:ra_ipla}).
Since it takes into account an HARQ retransmission process using statistics of the aggregated ICI term, which is assumed by a Gamma distribution through the IPLA, the achievable rate is different from the transmission source rate. Thus, the \emph{expected throughput}-based ERM is considered for user scheduling as
\begin{align}
R_{\text{eff},u} =& S_{\mathrm{IPLA}}(R_{\mathrm{IPLA},u}^*) \nonumber\\
=& \sum_{i=1}^{N_{max}} \frac{R_{\mathrm{IPLA},u}^*}{i\cdot\pi} \int_{0}^{\infty} \bigg[ \mathcal{I}m \Big\{ \Phi_{\mathrm{IPLA}}(t;i, R_{\mathrm{IPLA},u}^*) \nonumber\\
&\quad\quad\quad\quad - \Phi_{\mathrm{IPLA}}(t;i-1,R_{\mathrm{IPLA},u}^*) \Big\} \bigg] dt,
\label{eq:ranking_ipla}
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
&\Phi_{\mathrm{IPLA}}(t;i,R_{\mathrm{IPLA},u}^*) \nonumber\\
&= \frac{ e^{-jt(2^{R_{\mathrm{IPLA},u}^*}-1)} }{ t } \cdot \left[ \frac{ 2\left( - \frac{ jst }{ \bar{L} } \right)^{ \frac{ K }{ 2 } } }{ (K-1)! } \cdot K_{K} \left( \sqrt{ - \frac{ 4jst }{ \bar{L} } } \right) \right]^i.\nonumber
\end{align}
Based on the selected transmission source rate and effective rate, the user scheduling is performed with the PF criterion and then, the HARQ transmission is performed for the scheduled user according to (Step~4) in the operating procedure of the cross-layer framework.
\subsubsection{Reference Policies}
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{Genie-Aided Policy}, $\mathcal{P}$\{RS-Opt, $R_{\mathrm{Opt}}^*\}$\\
The genie-aided policy has perfect knowledge on instantaneous ICI terms. In this case, the transmitter can accurately adapt to instantaneous interference channel and the channel capacity depending on the instantaneous interference channel conditions is achieved without any retransmission and outage. Even though this policy is rather unrealistic, it offers an upper bound of the system performance.
According to the RS-Opt scheme with the perfect knowledge for interference channels, the transmission source rate of the $u$-th user is determined by
\begin{equation}
R_{\text{Opt},u}^* = \log_2\left( 1 + \frac{s}{\sum_{k=1}^{K}L_{u}^{(k)} |w_{u}^{(k)}(t_1)|^2 + 1/\rho} \right),
\end{equation}
where $t_1$ denotes the time index at initial transmission, $|w_{u}^{(k)}(t_1)|^2$ represents the exact effective interference channel power gain from the $k$-th BS to the $u$-th user in the home cell, $s=L^{(0)}_{u}|w^{(0)}_{u} (t_1)|^2$, and $\rho=\frac{P_x}{N_0}$.
Next, since the genie-aided policy does not cause outage and retransmission, the \emph{instantaneous rate}-based ERM is considered as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ERM_Opt}
R_{\text{eff},u} = R_{\text{Opt},u}^*.
\end{equation}
\item \emph{Instantaneous SINR Policy}, $\mathcal{P}$\{RS-$i$-SINR, $R_{i\text{-}\mathrm{SINR}}^*$\}\\
The instantaneous SINR policy is the simplest one based on the SINR value fed back from the receiver. This policy has inaccurate rate selection due to independently varying interference channels for every (re)transmission and a feedback delay.
According to the RS-$i$-SINR scheme using the outdated feedback channel information, the transmission source rate of the $u$-th user is determined by
\begin{equation}
R_{i\text{-SINR},u}^* = \log_2\left( 1 + \frac{s}{\sum_{k=1}^{K}L_{u}^{(k)} |w_{u}^{(k)}(t_1 - \delta)|^2 + 1/\rho} \right),
\end{equation}
where $|w_{u}^{(k)}(t_1 - \delta)|^2$ represents the interference power gain from the $k$-th BS to user $u$ with the feedback delay $\delta$, $s=L^{(0)}_{u}|w^{(0)}_{u} (t_1)|^2$, and $\rho=\frac{P_x}{N_0}$.
Since the instantaneous SINR policy takes advantage of only instantaneous information without consideration of HARQ retransmission, the \emph{instantaneous rate}-based ERM is also considered as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ERM_i-SINR}
R_{\text{eff},u} = R_{i\text{-SINR},u}^*.
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{Conventional Policies}
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{Average Interference Policy}, $\mathcal{P}$\{RS-Avg-$\mathcal{X}$, $R_{\text{Avg-}\mathcal{X}}^*$\}\\
The average interference policy exploits an average value for the aggregated ICI term \cite{p_TWC10_Ait-Idir},
since each ICI term is an uncertain and independently varying factor.
According to the RS-Avg-$\mathcal{X}$ scheme replacing the aggregated ICI term by the average value, the transmission source rate of the $u$-th user is determined by
\begin{equation}
R_{\text{Avg-}\mathcal{X},u}^* = \log_2\left( 1 + \frac{s}{\bar{\mathcal{X}} + 1/\rho} \right),
\end{equation}
where $\bar{\mathcal{X}}=\mathbb{E}\left[\sum_{k=1}^{K} L_{u}^{(k)} |w_{u}^{(k)}|^2\right]=\sum_{k=1}^{K} L_{u}^{(k)}$, $s=L^{(0)}_{u}|w^{(0)}_{u}(t_1)|^2$, and $\rho=\frac{P_x}{N_0}$.
The average interference policy has an identical source rate during retransmissions because of applying the average value for the sum of ICI terms. Thus, similarly to Eqns. \eqref{eq:ERM_Opt} and \eqref{eq:ERM_i-SINR}, the \emph{instantaneous rate}-based ERM is considered as
\begin{equation}
R_{\text{eff},u} = R_{\text{Avg-}\mathcal{X},u}^*.
\end{equation}
\item \emph{GA-based Policy}, $\mathcal{P}$\{RS-GA, $S_{\mathrm{GA}}(R_{\mathrm{GA}}^*)$\}\\
The GA-based policy is based on RS through GA for the sum of ICI and noise terms.
According to the RS-GA scheme investigated in the previous section, the transmission source rate of the $u$-th user is determined by Eq.~(\ref{eq:ra_ga}).
Since the GA-based policy considers an HARQ retransmission process using statistics of the aggregated ICI term, the \emph{expected throughput}-based ERM is considered as
\begin{align}
&\!\!\!\!\!\! R_{\text{eff},u} = S_{\mathrm{GA}}(R_{\mathrm{GA},u}^*)= \sum_{i=1}^{N_{max}} \frac{R_{\mathrm{GA},u}^*}{i\cdot\pi} \cdot \nonumber\\
&\!\!\!\!\!\! \int_{0}^{\infty} \bigg[ \mathcal{I}m \Big\{ \Phi_{\mathrm{GA}}(t;i, R_{\mathrm{GA},u}^*) - \Phi_{\mathrm{GA}}(t;i-1,R_{\mathrm{GA},u}^*) \Big\} \bigg] dt,
\end{align}
where
\begin{align}
&\Phi_{\mathrm{GA}}(t;i,R_{\mathrm{GA},u}^*) \nonumber\\
&= \frac{ e^{-jt(2^{R_{\mathrm{GA},u}^*}-1)} }{ t } \cdot \left[ \sqrt{ - \frac{ 4jst }{ \sigma_{Z}^2 } } \cdot K_{1} \left( \sqrt{ - \frac{ 4jst }{ \sigma_{Z}^2 } } \right) \right]^i.\nonumber
\end{align}
\end{itemize}
\section{Numerical Results} \label{SEC:ICI:Numerical_Results}
In this section, we first examine the effectiveness of the proposed IPLA through a quantile versus quantile (Q-Q) plot on the effective SINR distribution, $F_{\gamma(n)}(x)$.
After that, we discuss effects of user distance and path-loss exponent on the rate selection in a single link.
Finally, we evaluate the performance of the proposed, conventional, and reference cross-layer policies in terms of system throughput and fairness metric, through system-level simulations. As basic simulation setups, we consider an 1-tier cellular network with six other cells (i.e. $K=6$) where users are asymmetrically distributed in the home cell. The BS-to-BS distance is set to $1000$ m (i.e., $D^{(k)}=1000, \; \forall k$) and angles between BS in the home cell and BSs in the other cells are set to $\mathbf{\psi}^{(k)}=\frac{5\pi}{6}-\frac{k\pi}{3}$, i.e., $\vec{\psi}=[\frac{5\pi}{6}, \frac{\pi}{2}, \frac{\pi}{6}, -\frac{\pi}{6}, -\frac{\pi}{2}, -\frac{5\pi}{6}]$. We set the distances between users and the home BS to $r \in [150, 200, 250, 300, 400]$m and each element in the vector is equally set according to the number of users. Therefore, we just consider the number of users as multiple of five and it is 250 m for a single user case. Additionally, the angles between users and the home BS are uniformly determined as $\theta=$Uniform$[-\pi,\pi]$. For path-loss, we set PL$_0$ to 37 dB at reference distance $d_0=1000$ m and path-loss exponent, $\alpha$, to 3. The maximum allowable number of transmissions, $N_{max}$, is set to 4, which is a typical value in LTE and WiMAX systems. In order to take into account an interference-limited situation, we set transmit SNR, $\rho$, to 43 dB.\footnote{In this setting, the average received SNR without interference becomes 6 dB when the distance is 1000 m.}
\subsection{Statistical Distribution of Effective SINR based on IPLA}
In order to examine the effectiveness of the proposed IPLA, we introduce a Q-Q plot which is widely used for quantitative comparison between two distributions.
It can provide an intuitive comparison between two statistical data sets as well as two theoretical distributions and more information on the local agreement between two distributions than other fitting tests such as Chi-square and Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests \cite{b_QQplot_Gibbons}. In this paper, we compare two theoretically approximated distributions with the real empirical distribution. In the Q-Q plot, the $x$-axis is based on the theoretical distribution with the approximated CDF, which is obtained by inverting the CDF, $F_{\gamma(n)}^{-1}(x)$, and the $y$-axis is based on the empirical quantile from a sample data set on the effective SINR obtained by statistical realizations.
\begin{figure}[pt]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{./fig/fig_QQ_plot.eps}
\caption{Q-Q plots of the proposed IPLA and the conventional GA ($K=6$, $r=250$ m, $\theta=\pi/2$, $\alpha=3$, $|w_{u_0}^{(0)}|^2=1$, $N_{max}=4$) }
\label{fig:QQ_plot}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{fig:QQ_plot} shows the Q-Q plots of the proposed IPLA and the conventional GA compared with the real empirical distribution according to the number of transmission attempts of a single packet, $n$. Since the line $y=x$ represents the identity of two compared distributions in the Q-Q plot, the proposed IPLA almost following the $y=x$ line agrees well with the real empirical distribution, regardless of $n$ values. As a general trend, with increasing the number of transmission attempts, $n$, the Q-Q plots of both approximated distributions move to the right-upper side, which implies a larger effective SINR value due to an HARQ-CC combining gain. While the Q-Q plot of the proposed IPLA agrees well, that of the conventional GA is flatter than the line $y=x$. This implies that the approximated distribution by the GA is more dispersed than the real empirical distribution. Additionally, difference between the approximated distribution by the GA and the empirical distribution increases as the value of effective SINR increases.
Through the comparison of the approximated distributions with the real empirical distribution, it is shown that the proposed IPLA offers a good approximation on the effective SINR, while the conventional GA gives significant differences in the approximation.
\subsection{Link Adaptation for a Single Link: Effects of User Distance and Path-Loss Exponent}\label{SEC:link_throughput}
In this subsection, we investigate the effects of user distance and path-loss exponent on the rate selection according to the proposed and conventional link adaptation schemes.
Fig.~\ref{fig:effect_dist} shows the DLT for varying source rate $R$ in three different user distance values. Basically, the DLT has a shape of quasi-concave function and a single optimal point with respect to the source rate. As the distance decreases, a higher DLT is achieved since the desired signal power increases while a closer distance to the BS fundamentally yields smaller interference from other-cell BSs. In the figure, the solid lines denote the exact simulation results with perfectly known individual ICIs. Additionally, the dotted lines denote the simulation results with perfectly known three dominant ICIs, which neglect the other three ICIs. Compared to both simulation results, neglecting non-dominant ICIs yields over-estimated DLTs due to the reduced interference even if it shows similar shapes of curves. On the contrary, the DLT analytically derived by the proposed IPLA has a high similarity with one by the exact simulation for all distance values. After all, the optimal source rate determined by the proposed IPLA is approximately identical to the actual optimal source rate on the exact simulation curves, regardless of the user distances.
However, optimal source rates based on the two conventional link adaptation schemes, GA and average interference schemes, exhibit significant differences from the actual optimal value on the exact simulation curves. The gap between the optimal source rate by the proposed IPLA and one by the conventional GA increases as the user distance increases (i.e., as ICI increases), whereas the gap between the optimal source rate by the proposed IPLA and one by the conventional average interference scheme increases as the user distance decreases. Therefore, we can conclude that the conventional GA is relatively good for near-BS users while the conventional average interference scheme is good for edge users, in the link adaptation perspective.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{./fig/fig_dlt_vs_R_r.eps}
\caption{Effect of User Distance on Rate Selection ($K=6$, $\theta=\pi/2$, $\alpha=3$, $|w_{u_0}^{(0)}|^2=1$, $N_{max}=4$) }
\label{fig:effect_dist}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{fig:effect_plexp} shows the DLT for varying source rate $R$ in three different path-loss exponent values. As the path-loss exponent value increases, a higher DLT is achieved since the interference is reduced with increasing the path-loss exponent value. The optimal source rate by the proposed IPLA also agrees well with the actual optimal value on the exact simulation curve, while those by the conventional schemes show significant differences. The basic trends of the differences are similar to those in Fig.~\ref{fig:effect_dist}. Consequently, for the conventional GA, the more interference exists, the larger difference occurs in the optimal source rate, while for the conventional average interference scheme, the less interference exists, the larger difference occurs in the optimal source rate. Fundamentally, both the conventional schemes exhibit significant differences with respect to the optimal source rate for large SINR values (i.e., $\alpha=4$), which correspond to the weak interference situation. However, in a scheduling-based multi-user system, a user with a large SINR value has more opportunities to be selected as the best user. Therefore, it is expected that the proposed IPLA-based cross-layer policy can obtain a significant throughput gain in the viewpoint of both link adaptation and user scheduling, compared to the conventional policies.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{./fig/fig_dlt_vs_R_plexp.eps}
\caption{Effect of Path-Loss Exponent on Rate Adaptation ($K=6$, $r=250$ m, $\theta=\pi/2$, $|w_{u_0}^{(0)}|^2=1$, $N_{max}=4$)}
\label{fig:effect_plexp}
\end{figure}
\subsection{System-Level Performance Evaluation: Cell Throughput and Fairness}
Fig.~\ref{fig:asym_user_dist} shows the system performance of various cross-layer policies for varying the number of users in the home-cell. Specifically, Fig.~\ref{fig:asym_user_dist}~(a) shows the system throughput of the proposed, conventional, and reference policies. The genie-aided policy, $\mathcal{P}$\{RS-Opt, $R_{\mathrm{Opt}}^*$\}, provides an upper bound of the system throughput even if it is unrealistic. The instantaneous SINR policy, $\mathcal{P}$\{RS-$i$-SINR, $R_{i\text{-SINR}}^*$\}, achieves the worst system throughput due to rather inaccurate estimation of the ICI term caused by the channel feedback delay. The proposed IPLA-based policy, $\mathcal{P}$\{RS-IPLA, $S_{\mathrm{IPLA}}(R_{\mathrm{IPLA}^*})$\}, always outperforms the conventional policies, $\mathcal{P}$\{RS-GA, $S_{\mathrm{GA}}(R_{\mathrm{GA}}^*)$\} and $\mathcal{P}$\{RS-Avg-$\mathcal{X}$, $R_{\text{Avg-}\mathcal{X}}^*$\}, in the entire range of the number of users, while both the GA and average interference policies achieve almost identical system throughput. Note that although the GA-based policy exploits statistics of the ICI term, it achieves similar system throughput to that of the average interference policy which just utilizes an average value of the ICI term. Moreover, it achieves rather smaller system throughput than that of the proposed IPLA-based policy which also exploits equivalent average statistics of the ICI term.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{./fig/fig_dlt_vs_nuser_asym.eps}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{./fig/fig_fm_vs_nuser_asym.eps}}
\caption{System Performance in an Asymmetric User Distribution Scenario (a) System DLT vs. Number of Users (b) Fairness Metric vs. Number of Users ($K=6$, $r\in [150,200,250,300,400]$m, $\theta=$Uniform$[-\pi,\pi]$, $\alpha=3$, $N_{max}=4$)}
\label{fig:asym_user_dist}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{fig:asym_user_dist}~(b) shows the fairness metric performance of various cross-layer policies for varying the number of users in the home-cell.
We consider the \emph{fairness metric} in \cite{s_BL99_Tse,p_TIT02_Viswanath,p_TWC05_Zheng,p_TVT13_Kim} defined as $\mathcal{FM}(T_1,\ldots,T_N)=\sum_{u=1}^{N}\log(T_u)$ where $T_u$ denotes the achieved throughput of the $u$-th user and $N$ is the number of users in the system. As investigated in the previous work, the fairness metric offers a performance measure considering both system throughput and user fairness together. Under the PF scheduling algorithm with averaging time scale $t_c=\infty$, the fairness metric is maximized almost surely among the class of all schedulers \cite{p_TIT02_Viswanath}. As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:asym_user_dist}~(b), the proposed IPLA-based policy, $\mathcal{P}$\{RS-IPLA, $S_{\mathrm{IPLA}}(R_{\mathrm{IPLA}}^*)$\}, also outperforms the other three policies except for the genie-aided policy for all the number of users. The average interference policy, $\mathcal{P}$\{RS-Avg-$\mathcal{X}$, $R_{inst}^*$\}, rather outperforms the GA-based policy, $\mathcal{P}$\{RS-GA, $S_{\mathrm{GA}}(R_{\mathrm{GA}}^*)$\}, in terms of the fairness metric, even if the GA-based policy exploits more information for ICI term than the average interference policy.
It comes from the fact that the GA on the aggregated ICI is inaccurate when there exist some dominant ICIs which are general in OFDM-based cellular networks, although the GA on the aggregated ICI is well-approximated for a sufficiently large number of independent and identically distributed interferers. In contrast, the proposed IPLA is highly accurate in this environment. Accordingly, the proposed IPLA-based cross-layer policy is able to be the most efficient in the OFDM-based cellular networks where there exist some dominant ICIs.
\section{Conclusion} \label{SEC:ICI:Conclusions}
In this paper, we investigated a joint link adaptation and user scheduling in multi-user and multi-cell environments, considering HARQ techniques. Based on the proposed mathematical approximation method for the ICI signals the optimal transmission rate selection algorithm in terms of the expected throughput is proposed. As for multi-user environments, a novel and effective cross-layer framework combining the link adaptation and user scheduling is also proposed. Through extensive link-/system-level simulations, it is shown that the proposed cross-layer policy significantly outperforms the conventional policies in terms of both cell throughput and user fairness.
With consideration of both HARQ and ICI, we have tried to investigate more general and practical communication scenarios including multi-user MIMO, receiver beamforming at users with multiple receive antennas, and HARQ technique with incremental redundancy, but they were not mathematically tractable unfortunately.
Therefore, we leave these issues for future work.
\balance
\bibliographystyle{./style/IEEEtran_v111}
|
\section{Introduction}
For a map of varieties $\pi: F\to X$, it is useful to study the diagonal
in the fibre square $F\times_X F$.
The classes of such diagonals for fibre bundles in topology and smooth proper morphisms in algebraic geometry
were investigated by Graham \cite{G}, Fulton and the second author \cite{P1}, \cite[Appendix G]{FP}. As explained in \cite[Section 5]{P1},
knowing such a class, one can compute the class of a subscheme of $F$. For an overview of applications, see \cite[Chapter 7]{FP}.
In the present paper, we shall rather study the
diagonals in the Cartesian squares $F\times F$ of the total spaces of flag bundles $\pi: F\to X$. Suitable resolutions of the structure
sheaves of the diagonals over the structure sheaves of the Cartesian squares of some homogeneous spaces were used by Kapranov in \cite{Ka} to give
descriptions of their derived categories. Many schemes can be realized as degeneracy loci of vector bundle homomorphisms. It turns out that
to understand degeneracy loci, it is useful to study diagonals of flag bundles (cf. \cite{P1}, \cite{DP}, \cite{F2}, \cite{PR}, \cite{FP}).
In \cite{PSP}, Pati, Srinivas and the second author investigated which varieties $X$ have
the following ``diagonal property'' ($D$): there exists a vector bundle of rank $\dim(X)$
on $X\times X$ with a section whose zero scheme is the diagonal.
If $X$ has $(D)$, then it is nonsingular.
Also, the following ``weak point property'' ($P$)
was investigated: for some point $x\in X$, there exists a vector bundle of rank $\dim(X)$ on $X$ with a section
whose zero scheme is $x$. If a variety $X$ has $(D)$, then it has $(P)$ for any $x\in X$. Any nonsingular curve has $(D)$. The product of varieties
having $(D)$, has $(D)$. In \cite[Section 3]{PSP}, we gave several detailed results on surfaces with $(D)$.
In particular, it was shown ({\it loc.cit.}, Proposition 4) that a ruled surface (cf., e.g., \cite[Chap. V, Sect. 2]{Ha}) has $(D)$, i.e., the projectivization of any rank 2 vector bundle on a nonsingular curve has $(D)$. This result was one of the starting points of the present paper.
It was shown by Fulton \cite{F}
and the second author \cite{P} that the flag varieties of the form $SL_n/P$ over any field have $(D)$.
Samuelsson and Sepp\"anen \cite{SS} gave recently an application of the diagonal property of flag varieties to global complex analysis.
The interest to $(D)$ for flag varieties was related to the theory of Schubert polynomials
of Lascoux-Sch\"utzenberger \cite{LS}. These authors defined on the polynomial ring in several variables a scalar product
\cite[Chapter 10]{L},
for which the (single) Schubert polynomials and their ``duals'' form adjoint bases ({\it loc.cit.}, Corollary 10.2.4). The reproducing kernel for this scalar product is equal to the top (double)
Schubert polynomial ({\it loc.cit.}, Section 10.2), which, in turn, is equal to the top Chern class of the vector bundle, realizing $(D)$ for the variety
$SL_n/B$ of complete flags -- a result of Fulton \cite{F}.
\smallskip
A natural question emerged then: do the flag varieties for other groups have the diagonal property?
(see \cite[p. 1235]{PSP}, \cite[Conjecture 8.2]{P} and \cite[Proposition 12]{PSP}). In the present paper, we answer this question almost completely for the manifolds $G/B$, where $G$ is a simple, simply connected, complex algebraic group (see Section \ref{full}). We show that for $G$ of type $(B_i) (i\ge 3), (D_i) (i\ge 4), (G_2), (F_4)$ and $(E_i) (i=6,7,8)$, the flag manifold $G/B$ has not the diagonal property (see Theorem \ref{thm:point-property-for-flag}).
The main tools are the Atiyah-Hirzebruch homomorphism
and the Borel characteristic homomorphism.
In Section \ref{form}, we recall several explicit formulas for the classes of diagonals of $G/B$; we do not use, however, these formulas in
the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:point-property-for-flag}.
\smallskip
Apart from the question about generalized flag manifolds, the present paper arose from our attempts to understand relations
between the diagonals of the base spaces and those of the total spaces of flag bundles.
We shall also study the following variant of $(D)$.
Given a section $s$ of a vector bundle, we write $Z(s)$ for its zero scheme.
We say that $X$ has property $(D')$, if there
exist two vector bundles $A$ and $B$ on $X\times X$ such that $\rank(A) + \rank(B)=\dim(X)$, a section $s$ of $A$ and
a section $t$ on $Z(s)$ of
the restriction $B_{Z(s)}$ of $B$ to $Z(s)$ such that $Z(t)$ is the diagonal of $X$.
Thus for $A=(0)$, we recover $(D)$. Note that $(D')$ is a slight weakening of $(D)$ as the key property
that the rank of the bundle is $\dim(X)$ holds also for $(D')$. A variety $X$ with $(D')$ is nonsingular because
its cotangent sheaf is locally free: it is isomorphic to the restriction of $A^{\vee}\oplus B^{\vee}$ to the diagonal of $X$.
The main results of the paper are Theorems \ref{D'}, \ref{pf}, \ref{p'f} and \ref{thm:point-property-for-flag}.
The paper is organized as follows.
In Section \ref{vb}, we discuss properties of flag bundles and construct a certain vector bundle
on the Cartesian square of a flag bundle. Using this vector bundle, we prove in Theorem \ref{D'}
that if the base space of a flag bundle has $(D)$, then its total space has $(D')$.
In Section \ref{top}, we discuss the analogs of this result for topological properties $(D_r)$ and $(D_c)$ from
\cite[Section 6]{PSP}. The topological situation is easier than that in algebraic geometry: if $X$ has
$(D_r)$ or $(D_c)$ then the corresponding flag bundles also have these properties (see Theorem {\ref{drE}).
In Section \ref{point} we show that if a quasiprojective base of a flag bundle has $(P)$, then its total space has $(P)$
(see Theorem \ref{pf}). For more general schemes, we prove in Theorem \ref{p'f} that if the base space of a flag bundle has $(P)$,
then its total space has $(P')$, a property analogous to $(D')$. In Section \ref{top}, we discuss the analogs for topological properties $(P_r)$
and $(P_c)$ from \cite[Section 6]{PSP}.
In Section \ref{full}, we investigate which complex manifolds $G/B$ for other groups $G$ have $(P_c)$, see
Theorem \ref{thm:point-property-for-flag} and Corollary \ref{red}. An absence of $(P_c)$ implies for many of them
the absence of $(D_c)$.
In Appendix, we discuss explicit formulas for the classes of diagonals of the varieties $G/B$ due to Fulton, the second author and Ratajski,
Graham, and De Concini, adding one for the type $(G_2)$ (see Lemma \ref{ng2}). We also disprove an integrality conjecture from \cite{G}
(see Remark \ref{cg}).
\section{Flag bundles of type $(A_{n-1})$}\label{vb}
Let $E$ be a vector bundle of rank $n$ on a variety $X$ over a field.
Fix an increasing sequence of integers
$$
d_{\bullet}: 0<d_1<d_2<\ldots<d_{k-1}<d_k=n\,.
$$
By a ${d_{\bullet}}$-flag, we mean an increasing sequence of subbundles of $E$
$$
E_1\subset E_2 \subset \cdots \subset E_{k-1}\subset E_k=E
$$
such that $\rank(E_i)=d_i$ for $i=1,\ldots,k$. Let
$$
\pi: Fl_{d_{\bullet}}(E)\to X
$$
be the flag bundle parametrizing all ${d_{\bullet}}$-flags.
For example, the sequence
$$
d_1=d<d_2=n
$$
gives rise to the Grassmann bundle $G_d(E)$, parametrizing subbundles of rank $d$ of $E$ (see \cite[B.5.7]{Fit}).
For $d=1$, we get the projectivization of $E$: $P(E)=G_1(E)$ (see \cite[Section 7]{Ha} and \cite[B.5.5]{Fit}).
It is well-known that
\begin{equation}\label{dimG}
\dim(G_d(E))=\dim(X)+d(n-d)\,.
\end{equation}
On $Fl_{d_{\bullet}}(E)$, there exists
the following tautological sequence of vector bundles:
\begin{equation}\label{tauto}
{S}_1\hookrightarrow {S}_2\hookrightarrow \cdots \hookrightarrow {S}_{k-1}
\hookrightarrow {S}_k={\pi}^*(E) \stackrel{q_{1}}\twoheadrightarrow {Q}_1 \stackrel{q_{2}}
\twoheadrightarrow {Q}_2 \stackrel{q_{3}}\twoheadrightarrow \cdots \stackrel{q_{k}}\twoheadrightarrow
{Q}_k=0\,,
\end{equation}
where $\rank({S}_i)=d_i$ for $i=1,\dots,k$, and
${Q}_i$ is the quotient of $\pi^*{E}$ by ${S}_i$\,,
so that $\rank({Q}_i)=n-d_i$.
On $G_d(E)$, the tautological sequence (with $S=S_1$, $Q=Q_1$)
\begin{equation}\label{exa}
0\to S\to \pi^*E \to Q\to 0\,,
\end{equation}
where $\rank(S)=d$, is a short exact sequence.
\smallskip
Regarding $Fl_{d_{\bullet}}(E)\to X$ as a tower of Grassmann bundles
\begin{equation}\label{tower}
Fl_{d_{\bullet}}(E)=G_{n-d_{k-1}}(Q_{k-1})\to \cdots \to G_{d_3-d_2}(Q_2) \to G_{d_2-d_1}(Q_1)\to G_{d_1}(E)\to X\,,
\end{equation}
and using (\ref{dimG}), we see that with $d_0=0$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{dim}
\dim (Fl_{d_{\bullet}}(E))= \dim(X)+\sum_{i=1}^{k-1}(d_i-d_{i-1})(n-d_i)\,.
\end{equation}
Write $F=Fl_{d_{\bullet}}(E)$.
Let $F_1=F_2=F$, and denote by
$$
p_i:F_1\times F_2 \to F_i
$$
the two projections. We shall now construct a certain vector bundle of rank $\dim(F)-\dim(X)$ on $F_1\times F_2$.
If $k=2$, using the notation of (\ref{exa}), we define the following vector bundle
\begin{equation}\label{H2}
H= {\Hom}(p_1^*S,p_2^*Q)=(p_1^*S)^\vee \otimes p_2^*Q\,.
\end{equation}
Suppose now that $k\ge 3$. Using the notation of (\ref{tauto}),
consider the following homomorphism of vector bundles on $F_1\times F_2$:
$$
\varphi: \bigoplus_{i=1}^{k-1}
{\Hom}(p_1^*{S}_i,p_2^*{Q}_i)
\to \bigoplus_{i=1}^{k-2}
{\Hom}(p_1^*{S}_i,p_2^*{Q}_{i+1})\,,
$$
defined by
\begin{equation}\label{phi}
\varphi(\sum_{i=1}^{k-1} h_i)=\sum_{i=1}^{k-2} \bigl(h_{i+1}|p_1^*{S}_i - p_2^*(q_{i+1})\circ h_i\bigr)\,,
\end{equation}
where $h_i\in
{\Hom}(p_1^*{S}_i,p_2^*{Q}_i)$.
\begin{lemma} The homomorphism $\varphi$ is surjective.
\end{lemma}
\proof
Let us fix $i=1,\ldots, k-2$.
Let $h\in
{\Hom}(p_1^*{S}_i,p_2^*{Q}_{i+1})$. By subtracting from $h$ a suitable
homomorphism from ${\Hom}(p_1^*{S}_{i+1},p_2^*{Q}_{i+1})$
restricted to the subbundle $p_1^*{S}_i$ of $p_1^*S_{i+1}$, we get a homomorphism from $p_1^*S_i$ to $p_2^*Q_{i+1}$,
which factorizes through $p_2^*{Q}_i$.
But such a homorphism belongs to $\varphi(
{\Hom}(p_1^*{S}_i,p_2^*{Q}_i))$. The assertion follows.
\qed
\smallskip
Define the following vector bundle on $F_1\times F_2$:
\begin{equation}\label{H}
H=\Ker (\varphi)\,.
\end{equation}
Using Lemma 1, we obtain (with $d_0=0$)
\begin{equation}\label{rH}
\rank (H)=\sum_{i=1}^{k-1} d_i(n-d_i) - \sum_{i=1}^{k-2} d_i(n-d_{i+1})=\sum_{i=1}^{k-1}(d_i-d_{i-1})(n-d_i)\,.
\end{equation}
\begin{note} \rm The present section is an expanded version of \cite[pp. 107-8]{P}. The bundle $H$, defined in (\ref{H}), is modeled on the bundle $K$ from \cite[(7.6)]{F}.
\end{note}
\begin{remark} \rm Let $X$ be a point. It is shown in \cite[Section 7]{F} that for
$$
d_{\bullet}=0<1<2<\ldots <n-1<n\,,
$$
the top Chern class of $H$ is the top
double Schubert polynomial taken on first Chern classes of the tautological quotient bundles on the two copies of
complete flag varieties. It will follow from Section \ref{diag} that it is actually the class of the diagonal of a complete flag variety.
\end{remark}
\section{Diagonal properties}\label{diag}
We adopt the set-up from the previous section, and state the following result.
\begin{theorem}\label{D'} \ If $X$ has $(D)$, then for any vector bundle $E$ and any $d_{\bullet}$, $Fl_{d_{\bullet}}(E)$
has $(D')$.
\end{theorem}
\proof
Let $G$ be a vector bundle of rank $\dim(X)$ on $X\times X$ with a section whose zero scheme $Z(s)$ is the diagonal $\Delta_X$ of $X$.
Fix $d_{\bullet}$, and follow the notation from Section \ref{vb}.
Let
$$
G'=(\pi_1\times\pi_2)^*(G)
$$
be a bundle on $F_1\times F_2$ together with a section $s'=(\pi_1\times\pi_2)^*(s)$.
Consider
$$
Z:=Z(s')=(\pi_1\times \pi_2)^{-1}(\Delta_X) \subset F_1\times F_2\,.
$$
Let $r_1, r_2: X\times X\to X$ be the two projections. The following two vector bundles on $\Delta_X$
are equal:
\begin{equation}\label{qEX}
(r_1^*E)_{\Delta_X}=(r_2^*E)_{\Delta_X}\,.
\end{equation}
Since
$$
(\pi_1\times\pi_2)^* r_i^*E=p_i^*(E_{F_i})
$$
for $i=1,2$, we obtain from (\ref{qEX}) that the following two vector bundles on $Z$ are equal:
\begin{equation}\label{id}
\bigl(p_1^*E_{F_1}\bigr)_{Z}=\bigl(p_2^*E_{F_2}\bigr)_{Z}\,.
\end{equation}
Thanks to (\ref{id}), we get, for any $i=1,\ldots,k-1$, the following homomorphism:
\begin{equation}\label{ti}
h_i: \bigl(p_1^*S_i\bigr)_Z \to \bigl(p_1^*E_{F_1}\bigr)_{Z}=\bigl(p_2^*E_{F_2}\bigr)_{Z} \to \bigl(p_2^*Q_i\bigr)_Z
\end{equation}
of vector bundles on $Z$. Here, the subbundle $S_i\hookrightarrow E_F$
and the quotient bundle $E_F \twoheadrightarrow Q_i$ are from (\ref{tauto}).
The family of homorphisms $\{h_i\}$ gives rise to the section
$$
h=\sum h_i\in \Gamma \bigl(Z,\oplus_{i=1}^{k-1} \Hom(p_1^*S_i, p_2^*Q_i)_Z\bigr)\,.
$$
Suppose $k\ge 3$. It follows from (\ref{ti}) that we have on $Z$
$$
h_{i+1}|p_1^*S_i=p_2^*(q_{i+1})\circ h_i
$$
for $i=1,\ldots,k-2$. Indeed, since $h_i$ and $h_{i+1}$ factorize through the bundle (\ref{id}), the two homomorphisms
$$
h_{i+1}|p_1^*S_i \ , \ \ p_2^*(q_{i+1})\circ h_i \ : \ \ \bigl(p_1^*S_i\bigr)_Z \to \bigl(p_2^*Q_{i+1}\bigr)_Z
$$
are equal.
Invoking (\ref{phi}), we see that
$$
\varphi \circ h=0\,,
$$
so $h$ induces
a section $t$ of the bundle $H_{Z}$, where $H$ is the vector bundle on $F_1\times F_2$ from (\ref{H}) and
(\ref{H2}).
By (\ref{dim}) and (\ref{rH}), we have
$$
\rank(G')+\rank(H)=\dim(F)\,.
$$
We claim that the section $t$ of the bundle $H_Z$
vanishes precisely (scheme theoretically) on the diagonal $\Delta_F \subset F_1\times F_2$. It vanishes on $\Delta_F$ since
the tautological sequence of vector bundles on $G_{d_i}(E)$ is a complex for any $i=1,\ldots,k-1$ (cf. (\ref{exa})).
Having defined the sections $s', t$ globally, it is sufficient to check the converse assertion $Z(t)\subset \Delta_F$ locally, where
$F_1\times F_2$ is the product of the Cartesian square of the base space times the Cartesian square of the flag variety
$Fl_{d_{\bullet}}(E_x)=: F_x$, where $x\in X$. In other words, this boils down to check the assertion over the point $x$, i.e. on $F_x\times F_x$.
For the case of complete flags, see \cite[p. 402]{F}. For any $d_{\bullet}$, let $f\in Z$ with $\pi_1(x)=\pi_2(x)=x$, so we may
regard $f$ as a point
$$
f=(L_1 \subset \cdots \subset L_{k-1}\subset L_k=E_x \ , \ M_1\subset \cdots \subset M_{k-1}\subset M_k=E_x)
$$
in $F_x\times F_x$.
Let $F_{x,1}=F_{x,2}=F_x$. For any $i=1,\ldots,k-1$, the restriction of $h_i$ (see \ref{ti}) to $F_{x,1}\times F_{x,2}$ is
\begin{equation}\label{tV}
p_1^*S_i \to p_1^*V_{F_{x,1}}=V_{F_{x,1}\times F_{x,2}}= p_2^*V_{F_{x,2}} \to p_2^*Q_i\,,
\end{equation}
where we write $V$ for $E_x$, $S_i$ and $Q_i$ are the restrictions to $F_x$ of the tautological bundles on $F$, and $p_1, p_2$ are the two projections from $F_{x,1}\times F_{x,2}$
to the factors.
At the point $f=((L_i),(M_i))$, (\ref{tV}) becomes the map
$$
L_i\hookrightarrow V \twoheadrightarrow V/M_i\,,
$$
whose vanishing implies $L_i=M_i$. This holds for any $i=1,\ldots,k-1$. We have proved that set-theoretically $Z(t)=\Delta_F$.
It is not hard to verify that this equality holds scheme-theoretically.
The assertion of the theorem follows.
\qed
\smallskip
We record the following simple fact.
\begin{lemma}\label{triv} \ Let $E$ be a vector bundle on a variety $X$. Let $r_1, r_2: X\times X \to X$ be the two projections.
Suppose that the following two vector bundles on $X\times X$ are equal:
$$
r_1^*E=r_2^*E\,.
$$
Then $E$ is a trivial bundle.
\end{lemma}
\proof
Fix a point $x\in X$. By the assumption, we have
$$
(r_1^*E)_{X\times \{x\}}=(r_2^*E)_{X\times \{x\}}\,.
$$
Via the identification $X\times \{x\}\simeq X$, the LHS is the bundle $E\to X$. The RHS is the trivial bundle $(E_x)_X$. The assertion follows.
\qed
\begin{remark}\label{analiza} \rm
Let us speculate a bit about {\it this} proof of Theorem \ref{D'}.
To convert it to that of $(D)$, we must extend the section $t$ to the whole $F_1\times F_2$. This can be done
only if $p_1^*(E_{F_1})=p_2^*(E_{F_2})$; so, by virtue of Lemma \ref{triv}, only if the bundle $E_F$ is trivial.
\end{remark}
\section{Point properties}\label{point}
We first record the following result.
\begin{proposition}\label{pg} Suppose that $X$ is a quasiprojective variety with $(P)$.
Then for any vector bundle $E$ on $X$ and any $1\le d\le n-1$, the Grassmann bundle $G_d(E)$ has $(P)$.
\end{proposition}
\proof
By the assumption, for a certain point $x\in X$, there exists a vector bundle $G$ of rank $\dim(X)$ and
$s\in \Gamma(X,G)$ such that $Z(s)=x$.
Suppose that $\rank(E)=n$. We realize $X$ as an open subset in a projective variety $X'$. By \cite[Proposition 2]{BS},
there exists a coherent sheaf $E'$ on $X'$ whose restriction to $X$ is $E$. Let $L$ be the restriction of $\cO_{X'}(1)$ to $X$.
We claim that there exists an integer $m$ such that $E\otimes L^{\otimes m}$ has $n$ global sections which
are independent at $x$.
Indeed, this follows (by restriction from $X'$ to $X$) from \cite[Th\'eor\`eme 2(a), p. 259]{Se} which asserts
that there exists an integer $m$ such that the $\cO_{x,X'}$-module $E'(m)_x$ is generated by the elements of $\Gamma(X',E'(m))$.
Choose any $d$ sections out of these $n$ global sections of $E\otimes L^{\otimes m}$.
Using a canonical isomorphism
$$
G_d(E\otimes L^{\otimes m})\simeq G_d(E)\,,
$$
and the assumption on $E$, we can reduce to the situation when $E$ has $d$ sections $\{s_i\}$ which are independent at $x$.
Set $F=G_d(E)$, and denote by $\pi: F\to X$ the projection. Let $Q$ be the tautological quotient rank $n-d$
bundle on $F$. Consider the following rank $\dim(F)=\dim(X) + d(n-d))$ vector bundle $H$ on $F$:
$$
H=\pi^*G \oplus Q^{\oplus d}\,.
$$
We define the following section $t\in \Gamma(F,H)$. On the first summand of $H$, we take the pullback via $\pi^*$ of
the section $s: X \to G$. On the last $d$ summands, we take the following sections: we compose
the sections
$$
\pi^*(s_i): F \to \pi^*E
$$
with the canonical surjection $\pi^*E \twoheadrightarrow Q$. We have
\begin{equation}\label{zt}
Z(t)=Z(\pi^*(s))\cap Z(\oplus \pi^*(s_i))\,.
\end{equation}
But
$$
Z(\pi^*(s))=\pi^{-1}(x)=G_d(E_x)\,,
$$
so that (\ref{zt}) as a point of $G_d(E_x)$ corresponds to the $d$-dimensional vector subspace of $E_x$ spanned by $(s_i)_x$.
We get that $Z(t)$ is a single point in $G_d(E)$. Hence $G_d(E)$ has $(P)$.
\qed
\begin{remark} \rm The projective bundle
$$
P\bigl(\cO(a_1)\oplus \cdots \oplus \cO(a_r)\bigr)\to P^n\,,
$$
$a_i\in \Z$, is a toric variety (cf. \cite{O}). Thus the proposition
gives some support to the conjecture (cf. \cite[p. 115]{P}) that a nonsingular toric variety has $(P)$ (and
perhaps even $(D)$ -- which is known in the surface case \cite{PSP}).
\end{remark}
It is well-known (cf., e.g., \cite[p. 142]{Gr}) that the projective, Grassmann and flag bundles
on quasiprojective varieties are quasiprojective. Realizing a flag bundle as a tower (\ref{tower})
of Grassmann bundles, and using an easy induction, we infer from the proposition the following
result.
\begin{theorem}\label{pf} Suppose that $X$ is a quasiprojective variety with $(P)$. Then for any
vector bundle $E$ on $X$ and any $d_{\bullet}$, the flag bundle $Fl_{d_{\bullet}}(E)$ has $(P)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark} \rm
Sometimes, one
studies the following ``strong point property'' of a variety $X$: for {\it any} $x\in X$, there exists a bundle
on $X$ of rank $\dim(X)$ with a section whose zero scheme is $x$. Granting this property for a quasiprojective variety $X$,
the above reasoning shows
that $F=Fl_{d_{\bullet}}(E)$ has $(P)$ for any point $f\in F$. Indeed, given $f\in F$, put $x=\pi(f)$, and argue as above.
Thus $F$ also has the strong point property.
\end{remark}
For {\it any} scheme, we still have a result explained in the following theorem. We need a definition.
We say that $X$ has
property $(P')$, if for some $x\in X$, there
exist two vector bundles $A$ and $B$ on $X$ such that $\rank(A) + \rank(B)=\dim(X)$, a section $s$ of $A$ and
a section $t$ of $B_{Z(s)}$ such that $Z(t)$ is $x$.
If $X$ has $(D')$, then for any $x\in X$, $(P')$ holds by restricting the data giving $(D')$ to $X\times \{x\}$.
\begin{theorem}\label{p'f} \ If $X$ has $(P)$, then $Fl_{d_{\bullet}}(E)$ has $(P')$ for any $d_{\bullet}$.
\end{theorem}
\proof
Fix $d_{\bullet}$, and write $F=Fl_{d_{\bullet}}(E)$. Let $\pi: F\to X$ be the projection.
Suppose that for the fixed point $x\in X$, there exists a vector bundle $G$ of rank $\dim(X)$ on $X$ with a section $s$ whose zero scheme is $x$.
We shall show that $F$ has $(P')$ for any point $f\in \pi^{-1}(x)$. Let $G'=\pi^*(G)$ and $s'=\pi^*(s)$.
Consider $W=Z(s')\subset F$. In other words $W=\pi^{-1}(x)$.
Using the vector bundle $H$ from (\ref{H}) and (\ref{H2}), we define the following vector bundle:
$$
H'=H_{F \times \{f\}}
$$
on $F \simeq F\times \{f\}$.
Note that $\rank(G')+\rank(H')=\dim(F)$.
Invoke $Z=(\pi\times \pi)^{-1}(\Delta_X)\subset F\times F$ from the proof of Theorem \ref{D'}.
In this proof, we constructed the section $t$ of the bundle $H_Z\to Z$ whose zero scheme
is the diagonal of $F$.
We have $W\simeq W\times \{f\} \subset Z$.
The restriction to $W\times \{f\}$ of the section $t$, gives rise to a section, denoted $t'$, of the bundle
$H'_{W\times \{f\}}\to W\times \{f\}$.
We claim that $Z(t')=f$. The section $t'$ vanishes at $f$ because $(f,f)$ belongs to the diagonal.
It is sufficient to check the converse assertion locally. Let $g\in Z(t')$.
Since $\pi(g)=\pi(f)=x$, we may regard
$$
f=(L_1\subset \cdots \subset L_{k-1}\subset L_k=E_x) \ \ \ \hbox{and} \ \ \ g=(M_1\subset \cdots \subset M_{k-1}\subset M_k=E_x)
$$
as points in $Fl_{d_{\bullet}}(E_x)=F_x$.
Write $V=E_x$. For $i=1,\ldots,k-1$, we consider (\ref{tV}) restricted to $F_x \times \{f\}$:
\begin{equation}\label{hres}
p_1^*S_i \to p_1^*V_{F_x} = V_{F_x\times \{f\}}= p_2^*V_f \to p_2^*(Q_i)_f \,,
\end{equation}
where $p_1: F_x\times \{f\} \to F_x$, $p_2: F_x\times \{f\} \to f$ are the two projections, and $S_i$ (resp. $Q_i$) are the restrictions of
the tautological bundles from $F$ to $F_x$ (resp. $f$).
Restricted to the point $g$, (\ref{hres}) becomes the map
$$
M_i\hookrightarrow V \twoheadrightarrow V/L_i\,,
$$
whose vanishing implies $M_i=L_i$.
This holds for every $i=1,\ldots,k-1$. We have proved that $g=f$, i.e., $Z(t')=f$, and hence $F$ has $(P')$ for any $f\in \pi^{-1}(x)$.
\qed
\begin{remark} \rm
Granting the strong point property for $X$, the above reasoning shows
that $F$ has $(P')$ for any point $f\in F$. Indeed, given $f\in F$, put $x=\pi(f)$, and argue as above.
\end{remark}
\section{Topological properties}\label{top}
We now pass to topology. We first recall some definitions from \cite[Section 6]{PSP}.
Let $X$ be a (smooth) compact connected oriented manifold, and $\Delta$ be the diagonal submanifold
of $X\times X$. We say that $X$ has property ($D_r$) if there exists a smooth real vector bundle of rank $\dim(X)$
on $X\times X$ with a smooth section $s$ which
is transverse to the zero section of the bundle and whose zero locus is $\Delta$.
If $\dim_{\mathbb{R}} X=2m$ and the above vector bundle is a complex vector bundle
of complex rank $m$, then we say that $X$ has property ($D_c$). If $X$ has
($D_c$), then it is almost complex ({\it loc.cit.}, p. 1259). For a complex manifold, we have the following relation
between the diagonal properties: \ $(D) \Rightarrow (D_c) \Rightarrow (D_r)$.
\begin{remark} \rm In \cite[Section 6]{PSP}, the diagonal property ($D_o$) is also studied (one requires that the
bundle involved in the definition of ($D_r$) is orientable). It is proved there that a real projective
space of odd dimension does not have ($D_o$).
\end{remark}
Let $E$ be a smooth real vector bundle on $X$. For any $d_\bullet$ like in Section \ref{vb}, there is an associated flag bundle
$\pi: Fl_{d_{\bullet}}^{\mathbb R}(E)\to X$
parametrizing $d_{\bullet}$-flags of real subbundles of $E$. It is endowed with the tautological sequence (\ref{tauto})
of real bundles. Similarly,
if $E$ is a smooth complex vector bundle on $X$, then there is an associated flag bundle $\pi: Fl_{d_{\bullet}}^{\mathbb C}(E)\to X$
parametrizing $d_{\bullet}$-flags of complex subbundles of $E$, endowed with the tautological sequence (\ref{tauto})
of complex bundles.
\begin{theorem}\label{drE} \ (i) If $X$ has ($D_r$) and $E\to X$ is a smooth real bundle, then $Fl_{d_{\bullet}}^{\mathbb R}(E)$
has ($D_r$).
\noindent
(ii) \ If $X$ has ($D_c$) and $E\to X$ is a smooth complex bundle, then $Fl_{d_{\bullet}}^{\mathbb C}(E)$ has ($D_c$).
\end{theorem}
Proof.
Both cases of the theorem can be proved by the construction using the tautological bundles from the proof
of Theorem \ref{D'}. Using the proof of this theorem and its notation, we have
$$
\Delta_F \subset Z \subset F_1 \times F_2\,,
$$
and we have the section $s'$ of $G'$ and the section $t$ of $H_Z$.
By a partition of unity argument (cf. \cite[Lemma 1.4.1]{A}),
$t$ can be extended to a global section of $H$.
Then, $s' \oplus t$ is a global section of $G'\oplus H$ which vanishes exactly on $\Delta_F$
(compare with Remark \ref{analiza}).
\qed
We say, following \cite[Section 6]{PSP}, that $X$ as above has property ($P_r$) if there exists a smooth real vector bundle of rank $\dim(X)$
on $X$ with a smooth section $s$ which is transverse to the zero section of the bundle and whose zero locus is a point.
If $\dim_{\mathbb{R}} X=2m$ and the above vector bundle is a complex vector bundle
of complex rank $m$, then we say that $X$ has property ($P_c$).
\begin{remark}\label{no} \rm It was shown in \cite[Remark 6]{PSP} that if a bundle $E$
of rank $\dim(X)$ on a (connected) manifold $X$ has $e(E)=\pm 1$ (resp. $c_m(E)=\pm 1$), then we can use this bundle to realize $(P_r)$ (resp. $(P_c)$).
\end{remark}
\begin{remark} \rm
By the argument from Theorem \ref{p'f},
we see that if $X$ has $(P_r)$ (resp. $(P_c)$), then $Fl_{d_{\bullet}}^{\mathbb R}(E)$ (resp. $Fl_{d_{\bullet}}^{\mathbb C}(E)$)
has $(P_r)$ (resp. $(P_c)$). The same holds for the corresponding strong point properties.
\end{remark}
\section{Manifolds $G/B$ for other groups}\label{full}
A general reference for group-theoretic notions used in this section
is \cite{Hu}.
Let $G$ be a simple, simply connected algebraic group over $\C$,
$B$ its Borel subgroup, and $T$ a maximal torus contained in $B$.
Denote by $G/B$ the generalized flag manifold.
In this section, we work in topological category and all vector bundles are complex.
Suppose that the complex dimension of $G/B$ is $m$. We shall study
when $G/B$ has $(P_c)$, i.e. when there exists a vector bundle $E$
of complex rank $m$ on $G/B$ such that $c_m(E)$ is the class of a point in $H^{2m}(G/B;\Z)$
(cf. Remark \ref{no}).
Our main result in this section is
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:point-property-for-flag}
For $G$ of type $(B_i) (i\ge 3), (D_i) (i\ge 4), (G_2), (F_4)$ and $(E_i) (i=6,7,8)$,
the flag manifold $G/B$ has not $(P_c)$, and consequently it has not the diagonal property $(D_c)$.
\end{theorem}
To prove the theorem, we need several results.
Let $\cX(T)$ be the group of characters of $T$ and let $K(G/B)$ be the Grothendieck group of $G/B$ (cf. \cite[Section 2.1]{A}).
Consider the {\it Atiyah-Hirzebruch homomorphism} (see \cite[Definition 3.17(a)]{KK}):
$$
\beta_1: S(\cX(T)) \to K(G/B)
$$
such that for $\lambda\in \cX(T)$, $e^\lambda\mapsto \ \hbox{class of} \ L_\lambda=G\times_B \C_\lambda$,
a line bundle on $G/B$.
Here, we regard the $T$-representation $\C_\lambda$ as a $B$-representation
by letting the nilradical of $B$ act trivially. Then, we extend this definition multiplicatively to the entire symmetric algebra $S(\cX(T))$.
We record (see {\cite[Theorem 4.6]{KK}} and the references therein):
\begin{theorem}
The homomorphism $\beta_1$ is surjective.
\end{theorem}
Since in $S(\cX(T))$ any element is a $\Z$-linear combination of monomials $e^{\lambda_1}\cdots e^{\lambda_k}$, where $\lambda_i\in \cX(T)$, and
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\beta_1(e^{\lambda_1}\cdots e^{\lambda_k})=\beta_1(e^{\lambda_1})& \cdots \beta_1(e^{\lambda_k})\\
=&[L_{\lambda_1}]\cdots [L_{\lambda_k}]= [L_{\lambda_1}\otimes \cdots \otimes L_{\lambda_k}]=[L_{{\lambda_1}+\cdots +{\lambda_k}}]\,,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
the theorem implies the following
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:splitting}
In $K(G/B)$, the class of any vector bundle is a $\Z$-linear combination of the classes of line bundles $L_\mu$ for some $\mu \in \cX(T)$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{remark} \rm
It is shown by Kumar in \cite[Corollary 2.12]{K} that for $G/B$ the present $K$-group is the same as the algebraic geometric $K$-group
discussed in \cite[Section 15.1]{Fit}.
\end{remark}
Recall now the following {\em Borel characteristic homomorphism}:
\[
c: S(\cX(T)) \to H^*(G/B;\Z)
\]
such that for $\lambda \in \cX(T)$, $e^\lambda\mapsto c_1(L_\lambda)$. Then, we extend this definition multiplicatively to all $S(\cX(T))$
(see \cite{Bo1} and \cite{Dem} for more details).
It follows from Corollary \ref{cor:splitting} that
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:image-of-c^*}
The Chern classes of any vector bundle on $G/B$ are in the image of $c$.
\end{corollary}
The smallest positive integer $t_G$ such that
$$
t_G \cdot \text{(class of a point)}
$$
is in the image of $c$ is called the {\em torsion index} of $G$.
We record (see {\cite[Proposition 4.2]{Bo}, \cite[Proposition 7]{Dem} and also \cite{T}):
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:torsion-index}
We have $t_G=1$ if and only if $G$ is of type $(A_i)$ or $(C_i)$.
\end{theorem}
Combining Corollary \ref{cor:image-of-c^*} and Theorem \ref{thm:torsion-index},
the assertion of Theorem \ref{thm:point-property-for-flag} follows.\qed
Let $G$ be a complex reductive group.
Recall that by replacing $G$ with its universal covering group, the flag variety $G/B$
can be regarded as a product of flag varieties associated to simple, simply-connected groups of type
$(A_i)$, $(B_i)$ ($i \ge 3$), $(C_i)$ ($i \ge 2$), $(D_i)$ ($i \ge 4$), $(G_2)$, $(F_4)$ and $(E_i)$ ($i = 6, 7, 8$).
\begin{corollary}\label{red} \rm Let $G$ be a complex reductive group containing either type $(B_i)$($i \ge 3$), $(D_i)$ ($i \ge 4$), $(G_2)$, $(F_4)$
or $(E_i)$ ($i = 6, 7, 8)$ as a factor.
Then, its flag variety $G/B$ has not $(P_c)$, and consequently it has not $(D_c)$.
\end{corollary}
\proof
The class of a point in $G_1/B_1 \times G_2/B_2$ is the product of the classes of points in $G_1/B_1$ and $G_2/B_2$,
and
$$
K(G_1/B_1\times G_2/B_2)\simeq K(G_1/B_1)\otimes K(G_2/B_2)
$$
by the K\"unneth theorem. Therefore, our argument for the proof of Theorem 18 applies straightforwardly.\qed
\smallskip
We pass now to type $(C_n)$. We have an identification of $F=Sp(2n,\mathbb C)/B$ with the space of complete isotropic flags
$$
V_1\subset V_2\subset \cdots \subset V_n \subset \C^{2n}\,.
$$
Let
$$
(0)=S_0\subset S_1\subset S_2\subset \cdots \subset S_n\subset \C^{2n}_F
$$
be the tautological flag on $F$. We set for $i=1,\ldots,n$, $L_i=S_i/S_{i-1}$. Let $x_i=c_1(L_i)$.
Then, we have
$$
H^*(F;\Z)=\dfrac{\Z[x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n]}{(e'_i(x))},
$$
where $e'_i(x)$ is the $i$-th elementary symmetric polynomial in $x_1^2,x_2^2,\ldots, x_n^2$.
Now, the class of a point is $x_1 x_2^3 \cdots x_n^{2n-1}$, which is the top Chern class of
the bundle
$$
L_1 \oplus L_2{^{\oplus 3}} \oplus \cdots \oplus L_n{^{\oplus 2n-1}}\,.
$$
This shows that the following result holds.
\begin{proposition}\label{p} The flag manifold $Sp(2n,\C)/B$ has $(P_c)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{remark} \rm In the paper \cite{KP}, we shall investigate the diagonal and point
properties of the spaces $G/P$.
\end{remark}
\section{Appendix: Explicit formulas for the classes of diagonals}\label{form}
Several authors worked out algebraic expressions for the classes of diagonals of the spaces $G/B$ in the cohomology rings $H^*(G/B\times G/B;\Z)$
(or equivalently in the Chow rings $A^*(G/B\times G/B)$).
Let us mention them and relevant references: Fulton \cite{F, F1}, the second author and Ratajski \cite{PR}, Graham \cite{G},
De Concini \cite{DeC} (see also \cite{FP}).
Let $BG$ and $BB$ denote the classifying spaces of $G$ and $B$.
Consider the sequence
$$
G/B \times G/B \to BB \times_{BG} BB \to BB\times BB\,,
$$
which yields the following sequence of homomorphisms of their cohomology rings:
$$
S(\cX(T))\otimes S(\cX(T))\to H^*(BB\times_{BG} BB;\Z)\to H^*(G/B\times G/B;\Z)\,.
$$
The first map is the Borel characteristic homomorphism and it is surjective after tensoring with $\Q$.
Thus we shall realize the representatives of the classes of diagonals of $G/B$ in
\begin{equation}\label{SS}
S(\cX(T))_{\Q}\otimes_{\Q} S(\cX(T))_{\Q}=\Q[x_1,\ldots,x_n; y_1,\ldots,y_n]\,,
\end{equation}
where $x_i\in \cX(T)$ and $y_i\in \cX(T)$ are coordinates on $T\times T$\footnote{Our convention is that $x_i$ and $y_i$ represent the same coordinate
on $T$; moreover, on $T\times T$, $x_i$ corresponds to the first factor and $y_i$ to the second.}.
In \cite[Theorem 1.1]{G}, the author established a criterion for an element
in (\ref{SS}) to represent the class of the diagonal $\Delta$ of $G/B$. Among other methods, we mention Gysin maps (\cite{P1, PR, G, FP}) and equivariant cohomology (\cite{DeC}, cf. also the end of the introduction to \cite{G}).
\smallskip
For type $(A_{n-1})$, $[\Delta]$ is represented by
$$
\prod_{1\le i<j\le n}(x_i-y_j)\,,
$$
the top (double) Schubert polynomial of Lascoux-Sch\"utzenberger (see \cite{F}). (Note that
our convention for numbering the variables is different from that in \cite{F}.)
\smallskip
For type $(C_n)$, $[\Delta]$ is represented by
$$
\prod_{i<j}(x_i-y_j)\cdot W(x,y)\,,
$$
where denoting by $e_i(x)$ the $i$th elementary symmetric polynomial in $x$,
$$
W(x,y)=|e_{n+1+j-2i}(x)+e_{n+1+j-2i}(y)|_{1\le i,j \le n}\,
$$
(see \cite{F1}), or (see \cite{PR}):
$$
W(x,y)=\sum_{I\subset (n,\ldots,1)} \widetilde Q_I(x)\cdot \widetilde Q_{(n,\ldots,1) \smallsetminus I}(y)\,,
$$
where the sum is over strict partitions $I$, and $\widetilde Q_I(x)$ is defined in \cite[Section 4]{PR}. In \cite{DeC},
the following expression representing $[\Delta]$ was given:
\begin{equation}\label{concini}
\prod_{i<j}(x_i^2-y_j^2)\prod_i(x_i+y_i)\,.
\end{equation}
For type $(B_n)$ we have analogous expressions (differing by powers of 2) (cf. \cite{F1, F2, DeC, PR}). This is also the
case of the formulas for type $(D_n)$ from \cite{F1, PR}.
The author of \cite{DeC} stated that $[\Delta]$ is represented by $$
\prod_{i=1}^{n-1}W_i(x,y)\,,
$$
where
$$
W_i(x,y)=\frac{1}{2}\bigl((1+\frac{y_i}{x_i})\prod_{j>i}(x_i^2-y_j^2)+(-1)^{n-i}(x_i\cdots x_n-y_i\cdots y_n)\frac{y_{i+1}\cdots y_n}{x_i}\bigr)\,.
$$
We can regard this expression in the following way.
First, we multiply $W_i(x,y)$ by $x_i$. Then the first summand is the one for type $(B_n)$, which is almost good but of degree by one greater.
So we add a zero class so that it makes the sum divisible by $x_i$. This gives rise to the second summand.
Notice that the only term in the first summand which is not divisible by $x_i$ is $y_i y_{i+1}^2 \cdots y_n^2$.
Hence we have to add another term involving the $y_i$'s to cancel out the term in cohomology. This gives the above expression.
\smallskip
For type $(G_2)$, in \cite{G}, the following expression was given for a representative of $[\Delta]$:
$$
-\frac{27}{2}(x_1-y_2)(x_1-y_3)(x_2-y_3)(x_1 x_2 x_3 + y_1 y_2 y_3).
$$
Note that here $S(\cX(T))=\Z[x_1,x_2,x_3]/(x_1+x_2+x_3)$.
\begin{remark}\label{cg} \rm
In \cite[p. 483]{G}, the author conjectured that
$$
\frac{1}{2}(x_1x_2x_3+y_1y_2y_3)
$$
is integral. A Schubert calculus computation gives that this class is a $\Q$-linear combination of Schubert classes
\begin{equation}\label{dispr}
-\frac{2}{9} \sigma_{s_2 s_1 s_2} + \hbox{lower terms}\footnote{Here, we use the identification
$
H^*(BB \times_{BG} BB) = H^*_T(G/B)
$
with the bi-grading on the RHS given by the degree in the coefficient $H^*(BT)$ and the degree of the Schubert basis.
So ``lower terms'' mean a $H^*(BT)$-linear combination of Schubert classes corresponding to shorter Weyl group elements.}
\end{equation}
The expression (\ref{dispr}) disproves the conjecture.
\end{remark}
We add another expression for the type $(G_2)$. We now identify
$$
S(\cX(T))_\Q \otimes_\Q S(\cX(T))_\Q=\Q[a_1,a_2;b_1,b_2]\,,
$$
where $a_1$ and $b_1$ (resp. $a_2$ and $b_2$) the two copies of the simple short root (resp. long root).
\begin{proposition}\label{ng2} The expression
\begin{equation}\label{3g2}
\frac12 (a_1+b_1)(a_1-(2b_1+b_2))(a_1+(2b_1+b_2))(a_1-(b_1+b_2))(a_1+(b_1+b_2))(a_2-(3b_1+b_2))
\end{equation}
represents $[\Delta]$.
\end{proposition}
\proof
We use Graham's criterion \cite[Theorem 1.1]{G}.
The Weyl group of $G_2$ is the dihedral group of order $12$.
The orbit of $a_1$ under $W$ is
$$
\{\pm a_1, \pm (2a_1+a_2), \pm(a_1+a_2) \}\,.
$$
This accounts for the first five factors.
The stabilizers of $a_1$ are the identity and $s_{3a_1+2a_2}$,
and the latter takes $a_2$ to $3a_1+a_2$. This accounts for the last factor.
If we evaluate the polynomial (\ref{3g2}) at $a_1=b_1, a_2=b_2$, we obtain the product of all the positive roots.
By Grahams's criterion, the expression (\ref{3g2}) represents $[\Delta]$.
\qed
\noindent
A similar expression was stated in \cite{DeC}. This representative
$$
\frac12 (a_1+b_1)(a_1^2-(2b_1+b_2)^2)(a_1^2-(b_1+b_2)^2)(a_2-(3b_1+b_2))
$$
has property that the global coefficient equals the inverse of the torsion index, which is the best possible.
\vskip10pt
\noindent
{\bf Acknowledgments}
\vskip5pt
We thank Adrian Langer for helpful discussions.
A part of the present article was written during the stay of the second author at IMPA in Rio de Janeiro, in May 2015.
He thanks this institute, and especially Eduardo Esteves, for hospitality.
|
\section{Introduction}
Atoms in highly excited states --- so-called Rydberg atoms --- interact via power-law potentials, which in conjunction with an external laser drive give rise to intricate many-body phenomena. Recent experiments with Rydberg gases have revealed that the dynamical behavior of these systems is of surprising variety. Examples are the emergence of bistable behavior \cite{Carr2013,Malossi2014}, the observation of correlated aggregation of excitations \cite{Schempp2014} and of coherent excitation transport \cite{Ditzhuijzen08,gunter_observing_2013,Barredo14}. Strong interactions also become manifest in the structure of the ground state of Rydberg ensembles. Several theoretical works have predicted and studied the formation and the melting of crystalline phases \cite{Schachenmayer10,Pohl10,vanBijnen11,Sela11,Lesanovsky12,Ji,Honing13,Weimer,Vermersch15}. But only recently it was shown that these crystalline states can be actually accessed experimentally \cite{Schauss14}.
Currently there is a surge of interest in atomic systems in which multiple Rydberg states are excited. One of the main motivations is the presence of an exchange interaction between Rydberg states of different atoms that results in coherent transport dynamics \cite{Ditzhuijzen08,gunter_observing_2013,Barredo14}, the non-local propagation of light \cite{Li14} as well as a non-trivial collapse and revival dynamics \cite{Bettelli13,Maxwell14}.
Interesting physics emerges also in the absence of exchange interactions. The main reason is that depending on the Rydberg states the interaction between two atoms can vary by one or more orders of magnitude \cite{Saffman_2010,Beguin_2013}. This feature is exploited for example in all-optical transistors for light pulses \cite{Gorniaczyk14,Tiarks14}.
In this work we explore the many-body ground states of an atomic lattice gas in which two Rydberg states --- or species --- are simultaneously excited. We focus on a situation where interactions are present only between atoms of the same species. This is reminiscent of the Potts model \cite{Wu_1982}, for which however only few studies exist that consider interactions that extend beyond nearest neighbors \cite{Herrmann_1984, Glumac_1993, Cannas_1997, Bayong_1999}. We show that the ground state of the two-species Rydberg lattice gas features a surprisingly complex structure with a series of compatible to incompatible transitions. In the compatible case the two species can occupy the lattice such that they can both minimize their interaction energy independently. In the incompatible case this is not possible and it leads to mutual frustration. We provide analytical expressions for the regions of stability of the (in)compatible phases in the classical regime, i.e. in the limit of vanishing laser driving strength. The quantum regime is studied numerically as well as analytically with the help of an approximate Hamiltonian of Rokhsar-Kivelson form. These considerations show how frustration persists also in the quantum regime.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim = 0mm 0mm 0mm 0mm, clip, width=\textwidth]{fig1.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) (a) Relevant atomic levels. Two Rydberg nS-states $\ket{\alpha}$, $\alpha=s,w$ (referred to as species) are excited from the ground state $\ket{g}$ by a laser with Rabi frequencies $\Omega_{\alpha}$ and detuning $\Delta_{\alpha}$. Atoms in the state $\ket{s}$ ($\ket{w}$) interact strongly (weakly). (b) Sketch of two minimum interaction-energy configurations for the strong and weak species at incompatible filling fractions. (c) Achieving a minimum energy disposition. The available lattice sites after placing the $s$-species form a distorted lattice with spacings of 1 and 2 times the original lattice spacing. Atoms of the $w$-species are placed in the available lattice sites according to the algorithm of Ref. \cite{Hubbard}. (d) Examples of ground states with different filling fractions $\rho_\alpha$. Incompatible (compatible) cases are shaded in red (green).}
\label{fig:1}
\end{figure}
\section{Description of the system} We consider a one-dimensional gas of atoms trapped in a lattice of spacing $a$ with a single atom per site. The relevant internal level structure of the atoms is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:1}a. The ground state $\left|g\right>$ is coupled to two Rydberg nS-states ($\left|s\right>$ and $\left|w\right>$) via two laser fields with Rabi frequencies $\Omega_\alpha$ and detuning $\Delta_\alpha$ ($\alpha=s,w$). The fundamental interaction between two such atoms is to leading order given by the dipole-dipole potential. However, for Rydberg atoms in nS-states, as considered here, this interaction results in a (second order) van-der-Waals energy shift \cite{Saffman_2010}. For two atoms in the pair state $\left|\alpha\alpha\right>\equiv\left|\alpha\right>\left|\alpha\right>$ and separated by the distance $R$ it reads $V_{\alpha}(R) = C^{(\alpha)}_6\,R^{-6}$. The van-der-Waals coefficients $C^{(\alpha)}_6$ scale with the eleventh power of the principal quantum number $n$ \cite{Gallagher_1994,Saffman_2010,Rydberg2}. This generates strong interactions among Rydberg states and moreover permits to achieve a scenario in which the interaction between two atoms in the pair-state $\ket{ss}$ is much larger than the interaction between two atoms in $\ket{ww}$. Henceforth we focus on such a case, which is in practice achieved by choosing the principal quantum number of state $\ket{s}$ (the strong species) to be larger than that of state $\ket{w}$ (the weak species). Moreover, such large difference in the principle quantum numbers results in a strongly suppressed interspecies interactions \cite{olmos_2011} as experimentally shown in Ref. \cite{Teixeira}.
This is a rather generic feature of Rydberg atoms in the sense that one can find various combinations of suitable levels which satify such strong-weak hierarchy. Identification of these levels is atomic species dependent and the corresponding van-der-Waals coefficients can be calculated using perturbative techniques as described e.g. in \cite{Singer_2005}. To give an idea of the orders of magnitude of the $C_6$ coefficients and how they depend on the principle quantum number, we provide a typical example in Fig. \ref{fig:X}, where we compare the inter- and intra-species interactions for Rydberg states of rubidium.
The Hamiltonian of the system can be written (within the rotating-wave approximation) as the sum of Hamiltonians of the strong and weak species, $H=H_w + H_s$, with
\begin{eqnarray}
H_{\alpha} &=& \sum_{k=1}^{L}\left[\Omega_{\alpha}\sigma^{x(\alpha)}_k-\Delta_{\alpha}n^{(\alpha)}_k+V_\alpha\sum_{l>k}\frac{n^{(\alpha)}_k n^{(\alpha)}_l}{\left(l-k\right)^6}\right], \label{eq:hamiltonian}
\end{eqnarray}
where $n^{(\alpha)}=\ket{\alpha}\bra{\alpha}$ and $\sigma^{x(\alpha)}=\ket{\alpha}\bra{g} + \ket{g}\bra{\alpha}$, and $V_\alpha=C_6^{(\alpha)}/a^6$.
Note, that $H_w$ and $H_s$ do not commute due to the fact that both Rydberg species are excited from a common ground state. This is the origin of the compatible to incompatible transitions as well as the frustration effects which we will discuss in the following.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim = 0mm 0mm 0mm 0mm, clip, width=0.6\textwidth]{figX.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) Comparison of the van-der-Waals $C_6(n_0,n)$ coefficients describing the interaction strength between two rubidium atoms in Rydberg states with principal quantum number $n_0$ and $n$ respectively. $C_6$ for the inter-species case is shown as a blue line (attractive interaction) and red circles (repulsive interaction). The black dashed line corresponds to the intra-species $C_6$, i.e. $n_0=n$. Green crosses represent a possible choice of Rydberg levels implementing the required hierarchy of interaction strengths assumed in our work. Identifying $n_0=65$ with the strong species and $n=47$ with the weak one we get $C^{(s)}_6/C^{(w)}_6 = 50.5$ and $C^{(w)}_6/C^{(sw)}_6 = 49$, i.e. the hierarchy $C_6^{(s)} \gg C_6^{(w)} \gg C^{(sw)}_6$ is well respected (we have denoted here by $C_6^{(sw)} = C_6(65,47)$ the inter-species $C_6$ coefficient).
}
\setlength{\unitlength}{1cm}
\begin{picture}(2,2)
\put(4.4,11.7){\normalsize{ $C_6^{(s)}$ }}
\put(1.5,11.7){\normalsize{ $C_6^{(w)}$ }}
\put(1.5,9.7){\normalsize{ $C_6^{(sw)}$ }}
\end{picture}
\label{fig:X}
\end{figure}
\section{Compatible to incompatible transition}
We start by studying the case $\Omega_{\alpha}=\Delta_{\alpha}=0$ in the thermodynamic limit, i.e. an infinite lattice, where Eq. (\ref{eq:hamiltonian}) reduces to the Hamiltonian of a classical two-species Potts-model with (convex) $1/r^6$ interactions and inequivalent couplings ($V_s \neq V_w$). We are interested in finding the microscopic state which minimizes the interaction energy for given filling fractions of excitations $\rho_s$ and $\rho_w$. For a single species and a general convex potential this problem was studied in \cite{Pokrovsky,Hubbard,Bak,Burnell}. Given the filling fraction the convexity of the potential forces the system into the most homogeneous configuration achievable accounting for the lattice constraint, as shown by Hubbard in Ref. \cite{Hubbard}.
When two species are present it is in general not possible to minimize at the same time the interaction energy of both. An example is given in Fig. \ref{fig:1}(b) for $\rho_s=1/3$ and $\rho_w=1/2$. Finding the actual ground state is simplified by our assumption $V_{s} \gg V_{w}$. Here, the configuration of the $s$-species can be considered as ``frozen'' and not constrained by that of the $w$-species \footnote{This is strictly speaking true only in the asymptotic limit $V_s/V_w \rightarrow \infty$. Otherwise an additional assumption has to be made on the filling fractions, namely $V_s/V_w \gg 1$ \emph{and} $\rho_s/\rho_w > 1$, the situation we consider here. See also \cite{InPrep} for details.}. Atoms of the $s$-species will then arrange following the single species prescription of Ref. \cite{Hubbard}, that is calling $r_l$ the distance between an $s$-atom and its $l$-th nearest neighbor, the $s$-atoms will be distributed on the chain with distances satisfying $r_l=\left\lfloor l/\rho_s\right\rfloor$ or $\left\lceil l/\rho_s\right\rceil$.
This set of constrains identifies a unique distribution for the atoms of the $s$-species, and will in general lead to a deformed lattice formed by the remaining empty sites on which the minimum-energy arrangement of the atoms of the $w$-species needs to be found.
For the example shown in Fig. \ref{fig:1}(b) the $w$-atom sitting in the doubly occupied site has to be moved to an empty site in a way that minimizes the increment in interaction energy. As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:1}(c) the strong species leaves a distorted lattice with a density of empty sites given by $1-\rho_s=2/3$ and lattice spacings $a$ and $2a$. The minimum interaction energy is then obtained by arranging the $w$-atoms according to the single species prescription of Ref. \cite{Hubbard} considering that the filling fraction of the $w$ species on the distorted lattice is $\rho_w/\left(1-\rho_s\right)=3/4$. This finally leads to the state depicted in Fig. \ref{fig:1}(c). The mathematical proof of this method we provide in a separate publication, see Ref. \cite{InPrep}. Some examples of minimum interaction--energy configurations are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:1}(d). From these considerations one finds that two cases, which depend on the filling fractions $\rho_\alpha$, need to be distinguished: (i) The compatible case in which the two species assume their minimum--energy dispositions independently without interfering with each other. (ii) The incompatible case in which the strong species prevents the atoms of $w$-species from assuming their minimum energy configuration.
Understanding whether two filling fractions are compatible is generally a hard task which requires the study of the full arrangement of excitations. In the following analytical analysis we will consider filling fractions of the form $\rho_\alpha=1/q_\alpha$, where both $q_{\alpha}$ are positive integers. Clearly, the minimum energy configuration is achieved when the $\alpha$-atoms are arranged uniformly with distance $q_\alpha$. The filling fractions are compatible only if they share a common divisor (see \cite{InPrep}). In the incompatible case the distribution of the $w$-atoms will be distorted and can be represented by repeated strings of repeated intervals of lengths $...q_w(q_w-1)(q_w+1)q_w...$, as shown for the example in Fig. \ref{fig:1}(c).
Let us now turn to the discussion of the stability of the (in)compatible phases. So far we have assumed that the filling fractions $\rho_\alpha$ of the individual species are externally imposed. However, in practice the filling fraction is controlled by the parameters $\Delta_\alpha$ in Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:hamiltonian}) which act as chemical potentials \cite{Pohl10,Weimer}. The question is then which state, or filling fraction, is actually stabilized in a given region of the $\Delta_{s}-\Delta_{w}$ manifold. As the distribution of the $s$-species is effectively independent from that of the $w$-atoms, we can study its stability with the single species method \cite{Bak,Burnell,Weimer}. The stability of a given filling fraction $\rho_w$ on the other hand is less simple to analyze, as it depends on the configuration of the $s$-atoms. We can obtain an analytical result for the transition to an incompatible state in the thermodynamic limit starting from a compatible arrangement of atoms for which $\nu=q_w/q_s$ is integer (see Section 6 in \cite{InPrep}). The region of stability is delimited by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:stability}
\frac{\Delta_w^{(\pm)}}{V_w}=\sum_{l=1}^{\infty}\left[\frac{1\mp l(q_w-\nu)}{(lq_w)^6}\pm\frac{l(q_w-2\nu)}{(lq_w\mp1)^6}\pm\frac{l\nu}{(lq_w\mp 2)^6} \right].
\end{equation}
On the one hand a transition to an incompatible state takes place when $\Delta_w=\Delta_w^{(+)}$, the value of $\Delta_w$ for which the introduction of one more excitation is energetically favorable when keeping $\Delta_s$ fixed.
In this case the distribution of the $l$-th nearest neighbor $w$-atoms which in the compatible phase is homogeneous, e.g. atoms at distance $lq_w$, is deformed by the introduction of $l\nu$ distances $q_w-2$, and $l(q_w-2\nu)$ distances $q_w-1$.
On the other hand there is a transition at $\Delta_w=\Delta_w^{(-)}$ at which the $w$ species loses an excitation and the compatible distribution is deformed by the introduction of $l\nu$ distances $q_w+2$, and $l(q_w-2\nu)$ distances $q_w+1$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim = 0mm 0mm 0mm 0mm, clip, width=0.7\textwidth]{fig2.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) Exact diagonalization results. (a) Density plot showing the transverse magnetization of the strong species $m_s$ in a parameter regime $\Delta_s$ where the filling fraction in the classical limit $\rho_s^{\rm cl}$, i.e. at $\Omega_s=0$, is $1/2$. The white contours show lines of equal $\rho_s$. (b) Frustration energy (\ref{eq:fe}) plotted along $\Delta_s=102$, i.e. the $\rho_s=1/2$ contour of (a). The blue and red lines correspond respectively to a compatible ($\rho^{\rm cl}_w=1/4$) and an incompatible ($\rho^{\rm cl}_w=3/8$) classical filling fraction. The value of $\rho_w$ is indicated explicitly in the figure for some plateaus. The inset magnifies the first small jump in $\rho_w$ in the incompatible cases. (c,d) Filling fractions of the weak species for compatible [$\rho^{\rm cl}_w=1/4$, (c)] and incompatible [$\rho^{\rm cl}_w=3/8$, (d)] case. The data were obtained with $V_s=100V_w=100.$ }
\label{fig:2}
\end{figure}
\section{Quantum fluctuations and frustration energy.}
We now address the question as to how quantum fluctuations introduced by a laser of finite driving strength affect the compatible to incompatible transitions and in particular the emergence of frustrated states. To this end we consider a non-zero value of $\Omega_s$. This changes the state of the $s$-species from a classical one to a superposition of configurations with different excitation number. We are interested in how this impacts the classical arrangements of the $w$-species, i.e. at $\Omega_{w}=0$. To quantify this we introduce the frustration energy
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:fe}
E_{\rm fr} = E^{(w)}_{\rm 2 sp}(\Delta_{s,w};\Omega_{s}) - E^{(w)}_{\rm 1 sp}(\Delta_{w}),
\end{eqnarray}
which measures by how much the strong species prevents the $w$-species from reaching its minimum energy configuration if it were alone. Here $E^{(w)}_{\rm 2 sp}(\Delta_{s,w};\Omega_{s}) = \vev{ H_{w} }$, i.e. the expectation value of $H_w$ [see Eq. (\ref{eq:hamiltonian})] and $E^{(w)}_{\rm 1 sp}(\Delta_{w})$ is the energy of the classical configuration of the $w$-species in the absence of $s$-atoms.
In the classical limit, $\Omega_\alpha=0$, the frustration energy is zero when the detunings $\Delta_\alpha$ are chosen such that they stabilize filling fractions $\rho_\alpha$ which are compatible. $E_{\rm fr}$ becomes in general larger with increasing $\Omega_s$ as increasing density fluctuations in the $s$-species force the $w$-atoms to assume configurations with increased energy. In order to study this behaviour in more detail we diagonalize Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:hamiltonian}) for a chain of length $L=8$ with periodic boundary conditions. This approach has the typical drawbacks of a small scale numerical study: the presence of finite size effects (though minimized by the periodic boundaries), and the fact that one is limited to filling fractions of the form $p/L$ for $p\leq L$. We will see, however, that the results provide an intuitive understanding of the physics at work. Note furthermore, that the considered relatively small system size in fact comes close to what is currently realizable experimentally in the context of Rydberg atoms \cite{Schauss12,Schauss14}.
For our numerical study we focus on a regime where the strong species in the classical limit forms a crystal with filling fraction $\rho^\mathrm{cl}_s=1/2$. With increasing $\Omega_s$ this crystal melts as is seen in Fig. \ref{fig:2}(a) where we show a density plot of the transverse magnetization $m_s = (1/L) \sum_{k=1}^L\vev{\sigma_k^{x(s)}}$. The magnetization displays the typical lobe-structure \cite{Weimer}, and the formation of a (longitudinally) paramagnetic state ($m_s =-1$) at large $\Omega_s$. Here it is evident that the state of the strong species is formed by a superposition of states with different number of excitations.
Let us now have a look at the frustration energy when the weak species is added. The corresponding data is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:2}(b).
In the classical limit ($\Omega_s=0$) we choose $\Delta_s = 102$ which corresponds to half filling of the strong species, $\rho^{\rm cl}_s=1/2$, and consider values of $\Delta_w$ which stabilize the compatible case $\rho^{\rm cl}_w=1/4$ ($\Delta_w\simeq 0.0159$ blue line) and the incompatible case $\rho^{\rm cl}_w=3/8$ ($\Delta_w\simeq 0.0314$, red line), respectively. We first determine the values of $\Delta_w$ numerically as the midpoints of the stability regions. In the compatible case one can use Eq. (\ref{eq:stability}) to determine $\Delta_w$. In the incompatible case on the other hand Eq. (\ref{eq:stability}) cannot be applied directly.
In the finite size case though, as previously mentioned, only fillings of the form $p/L$ are accessible, and as such the region of stability of $\rho^{\rm cl}_w=3/8$ extends from the upper boundary $\Delta^{(+)}_w$ for $\rho_w=1/4$ to the lower boundary $\Delta^{(-)}_w$ for $\rho^{\rm cl}_w=1/2$. These cases are compatible such that we can use again Eq. (\ref{eq:stability}) to estimate the midpoint of this region of stability. We find that the values obtained analytically from Eq. (\ref{eq:stability}) are in remarkable agreement with the numerically determined values despite the small size of the system.
At $\Omega_{s}=0$, $E_{\rm fr}$ is zero for compatible densities and finite for incompatible ones. With increasing $\Omega_{s}$, the $w$-species becomes more and more frustrated which is reflected in an increase of $E_{\rm fr}$. Interestingly, this increase is step-wise and each step is accompanied by a change of the filling fraction $\rho_w$ of $w$-atoms, whose value is provided in Fig. \ref{fig:2}(b) for each plateau of $E_{\rm fr}$.
Furthermore, we show the behavior of the weak filling fraction in the entire $\Omega_{s}-\Delta_{s}$ plane in Fig. \ref{fig:2}(c,d). Note, that contrary to $\rho_s$ [shown as contours in Fig. \ref{fig:2}(a)], $\rho_w$ exhibits a lobe like structure which is not symmetric. This can be understood as follows: For a given finite $\Omega_{s}$ the filling fraction $\rho_s$ decreases with decreasing $\Delta_s$. The resulting smaller number of $s$-atoms permits the accommodation of a larger number of $w$-atoms. This effect is stronger the larger $\Omega_{s}$ leading to an increasing asymmetry of the lobes in Figs. \ref{fig:2}(c,d). Moreover, for any $\Delta_s$, $\rho_w$ decreases stepwise with increasing $\Omega_s$ and eventually vanishes. The decrease in $\rho_w$ can be qualitatively explained as follows: As $\Omega_s$ increases the ground state begins to contain basis states with $s$-atom numbers that are larger than in the classical case. This forces the $w$-atoms to assume a lower filling fraction. The fraction of admixed basis states with increased $s$-atom number becomes larger the larger $\Delta_s$ [see contours in Fig. \ref{fig:2}(a)] which results in the asymmetry of the lobes in Figs. \ref{fig:2}(c,d).
We expect the qualitative features, namely the increase of frustration with $\Omega_{s}$ to hold also in the thermodynamic limit. To study this a semi-analytical treatment of quantum fluctuations based on a perturbative expansion of the ground state around the classical limit could in principle be performed. This task is, however, quite involved due to the fact that the filling fraction of the weak species is in fact a function of $\Omega_{s}$. Nevertheless, one can still gain analytical insight into the quantum regime by considering the description of the system in terms of an approximate Hamiltonian, as is shown in the following.
\section{Rokhsar Kivelson approximation}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[trim = 0mm 0mm 0mm 0mm, clip, width=\textwidth]{fig3final3.pdf}
\caption{(Color online)
(a) RK manifold of the $s$-atoms (solid blue line) and the $w$-atoms (red dashed line) \correction{for $V_s=100V_w=100$}. The RK manifold is parameterized by the parameters $\xi_\alpha$ which increase when going from right to left along the manifolds. \correction{The inset show a magnification of the main figure in the region of small $\Omega_\alpha$.} (b) Filling fractions $\rho_{\alpha}=(1/L)\sum_{k=1}^L \bra{G}n^{(\alpha)}_k\ket{G}$ as function of $\xi_{w}$ in the absence of $s$-atoms. Here $\rho_w$ saturates to its unfrustrated value $1/2$. \correction{The blue circles and red triangles represent the filling fractions obtained by diagonalizing exactly Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:hamiltonian}) for L=6 with periodic boundary conditions. We chose $V_s=100V_w=100$, and used the definitions of $\xi_{s,w}$ to fix $\Omega_{s,w}$, and Eq. (\ref{eq:RKmanifold}) to fix $\Delta_{s,w}$}. (c) In the presence of $s$-atoms the $w$-atoms can only assume a maximum filling fraction $\rho_s=1/3$ and form a frustrated state with \emph{exponentially many} configurations. The inset shows two example configurations with filling $\rho_w=1/3$. Here red ellipsoids (blue rectangles) sketch the dimers (trimers) of the RK construction. \correction{The blue circles and red triangles are the exact results drawn for comparison, and are obtained with the same method explained for panel (b)}.}
\label{fig:3}
\end{figure}
In the following we conduct an approximate analytical study of the ground state by means of a Rokhsar-Kivelson (RK) Hamiltonian $H_\mathrm{RK}$. This generalizes the approach used in Refs. \cite{Lesanovsky11,Lesanovsky12,Levi} for characterizing the statics of a Rydberg gas.
The central idea is to approximate the Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:hamiltonian}) as a sum of local positive semi-definite projective Hamiltonians $H_{\mathrm{RK}}=\sum_{k=1}^{L}h_k$.
In this case a state $\ket{G}$ can be found which is annihilated by each of the local Hamiltonians, i.e. $h_k\ket{G}=0$, and thus represents the ground state of $H_\mathrm{RK}$. Under the RK approximation the ground state $\ket{G}$ is given by a superposition of classical configurations of a gas of hard-core polymers. As is shown below, this procedure neglects the long-range tails in the interactions. As a consequence the densities that the different species assume in the classical limit need to be adjusted by hand.
We consider a situation where in the classical limit the densities of the weak and strong species are given by $\rho_w=1/2$ and $\rho_s=1/3$. In this case the we can think of atoms in terms of polymers extending over sites at maximal distance $R_w=1$ (dimers) and $R_s=2$ (trimers), respectively (see Ref. \cite{Levi} for detail). The polymer analogy is equivalent to the hard-core conditions $n^{(w)}_k n^{(w)}_{k \pm 1}=0$ and $n^{(s)}_k n^{(s)}_{k \pm 1}=n^{(s)}_k n^{(s)}_{k \pm 2}=0$. Neglecting interactions on distances larger than $R_\alpha+1$ and making the hard-core conditions explicit also in the laser-excitation part of the Hamiltonian \cite{Lesanovsky11,Levi}, we can rewrite Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:hamiltonian}) as
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:apprHam}
H = \sum_{k=1,\alpha=s,w}^L&& \left\{-\Omega_\alpha \xi_\alpha +\Omega_\alpha h^{(\alpha)}_k+\left[\Delta_\alpha-\Omega_\alpha\xi_{\alpha}^{-1}-\Omega_\alpha(2R_\alpha+1)\xi_{\alpha}\right]n_k^{(\alpha)}\right. \nonumber \\
&&\left.+\left[\frac{V_\alpha}{(R_\alpha+1)^6}-\Omega_\alpha \xi_\alpha R_\alpha\right] n_k^{(\alpha)}n_{k+R+1}^{(\alpha)} \right\}.
\end{eqnarray}
where the local Hamiltonians $h^{(\alpha)}_k$ are given by
\begin{equation}
h^{(\alpha)}_k=\Pi^{(\alpha)}_k\left( \sigma^{x (\alpha)}_k+\xi_\alpha n^{(g)}_k+\xi^{-1}_\alpha n^{(\alpha)}_k \right).
\end{equation}
The $h^{(\alpha)}_k$ are the above-mentioned positive semi-definite operators which are proportional to projection operators and whose sum yields the RK Hamiltonian. The projection operators $\Pi^{(\alpha)}_k$ implement the hard-core condition by ensuring that dimers (trimers) do not occupy neighboring (next-neighboring) sites: $\Pi^{(w)}_k=p^{(w)}_{k-1}p^{(w)}_{k+1}$ and $\Pi^{(s)}_k=p^{(s)}_{k-2}p^{(s)}_{k-1}p^{(s)}_{k+1}p^{(s)}_{k+2}$ with $p^{(\alpha)}_k=1-n^{(\alpha)}_k$.
Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:apprHam}) is not yet of RK form since there are a number of additional terms. For specific parameter choices, however, these terms vanish up to trivial constants. In order to make this more transparent we have introduced (following Ref. \cite{Lesanovsky11}) the parameters $\xi_\alpha$. Those can be chosen freely since the Hamiltonian does not depend on them, as can be seen when multiplying out all the individual terms.
The RK form is assumed when choosing $\xi_\alpha=f_\alpha\,V_{\alpha}/\Omega_\alpha$ with $f_s=1/(2\times3^6)$ and $f_w=1/2^6$ and requiring the parameters $\Omega_\alpha, \Delta_\alpha, V_{\alpha}$ to accomplish
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:RKmanifold}
\left(\frac{\Omega_\alpha}{f_\alpha V_\alpha}\right)^2=\frac{\Delta_\alpha}{f_\alpha V_\alpha}+g_\alpha,
\end{eqnarray}
where $g_s=5$ and $g_w=3$. The first condition eliminates the two terms in the second line of Eq. (\ref{eq:apprHam}) while the second one leads to a cancellation of the terms proportional to $\Delta_\alpha$ and $\Omega_\alpha$. Both conditions define the so-called RK-manifold [see Fig. \ref{fig:3}(a)] on which Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:apprHam}) assumes the RK form
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Happrox}
H_\mathrm{RK}=-(\Omega_s\xi_s+\Omega_w\xi_w)L+\sum_{k=1,\alpha=s,w}^L \Omega_\alpha h^{(\alpha)}_k.
\end{equation}
The ground state $\ket{G}$ of $H_\mathrm{RK}$ is written as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:GS}
\ket{G}=\prod_{k=1}^N\left(1-\xi_d \Pi^{(w)}_k c^{(w)\dagger}_k-\xi_t \Pi^{(s)}_k c^{(s)\dagger}_k\right)\ket{0},
\end{equation}
where $\ket{0}=\bigotimes_{i=1}^N\ket{g}_i$ and $c^{(\alpha)\dagger}=\ket{\alpha}\bra{g}$.
The parameters $\xi_\alpha$ can be then thought of as the fugacities of the dimers and trimers gases, such that large (small) values result in a ground state with high (low) density of the respective species.
The ground state (\ref{eq:GS}) can be represented explicitly as matrix product state (see e.g. \cite{Levi}). We can now use the ground state $H_\mathrm{RK}$ to get an idea of the effect of quantum fluctuations on crystalline states. We find that frustrated states emerge also away from the classical limit, i.e. for non-zero $\Omega_\alpha$.
By construction $H_\mathrm{RK}$ is frustration free, i.e. the frustration energy (\ref{eq:fe}) is always zero. In fact this is an artifact stemming from the omission of long-range tails. Nevertheless, the interspecies frustration still manifests in the behaviour of the filling fractions, Fig. \ref{fig:3}. In Fig. \ref{fig:3}(b), where we set $\xi_s<0$ in order to have a low density of dimers, we find that indeed only dimers are occupying the lattice and that they fill it completely in the limit $\xi_w \rightarrow \infty$. This corresponds to a unique (translationally invariant) crystalline ground state with $\rho_w = 1/2$. On the other hand in Fig. \ref{fig:3}(c) we fix the parameter $\xi_s$ such that the strong species (trimers) fills up the lattice at density $\rho_s=1/3$. We now increase $\xi_w$ which increases the density of the weak species. However, instead of a saturation at density $1/2$ --- as in the absence of the strong species --- we find that $\rho_w$ tends to a value of $1/3$. This is a signature of inter-species frustration. The weak species does not crystallize but is in a superposition of exponentially many states with density $1/3$, two of which are shown in the inset of Fig. \ref{fig:3}(c).
\section{Summary and outlook}
We have investigated the statics of a two component Rydberg gas at zero temperature, with particular focus on the emergence of frustration effects. In the classical regime we identified regions in parameter space where the two Rydberg species form compatible and incompatible arrangements. In the quantum case we introduced the frustration energy to quantify the degree of frustration. We found that this quantity shows a staircase pattern as the system visits different phases characterized by different filling fractions. Finally, we performed an approximate analytical study of the quantum regime by means of an RK Hamiltonian, which further corroborated the existence of frustrated states.
Our analysis provides insights into the complexity of ground state structures in multi-component Rydberg gases. In the future it would be interesting to extend the work to situations without the strong-weak hierarchy that was assumed here. Moreover, an extension of the analysis to Rydberg gases with more than two relevant excited states and/or to high-dimensional lattices would be desirable due to the number of Rydberg lattice experiments that recently has become available.
\section{Acknowledgements}
We are very indebted to Weibin Li for providing us with data used to plot Fig. \ref{fig:X}. E.L. would like to thank M. Marcuzzi for insightful discussions. J. M. would like to thank H. Weimer for useful discussions. The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Research Council under the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP/2007-2013) / ERC Grant Agreement No. 335266 (ESCQUMA), the EU-FET grants HAIRS 612862 and from the University of Nottingham. Further
funding was received through the H2020-FETPROACT-2014 Grant No. 640378 (RYSQ) and the EPSRC Grant no.\ EP/M014266/1. \\
\\
\\
\bibliographystyle{iopart-num}
\providecommand{\newblock}{}
\section{Introduction}
The \texttt{iopart-num} Bib\TeX{} style is intended for use in
preparing manuscripts for Institute of Physics Publishing journals,
including Journal of Physics. It provides numeric citation with
Harvard-like formatting, based upon the specification in ``How to
prepare and submit an article for publication in an IOP journal using
\LaTeXe'' by Graham Douglas (2005).
The \texttt{iopart-num} package is available on the Comprehensive
\TeX{} Archive Network (CTAN) as \texttt{/biblio/bibtex/contrib/iopart-num}.
\section{General instructions}
To use the \texttt{iopart-num} style, include the command
\verb+\bibliographystyle{iopart-num}+ in the
document preamble. The reference section is then inserted into the
document with the command \verb+ |
\section{Proofs Omitted from Section~\ref{sec:limit}}
\label{sec:proof_local}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:mono local}}
Let $s$ denote the accessed element in the before-path $P$ (i.e.\ the root of $A$).
(i) Suppose for contradiction that the after-tree $A$ is not decomposable into $2w$ monotone sets. As a corollary of Lemma~\ref{lem:tree_monotone}, $A$ contains a sequence of elements
$x_1, x_2,$ $\dots, x_{w+1}$ such that either (a) $s<x_1<\dots<x_{w+1}$, or (b) $x_{w+1}<x_w<\dots<x_1<s$ holds, and $x_{i+1}$ is a descendant of $x_{i}$ for all $i$. Assume that case (a) holds; the other case is symmetric.
Let $i'$ be the first index for which $x_{w+1} \in P_{i'}$. From the (window-size) condition we know that $P_{i'}$ contains at most $w$ elements, and thus there exists some index $j<w+1$ such that $x_{j} \notin P_{i'}$. As $x_j$ is a descendant of $x_{w+1}$ in the before-path, it was on some path $P_i''$ for $i''<i'$, and due to the (no-revisit) condition it will not be on another path in the future. Thus, it is impossible that $x_j$ becomes an ancestor of $x_{w+1}$, so no local algorithm can create $A$ from $P$.
\newcommand{\mathit{FRA}}\newcommand{\FLA}{\mathit{FLA}}{\mathit{FRA}}\newcommand{\FLA}{\mathit{FLA}}
\newcommand{\mathit{parent}}{\mathit{parent}}
(ii) We give an explicit local algorithm $\mathcal{A}$ that creates the tree $A$ from path $P$. As in the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:tree_monotone} we decompose $A_{>}=R_{1}\dot{\cup}\dots\dot{\cup}R_{w_R}$, and $A_{<}=L_{1}\dot{\cup}\dots\dot{\cup}L_{w_L}$, where $R_{i}$ (resp.\ $L_{i}$) is the set of elements whose search path contains exactly $i$ right (resp.\ left) turns. Let $L_0 = R_0 = \{ s\}$. Let $P = (x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_k = s)$ be the search path for $s$, i.e.,
$x_1$ is the root of the current tree and $x_{j+1}$ is a child of $x_j$. For any $j$, let $t_j(R_i)$ be the element in $R_i \cap \{x_j,\ldots,x_k \}$ with minimal index; $t_j(L_i)$ is defined analogously.
For any node $x$ of $A$, let the first right ancestor $\mathit{FRA}}\newcommand{\FLA}{\mathit{FLA}(x)$ be the first ancestor of $x$ in $A$ that is larger than $x$ (if any) and let the first left ancestor $\FLA(x)$ be the first ancestor of $x$ smaller than $x$ (if any).
\begin{lemma} Fix $j$, let $X = \{x_j,\ldots,x_k\}$, consider any $i \ge 1$, and let $x = t_j(R_i)$.
\begin{compactenum}[(i)]
\item If $x$ is a right child in $A$ then its parent belongs to $X \cap R_{i-1}$.
\item If $x$ is a left child in $A$ then $\FLA(x)$ is equal to $t_j(X_{i-1})$ and $\mathit{FRA}}\newcommand{\FLA}{\mathit{FLA}(x) \not\in X$.
\item If $x$ is a right child and $\mathit{FRA}}\newcommand{\FLA}{\mathit{FLA}(x) \in X$ then all nodes in the subtree of $A$ rooted at $x$ belong to $X$.
\item If $\mathit{FRA}}\newcommand{\FLA}{\mathit{FLA}(x) \in X$ then $\mathit{FRA}}\newcommand{\FLA}{\mathit{FLA}(t_j(R_\ell)) \in X$ for all $\ell \ge i$.
\end{compactenum}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}\let\qed\relax
\begin{compactenum}[(i)]
\item The parent of $x$ lies between $s$ and $x$ and hence belongs to $X$. By definition of the $R_i$'s, it also belongs to $R_{i-1}$.
\item $\mathit{parent}(x) \in R_i$ and hence, by definition of $t_j(R_i)$, $\mathit{parent}(x) \not\in X$. $\FLA(x) < x$ and hence
$\FLA(x) \in X \cap R_{i-1}$. The element in $R_{i-1}$ after $\FLA(x)$ is larger than $\mathit{parent}(x)$ and hence does not belong to $X$. The second claim holds since $\mathit{FRA}}\newcommand{\FLA}{\mathit{FLA}(x) \in R_i$ if $x$ is a left child.
\item The elements between $s$ and $\mathit{FRA}}\newcommand{\FLA}{\mathit{FLA}(x)$ (inclusive) belong to $X$.
\item Since $z = \mathit{FRA}}\newcommand{\FLA}{\mathit{FLA}(x) \in X$, $x$ is a right child and $z$ belongs to $R_\ell$ for some $\ell < i$. Since $x = t_j(R_i)$, the right subtree of $z$ contains no element in $X \cap R_i$. Consider any $\ell > i$. Then $t_j(R_\ell)$ must lie in the left subtree of $z$ and hence $\mathit{FRA}}\newcommand{\FLA}{\mathit{FLA}(t_j(R_\ell) \le z$. Thus $\mathit{FRA}}\newcommand{\FLA}{\mathit{FLA}(t_j(R_\ell)) \in X$. \hfill $\square$
\end{compactenum}\end{proof}
We are now ready for the algorithm. We traverse the search path $P$
to $s$ backwards towards the root. Let $P = (x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_k = s)$. Assume that we have reached node $x_j$. Let $X = \{x_j,\ldots,x_k\}$. We maintain an active set $A^*$ of nodes. It consists of all $t_j(R_i)$ such that $\mathit{FRA}}\newcommand{\FLA}{\mathit{FLA}(t_j(R_i)) \not\in X$ and all $t_j(L_i)$ such that $\FLA(t_j(L_i)) \not\in X$. When $j = k$, $A^* = \{s\}$. Consider any $y \in A^*$ and assume $\mathit{parent}(y) \in X$. Then $y$ must be a right child by (ii) and $\mathit{FRA}}\newcommand{\FLA}{\mathit{FLA}(y) \not\in X$. Since $\mathit{FRA}}\newcommand{\FLA}{\mathit{FLA}(y)$ is also $\mathit{FRA}}\newcommand{\FLA}{\mathit{FLA}(\mathit{parent}(y))$, the parent is also active.
By part (iv) of the preceding Lemma, there are indices $\ell$ and $r$ such that exactly the nodes $t_j(L_{-\ell})$ to $t_j(R_r)$ are active. When $j = k$, only $t_j(R_0) = s$ is active. We maintain the active nodes in a path $P'$. By the preceding paragraph, the nodes in $X \setminus A^*$ form subtrees of $A$. We attach them to $P'$ at the appropriate places and we also attach $P'$ to the initial segment $x_1$ to $x_{j-1}$ of $P$.
What are the actions required when we move from $x_j$ to $x_{j-1}$? Assume $x_{j-1} > s$ and let $X' = \{x_{j-1},\ldots,x_k\}$. Also assume that $x_{j-1}$ belongs to $R_i$ and hence $x_{j-1} = t_{j-1}(R_i)$. For all $\ell \not= i$, $t_j(R_\ell) = t_{j-1}(R_\ell)$. Notice that $x_{j-1}$ is larger than all elements in $X$ and hence $\mathit{FRA}}\newcommand{\FLA}{\mathit{FLA}(x_{j-1}) \not\in X'$. Thus $x_{j-1}$ becomes an active element and the $t_j(R_\ell)$ for $\ell < i$ are active and will stay active. All $t_j(R_\ell)$, $\ell > j$, with $\mathit{FRA}}\newcommand{\FLA}{\mathit{FLA}(t_j(R_\ell)) = x_{j-1}$ will become inactive and part of the subtree of $A$ formed by the inactive nodes between $t_{j-1}(R_{i-1})$ and $x_{j-1}$. We change the path $P'$ accordingly.
\paragraph{Remark:} The algorithm in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:mono local} relies on advice about the global structure of the before-path to after-tree transformation, in particular, it needs information about the nearest left- or right- ancestor of a node in the after-tree $A$. This fact makes Theorem~\ref{thm:mono local} more generally applicable. We observe that a limited amount of information about the already-processed structure of the before-path can be encoded in the shape of the path $P'$ that contains the active set $A^*$ (the choice of the path shape is rather arbitrary, as long as the largest or the smallest element is at its root).
\subsection{Discussion of known local algorithms}
\label{sec:known local}
This section further illustrates the generality of Theorem \ref{thm:suff tree}.
For any element $x$ in $T$, the neighbors of $x$ are the predecessor
of $x$ and the successor of $x$.
\paragraph{Subramanian local algorithm~\cite{Subramanian96}:}
This type of algorithm is such that 1) there is a constant $D$ such
that \emph{the} leaf of $P_{i+D}$ is not a leaf of $T_{i}$, 2) if the depth
of the leaf $l_{i}$ of $P_{i}$ is $d_{i}$, then the depth of $l_{i}$
and neighbor of $l_{i}$ in $T_{i}$ is less than $d_{i}$.
\paragraph{Georgakopoulos and McClurkin local algorithm~\cite{GeorgakopoulosM04}:}
This type of algorithm is such that 1) the leaf of $P_{i+1}$ cannot
be a leaf of $T_{i}$, 2) if there are $k$ transformations yielding
$T_{1},\dots,T_{k}$, then there are $\Omega(k)$ many $T_{i}$'s
which are not paths.
\begin{theorem}
Any Subramanian local algorithm is a Georgakopoulos and McClurkin local
algorithm.\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The first condition of Subramanian implies the first condition of
Georgakopoulos and McClurkin by ``composing'' $D$ transformations
together. From now on we can assume that, for every $i$, the leaf of $P_{i+1}$ cannot
be a leaf of $T_{i}$ even for a Subramanian algorithm.
For the second condition, suppose that, for $i\in\{i_{0},i_{0}+1\}$,
the depth of the leaf $l_{i}$ of $P_{i}$ is $d_{i}$ and the depth
of $l_{i}$ and neighbors of $l_{i}$ in $T_{i}$ is less than $d_{i}$,
but $T_{i}$ is a path.
We claim that composing the $i_{0}$-th and $i_{0}+1$-th transformations
give us a non-path tree. Let $l'_{i_{0}}$ be \emph{the} leaf of $T_{i_{0}}$.
Let $ {\mathit{pred}}$ and $\mathit {succ}$ be the predecessor and the successor of $l_{i_{0}+1}$
in $P_{i_{0}+1}$. As $T_{i_{0}}$ is a path, $ {\mathit{pred}}<l'_{i_{0}}$ if $ {\mathit{pred}}$ exists, and
$l'_{i_{0}}<\mathit {succ}$ if $\mathit {succ}$ exists.
There must exist another element $x \neq l_{i_{0}+1}, {\mathit{pred}},\mathit {succ}$ in $P_{i_{0}+1}$.
Otherwise, $P_{i_{0}+1}$ is of size either 2 or 3. Then there is no transformation such that $T_{i_{0}+1}$ is a path and satisfies Subramanian's condition.
Since $x$ exists, we know that either $x< {\mathit{pred}}$ or $\mathit {succ}<x$. Assume w.l.o.g. that $x< {\mathit{pred}}$.
There must, moreover, exist $x$ such that $x< {\mathit{pred}}$ and $x$ is below $ {\mathit{pred}}$ in $T_{i_{0}+1}$. Otherwise, $ {\mathit{pred}}$ or $l_{i_{0}+1}$
would have depth $d_{i_{0}+1}$ violating Subramanian's condition.
Now $ {\mathit{pred}}$ is higher than both $x$ and $l'_{i_{0}}$ where $x< {\mathit{pred}}<l'_{i_{0}}$.
Therefore, there is a branching in the ``composed'' transformation. So composing the $i_{0}$-th and $i_{0}+1$-th transformations
give us a non-path tree.\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
A Georgakopoulos and McClurkin local algorithm that brings the accessed
element to the root satisfies the conditions of Theorem \ref{thm:suff tree}.
Hence it satisfies the access lemma.\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem \ref{thm:mono local}, we just need to show that the after-tree
$T$ has $\Omega(k-z)$ leaves, when $P$ contains $z$ side
alternations (zigzag) and there are $k$ transformations. To do this,
we claim that all non-path $T_{i}$'s, except $O(z)$ many, contribute
a leaf to $T$.
For each non-path $T_{i}$, suppose that there are two leaves $l_{1}$
and $l_{2}$ in $T_{i}$ which are on the same side. That is, both are
less or more than the accessed element $s$. Then $T_{i}$ would contribute
one branching to $T$, because the leaf of $P_{i+1}$ cannot be $l_{1}$
or $l_{2}$ and so there will be another element between $l_{1}$
and $l_{2}$ placed higher than both of them, which is a branching.
A branching in $T$ contributes a leaf in $T$.
Now if $T_{i}$ is not a path but there are no two leaves on the same
side: this means that there is exactly one leaf on left and right
side of $s$. However, there can be at most $w\cdot z=O(z)$ many
of this kind of $T_{i}'s$. This is because for each side alternation
of $P$, the algorithm can bring up at most $w$ elements from another
side.\end{proof}
\section{Proof Omitted from Section~\ref{sec:heuristics}}
\label{app:depth}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{prop:depth}}
We show that $\mathcal{A}$ satisfies the three conditions of Theorem~\ref{thm:suff tree}. Condition (i) is satisfied by definition.
Let $s$ be the accessed element, and let $L_1$ be its left child in the after-tree. Let $(L_1, \dots, L_t)$ denote the longest sequence of nodes such that for all $i<t$, $L_{i+1}$ is the right child of $L_i$ in the after-tree, and let $T_i$ denote the left subtree of $L_i$ for all $i \leq t$. Observe that the nodes in $T_i$ are ancestors of $L_i$ in the before-path, therefore, $L_i$ has gained them as descendants. Thus, from condition (ii), we have that $|T_i| \leq d$ for all $i$. Since there are at most $d$ nodes in each subtree, the largest number of left-turns in the left subtree of $s$ is $d$. A symmetric statement holds for the right subtree of $s$. This proves condition (iii) of Theorem~\ref{thm:suff tree}.
Next, we show that a linear number of leaves are created, verifying condition (ii) of Theorem~\ref{thm:suff tree}.
We claim that there exists a left-ancestor of $s$ in the before-path that loses $\epsilon d(s)/2 - (c + 1)$ left-ancestors, or a right-ancestor of $s$ that loses this number of right-ancestors.
Suppose that there exists such a left-ancestor $L$ of $s$ (the argument on the right is entirely symmetric).
Observe that the left-ancestors that $L$ has \emph{not lost} form a right-path, with subtrees hanging to the left; the lost left-ancestors of $L$ are contained in these subtrees. From the earlier argument, each of these subtrees is of size at most $d$. Since the subtrees contain in total at least $\epsilon d(s)/2 - (c+1)$ elements, there are at least $(\epsilon d(s)/2 - (c + 1))/d = \Omega(d(s))$ many of them, thus creating $\Omega(d(s))$ new leaves.
It remains to prove the claim that some ancestor of $s$ loses many ancestors ``on the same side''.
Let $L$ and $R$ be the nearest left- (respectively right-) ancestor of $s$ on the before-path. W.l.o.g.\ assume that $L$ is the parent of $s$ in the search path.
For any node $y$, let $d_l(y)$, $d_r(y)$ denote the number of left- respectively right-ancestors of a node $y$ in the search path.
We consider two cases:
\begin{itemize}
\item If $d_l(s) > d_r(s)$, then $d_r(L) \leq d(s)/2$. Since $L$ loses $(\frac{1}{2} + \epsilon) \cdot d(L) - c \ge (\frac{1}{2} + \epsilon) d(s) - (c + 1)$ ancestors, it must lose at least $\epsilon d(s) - (c + 1)$ left-ancestors.\smallskip
\item Suppose now that $d_l(s) \le d_r(s)$. Then $d_l(R) < d_r(R)$ and hence $d_l(R) \le d(R)/2$.
At the same time $d(R) \ge d_r(R) = d_r(s) - 1 \ge (d(s) - 2)/2 $. Since $R$ loses $(\frac{1}{2} + \epsilon) \cdot d(R) - c$ ancestors, it must lose at least $(\frac{1}{2} + \epsilon) \cdot d(R) - c - d_l(R) \ge
\epsilon \cdot (d(s)-2)/2 - c \ge \epsilon d(s)/2 - (c + 1)$ right-ancestors.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{depth1.pdf}\hfill \includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{depth2.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{
Rearrangements which do not satisfy Theorem~\ref{thm:suff tree}. Let $z,\ell$ be the number of side alternations in the before-path $P$ and the number of leaves in the after-tree respectively. Let $n=\abs{P}$.\\
(left) A rearrangement in which every node loses half of its ancestors and gains only one new descendant.
However, $z,\ell=O(\sqrt{n})$. \\
(right) A rearrangement in which every node loses a $(1 - o(1))$-fraction of its ancestors and gains only one new ancestor.
However, $z=0,\ell=O(\sqrt{n})$.
}
\label{fig:depth1}\label{fig:depth2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{depth3.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{A rearrangement in which every node approximately halves its depth. However, there is an element $x<y$
whose search path contains $\Omega(n)$ left turns. By Theorem~\ref{thm:mono local} and Theorem~\ref{thm: necessity}, this rearrangement cannot satisfy access lemma with the SOL potential.
}
\label{fig:depth3}
\end{figure}
\section{Zigzag Sets}
\label{sec:zigzag}
Let $s$ be the accessed element and let $a_1,\ldots,a_{\abs{P} - 1}$ be the reversed search path without $s$.
For each $i$, define the set $Z_{i}=\sset{a_{i},a_{i+1}}$ if $a_i$ and $a_{i+1}$ lie on different sides of $s$, and let $Z_{i}=\emptyset$ otherwise.
The zigzag set $Z_P$ is defined as $Z_P = \bigcup_{i} Z_i$.
In words, the number of non-empty sets $Z_i$ is exactly the number of ``side alternations'' in the search path, and the cardinality of $Z_P$ is the number of elements involved in such alternations.
\paragraph{Rotate to Root:} We first analyze the rotate-to-root algorithm (Allen, Munro~\cite{allen_munro}), that brings the accessed element $s$ to the root and arranges the elements smaller (larger) than $s$ so the ancestor relationship is maintained, see Figure~\ref{fig:splay} for an illustration.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:zigzag}$ \abs{Z} \le \Phi(Z_P)-\Phi'(Z_P)+O(1+\log\frac{W}{w(T(s))}).$\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Because $s$ is made the root and ancestor relationships are preserved otherwise, $T'(a)=T(a)\cap(-\infty,s)$ if $a < s$ and $T'(a)=T(a)\cap(s,\infty)$ if $a > s$. We first deal with a single side alternation.
\begin{claim}
$ 2 \le \Phi(Z_{i})-\Phi'(Z_{i})+ \log\frac{w(T(a_{i+1}))}{w(T(a_{i}))}$.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof} This proof is essentially the proof of the zig-zag step for splay trees.
We give the proof for the case where $a_i > s$ and $a_{i+1} < s$; the other case is symmetric. Let $a'$ be the left ancestor of $a_{i+1}$ in $P$ and let $a''$ be the right ancestor of $a_i$ in $P$. If these elements do not exist, they are $-\infty$ and $+\infty$, respectively.
Let $W_1= w((a', 0))$, $W_2 = w((0,a''))$, and $W' = w((a_{i+1}, 0))$. In $T$, we have $w(T(a_i)) = W' + w(s) + W_2$ and $w(T(a_{i+1})) = W_1 + w(s) + W_2$, and in $T'$, we have $w(T'(a_i)) = W_2$ and $w(T'(a_{i+1})) = W_1$.
Thus $\Phi(Z_i) - \Phi'(Z_i) + \log \frac{W_1+ w(s) + W_2}{W' + w(s) + W_2} \geq \log (W_1 + w(s) + W_2) - \log W_1 + \log (W_2 + w(s) + W') - \log W_2 + \log \frac{W_1 +w(s) + W_2}{W' + w(s) + W_2} \ge
2\log (W_1 + W_2) - \log W_1 - \log W_2 \ge 2$, since $(W_1 +W_2)^2 \geq 4 W_1 W_2$ for all positive numbers $W_1$ and $W_2$.
\end{proof}
Let $Z_{\text{even}}$ ($Z_{\text{odd}}$) be the union of the $Z_i$ with even (odd) indices. One of the two sets has cardinality at least $\abs{Z_P}/2$.
Assume that it is the former; the other case is symmetric.
We sum the statement of the claim over all $i$ in $Z_{\text{even}}$ and obtain
$$\sum_{i \in Z_{\text{even}}} \left(\Phi(Z_i) - \Phi'(Z_i) + \log \frac{w(T(a_{i+1}))}{w(T(a_i))}\right) \geq 2 \abs{Z_{\text{even}}} \ge \abs{Z_P}.$$
The elements in $Z_P\setminus Z_{\text{even}}$ form two monotone sets and hence $\Phi(Z_P \setminus Z_{even})-\Phi'(Z_P\setminus Z_{even}) + 2\log(W/w(s)) \ge0$.
This completes the proof.
\end{proof}
The following theorem combines all three tools we have introduced: subtree-disjoint, monotone, and zigzag sets.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:disj+mono+zigzag}Suppose that, for every access we can partition $P \setminus s$ into at most $k$ subtree-disjoint sets $D_1$ to $D_k$ and at most $\ell$ monotone sets $M_1$ to $M_\ell$. Then
\vspace{-0.1in}
\[\sum_{i\le k}\abs{D_{i}}+|Z_{P}| \le
\Phi(P)-\Phi'(P)+O((k+\ell)(1 + \log\frac{W}{w(s)})).\]
\end{theorem}
\vspace{-0.1in}
\begin{proof} We view the transformation as a two-step process, i.e., we first rotate $s$ to the root and then transform the left and right subtrees of $s$. Let $\Phi''$ be the potential of the intermediate tree.
By Lemma \ref{lem:zigzag}, $\abs{Z_P} \le \Phi(P)-\Phi''(P)+O(1 + \log\frac{W}{w(T(s))})$.
By Theorem \ref{thm:disj+mono}, $\sum_{i\le k}\abs{D_{i}} \le \Phi''(P)-\Phi'(P)+O((k + \ell)(1 + \log\frac{W}{w(T(s))}))$.
\end{proof}
We next derive an easy to apply corollary from this theorem. For the statement, we need the following proposition that follows directly from the definition of monotone set.
\begin{proposition}
\label{lem:tree_monotone} Let $S$ be a subset of the search path consisting only of elements larger than $s$.
Then $S$ can be decomposed into $\ell$ monotone sets if and only if the elements of $S$ have only $\ell$ different right-depths in the after-tree.
\end{proposition}
\begin{theorem}[Restatement of Theorem~\ref{main theorem}]
\label{thm:suff tree}
Suppose the BST
algorithm $\mathcal{A}$ rearranges a search path $P$ that contains $z$ side alternations,
into a tree $A$ such that (i) $s$, the element accessed, is the root of $A$, (ii) the number
of leaves of $A$ is $\Omega(|P|-z)$, (iii) for every element $x$ larger (smaller)
than $s$, the right-depth (left-depth) of $x$ in $A$ is bounded by a constant.
Then $\mathcal{A}$ satisfies the access lemma.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} Let $B$ be the set of leaves of $T$ and let $b = \abs{B}$.
By assumption (ii), there is a positive
constant $c$ such that $b \ge (\abs{T} - z)/c$. Then $\abs{T} \le c b + z$.
We decompose $P \setminus s$ into $B$ and $\ell$ monotone sets. By assumption (iii), $\ell = O(1)$. An application
of Theorem~\ref{thm:disj+mono+zigzag} with $k = 1$ and $\ell = O(1)$ completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{wrapfigure}[11]{l}[0.3\textwidth]{0.7\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth, trim=0 1cm 0 3.5cm]{SplayExample2.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{fig:splay} A global view of splay trees. The transformation from the left to the middle illustrates rotate-to-root. The transformation from the left to the right illustrates splay trees.}
\end{wrapfigure}
\paragraph{Splay:} Splay extends rotate-to-root: Let $s = v_0$, $v_1$, \ldots $v_k$ be the reversed search path. We view splaying as a two step process, see Figure~\ref{fig:splay}. We first make $s$ the root and split the search path into two paths, the path of elements smaller than $s$ and the path of elements larger than $s$. If $v_{2i+1}$ and $v_{2i + 2}$ are on the same side of $s$, we rotate them, i.e., we remove $v_{2i+2}$ from the path and make it a child of $v_{2i+1}$.
\begin{proposition}
The above description of splay is equivalent to the Sleator-Tarjan description.\end{proposition}
\begin{theorem}
Splay satisfies the access lemma.\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} There are $\abs{P}/2 - 1$ odd-even pairs. For each pair, if there is no side change, then splay creates a new leaf in the after-tree.
Thus
\[ \text{\# of leaves} \ge \abs{P}/2 - 1 - \text{\# of side changes}.\]
Since right-depth (left-depth) of elements in the after-tree of splay is at most 2, an application of Theorem~\ref{thm:suff tree} finishes the proof.
\end{proof}
\section{Geometric BST Algorithms}
\label{sec:geom}
In this section, we show that our results can be extended to apply in the \emph{geometric view} of BST algorithms, introduced by Demaine et al.\ in~\cite{DemaineHIKP09}. In particular, we prove that Greedy BST satisfies the access lemma.
A \emph{height diagram} $h:[n] \rightarrow \mathbb{N}$ is a function mapping $[n]$ to the natural numbers.
We say that $h$ has \emph{tree structure} if, for any interval $[a,b]$, there is a unique maximum in $\{h(a),h(a+1),\dots,h(b)\}$.
For any BST $T$ on $[n]$, let $H$ be the height of $T$ and, for any element $a\in[n]$, let $d(a)$ be its depth.
The height diagram $h_T$ of BST $T$ is defined such that $h_T(a) = H - d(a)$ for each $a$. See \Cref{fig:diagram1} for an example height diagram of a BST. The proof of the next proposition is straightforward.
\begin{proposition}
A height diagram $h$ has tree structure iff, for some BST $T$, $h$ is the height diagram of $T$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{figure}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{figure1.pdf}}
\caption{(left) BST with search path and subtree of node 5 shown; (right) height diagram with stair (dashes) and neighborhood (arrow) of element 5 shown.}
\label{fig:diagram1}
\end{figure}
Fix a height diagram $h$. We now define \emph{stair} and \emph{neighborhood} of each element $a\in [n]$.
The stair of $a$, denoted by ${\mathit{stair}}_h(a)$, contains the element $b$ if and only if the rectangular region formed by $(a,\infty)$ and $(b,h(b))$ does not contain any point $(b', h(b'))$ for $b' \in [n]$.\footnote{The reader familiar with the geometric view of Demaine et al.~\cite{DemaineHIKP09} might recognize here the relation with the concept of \emph{unsatisfied} rectangles.}
The neighborhood of $a$, denoted by $N_h(a)$, is the maximal open interval $(x,y)$ such that $a \in (x,y)$ and there is no element $b \in (x,y)$ where $h(b) \ge h(a)$. We remark that the neighborhood is thought of as an interval of reals.
See Figure~\ref{fig:diagram1} for the geometric view of stairs and neighborhoods.
\begin{proposition}
Let $h$ be a height diagram of BST $T$. Then, for any element $a\in[n]$, ${\mathit{stair}}_h(a)$ contains exactly the elements on the search path of $a$ in $T$, and $N_h(a) \cap [n]$ contains exactly the elements in the subtree of $T$ rooted at $a$.
\end{proposition}
Therefore, to put it in this geometric setting, minimally self-adjusting BSTs (or simply BSTs) are algorithms that, given a height diagram $h$ with tree structure and accessed element $s$, may only change the height of elements in ${\mathit{stair}}_h(s)$, so that no element in ${\mathit{stair}}_h(s)$ has height less than or equal the height of any element outside ${\mathit{stair}}_h(s)$. The adjusted height diagram $h'$ must have tree structure.
\emph{Minimally self-adjusting geometric BSTs} (or simply geometric BSTs) are just minimally self-adjusting BSTs without restrictions that $h$ and $h'$ must have tree structure. More precisely, let $\cal A$ be a geometric BST. Given a height diagram $h$ and an accessed element $s$, $\cal A$ may change the height of elements only in ${\mathit{stair}}_h(s)$ so that no element in ${\mathit{stair}}_h(s)$ has height less than or equal the height of any element outside ${\mathit{stair}}_h(s)$. Let $h'$ be the new height diagram $h'$. The access cost is $|{\mathit{stair}}_h(s)|$.
For example, Greedy BST from the formulation of \cite{DemaineHIKP09} just changes the height of all elements in ${\mathit{stair}}_h(s)$ to any constant greater than the height of elements outside ${\mathit{stair}}_h(s)$.
The following theorem shows that even though geometric BSTs are a generalization of BSTs, their costs are within a constant factor of BSTs.
\begin{theorem}[\!\cite{DemaineHIKP09}]
For any geometric BST algorithm $\aset$, there is a BST algorithm $\aset'$ whose amortized cost is at most $O(1)$ times the cost of $\aset$, for each access.
\end{theorem}
\paragraph{Geometric Access Lemma:}
We define the geometric variant of the Sleator-Tarjan potential as $\Phi_h = \sum_{a \in [n]} \log w(N_h(a))$.
Let $\aset$ be a geometric BST algorithm. Let $h: [n] \rightarrow {\mathbb N}$ be a height diagram and let $h'$ be the output of algorithm $\aset$ when accessing element $s \in [n]$.
Algorithm $\aset$ \emph{satisfies the access lemma (via the SOL potential function)} if
\vspace{-0.1in}
\[\Phi_h - \Phi_{h'} + O(1 + \log \frac{W}{w(s)}) \geq \Omega(|{\mathit{stair}}_h(s)|). \]
The geometric access lemma similarly implies \emph{logarithmic amortized cost}, \emph{static optimality}, and the \emph{static finger} and \emph{working set} properties.
Next, we define the geometric analogue of a subtree-disjoint set.
Fix the height diagram $h$, the accessed element $s$ and the new height diagram $h'$.
A subset $X$ of ${\mathit{stair}}_h(s)$ is \emph{neighborhood-disjoint} if $N_{h'}(a)\cap N_{h'}(a')=\emptyset$ for all $a\neq a' \in X$.
The following lemma can be proven in the same way as Lemma~\ref{lem:disj}.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:disj geo}
Let $X$ be a neighborhood-disjoint set of nodes.
Then
\[ \abs{X} \le 2 + 8 \cdot \log \frac{W}{w(N_h(s))} + \Phi_h(X) - \Phi_{h'}(X). \]
\end{lemma}
\begin{theorem}[Restatement of \Cref{thm:greedy sat}]
Let $S = {\mathit{stair}}_h(s)$.
$\Phi_{h'}(S)-\Phi_h(S)\le O(1 + \log\frac{W}{w(s)})-|S|$. Thus, Greedy BST satisfies the
access lemma.\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Write $S = \{a_1,\dots,a_k\}$ where $a_i < a_{i+1}$.
Notice that element $a_i \in S$ has neighborhood $N_{h'}(a_i) = (a_{i-1},a_{i+1})$.
We decompose $S=S_{odd}\dot{\cup}S_{even}$ where $S_{odd}$ and $S_{even}$ are the elements in $S$ with odd, respectively even index. Both sets are neighborhood-disjoint. An application of Lemma~\ref{lem:disj geo} yields the claim.
\end{proof}
\noindent\textbf{Remark:} It is also straightforward to define monotone and zigzag sets in geometric setting and to prove a geometric analogue of \Cref{thm:suff tree}.
\begin{comment}
Given a height diagram $h: [n] \rightarrow {\mathbb N}$, let $H = \max_{a \in [n]} h(a)$. The stair of $h$ at $a \in [n]$, denoted by ${\mathit{stair}}_h(a)$ is defined to contain all elements in $[n]$ that are not ``blocked'' when viewed from $(a,H+1)$, i.e.\ formally, $b \in {\mathit{stair}}_h(a)$ if and only if the rectangular region formed by $(a,H+1)$ and $(b,h(b))$ does not contain any point $(b', h(b'))$ for $b' \in [n]$. The reader familiar with the geometric view of Demaine et al.~\cite{DemaineHIKP09} might recognize here the relation with the concept of \emph{unsatisfied} rectangles.
See Figure~\ref{fig:diagram1} for the geometric view of stairs.
\begin{proposition}
Let $T$ be a tree and $h$ its height diagram.
Then, for any element $a \in [n]$, ${\mathit{stair}}_h(a)$ contains exactly the elements on the search path of $a$ in $T$.
\end{proposition}
\vspace{0.05in}
Now we define the notion of neighborhood. This definition is essentially the same as the one used by Fox~\cite{Fox11}.
Let $h$ be a height diagram.
The neighborhood $N_h(a)$ is the maximal open interval $(x,y)$ such that $a \in (x,y)$ and there is no element $b \in (x,y)$ where $h(b) \ge h(a)$;
we remark that the neighborhood is thought of as an interval of reals. .
It is very instructive to see this in the geometric view (Figure~\ref{fig:diagram1}).
\begin{proposition}
Let $h$ be a height diagram for tree $T$.
Then for any element $a \in [n]$, $N_h(a) \cap [n]$ contains exactly the elements in the subtree of $T$ rooted at $a$.
\end{proposition}
\paragraph{Self-adjusting BST algorithms:} A self-adjusting BST algorithm $\aset$ can be described by a collection of {\em path rearrangement} rules $\{\tau_k\}$ that map a (search) path of length $k$ into a binary search tree with $k$ nodes.
We focus on the family of BST algorithms that rearrange only the search path and do not touch other nodes.
Let $T$ be a binary search tree on $[n]$.
Let $w: [n] \rightarrow {\mathbb R}_{> 0}$ and
for any set $S$, $w(S) = \sum_{a \in S \cap [n]} w(a)$.
Sleator and Tarjan defined the potential function $\Phi_T = \sum_{a \in [n]} \log w(T_a)$ where $T_a$ is the subtree of $T$ rooted at $a$.
We say that an algorithm $\aset$ satisfies the {\em access lemma (via the SOL potential function)} if for all $T'$ that can be obtained as a rearrangement done by algorithm $\aset$ after some element $s$ is accessed, we have
\[\Phi_T- \Phi_{T'} + O(1 + \log \frac{W}{w(s)}) \geq \Omega(|P|) \]
where $P$ is the search path when accessing $s$ in $T$ and $W = w(T)$.
\paragraph{Geometric BST algorithms:}
Now we turn the concepts of self-adjusting BST algorithms and access lemma into geometric ones.
A geometric BST algorithm is a collection of rules that describe how the heights of the elements on a stair can be adjusted.
More formally, we represent each stair on elements by a height diagram $h_{{\mathit{stair}}}: \{-l, -l+1,\ldots, 0,\ldots, r\} \rightarrow {\mathbb N}$.
We think of $0$ as the accessed element, and negative and positive numbers as elements on the left and right stairs respectively.
A geometric BST algorithm is a collection of mappings $\aset =\{\tau_{l,r}\}$ such that $\tau_{l,r}$ maps the height diagram $h_{{\mathit{stair}}}$ on $\{-l,\ldots, 0, \ldots, r\}$ to an adjusted height diagram $h'_{{\mathit{stair}}} = \tau_{l,r}(h_{{\mathit{stair}}})$ on the same set $\{-l,\ldots, 0, \ldots, r\}$.
These rules are applied as follows.
Let $h:[n] \rightarrow {\mathbb N}$ be a height function (i.e. a tree).
If an element $s \in [n]$ is accessed, then the algorithm $\aset$ adjusts the heights of elements in ${\mathit{stair}}_h(s) = \{a_{-l},\ldots,a_0 = s, \ldots, a_r\}$ by outputing $h':[n] \rightarrow {\mathbb N}$ with $h'(a) = h(a)$ for $a \not\in {\mathit{stair}}_h(s)$ and $h'(a_j) = H+ h'_{{\mathit{stair}}}(j)$ where $H = \max_{a \in [n]} h(a)$ and $h_{{\mathit{stair}}}(j) = h(a_j)$, for all $j \in \{-l,\ldots, 0,\ldots, r\}$.
For technical reasons, we only allow height adjustments that lift elements in the stair higher than the non-stair elements.
We say that a geometric BST algorithm is {\em natural} if it guarantees that $h'_{{\mathit{stair}}}$ has tree structure.
\begin{proposition}
There is a correspondence between self-adjusting BST algorithms and natural geometric BST algorithms.
\end{proposition}
We observe that the correspondence can be made one-to-one, with the choice of a suitable canonical height function.
\begin{proposition}[\!\cite{DemaineHIKP09}]
For any (possibly not natural) geometric BST algorithm $\aset$, there is a BST algorithm whose amortized cost is at most $O(1)$ times the cost of $\aset$.
\end{proposition}
These correspondences imply that, in order to analyze the asymptotic cost of a BST algorithm, one only needs to analyze the cost for its geometric counterpart.
\paragraph{Geometric Access Lemma:}
We define the geometric variant of the Sleator-Tarjan potential as $\Phi_h = \sum_{a \in [n]} \log w(N_h(a))$.
Let $\aset$ be a geometric BST algorithm. Let $h: [n] \rightarrow {\mathbb N}$ be a height diagram and let $h'$ be the output of algorithm $\aset$ when accessing element $s \in [n]$.
Algorithm $\aset$ \emph{satisfies the access lemma (via the SOL potential function)} if it always holds that
\vspace{-0.1in}
\[\Phi_h - \Phi_{h'} + O(1 + \log \frac{W}{w(s)}) \geq \Omega(|{\mathit{stair}}_h(s)|). \]
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:mono}
Let $X$ be a monotone set of nodes with
{either $x > s$ for all $x \in X$ or $x < s$ for all $x \in X$}. \marginpar{only makes sense in geometry view.}
If $h'(0) \ge h'(x)$ for all elements $x \in X$ then
\vspace{-0.1in}
\[\Phi_T(X) - \Phi_{T'}(X) +\log \frac{W}{w(s)}\geq 0. \]
\end{lemma}
\end{comment}
\section{New Heuristics: Depth reduction}
\label{sec:heuristics}\label{sec:depth-halving}
Already Sleator and Tarjan~\cite{ST85} formulated the belief that \emph{depth-halving} is the property that makes splaying efficient, i.e.\ the fact that every element on the access path reduces its distance to the root by a factor of approximately two. Later authors~\cite{Subramanian96, PathBalance, GeorgakopoulosM04} raised the question, whether a suitable \emph{global} depth-reduction property is sufficient to guarantee the access lemma. Based on Theorem~\ref{thm:suff tree}, we show that a strict form of depth-halving suffices to guarantee the access lemma.
Let $x$ and $y$ be two arbitrary nodes on the search path. If $y$ is an ancestor of $x$ in the search path, but not in the after-tree, then we say that $x$ has \emph{lost} the ancestor $y$, and $y$ has lost the descendant $x$. Similarly we define \emph{gaining} an ancestor or a descendant. We stress that only nodes on the search path (resp.\ the after-tree) are counted as descendants, and not the nodes of the pendent trees.
Let $d(x)$ denote the depth (number of ancestors) of $x$ in the search path.
We give a sufficient condition for a good heuristic, stated below. The proof is deferred to Appendix~\ref{app:depth}.
\begin{theorem}
\label{prop:depth}
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a minimally self-adjusting BST algorithm that satisfies the following conditions: (i)
Every node $x$ on the search path loses at least $(\frac{1}{2} + \epsilon) \cdot d(x) - c$ ancestors, for fixed constants $\epsilon>0, c>0$, and
(ii) every node on the search path, except the accessed element, gains at most $d$ new descendants, for a fixed constant $d>0$.
Then $\mathcal{A}$ satisfies the access lemma.
\end{theorem}
We remark that in general, splay trees do not satisfy condition (i) of Theorem~\ref{prop:depth}. One may ask how tight are the conditions of Theorem~\ref{prop:depth}. If we relax the constant in condition (i) from $(\frac{1}{2} + \epsilon)$ to $\frac{1}{2}$, the conditions of Theorem~\ref{thm:suff tree} are no longer implied. Figure~\ref{fig:depth1} in Appendix~\ref{app:depth} shows a rearrangement in which every node loses a $\frac{1}{2}$-fraction of its ancestors, gains at most two ancestors or descendants, yet both the number of side alternations and the number of leaves created are $O(\sqrt{|P|})$, where $P$ is the before-path. If we further relax the ratio to $(\frac{1}{2} - \epsilon)$, we can construct an example where the number of alternations and the number of leaves created are only $O(\log{|P|}/\epsilon)$.
Allowing more gained descendants and limiting instead the number of gained ancestors is also beyond the strength of Theorem~\ref{thm:suff tree}. In the example of Figure~\ref{fig:depth2} in Appendix~\ref{app:depth} every node loses an $(1-o(1))$-fraction of ancestors, yet the number of leaves created is only $O(\sqrt{|P|})$ (there are no alternations in the before-path).
Finally, we observe that depth-reduction alone is likely not sufficient: one can restructure the access path in such a way that every node reduces its depth by a constant factor, yet the resulting after-tree has an anti-monotone path of linear size. Figure~\ref{fig:depth3} in Appendix~\ref{app:depth} shows such an example for depth-halving. Based on Theorem~\ref{thm: necessity}, this means that if such a restructuring were to satisfy the access lemma in its full generality, the SOL potential would not be able to show it.
\section{Introduction}
The binary search tree (BST) is a fundamental data structure for the dictionary problem. Self-adjusting BSTs rearrange the tree in response to data accesses, and are thus able to adapt to the distribution of queries.
We consider the class of \emph{minimally self-adjusting} BSTs: algorithms that rearrange only the search path during each access and make the accessed element the root of the tree. Let $s$ be the element accessed and let $P$ be the search path to $s$. Such an algorithm can be seen as a mapping from the search path $P$
(called ``before-path'' in the sequel) to a tree $A$ with root $s$ on the same set of nodes (called ``after-tree'' in the sequel). Observe that all subtrees that are disjoint from the before-path can be reattached to the after-tree in a unique way governed by the ordering of the elements. In the BST model, the cost of the access plus the cost of rearranging is $\abs{P}$, see Figure~\ref{BST-algorithm} for an example.
\begin{wrapfigure}[20]{l}[0.3\textwidth]{0.55\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth, trim=0 0 0 1cm]{BSTExample2.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{BST-algorithm} The search path to $s$ is shown on the left, and the after-tree is shown on the right. The search path consists of 12 nodes and contains four edges that connect nodes on different sides of $s$ ($z = 4$ in the language of Theorem~\ref{main theorem}). The after-tree has five leaves. The left-depth of $a$ in the after-tree is three (the path from the root to $a$ goes left three times) and the right-depth of $y$ is two. The set $\sset{a,c,f,v,y}$ is subtree-disjoint.
The sets $\sset{d,e,g}$, $\sset{b,f}$, $\sset{x,y}$, $\sset{w}$ are monotone.
}
\end{wrapfigure}
Let $T$ be a binary search tree on $[n]$.
Let $w: [n] \rightarrow {\mathbb R}_{> 0}$ be a positive weight function, and
for any set $S \subseteq [n]$, let $w(S) = \sum_{a \in S} w(a)$.
Sleator and Tarjan defined the sum-of-log (SOL) potential function $\Phi_T = \sum_{a \in [n]} \log w(T_a)$, where $T_a$ is the subtree of $T$ rooted at $a$.
We say that an algorithm $\aset$ satisfies the \emph{access lemma (via the SOL potential function)} if for all $T'$ that can be obtained as a rearrangement done by algorithm $\aset$ after some element $s$ is accessed, we have
\[ |P| \le \Phi_T- \Phi_{T'} + O(1 + \log \frac{W}{w(s)}), \]
where $P$ is the search path when accessing $s$ in $T$ and $W = w(T)$. The access lemma is known to hold for the splay trees of Sleator and Tarjan~\cite{ST85}, for their generalizations to \emph{local algorithms} by Subramanian~\cite{Subramanian96} and Georgakopoulos and McClurkin~\cite{GeorgakopoulosM04}, as well as for Greedy BST, an online algorithm introduced by Demaine et al.~\cite{DemaineHIKP09} and shown to satisfy the access lemma by Fox~\cite{Fox11}. For minimally self-adjusting BSTs, the access lemma implies \emph{logarithmic amortized cost}, \emph{static optimality}, and the \emph{static finger} and \emph{working set} properties.
\begin{theorem}\label{main theorem}
Let $\cal A$ be a minimally self-adjusting BST algorithm. If
(i) the number of leaves of the after-tree is $\Omega(|P| -z)$ where $P$ is the search path and $z$ is the number of ``side alternations\footnote{$z$ is the number of edges on the search path connecting nodes on different sides of $s$. The right-depth of a node is the number of right-going edges on the path from the root to the node.}'' in $P$ and (ii) for any element $t >s$ (resp. $t< s$), the right-depth of $t$ (left-depth of $t$) in the after-tree is $O(1)$, then $\cal A$ satisfies the access lemma.
\end{theorem}
Note that the conditions in Theorem~\ref{main theorem} are purely combinatorial conditions on the before-paths and after-trees. In particular, the potential function is completely hidden. The theorem directly implies the access lemma for all BST algorithms mentioned above and some new ones.
\begin{corollary}\label{corollary}
The following BST algorithms satisfy the access lemma: (i) Splay tree, as well as its generalizations to local algorithms (ii) Greedy BST, and (iii) new heuristics based on ``strict'' depth-halving.
\end{corollary}
The third part of the corollary addresses an open question raised by several authors~\cite{Subramanian96, PathBalance, GeorgakopoulosM04} about whether some form of depth reduction is sufficient to guarantee the access lemma.
We show that a strict depth-halving suffices.
For the first part, we formulate a global view of splay trees. We find this new description intuitive and of independent interest. The proof of (i) is only a few lines.
We also prove a partial converse of Theorem~\ref{main theorem}.
\begin{theorem}[Partial Converse]\label{partial converse} If a BST algorithm satisfies the access lemma via the SOL-potential function, the after-trees must satisfy condition (ii) of Theorem~\ref{main theorem}.
\end{theorem}
We call a BST algorithm \emph{local} if the transformation from before-path to after-tree can be performed in a bottom-up traversal of the path with a buffer of constant size. Nodes outside the buffer are already arranged into subtrees of the after-tree. We use Theorem~\ref{partial converse} to show that BST-algorithms satisfying the access lemma (via the SOL-potential) are necessarily local.
\begin{theorem} [Characterization Theorem]\label{characterization}
If a minimally self-adjusting BST algorithm satisfies the access lemma via the SOL-potential, then it is local.
\end{theorem}
The theorem clarifies, why the access lemma was shown only for local BST algorithms.
In the following, we introduce our main technical tools: subtree-disjoint and monotone sets in \S\,\ref{sec:tools}, and zigzag sets in \S\,\ref{sec:zigzag}. Bounding the potential change over these sets leads to the proof of Theorem~\ref{main theorem} in \S\,\ref{sec:zigzag}. Corollary~\ref{corollary}(i) is also proved in \S\,\ref{sec:zigzag}. Corollary~\ref{corollary}(ii) is shown in Appendix~\ref{sec:known local}, and Corollary~\ref{corollary}(iii) is the subject of \S\,\ref{sec:depth-halving}. In \S\,\ref{subsec:nec1} we show that condition (ii) of Theorem~\ref{main theorem} is necessary (Theorem~\ref{partial converse}), and in \S\,\ref{subsec:nec2} we argue that a weaker form of condition (i) must also be fulfilled by any reasonably efficient algorithm. We prove Theorem~\ref{characterization} in \S\,\ref{sec:limit}. We defer some of the proofs to the appendix.
\paragraph{Notation:} We use $T_a$ or $T(a)$ to denote the subtree of $T$ rooted at $a$. We use the same notation to denote the set of elements stored in the subtree. The set of elements stored in a subtree is an interval of elements. If $c$ and $d$ are the smallest and largest elements in $T(a)$, we write $T(a) = [c,d]$. We also use open and half-open intervals to denote subsets of $[n]$, for example $[3,7)$ is equal to $\sset{3,4,5,6}$.
We frequently write $\Phi$ instead of $\Phi_T$ and $\Phi'$ instead of $\Phi_{T'}$.
\section{Necessary Conditions}\label{sec:necessary conditions}
\subsection{Necessity of $O(1)$ monotone sets}
\label{subsec:nec1}
In this section we show that condition (ii) of Theorem~\ref{main theorem} is necessary for any minimally self-adjusting BST algorithm that satisfies the access lemma via the SOL potential function.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm: necessity}
Consider the transformations from before-path $P$ to after-tree $A$ by algorithm $\aset$.
If $A\setminus s$
cannot be decomposed into constantly many monotone sets, then $\aset$ does
not satisfy the access lemma with the SOL potential.\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} We may assume that the right subtree of $A$ cannot be decomposed into constantly many monotone sets. Let $x > s$ be a node of maximum right depth in $A$. By Lemma~\ref{lem:tree_monotone}, we may assume that the right depth is $k=\omega(1)$. Let $a_{i_{1}},\dots,a_{i_{k}}$ be the elements on the path to $x$ where the right child pointer is used. All these nodes are descendants of $x$ in the before-path $P$.
We now define a weight assignment to the elements of $P$ and the pendent trees for which
the access lemma does not hold with the SOL potential. We assign weight zero to all pendent trees, weight one to all
proper descendants of $x$ in $P$ and weight $K$ to all ancestors of $x$ in $P$. Here $K$ is a big number.
The total weight $W$ then lies between $K$ and $\abs{P}K$.
We next bound the potential change. Let $r(a_i) = w(T'(a_{i}))/w(T(a_{i}))$ be the ratio of the weight of the
subtree rooted at $a_i$ in the after-tree and in the before-path. For any element $a_{i_j}$ at which a right turn occurs, we have $w(T(a_{i_{j}}))\le|P|$ and $w(T'(a_{i_{j}}))\ge K$. So $r(a_{i_{j}}) \ge K/|P|$. Consider now any other
$a_i$. If it is an ancestor of $x$ in the before-path, then $w(T(a_i))\le W$ and $w(T'(a_i))\ge K$. If it is a descendant of $x$, then $w(T(a_i))\le \abs{P}$ and $w(T'(a_i))\ge 1$. Thus $r(a_i) \ge 1/\abs{P}$ for every $a_i$. We conclude
\[
\Phi'(T)-\Phi(T)\ge k\cdot\log\frac{K}{|P|}-|P|\log|P|.
\]
If $\aset$ satisfies the access lemma with the SOL potential function, then we must have $\Phi'(T)-\Phi(T)\le O(\log\frac{W}{w(s)}-|P|) = O(\log (K\abs{P}))$. However, if $K$ is large enough and $k=\omega(1)$, then $k\cdot\lg\frac{K}{|P|}-|P|\lg|P|\gg O(\log (K \abs{P}))$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Necessity of many leaves}
\label{subsec:nec2}
In this section we study condition (i) of Theorem~\ref{main theorem}. We show that some such condition is necessary for an efficient BST algorithm: if a local algorithm consistently creates only few leaves, it cannot satisfy the sequential access theorem, a natural efficiency condition known to hold for several BST algorithms~\cite{tarjan_sequential, Fox11}.
\begin{definition}
A self-adjusting BST algorithm $\mathcal{A}$ satisfies the \emph{sequential access theorem} if starting from an arbitrary initial tree $T$, it can access the elements of $T$ in increasing order with total cost $O(|T|)$.
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:necc2}
If for all after-trees $A$ created by algorithm $\aset$ executed on $T$, it holds that (i) $A$
can be decomposed into $O(1)$ monotone sets, and (ii) the number of leaves of $A$ is at most $|T|^{o(1)}$, then $\aset$ does not satisfy the sequential access theorem.
\end{theorem}
The rest of the section is devoted to the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:necc2}.
Let $R$ be a BST over $[n]$. We call a maximal left-leaning path of $R$ a \emph{wing} of $R$. More precisely, a wing of $R$ is a set $\{x_1, \dots, x_k \} \subseteq [n]$, with $x_1 < \cdots < x_k$, and such that $x_1$ has no left child, $x_k$ is either the root of $R$, or the right child of its parent, and $x_i$ is the left child of $x_{i+1}$ for all $1 \leq i < k$. A wing might consist of a single element. Observe that the wings of $R$ partition $[n]$ in a unique way, and we call the set of wings of $R$ the \emph{wing partition} of $R$, denoted as $wp(R)$. We define a potential function $\phi$ over a BST $R$ as follows: $\phi(R) = \sum_{w \in wp(R)}{|w| \log(|w|)}$.
Let $T_0$ be a left-leaning path over $[n]$ (i.e.\ $n$ is the root and $1$ is the leaf). Consider a minimally self-adjusting BST algorithm $\aset$, accessing elements of $[n]$ in sequential order, starting with $T_0$ as initial tree. Let $T_{i}$ denote the BST after accessing element $i$. Then $T_i$ has $i$ as the root, and the elements yet to be accessed (i.e.\ $[i+1,n]$) form the right subtree of the root, denoted $R_i$. To avoid treating $T_0$ separately, we augment it with a ``virtual root'' 0. This node plays no role in subsequent accesses, and it only adds a constant one to the overall access cost.
Using the previously defined potential function, we denote $\phi_i = \phi(R_i)$. We make the following easy observations: $\phi_0 = n \log{n}$, and $\phi_n = 0$.
Next, we look at the change in potential due to the restructuring after accessing element $i$. Let $P_i= (x_1, x_2, \dots, x_{n_i})$ be the access path when accessing $i$ in $T_{i-1}$, and let $n_i$ denote its length, i.e.\ $x_1=i-1$, and $x_{n_i} = i$. Observe that the set $P'_i = P_i \setminus \{x_1\}$, is a wing of $T_{i-1}$.
Let us denote the after-tree resulting from rearranging the path $P_i$ as $A_i$. Observe that the root of $A_i$ is $i$, and the left child of $i$ in $A_i$ is $i-1$. We denote the tree $A_i \setminus \{ i-1 \}$ as $A'_i$, and the tree $A'_i \setminus \{ i \}$, i.e.\ the right subtree of $i$ in $A_i$, as $A''_i$.
The crucial observation of the proof is that for an arbitrary wing $w \in wp(T_{i})$, the following holds: (i) either $w$ was not changed when accessing $i$, i.e.\ $w \in wp(T_{i-1})$, or (ii) $w$ contains a portion of $P'_{i}$, possibly concatenated with an earlier wing, i.e.\ there exists some $w' \in wp(A'_i)$, such that $w' \subseteq w$. In this case, we denote $\mathrm{ext}(w')$ the \emph{extension} of $w'$ to a wing of $wp(T_{i})$, i.e.\ $\mathrm{ext}(w') = w \setminus w'$, and either $\mathrm{ext}(w')=\emptyset$, or $\mathrm{ext}(w') \in wp(T_{i-1})$.
Now we bound the change in potential $\phi_{i} - \phi_{i-1}$. Wings that did not change during the restructuring (i.e.\ those of type (i)) do not contribute to the potential difference. Also note, that $i$ contributes to $\phi_{i-1}$, but not to $\phi_i$. Thus, we have for $1 \leq i \leq n$, assuming that $0\log{0} = 0$, and denoting $f(x) = x\log(x)$:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\phi_{i} - \phi_{i-1} =
\sum_{w' \in wp(A''_i)}{ \bigl( f( |w'| + |\mathrm{ext}(w')| ) - f( |\mathrm{ext}(w')| ) \bigr) }- f(n_i-1).
\end{eqnarray*}
By simple manipulation, for $1 \leq i \leq n$:
$$
\phi_{i} - \phi_{i-1} \geq
\sum_{w' \in wp(A''_i)}{ f(|w'|) } - f(n_i-1).
$$
By convexity of $f$, and observing that $|A''_i| = n_i-2$, we have
$$
\phi_{i} - \phi_{i-1} \geq
|wp(A''_i)| \cdot f\left( \frac{n_i-2}{|wp(A''_i)|} \right) - f(n_i-1) = (n_i-2) \cdot \log{\frac{n_i-2}{|wp(A''_i)|}} - f(n_i-1).
$$
\begin{lemma}
If $R$ has right-depth $m$, and $k$ leaves, then $|wp(R)| \leq mk$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} For a wing $w$, let $\ell(w)$ be any leaf in the subtree rooted at the node of maximum depth in the wing. Clearly, for any leaf $\ell$ there can be at most $m$ wings $w$ with $\ell(w) = \ell$. The claim follows. \end{proof}
Thus, $|wp(A''_i)| \leq n^{o(1)}$. Summing the potential differences over $i$, we get
$
\phi_n - \phi_0 = - n \log{n} \geq - \sum_{i=1}^n{n_i \log{(n^{o(1)})}} - O(n).
$
Denoting the total cost of algorithm $\aset$ on the sequential access sequence as $C$, we obtain $ C = \sum_{i=1}^n{n_i} = n \cdot \omega(1)$.
This shows that $\aset$ does not satisfy the sequential access theorem.
\section{Small Monotonicity-Depth and Local Algorithms}
\label{sec:limit}
In this section we define a class of minimally self-adjusting BST algorithms that we call \emph{local}. We show that an algorithm is local exactly if all after-trees it creates can be decomposed into constantly many monotone sets. Our definition of local algorithm is inspired by similar definitions by Subramanian~\cite{Subramanian96} and Georgakopoulos and McClurkin~\cite{GeorgakopoulosM04}.
Our locality criterion subsumes both previous definitions, apart from a technical condition not needed in these works: we require the transformation to bring the accessed element to the root. We require this (rather natural) condition in order to simplify the proofs. We mention that it can be removed at considerable expense in technicalities.
Apart from this point, our definition of locality is more general: while existing local algorithms are oblivious to the global structure of the after-tree, our definition of local algorithm allows external global advice, as well as non-determinism.
Consider the before-path $P$ and the after-tree $A$. A \emph{decomposition} of the transformation $P \rightarrow A$ is a sequence of BSTs $(P=Q_0 \xrightarrow{P_0} Q_1 \xrightarrow{P_1} \dots \xrightarrow{P_{k-1}} Q_k = A)$, such that for all $i$, the tree $Q_{i+1}$ can be obtained from the tree $Q_i$, by rearranging a path $P_i$ contained in $Q_i$ into a tree $T_i$, and linking all the attached subtrees in the unique way given by the element ordering. Clearly, every transformation has such a decomposition, since a sequence of rotations fulfills the requirement.
The decomposition
is \emph{local} with window-size $w$, if it satisfies the following conditions:
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
\item (start) $s \in P_0$, where $s$ is the accessed element in $P$,
\item (progress) $P_{i+1} \setminus P_i \neq \emptyset$, for all $i$,
\item (overlap) $P_{i+1} \cap P_i \neq \emptyset$, for all $i$,
\item (no-revisit) $(P_i - P_{i+1}) \cap P_j = \emptyset$, for all $j>i+1$,
\item (window-size) $|P_i| \leq w$, for some constant $w > 0$.
\end{enumerate}
We call a minimally self-adjusting algorithm $\mathcal{A}$ \emph{local}, if all the before-path $\rightarrow$ after-tree transformations performed by $\mathcal{A}$ have a local decomposition with constant-size window.
The following theorem shows that local algorithms are exactly those that respect condition (ii) of Theorem~\ref{main theorem} (proof in Appendix~\ref{sec:proof_local}).
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:mono local}
Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a minimally self-adjusting algorithm. (i) If $\mathcal{A}$ is local with window size $w$, then all the after-trees created by $\mathcal{A}$ can be partitioned into $2w$ monotone sets. (ii) If all the after-trees created by $\mathcal{A}$ can be partitioned into $w$ monotone sets, then $\mathcal{A}$ is local with window-size $w$.
\end{theorem}
Due to the relationship between monotone sets and locality of algorithms,
we have
\begin{theorem}
If a minimally self-adjusting BST algorithm $\mathcal{A}$ satisfies the access lemma with the SOL potential, then
$\mathcal{A}$ can be made local.\end{theorem}
\section{Disjoint and Monotone Sets}
\label{sec:tools}
Let $\aset$ be any BST algorithm. Consider an access to $s$ and let $T$ and $T'$ be the search trees before and after the access. The main task in proving the access lemma is to relate the potential difference $\Phi_T- \Phi_{T'}$
to the length of the search path. For our arguments, it is convenient to split the potential into parts that we can argue about separately. For a subset $X$ of the nodes, define a partial potential on $X$ as $\Phi_T(X) = \sum_{a \in X} \log w(T(a))$.
We start with the observation that the potential change is determined only by the nodes on the search path and that we can argue about disjoint sets of nodes separately.
\begin{proposition} Let $P$ be the search path to $s$. For $a \not\in P$, $T(a) = T'(a)$. Therefore,
$\Phi_T - \Phi_{T'} = \Phi_T(P) - \Phi_{T'}(P)$.
Let $X= \dot{\bigcup}_{i=1}^k X_i$ where the sets $X_i$ are pairwise disjoint.
Then $\Phi_T(X) - \Phi_{T'}(X) = \sum_{i=1}^k (\Phi_T(X_i) - \Phi_{T'}(X_i))$.
\end{proposition}
We introduce three kinds of sets of nodes, namely subtree-disjoint, monotone, and zigzag sets, and derive bounds for the potential change for each one of them.
A subset $X$ of the search path is \emph{subtree-disjoint} if $T'(a) \cap T'(a') = \emptyset$ for all pairs $a\neq a' \in X$; remark that subtree-disjointness is defined w.r.t.\ the subtrees after the access.
We bound the change of partial potential for subtree-disjoint sets. The proof of the following lemma was inspired by the proof of the access lemma for Greedy BST by Fox~\cite{Fox11}.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:disj}
Let $X$ be a subtree-disjoint set of nodes.
Then
\[ \abs{X} \le 2 + 8 \cdot \log \frac{W}{w(T(s))} + \Phi_T(X) - \Phi_{T'}(X). \]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We consider the nodes smaller than $s$ and greater or equal to $s$ separately, i.e. $X = X_{< s} \dot{\cup} X_{\ge s}$.
We show $\abs{X_{\ge s}} \le 1 + \Phi_T(X_{\ge s}) - \Phi_{T'}(X_{\ge s}) + 4 \log \frac{W}{w(T(s))}$, and the same holds for $X_{< s}$.
We only give the proof for $X_{\ge s}$.
Denote $X_{\ge s}$ by $Y = \{a_0, a_1, \ldots, a_q\}$ where $s \leq a_0 < \ldots < a_q$. Before the access, $s$ is a descendant of $a_0$, $a_0$ is a descendant of $a_1$, and so on. Let $T(a_0) = [c,d]$. Then $[s,a_0] \subseteq [c,d]$ and $d < a_1$. Let $w_0 = w(T(a_0))$.
For $j \ge 0$, define $\sigma_j$ as the largest index $\ell$ such that $w([c,a_\ell]) \le 2^j w_0$.
Then $\sigma_0 = 0$ since weights are positive and $[c,d]$ is a proper subset of $[c,a_1]$.
The set $\{\sigma_0, \ldots \}$ contains at most $\lceil{\log (W/w_0)\rceil}$ distinct elements. It contains $0$ and $q$.
Now we upper bound the number of $i$ with $\sigma_j \le i < \sigma_{j+1}$.
We call such an element $a_i$ \emph{heavy} if $w(T'(a_i)) > 2^{j-1}w_0$. There can be at most $3$ heavy elements
as otherwise $w([c,a_{j+1}]) \ge \sum_{\sigma_j \le k < \sigma_{j+1}} w(T'(a_k)) > 4 \cdot 2^{j-1}w_0$, a contradiction.
\sloppypar{Next we count the number of light (= non-heavy) elements.
For each such light element $a_i$, we have $w(T'(a_i)) \leq 2^{j-1} w_0$. We also have $w(T(a_{i+1})) \ge w([c,a_{i+1}]) > w([c,a_{\sigma_j}])$ and thus $w(T(a_{i+1})) > 2^j w_0$ by the definition of $\sigma_j$.
Thus the ratio $r_i = {w(T(a_{i+1}))}/{w(T'(a_{i}))} \geq 2$ whenever $a_i$ is a light element.
Moreover, for any $i =0,\ldots, q-1$ (for which $a_i$ is not necessarily light), we have $r_i \geq 1$.
Thus,}
\begin{align*}
2^{\text{number of light elements}} &\le \prod_{0 \le i \le q-1} r_i
= \left(\prod_{0 \le i \le q} \frac{w(T(a_i))}{w(T'(a_i))}\right) \cdot \frac{w(T'(a_q))}{w_0}.
\end{align*}
So the number of light elements is at most $\Phi_{T}(Y) - \Phi_{T'}(Y)+ \log (W/w_0) $.
\noindent
Putting the bounds together, we obtain, writing $L$ for $\log (W/w_0)$:
\begin{align*}
\abs{Y} \le 1 + 3 ( \lceil{L \rceil} - 1) + \Phi_{T}(Y) - \Phi_{T'}(Y)+
{L}
\le 1 + 4 L + \Phi_{T}(Y) - \Phi_{T'}(Y).
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
\newcommand{{\mathit{depth}}}{{\mathit{depth}}}
Now we proceed to analyze our second type of subsets, that we call {\em monotone sets.}
A subset $X$ of the search path is {\em monotone} if all elements in $X$ are larger (smaller) than $s$ and have the same right-depth (left-depth) in the after-tree.
\begin{lemma}\label{characterization monotone} Assume $s < a < b$ and that $a$ is a proper descendant of $b$ in $P$. If $\{a,b\}$ is monotone, $T'(a) \subseteq T(b)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Clearly $[s,b] \subseteq T(b)$. The smallest item in $T'(a)$ is larger than $s$, and, since $a$ and $b$ have the same right-depth, $b$ is larger than all elements in $T'(a)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:mono}
Let $X$ be a monotone set of nodes.
Then
\vspace{-0.1in}
\[\Phi(X) - \Phi'(X) +\log \frac{W}{w(s)}\geq 0. \]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We order the elements in $X = \{a_1,\ldots, a_q\}$ such that $a_i$ is a proper descendant
of $a_{i+1}$ in the search path for all $i$. Then $T'(a_i) \subseteq T(a_{i+1})$ by monotonicity, and hence
\[ \Phi(X) - \Phi'(X) = \log \frac{\prod_{a \in X} w(T(a))}{\prod_{a \in X} w(T'(a))} = \log \frac{w(T(a_1))}{w(T'(a_q))} + \sum_{i=1}^{q-1} \log \frac{w(T(a_{i+1}))}{w(T'(a_{i}))}.\]
The second sum is nonnegative. Thus $\Phi(X) - \Phi'(X) \ge \log \frac{w(T(a_1))}{w(T'(a_q))} \ge \log \frac{w(s)}{W}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:disj+mono}Suppose that, for every access to an element $s$, we can partition the elements on the search path $P$ into at most $k$ subtree-disjoint sets $D_1$ to $D_k$ and at most $\ell$ monotone sets $M_1$ to $M_\ell$. Then
\vspace{-0.1in}
\[\sum _{i\le k} \abs{D_{i}} \le
\Phi_T(S)-\Phi_{T'}(S) + 2 k + (8 k+\ell)\log\frac{W}{w(s)}.
\]
\end{theorem}
The proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:disj+mono} follows immediately from Lemma~\ref{lem:disj} and \ref{lem:mono}. We next give some easy applications.
\paragraph{Path-Balance:}
The path-balance algorithm maps the search path $P$ to a balanced BST of depth
$c=\left\lceil \log_{2}(1 + |P|)\right\rceil$ rooted at $s$. Then
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:pblemma}
$\abs{P} \le \Phi(P) - \Phi'(P) + O((1 + \log \abs{P})(1 + \log (W/w(s))))$. \end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We decompose $P$ into sets $P_0$ to $P_c$, where $P_k$ contains the nodes of depth $k$ in the after-tree. Each $P_k$ is subtree-disjoint. An application of Theorem~\ref{thm:disj+mono} completes the proof. \end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
Path-Balance has amortized cost at most $O(\log n\log\log n)$.\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We choose the uniform weight function: $w(a)=1$ for all $a$. Let $c_i$ be the cost of the $i$-th access, $1 \le i \le m$, and let $C = \sum_{1 \le i \le m} c_i$ be the total cost of the accesses. Note that $\prod_i c_i \le (C/m)^m$.
The potential of a tree with $n$ items is at most $n \log n$. Thus
$C \le n \log n + \sum_{1 \le i \le m} O((1 + \log c_i)(1 + \log n))
= O((n + m) \log n) + O(m \log n) \cdot \log (C/m)$
by Lemma~\ref{lem:pblemma}. Assume $C = K (n+ m) \log n$ for some $K$. Then $K = O(1) + O(1) \cdot \log(K \log n)$ and hence $K = O(\log\log n)$.
\end{proof}
\paragraph{Greedy BST:} The Greedy BST algorithm was introduced by Demaine et al.~\cite{DemaineHIKP09}. It is an online version of the offline greedy algorithm proposed independently by Lucas and Munro~\cite{Mun00,Luc88}.
The definition of Greedy BST requires a geometric view of BSTs.
Our notions of subtree-disjoint and monotone sets translate naturally into geometry, and this allows us to derive the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:greedy sat}
Greedy BST satisfies the (geometric) access lemma.
\end{theorem}
The geometric view of BSTs and the proof of the theorem are deferred to Appendix~\ref{sec:geom}.
We remark that once the correspondences to geometric view are explained, the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:greedy sat} is almost immediate.
|
\section{The ALICE Collaboration}
\begingroup
\small
\begin{flushleft}
J.~Adam\Irefn{org39}\And
D.~Adamov\'{a}\Irefn{org82}\And
M.M.~Aggarwal\Irefn{org86}\And
G.~Aglieri Rinella\Irefn{org36}\And
M.~Agnello\Irefn{org110}\And
N.~Agrawal\Irefn{org47}\And
Z.~Ahammed\Irefn{org130}\And
S.U.~Ahn\Irefn{org67}\And
I.~Aimo\Irefn{org93}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org110}\And
S.~Aiola\Irefn{org135}\And
M.~Ajaz\Irefn{org16}\And
A.~Akindinov\Irefn{org57}\And
S.N.~Alam\Irefn{org130}\And
D.~Aleksandrov\Irefn{org99}\And
B.~Alessandro\Irefn{org110}\And
D.~Alexandre\Irefn{org101}\And
R.~Alfaro Molina\Irefn{org63}\And
A.~Alici\Irefn{org104}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org12}\And
A.~Alkin\Irefn{org3}\And
J.~Alme\Irefn{org37}\And
T.~Alt\Irefn{org42}\And
S.~Altinpinar\Irefn{org18}\And
I.~Altsybeev\Irefn{org129}\And
C.~Alves Garcia Prado\Irefn{org118}\And
C.~Andrei\Irefn{org77}\And
A.~Andronic\Irefn{org96}\And
V.~Anguelov\Irefn{org92}\And
J.~Anielski\Irefn{org53}\And
T.~Anti\v{c}i\'{c}\Irefn{org97}\And
F.~Antinori\Irefn{org107}\And
P.~Antonioli\Irefn{org104}\And
L.~Aphecetche\Irefn{org112}\And
H.~Appelsh\"{a}user\Irefn{org52}\And
S.~Arcelli\Irefn{org28}\And
N.~Armesto\Irefn{org17}\And
R.~Arnaldi\Irefn{org110}\And
T.~Aronsson\Irefn{org135}\And
I.C.~Arsene\Irefn{org22}\And
M.~Arslandok\Irefn{org52}\And
A.~Augustinus\Irefn{org36}\And
R.~Averbeck\Irefn{org96}\And
M.D.~Azmi\Irefn{org19}\And
M.~Bach\Irefn{org42}\And
A.~Badal\`{a}\Irefn{org106}\And
Y.W.~Baek\Irefn{org43}\And
S.~Bagnasco\Irefn{org110}\And
R.~Bailhache\Irefn{org52}\And
R.~Bala\Irefn{org89}\And
A.~Baldisseri\Irefn{org15}\And
F.~Baltasar Dos Santos Pedrosa\Irefn{org36}\And
R.C.~Baral\Irefn{org60}\And
A.M.~Barbano\Irefn{org110}\And
R.~Barbera\Irefn{org29}\And
F.~Barile\Irefn{org33}\And
G.G.~Barnaf\"{o}ldi\Irefn{org134}\And
L.S.~Barnby\Irefn{org101}\And
V.~Barret\Irefn{org69}\And
P.~Bartalini\Irefn{org7}\And
J.~Bartke\Irefn{org115}\And
E.~Bartsch\Irefn{org52}\And
M.~Basile\Irefn{org28}\And
N.~Bastid\Irefn{org69}\And
S.~Basu\Irefn{org130}\And
B.~Bathen\Irefn{org53}\And
G.~Batigne\Irefn{org112}\And
A.~Batista Camejo\Irefn{org69}\And
B.~Batyunya\Irefn{org65}\And
P.C.~Batzing\Irefn{org22}\And
I.G.~Bearden\Irefn{org79}\And
H.~Beck\Irefn{org52}\And
C.~Bedda\Irefn{org110}\And
N.K.~Behera\Irefn{org48}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org47}\And
I.~Belikov\Irefn{org54}\And
F.~Bellini\Irefn{org28}\And
H.~Bello Martinez\Irefn{org2}\And
R.~Bellwied\Irefn{org120}\And
R.~Belmont\Irefn{org133}\And
E.~Belmont-Moreno\Irefn{org63}\And
V.~Belyaev\Irefn{org75}\And
G.~Bencedi\Irefn{org134}\And
S.~Beole\Irefn{org27}\And
I.~Berceanu\Irefn{org77}\And
A.~Bercuci\Irefn{org77}\And
Y.~Berdnikov\Irefn{org84}\And
D.~Berenyi\Irefn{org134}\And
R.A.~Bertens\Irefn{org56}\And
D.~Berzano\Irefn{org36}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org27}\And
L.~Betev\Irefn{org36}\And
A.~Bhasin\Irefn{org89}\And
I.R.~Bhat\Irefn{org89}\And
A.K.~Bhati\Irefn{org86}\And
B.~Bhattacharjee\Irefn{org44}\And
J.~Bhom\Irefn{org126}\And
L.~Bianchi\Irefn{org27}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org120}\And
N.~Bianchi\Irefn{org71}\And
C.~Bianchin\Irefn{org133}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org56}\And
J.~Biel\v{c}\'{\i}k\Irefn{org39}\And
J.~Biel\v{c}\'{\i}kov\'{a}\Irefn{org82}\And
A.~Bilandzic\Irefn{org79}\And
S.~Biswas\Irefn{org78}\And
S.~Bjelogrlic\Irefn{org56}\And
F.~Blanco\Irefn{org10}\And
D.~Blau\Irefn{org99}\And
C.~Blume\Irefn{org52}\And
F.~Bock\Irefn{org73}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org92}\And
A.~Bogdanov\Irefn{org75}\And
H.~B{\o}ggild\Irefn{org79}\And
L.~Boldizs\'{a}r\Irefn{org134}\And
M.~Bombara\Irefn{org40}\And
J.~Book\Irefn{org52}\And
H.~Borel\Irefn{org15}\And
A.~Borissov\Irefn{org95}\And
M.~Borri\Irefn{org81}\And
F.~Boss\'u\Irefn{org64}\And
M.~Botje\Irefn{org80}\And
E.~Botta\Irefn{org27}\And
S.~B\"{o}ttger\Irefn{org51}\And
P.~Braun-Munzinger\Irefn{org96}\And
M.~Bregant\Irefn{org118}\And
T.~Breitner\Irefn{org51}\And
T.A.~Broker\Irefn{org52}\And
T.A.~Browning\Irefn{org94}\And
M.~Broz\Irefn{org39}\And
E.J.~Brucken\Irefn{org45}\And
E.~Bruna\Irefn{org110}\And
G.E.~Bruno\Irefn{org33}\And
D.~Budnikov\Irefn{org98}\And
H.~Buesching\Irefn{org52}\And
S.~Bufalino\Irefn{org110}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org36}\And
P.~Buncic\Irefn{org36}\And
O.~Busch\Irefn{org92}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org126}\And
Z.~Buthelezi\Irefn{org64}\And
J.T.~Buxton\Irefn{org20}\And
D.~Caffarri\Irefn{org36}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org30}\And
X.~Cai\Irefn{org7}\And
H.~Caines\Irefn{org135}\And
L.~Calero Diaz\Irefn{org71}\And
A.~Caliva\Irefn{org56}\And
E.~Calvo Villar\Irefn{org102}\And
P.~Camerini\Irefn{org26}\And
F.~Carena\Irefn{org36}\And
W.~Carena\Irefn{org36}\And
J.~Castillo Castellanos\Irefn{org15}\And
A.J.~Castro\Irefn{org123}\And
E.A.R.~Casula\Irefn{org25}\And
C.~Cavicchioli\Irefn{org36}\And
C.~Ceballos Sanchez\Irefn{org9}\And
J.~Cepila\Irefn{org39}\And
P.~Cerello\Irefn{org110}\And
B.~Chang\Irefn{org121}\And
S.~Chapeland\Irefn{org36}\And
M.~Chartier\Irefn{org122}\And
J.L.~Charvet\Irefn{org15}\And
S.~Chattopadhyay\Irefn{org130}\And
S.~Chattopadhyay\Irefn{org100}\And
V.~Chelnokov\Irefn{org3}\And
M.~Cherney\Irefn{org85}\And
C.~Cheshkov\Irefn{org128}\And
B.~Cheynis\Irefn{org128}\And
V.~Chibante Barroso\Irefn{org36}\And
D.D.~Chinellato\Irefn{org119}\And
P.~Chochula\Irefn{org36}\And
K.~Choi\Irefn{org95}\And
M.~Chojnacki\Irefn{org79}\And
S.~Choudhury\Irefn{org130}\And
P.~Christakoglou\Irefn{org80}\And
C.H.~Christensen\Irefn{org79}\And
P.~Christiansen\Irefn{org34}\And
T.~Chujo\Irefn{org126}\And
S.U.~Chung\Irefn{org95}\And
Z.~Chunhui\Irefn{org56}\And
C.~Cicalo\Irefn{org105}\And
L.~Cifarelli\Irefn{org12}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org28}\And
F.~Cindolo\Irefn{org104}\And
J.~Cleymans\Irefn{org88}\And
F.~Colamaria\Irefn{org33}\And
D.~Colella\Irefn{org33}\And
A.~Collu\Irefn{org25}\And
M.~Colocci\Irefn{org28}\And
G.~Conesa Balbastre\Irefn{org70}\And
Z.~Conesa del Valle\Irefn{org50}\And
M.E.~Connors\Irefn{org135}\And
J.G.~Contreras\Irefn{org39}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org11}\And
T.M.~Cormier\Irefn{org83}\And
Y.~Corrales Morales\Irefn{org27}\And
I.~Cort\'{e}s Maldonado\Irefn{org2}\And
P.~Cortese\Irefn{org32}\And
M.R.~Cosentino\Irefn{org118}\And
F.~Costa\Irefn{org36}\And
P.~Crochet\Irefn{org69}\And
R.~Cruz Albino\Irefn{org11}\And
E.~Cuautle\Irefn{org62}\And
L.~Cunqueiro\Irefn{org36}\And
T.~Dahms\Irefn{org91}\And
A.~Dainese\Irefn{org107}\And
A.~Danu\Irefn{org61}\And
D.~Das\Irefn{org100}\And
I.~Das\Irefn{org100}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org50}\And
S.~Das\Irefn{org4}\And
A.~Dash\Irefn{org119}\And
S.~Dash\Irefn{org47}\And
S.~De\Irefn{org118}\And
A.~De Caro\Irefn{org31}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org12}\And
G.~de Cataldo\Irefn{org103}\And
J.~de Cuveland\Irefn{org42}\And
A.~De Falco\Irefn{org25}\And
D.~De Gruttola\Irefn{org12}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org31}\And
N.~De Marco\Irefn{org110}\And
S.~De Pasquale\Irefn{org31}\And
A.~Deisting\Irefn{org96}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org92}\And
A.~Deloff\Irefn{org76}\And
E.~D\'{e}nes\Irefn{org134}\And
G.~D'Erasmo\Irefn{org33}\And
D.~Di Bari\Irefn{org33}\And
A.~Di Mauro\Irefn{org36}\And
P.~Di Nezza\Irefn{org71}\And
M.A.~Diaz Corchero\Irefn{org10}\And
T.~Dietel\Irefn{org88}\And
P.~Dillenseger\Irefn{org52}\And
R.~Divi\`{a}\Irefn{org36}\And
{\O}.~Djuvsland\Irefn{org18}\And
A.~Dobrin\Irefn{org56}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org80}\And
T.~Dobrowolski\Irefn{org76}\Aref{0}\And
D.~Domenicis Gimenez\Irefn{org118}\And
B.~D\"{o}nigus\Irefn{org52}\And
O.~Dordic\Irefn{org22}\And
A.K.~Dubey\Irefn{org130}\And
A.~Dubla\Irefn{org56}\And
L.~Ducroux\Irefn{org128}\And
P.~Dupieux\Irefn{org69}\And
R.J.~Ehlers\Irefn{org135}\And
D.~Elia\Irefn{org103}\And
H.~Engel\Irefn{org51}\And
B.~Erazmus\Irefn{org112}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org36}\And
F.~Erhardt\Irefn{org127}\And
D.~Eschweiler\Irefn{org42}\And
B.~Espagnon\Irefn{org50}\And
M.~Estienne\Irefn{org112}\And
S.~Esumi\Irefn{org126}\And
J.~Eum\Irefn{org95}\And
D.~Evans\Irefn{org101}\And
S.~Evdokimov\Irefn{org111}\And
G.~Eyyubova\Irefn{org39}\And
L.~Fabbietti\Irefn{org91}\And
D.~Fabris\Irefn{org107}\And
J.~Faivre\Irefn{org70}\And
A.~Fantoni\Irefn{org71}\And
M.~Fasel\Irefn{org73}\And
L.~Feldkamp\Irefn{org53}\And
D.~Felea\Irefn{org61}\And
A.~Feliciello\Irefn{org110}\And
G.~Feofilov\Irefn{org129}\And
J.~Ferencei\Irefn{org82}\And
A.~Fern\'{a}ndez T\'{e}llez\Irefn{org2}\And
E.G.~Ferreiro\Irefn{org17}\And
A.~Ferretti\Irefn{org27}\And
A.~Festanti\Irefn{org30}\And
J.~Figiel\Irefn{org115}\And
M.A.S.~Figueredo\Irefn{org122}\And
S.~Filchagin\Irefn{org98}\And
D.~Finogeev\Irefn{org55}\And
F.M.~Fionda\Irefn{org103}\And
E.M.~Fiore\Irefn{org33}\And
M.G.~Fleck\Irefn{org92}\And
M.~Floris\Irefn{org36}\And
S.~Foertsch\Irefn{org64}\And
P.~Foka\Irefn{org96}\And
S.~Fokin\Irefn{org99}\And
E.~Fragiacomo\Irefn{org109}\And
A.~Francescon\Irefn{org36}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org30}\And
U.~Frankenfeld\Irefn{org96}\And
U.~Fuchs\Irefn{org36}\And
C.~Furget\Irefn{org70}\And
A.~Furs\Irefn{org55}\And
M.~Fusco Girard\Irefn{org31}\And
J.J.~Gaardh{\o}je\Irefn{org79}\And
M.~Gagliardi\Irefn{org27}\And
A.M.~Gago\Irefn{org102}\And
M.~Gallio\Irefn{org27}\And
D.R.~Gangadharan\Irefn{org73}\And
P.~Ganoti\Irefn{org87}\And
C.~Gao\Irefn{org7}\And
C.~Garabatos\Irefn{org96}\And
E.~Garcia-Solis\Irefn{org13}\And
C.~Gargiulo\Irefn{org36}\And
P.~Gasik\Irefn{org91}\And
M.~Germain\Irefn{org112}\And
A.~Gheata\Irefn{org36}\And
M.~Gheata\Irefn{org61}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org36}\And
P.~Ghosh\Irefn{org130}\And
S.K.~Ghosh\Irefn{org4}\And
P.~Gianotti\Irefn{org71}\And
P.~Giubellino\Irefn{org36}\And
P.~Giubilato\Irefn{org30}\And
E.~Gladysz-Dziadus\Irefn{org115}\And
P.~Gl\"{a}ssel\Irefn{org92}\And
A.~Gomez Ramirez\Irefn{org51}\And
P.~Gonz\'{a}lez-Zamora\Irefn{org10}\And
S.~Gorbunov\Irefn{org42}\And
L.~G\"{o}rlich\Irefn{org115}\And
S.~Gotovac\Irefn{org114}\And
V.~Grabski\Irefn{org63}\And
L.K.~Graczykowski\Irefn{org132}\And
A.~Grelli\Irefn{org56}\And
A.~Grigoras\Irefn{org36}\And
C.~Grigoras\Irefn{org36}\And
V.~Grigoriev\Irefn{org75}\And
A.~Grigoryan\Irefn{org1}\And
S.~Grigoryan\Irefn{org65}\And
B.~Grinyov\Irefn{org3}\And
N.~Grion\Irefn{org109}\And
J.F.~Grosse-Oetringhaus\Irefn{org36}\And
J.-Y.~Grossiord\Irefn{org128}\And
R.~Grosso\Irefn{org36}\And
F.~Guber\Irefn{org55}\And
R.~Guernane\Irefn{org70}\And
B.~Guerzoni\Irefn{org28}\And
K.~Gulbrandsen\Irefn{org79}\And
H.~Gulkanyan\Irefn{org1}\And
T.~Gunji\Irefn{org125}\And
A.~Gupta\Irefn{org89}\And
R.~Gupta\Irefn{org89}\And
R.~Haake\Irefn{org53}\And
{\O}.~Haaland\Irefn{org18}\And
C.~Hadjidakis\Irefn{org50}\And
M.~Haiduc\Irefn{org61}\And
H.~Hamagaki\Irefn{org125}\And
G.~Hamar\Irefn{org134}\And
L.D.~Hanratty\Irefn{org101}\And
A.~Hansen\Irefn{org79}\And
J.W.~Harris\Irefn{org135}\And
H.~Hartmann\Irefn{org42}\And
A.~Harton\Irefn{org13}\And
D.~Hatzifotiadou\Irefn{org104}\And
S.~Hayashi\Irefn{org125}\And
S.T.~Heckel\Irefn{org52}\And
M.~Heide\Irefn{org53}\And
H.~Helstrup\Irefn{org37}\And
A.~Herghelegiu\Irefn{org77}\And
G.~Herrera Corral\Irefn{org11}\And
B.A.~Hess\Irefn{org35}\And
K.F.~Hetland\Irefn{org37}\And
T.E.~Hilden\Irefn{org45}\And
H.~Hillemanns\Irefn{org36}\And
B.~Hippolyte\Irefn{org54}\And
P.~Hristov\Irefn{org36}\And
M.~Huang\Irefn{org18}\And
T.J.~Humanic\Irefn{org20}\And
N.~Hussain\Irefn{org44}\And
T.~Hussain\Irefn{org19}\And
D.~Hutter\Irefn{org42}\And
D.S.~Hwang\Irefn{org21}\And
R.~Ilkaev\Irefn{org98}\And
I.~Ilkiv\Irefn{org76}\And
M.~Inaba\Irefn{org126}\And
C.~Ionita\Irefn{org36}\And
M.~Ippolitov\Irefn{org75}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org99}\And
M.~Irfan\Irefn{org19}\And
M.~Ivanov\Irefn{org96}\And
V.~Ivanov\Irefn{org84}\And
V.~Izucheev\Irefn{org111}\And
P.M.~Jacobs\Irefn{org73}\And
C.~Jahnke\Irefn{org118}\And
H.J.~Jang\Irefn{org67}\And
M.A.~Janik\Irefn{org132}\And
P.H.S.Y.~Jayarathna\Irefn{org120}\And
C.~Jena\Irefn{org30}\And
S.~Jena\Irefn{org120}\And
R.T.~Jimenez Bustamante\Irefn{org62}\And
P.G.~Jones\Irefn{org101}\And
H.~Jung\Irefn{org43}\And
A.~Jusko\Irefn{org101}\And
P.~Kalinak\Irefn{org58}\And
A.~Kalweit\Irefn{org36}\And
J.~Kamin\Irefn{org52}\And
J.H.~Kang\Irefn{org136}\And
V.~Kaplin\Irefn{org75}\And
S.~Kar\Irefn{org130}\And
A.~Karasu Uysal\Irefn{org68}\And
O.~Karavichev\Irefn{org55}\And
T.~Karavicheva\Irefn{org55}\And
E.~Karpechev\Irefn{org55}\And
U.~Kebschull\Irefn{org51}\And
R.~Keidel\Irefn{org137}\And
D.L.D.~Keijdener\Irefn{org56}\And
M.~Keil\Irefn{org36}\And
K.H.~Khan\Irefn{org16}\And
M.M.~Khan\Irefn{org19}\And
P.~Khan\Irefn{org100}\And
S.A.~Khan\Irefn{org130}\And
A.~Khanzadeev\Irefn{org84}\And
Y.~Kharlov\Irefn{org111}\And
B.~Kileng\Irefn{org37}\And
B.~Kim\Irefn{org136}\And
D.W.~Kim\Irefn{org43}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org67}\And
D.J.~Kim\Irefn{org121}\And
H.~Kim\Irefn{org136}\And
J.S.~Kim\Irefn{org43}\And
M.~Kim\Irefn{org43}\And
M.~Kim\Irefn{org136}\And
S.~Kim\Irefn{org21}\And
T.~Kim\Irefn{org136}\And
S.~Kirsch\Irefn{org42}\And
I.~Kisel\Irefn{org42}\And
S.~Kiselev\Irefn{org57}\And
A.~Kisiel\Irefn{org132}\And
G.~Kiss\Irefn{org134}\And
J.L.~Klay\Irefn{org6}\And
C.~Klein\Irefn{org52}\And
J.~Klein\Irefn{org92}\And
C.~Klein-B\"{o}sing\Irefn{org53}\And
A.~Kluge\Irefn{org36}\And
M.L.~Knichel\Irefn{org92}\And
A.G.~Knospe\Irefn{org116}\And
T.~Kobayashi\Irefn{org126}\And
C.~Kobdaj\Irefn{org113}\And
M.~Kofarago\Irefn{org36}\And
M.K.~K\"{o}hler\Irefn{org96}\And
T.~Kollegger\Irefn{org42}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org96}\And
A.~Kolojvari\Irefn{org129}\And
V.~Kondratiev\Irefn{org129}\And
N.~Kondratyeva\Irefn{org75}\And
E.~Kondratyuk\Irefn{org111}\And
A.~Konevskikh\Irefn{org55}\And
C.~Kouzinopoulos\Irefn{org36}\And
O.~Kovalenko\Irefn{org76}\And
V.~Kovalenko\Irefn{org129}\And
M.~Kowalski\Irefn{org36}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org115}\And
S.~Kox\Irefn{org70}\And
G.~Koyithatta Meethaleveedu\Irefn{org47}\And
J.~Kral\Irefn{org121}\And
I.~Kr\'{a}lik\Irefn{org58}\And
A.~Krav\v{c}\'{a}kov\'{a}\Irefn{org40}\And
M.~Krelina\Irefn{org39}\And
M.~Kretz\Irefn{org42}\And
M.~Krivda\Irefn{org101}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org58}\And
F.~Krizek\Irefn{org82}\And
E.~Kryshen\Irefn{org36}\And
M.~Krzewicki\Irefn{org96}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org42}\And
A.M.~Kubera\Irefn{org20}\And
V.~Ku\v{c}era\Irefn{org82}\And
T.~Kugathasan\Irefn{org36}\And
C.~Kuhn\Irefn{org54}\And
P.G.~Kuijer\Irefn{org80}\And
I.~Kulakov\Irefn{org42}\And
J.~Kumar\Irefn{org47}\And
L.~Kumar\Irefn{org78}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org86}\And
P.~Kurashvili\Irefn{org76}\And
A.~Kurepin\Irefn{org55}\And
A.B.~Kurepin\Irefn{org55}\And
A.~Kuryakin\Irefn{org98}\And
S.~Kushpil\Irefn{org82}\And
M.J.~Kweon\Irefn{org49}\And
Y.~Kwon\Irefn{org136}\And
S.L.~La Pointe\Irefn{org110}\And
P.~La Rocca\Irefn{org29}\And
C.~Lagana Fernandes\Irefn{org118}\And
I.~Lakomov\Irefn{org36}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org50}\And
R.~Langoy\Irefn{org41}\And
C.~Lara\Irefn{org51}\And
A.~Lardeux\Irefn{org15}\And
A.~Lattuca\Irefn{org27}\And
E.~Laudi\Irefn{org36}\And
R.~Lea\Irefn{org26}\And
L.~Leardini\Irefn{org92}\And
G.R.~Lee\Irefn{org101}\And
S.~Lee\Irefn{org136}\And
I.~Legrand\Irefn{org36}\And
R.C.~Lemmon\Irefn{org81}\And
V.~Lenti\Irefn{org103}\And
E.~Leogrande\Irefn{org56}\And
I.~Le\'{o}n Monz\'{o}n\Irefn{org117}\And
M.~Leoncino\Irefn{org27}\And
P.~L\'{e}vai\Irefn{org134}\And
S.~Li\Irefn{org7}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org69}\And
X.~Li\Irefn{org14}\And
J.~Lien\Irefn{org41}\And
R.~Lietava\Irefn{org101}\And
S.~Lindal\Irefn{org22}\And
V.~Lindenstruth\Irefn{org42}\And
C.~Lippmann\Irefn{org96}\And
M.A.~Lisa\Irefn{org20}\And
H.M.~Ljunggren\Irefn{org34}\And
D.F.~Lodato\Irefn{org56}\And
P.I.~Loenne\Irefn{org18}\And
V.R.~Loggins\Irefn{org133}\And
V.~Loginov\Irefn{org75}\And
C.~Loizides\Irefn{org73}\And
X.~Lopez\Irefn{org69}\And
E.~L\'{o}pez Torres\Irefn{org9}\And
A.~Lowe\Irefn{org134}\And
P.~Luettig\Irefn{org52}\And
M.~Lunardon\Irefn{org30}\And
G.~Luparello\Irefn{org26}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org56}\And
P.H.F.N.D.~Luz\Irefn{org118}\And
A.~Maevskaya\Irefn{org55}\And
M.~Mager\Irefn{org36}\And
S.~Mahajan\Irefn{org89}\And
S.M.~Mahmood\Irefn{org22}\And
A.~Maire\Irefn{org54}\And
R.D.~Majka\Irefn{org135}\And
M.~Malaev\Irefn{org84}\And
I.~Maldonado Cervantes\Irefn{org62}\And
L.~Malinina\Irefn{org65}\And
D.~Mal'Kevich\Irefn{org57}\And
P.~Malzacher\Irefn{org96}\And
A.~Mamonov\Irefn{org98}\And
L.~Manceau\Irefn{org110}\And
V.~Manko\Irefn{org99}\And
F.~Manso\Irefn{org69}\And
V.~Manzari\Irefn{org103}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org36}\And
M.~Marchisone\Irefn{org27}\And
J.~Mare\v{s}\Irefn{org59}\And
G.V.~Margagliotti\Irefn{org26}\And
A.~Margotti\Irefn{org104}\And
J.~Margutti\Irefn{org56}\And
A.~Mar\'{\i}n\Irefn{org96}\And
C.~Markert\Irefn{org116}\And
M.~Marquard\Irefn{org52}\And
N.A.~Martin\Irefn{org96}\And
J.~Martin Blanco\Irefn{org112}\And
P.~Martinengo\Irefn{org36}\And
M.I.~Mart\'{\i}nez\Irefn{org2}\And
G.~Mart\'{\i}nez Garc\'{\i}a\Irefn{org112}\And
M.~Martinez Pedreira\Irefn{org36}\And
Y.~Martynov\Irefn{org3}\And
A.~Mas\Irefn{org118}\And
S.~Masciocchi\Irefn{org96}\And
M.~Masera\Irefn{org27}\And
A.~Masoni\Irefn{org105}\And
L.~Massacrier\Irefn{org112}\And
A.~Mastroserio\Irefn{org33}\And
H.~Masui\Irefn{org126}\And
A.~Matyja\Irefn{org115}\And
C.~Mayer\Irefn{org115}\And
J.~Mazer\Irefn{org123}\And
M.A.~Mazzoni\Irefn{org108}\And
D.~Mcdonald\Irefn{org120}\And
F.~Meddi\Irefn{org24}\And
A.~Menchaca-Rocha\Irefn{org63}\And
E.~Meninno\Irefn{org31}\And
J.~Mercado P\'erez\Irefn{org92}\And
M.~Meres\Irefn{org38}\And
Y.~Miake\Irefn{org126}\And
M.M.~Mieskolainen\Irefn{org45}\And
K.~Mikhaylov\Irefn{org57}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org65}\And
L.~Milano\Irefn{org36}\And
J.~Milosevic\Irefn{org22}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org131}\And
L.M.~Minervini\Irefn{org103}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org23}\And
A.~Mischke\Irefn{org56}\And
A.N.~Mishra\Irefn{org48}\And
D.~Mi\'{s}kowiec\Irefn{org96}\And
J.~Mitra\Irefn{org130}\And
C.M.~Mitu\Irefn{org61}\And
N.~Mohammadi\Irefn{org56}\And
B.~Mohanty\Irefn{org130}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org78}\And
L.~Molnar\Irefn{org54}\And
L.~Monta\~{n}o Zetina\Irefn{org11}\And
E.~Montes\Irefn{org10}\And
M.~Morando\Irefn{org30}\And
D.A.~Moreira De Godoy\Irefn{org112}\And
S.~Moretto\Irefn{org30}\And
A.~Morreale\Irefn{org112}\And
A.~Morsch\Irefn{org36}\And
V.~Muccifora\Irefn{org71}\And
E.~Mudnic\Irefn{org114}\And
D.~M{\"u}hlheim\Irefn{org53}\And
S.~Muhuri\Irefn{org130}\And
M.~Mukherjee\Irefn{org130}\And
H.~M\"{u}ller\Irefn{org36}\And
J.D.~Mulligan\Irefn{org135}\And
M.G.~Munhoz\Irefn{org118}\And
S.~Murray\Irefn{org64}\And
L.~Musa\Irefn{org36}\And
J.~Musinsky\Irefn{org58}\And
B.K.~Nandi\Irefn{org47}\And
R.~Nania\Irefn{org104}\And
E.~Nappi\Irefn{org103}\And
M.U.~Naru\Irefn{org16}\And
C.~Nattrass\Irefn{org123}\And
K.~Nayak\Irefn{org78}\And
T.K.~Nayak\Irefn{org130}\And
S.~Nazarenko\Irefn{org98}\And
A.~Nedosekin\Irefn{org57}\And
L.~Nellen\Irefn{org62}\And
F.~Ng\Irefn{org120}\And
M.~Nicassio\Irefn{org96}\And
M.~Niculescu\Irefn{org61}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org36}\And
J.~Niedziela\Irefn{org36}\And
B.S.~Nielsen\Irefn{org79}\And
S.~Nikolaev\Irefn{org99}\And
S.~Nikulin\Irefn{org99}\And
V.~Nikulin\Irefn{org84}\And
F.~Noferini\Irefn{org104}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org12}\And
P.~Nomokonov\Irefn{org65}\And
G.~Nooren\Irefn{org56}\And
J.~Norman\Irefn{org122}\And
A.~Nyanin\Irefn{org99}\And
J.~Nystrand\Irefn{org18}\And
H.~Oeschler\Irefn{org92}\And
S.~Oh\Irefn{org135}\And
S.K.~Oh\Irefn{org66}\And
A.~Ohlson\Irefn{org36}\And
A.~Okatan\Irefn{org68}\And
T.~Okubo\Irefn{org46}\And
L.~Olah\Irefn{org134}\And
J.~Oleniacz\Irefn{org132}\And
A.C.~Oliveira Da Silva\Irefn{org118}\And
M.H.~Oliver\Irefn{org135}\And
J.~Onderwaater\Irefn{org96}\And
C.~Oppedisano\Irefn{org110}\And
A.~Ortiz Velasquez\Irefn{org62}\And
A.~Oskarsson\Irefn{org34}\And
J.~Otwinowski\Irefn{org96}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org115}\And
K.~Oyama\Irefn{org92}\And
M.~Ozdemir\Irefn{org52}\And
Y.~Pachmayer\Irefn{org92}\And
P.~Pagano\Irefn{org31}\And
G.~Pai\'{c}\Irefn{org62}\And
C.~Pajares\Irefn{org17}\And
S.K.~Pal\Irefn{org130}\And
J.~Pan\Irefn{org133}\And
A.K.~Pandey\Irefn{org47}\And
D.~Pant\Irefn{org47}\And
V.~Papikyan\Irefn{org1}\And
G.S.~Pappalardo\Irefn{org106}\And
P.~Pareek\Irefn{org48}\And
W.J.~Park\Irefn{org96}\And
S.~Parmar\Irefn{org86}\And
A.~Passfeld\Irefn{org53}\And
V.~Paticchio\Irefn{org103}\And
B.~Paul\Irefn{org100}\And
T.~Peitzmann\Irefn{org56}\And
H.~Pereira Da Costa\Irefn{org15}\And
E.~Pereira De Oliveira Filho\Irefn{org118}\And
D.~Peresunko\Irefn{org75}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org99}\And
C.E.~P\'erez Lara\Irefn{org80}\And
V.~Peskov\Irefn{org52}\And
Y.~Pestov\Irefn{org5}\And
V.~Petr\'{a}\v{c}ek\Irefn{org39}\And
V.~Petrov\Irefn{org111}\And
M.~Petrovici\Irefn{org77}\And
C.~Petta\Irefn{org29}\And
S.~Piano\Irefn{org109}\And
M.~Pikna\Irefn{org38}\And
P.~Pillot\Irefn{org112}\And
O.~Pinazza\Irefn{org104}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org36}\And
L.~Pinsky\Irefn{org120}\And
D.B.~Piyarathna\Irefn{org120}\And
M.~P\l osko\'{n}\Irefn{org73}\And
M.~Planinic\Irefn{org127}\And
J.~Pluta\Irefn{org132}\And
S.~Pochybova\Irefn{org134}\And
P.L.M.~Podesta-Lerma\Irefn{org117}\And
M.G.~Poghosyan\Irefn{org85}\And
B.~Polichtchouk\Irefn{org111}\And
N.~Poljak\Irefn{org127}\And
W.~Poonsawat\Irefn{org113}\And
A.~Pop\Irefn{org77}\And
S.~Porteboeuf-Houssais\Irefn{org69}\And
J.~Porter\Irefn{org73}\And
J.~Pospisil\Irefn{org82}\And
S.K.~Prasad\Irefn{org4}\And
R.~Preghenella\Irefn{org36}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org104}\And
F.~Prino\Irefn{org110}\And
C.A.~Pruneau\Irefn{org133}\And
I.~Pshenichnov\Irefn{org55}\And
M.~Puccio\Irefn{org110}\And
G.~Puddu\Irefn{org25}\And
P.~Pujahari\Irefn{org133}\And
V.~Punin\Irefn{org98}\And
J.~Putschke\Irefn{org133}\And
H.~Qvigstad\Irefn{org22}\And
A.~Rachevski\Irefn{org109}\And
S.~Raha\Irefn{org4}\And
S.~Rajput\Irefn{org89}\And
J.~Rak\Irefn{org121}\And
A.~Rakotozafindrabe\Irefn{org15}\And
L.~Ramello\Irefn{org32}\And
R.~Raniwala\Irefn{org90}\And
S.~Raniwala\Irefn{org90}\And
S.S.~R\"{a}s\"{a}nen\Irefn{org45}\And
B.T.~Rascanu\Irefn{org52}\And
D.~Rathee\Irefn{org86}\And
K.F.~Read\Irefn{org123}\And
J.S.~Real\Irefn{org70}\And
K.~Redlich\Irefn{org76}\And
R.J.~Reed\Irefn{org133}\And
A.~Rehman\Irefn{org18}\And
P.~Reichelt\Irefn{org52}\And
M.~Reicher\Irefn{org56}\And
F.~Reidt\Irefn{org92}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org36}\And
X.~Ren\Irefn{org7}\And
R.~Renfordt\Irefn{org52}\And
A.R.~Reolon\Irefn{org71}\And
A.~Reshetin\Irefn{org55}\And
F.~Rettig\Irefn{org42}\And
J.-P.~Revol\Irefn{org12}\And
K.~Reygers\Irefn{org92}\And
V.~Riabov\Irefn{org84}\And
R.A.~Ricci\Irefn{org72}\And
T.~Richert\Irefn{org34}\And
M.~Richter\Irefn{org22}\And
P.~Riedler\Irefn{org36}\And
W.~Riegler\Irefn{org36}\And
F.~Riggi\Irefn{org29}\And
C.~Ristea\Irefn{org61}\And
A.~Rivetti\Irefn{org110}\And
E.~Rocco\Irefn{org56}\And
M.~Rodr\'{i}guez Cahuantzi\Irefn{org11}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org2}\And
A.~Rodriguez Manso\Irefn{org80}\And
K.~R{\o}ed\Irefn{org22}\And
E.~Rogochaya\Irefn{org65}\And
D.~Rohr\Irefn{org42}\And
D.~R\"ohrich\Irefn{org18}\And
R.~Romita\Irefn{org122}\And
F.~Ronchetti\Irefn{org71}\And
L.~Ronflette\Irefn{org112}\And
P.~Rosnet\Irefn{org69}\And
A.~Rossi\Irefn{org36}\And
F.~Roukoutakis\Irefn{org87}\And
A.~Roy\Irefn{org48}\And
C.~Roy\Irefn{org54}\And
P.~Roy\Irefn{org100}\And
A.J.~Rubio Montero\Irefn{org10}\And
R.~Rui\Irefn{org26}\And
R.~Russo\Irefn{org27}\And
E.~Ryabinkin\Irefn{org99}\And
Y.~Ryabov\Irefn{org84}\And
A.~Rybicki\Irefn{org115}\And
S.~Sadovsky\Irefn{org111}\And
K.~\v{S}afa\v{r}\'{\i}k\Irefn{org36}\And
B.~Sahlmuller\Irefn{org52}\And
P.~Sahoo\Irefn{org48}\And
R.~Sahoo\Irefn{org48}\And
S.~Sahoo\Irefn{org60}\And
P.K.~Sahu\Irefn{org60}\And
J.~Saini\Irefn{org130}\And
S.~Sakai\Irefn{org71}\And
M.A.~Saleh\Irefn{org133}\And
C.A.~Salgado\Irefn{org17}\And
J.~Salzwedel\Irefn{org20}\And
S.~Sambyal\Irefn{org89}\And
V.~Samsonov\Irefn{org84}\And
X.~Sanchez Castro\Irefn{org54}\And
L.~\v{S}\'{a}ndor\Irefn{org58}\And
A.~Sandoval\Irefn{org63}\And
M.~Sano\Irefn{org126}\And
G.~Santagati\Irefn{org29}\And
D.~Sarkar\Irefn{org130}\And
E.~Scapparone\Irefn{org104}\And
F.~Scarlassara\Irefn{org30}\And
R.P.~Scharenberg\Irefn{org94}\And
C.~Schiaua\Irefn{org77}\And
R.~Schicker\Irefn{org92}\And
C.~Schmidt\Irefn{org96}\And
H.R.~Schmidt\Irefn{org35}\And
S.~Schuchmann\Irefn{org52}\And
J.~Schukraft\Irefn{org36}\And
M.~Schulc\Irefn{org39}\And
T.~Schuster\Irefn{org135}\And
Y.~Schutz\Irefn{org112}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org36}\And
K.~Schwarz\Irefn{org96}\And
K.~Schweda\Irefn{org96}\And
G.~Scioli\Irefn{org28}\And
E.~Scomparin\Irefn{org110}\And
R.~Scott\Irefn{org123}\And
K.S.~Seeder\Irefn{org118}\And
J.E.~Seger\Irefn{org85}\And
Y.~Sekiguchi\Irefn{org125}\And
I.~Selyuzhenkov\Irefn{org96}\And
K.~Senosi\Irefn{org64}\And
J.~Seo\Irefn{org66}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org95}\And
E.~Serradilla\Irefn{org10}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org63}\And
A.~Sevcenco\Irefn{org61}\And
A.~Shabanov\Irefn{org55}\And
A.~Shabetai\Irefn{org112}\And
O.~Shadura\Irefn{org3}\And
R.~Shahoyan\Irefn{org36}\And
A.~Shangaraev\Irefn{org111}\And
A.~Sharma\Irefn{org89}\And
N.~Sharma\Irefn{org60}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org123}\And
K.~Shigaki\Irefn{org46}\And
K.~Shtejer\Irefn{org9}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org27}\And
Y.~Sibiriak\Irefn{org99}\And
S.~Siddhanta\Irefn{org105}\And
K.M.~Sielewicz\Irefn{org36}\And
T.~Siemiarczuk\Irefn{org76}\And
D.~Silvermyr\Irefn{org83}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org34}\And
C.~Silvestre\Irefn{org70}\And
G.~Simatovic\Irefn{org127}\And
G.~Simonetti\Irefn{org36}\And
R.~Singaraju\Irefn{org130}\And
R.~Singh\Irefn{org78}\And
S.~Singha\Irefn{org78}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org130}\And
V.~Singhal\Irefn{org130}\And
B.C.~Sinha\Irefn{org130}\And
T.~Sinha\Irefn{org100}\And
B.~Sitar\Irefn{org38}\And
M.~Sitta\Irefn{org32}\And
T.B.~Skaali\Irefn{org22}\And
M.~Slupecki\Irefn{org121}\And
N.~Smirnov\Irefn{org135}\And
R.J.M.~Snellings\Irefn{org56}\And
T.W.~Snellman\Irefn{org121}\And
C.~S{\o}gaard\Irefn{org34}\And
R.~Soltz\Irefn{org74}\And
J.~Song\Irefn{org95}\And
M.~Song\Irefn{org136}\And
Z.~Song\Irefn{org7}\And
F.~Soramel\Irefn{org30}\And
S.~Sorensen\Irefn{org123}\And
M.~Spacek\Irefn{org39}\And
E.~Spiriti\Irefn{org71}\And
I.~Sputowska\Irefn{org115}\And
M.~Spyropoulou-Stassinaki\Irefn{org87}\And
B.K.~Srivastava\Irefn{org94}\And
J.~Stachel\Irefn{org92}\And
I.~Stan\Irefn{org61}\And
G.~Stefanek\Irefn{org76}\And
M.~Steinpreis\Irefn{org20}\And
E.~Stenlund\Irefn{org34}\And
G.~Steyn\Irefn{org64}\And
J.H.~Stiller\Irefn{org92}\And
D.~Stocco\Irefn{org112}\And
P.~Strmen\Irefn{org38}\And
A.A.P.~Suaide\Irefn{org118}\And
T.~Sugitate\Irefn{org46}\And
C.~Suire\Irefn{org50}\And
M.~Suleymanov\Irefn{org16}\And
R.~Sultanov\Irefn{org57}\And
M.~\v{S}umbera\Irefn{org82}\And
T.J.M.~Symons\Irefn{org73}\And
A.~Szabo\Irefn{org38}\And
A.~Szanto de Toledo\Irefn{org118}\And
I.~Szarka\Irefn{org38}\And
A.~Szczepankiewicz\Irefn{org36}\And
M.~Szymanski\Irefn{org132}\And
J.~Takahashi\Irefn{org119}\And
N.~Tanaka\Irefn{org126}\And
M.A.~Tangaro\Irefn{org33}\And
J.D.~Tapia Takaki\Aref{idp5843168}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org50}\And
A.~Tarantola Peloni\Irefn{org52}\And
M.~Tariq\Irefn{org19}\And
M.G.~Tarzila\Irefn{org77}\And
A.~Tauro\Irefn{org36}\And
G.~Tejeda Mu\~{n}oz\Irefn{org2}\And
A.~Telesca\Irefn{org36}\And
K.~Terasaki\Irefn{org125}\And
C.~Terrevoli\Irefn{org30}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org25}\And
B.~Teyssier\Irefn{org128}\And
J.~Th\"{a}der\Irefn{org96}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org73}\And
D.~Thomas\Irefn{org116}\And
R.~Tieulent\Irefn{org128}\And
A.R.~Timmins\Irefn{org120}\And
A.~Toia\Irefn{org52}\And
S.~Trogolo\Irefn{org110}\And
V.~Trubnikov\Irefn{org3}\And
W.H.~Trzaska\Irefn{org121}\And
T.~Tsuji\Irefn{org125}\And
A.~Tumkin\Irefn{org98}\And
R.~Turrisi\Irefn{org107}\And
T.S.~Tveter\Irefn{org22}\And
K.~Ullaland\Irefn{org18}\And
A.~Uras\Irefn{org128}\And
G.L.~Usai\Irefn{org25}\And
A.~Utrobicic\Irefn{org127}\And
M.~Vajzer\Irefn{org82}\And
M.~Vala\Irefn{org58}\And
L.~Valencia Palomo\Irefn{org69}\And
S.~Vallero\Irefn{org27}\And
J.~Van Der Maarel\Irefn{org56}\And
J.W.~Van Hoorne\Irefn{org36}\And
M.~van Leeuwen\Irefn{org56}\And
T.~Vanat\Irefn{org82}\And
P.~Vande Vyvre\Irefn{org36}\And
D.~Varga\Irefn{org134}\And
A.~Vargas\Irefn{org2}\And
M.~Vargyas\Irefn{org121}\And
R.~Varma\Irefn{org47}\And
M.~Vasileiou\Irefn{org87}\And
A.~Vasiliev\Irefn{org99}\And
A.~Vauthier\Irefn{org70}\And
V.~Vechernin\Irefn{org129}\And
A.M.~Veen\Irefn{org56}\And
M.~Veldhoen\Irefn{org56}\And
A.~Velure\Irefn{org18}\And
M.~Venaruzzo\Irefn{org72}\And
E.~Vercellin\Irefn{org27}\And
S.~Vergara Lim\'on\Irefn{org2}\And
R.~Vernet\Irefn{org8}\And
M.~Verweij\Irefn{org133}\And
L.~Vickovic\Irefn{org114}\And
G.~Viesti\Irefn{org30}\Aref{0}\And
J.~Viinikainen\Irefn{org121}\And
Z.~Vilakazi\Irefn{org124}\And
O.~Villalobos Baillie\Irefn{org101}\And
A.~Vinogradov\Irefn{org99}\And
L.~Vinogradov\Irefn{org129}\And
Y.~Vinogradov\Irefn{org98}\And
T.~Virgili\Irefn{org31}\And
V.~Vislavicius\Irefn{org34}\And
Y.P.~Viyogi\Irefn{org130}\And
A.~Vodopyanov\Irefn{org65}\And
M.A.~V\"{o}lkl\Irefn{org92}\And
K.~Voloshin\Irefn{org57}\And
S.A.~Voloshin\Irefn{org133}\And
G.~Volpe\Irefn{org36}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org134}\And
B.~von Haller\Irefn{org36}\And
I.~Vorobyev\Irefn{org91}\And
D.~Vranic\Irefn{org96}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org36}\And
J.~Vrl\'{a}kov\'{a}\Irefn{org40}\And
B.~Vulpescu\Irefn{org69}\And
A.~Vyushin\Irefn{org98}\And
B.~Wagner\Irefn{org18}\And
J.~Wagner\Irefn{org96}\And
H.~Wang\Irefn{org56}\And
M.~Wang\Irefn{org7}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org112}\And
Y.~Wang\Irefn{org92}\And
D.~Watanabe\Irefn{org126}\And
M.~Weber\Irefn{org36}\And
S.G.~Weber\Irefn{org96}\And
J.P.~Wessels\Irefn{org53}\And
U.~Westerhoff\Irefn{org53}\And
J.~Wiechula\Irefn{org35}\And
J.~Wikne\Irefn{org22}\And
M.~Wilde\Irefn{org53}\And
G.~Wilk\Irefn{org76}\And
J.~Wilkinson\Irefn{org92}\And
M.C.S.~Williams\Irefn{org104}\And
B.~Windelband\Irefn{org92}\And
M.~Winn\Irefn{org92}\And
C.G.~Yaldo\Irefn{org133}\And
Y.~Yamaguchi\Irefn{org125}\And
H.~Yang\Irefn{org56}\And
P.~Yang\Irefn{org7}\And
S.~Yano\Irefn{org46}\And
Z.~Yin\Irefn{org7}\And
H.~Yokoyama\Irefn{org126}\And
I.-K.~Yoo\Irefn{org95}\And
V.~Yurchenko\Irefn{org3}\And
I.~Yushmanov\Irefn{org99}\And
A.~Zaborowska\Irefn{org132}\And
V.~Zaccolo\Irefn{org79}\And
A.~Zaman\Irefn{org16}\And
C.~Zampolli\Irefn{org104}\And
H.J.C.~Zanoli\Irefn{org118}\And
S.~Zaporozhets\Irefn{org65}\And
A.~Zarochentsev\Irefn{org129}\And
P.~Z\'{a}vada\Irefn{org59}\And
N.~Zaviyalov\Irefn{org98}\And
H.~Zbroszczyk\Irefn{org132}\And
I.S.~Zgura\Irefn{org61}\And
M.~Zhalov\Irefn{org84}\And
H.~Zhang\Irefn{org7}\And
X.~Zhang\Irefn{org73}\And
Y.~Zhang\Irefn{org7}\And
C.~Zhao\Irefn{org22}\And
N.~Zhigareva\Irefn{org57}\And
D.~Zhou\Irefn{org7}\And
Y.~Zhou\Irefn{org56}\And
Z.~Zhou\Irefn{org18}\And
H.~Zhu\Irefn{org7}\And
J.~Zhu\Irefn{org7}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org112}\And
X.~Zhu\Irefn{org7}\And
A.~Zichichi\Irefn{org12}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org28}\And
A.~Zimmermann\Irefn{org92}\And
M.B.~Zimmermann\Irefn{org53}\textsuperscript{,}\Irefn{org36}\And
G.~Zinovjev\Irefn{org3}\And
M.~Zyzak\Irefn{org42}
\renewcommand\labelenumi{\textsuperscript{\theenumi}~}
\section*{Affiliation notes}
\renewcommand\theenumi{\roman{enumi}}
\begin{Authlist}
\item \Adef{0}Deceased
\item \Adef{idp5843168}{Also at: University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, United States}
\end{Authlist}
\section*{Collaboration Institutes}
\renewcommand\theenumi{\arabic{enumi}~}
\begin{Authlist}
\item \Idef{org1}A.I. Alikhanyan National Science Laboratory (Yerevan Physics Institute) Foundation, Yerevan, Armenia
\item \Idef{org2}Benem\'{e}rita Universidad Aut\'{o}noma de Puebla, Puebla, Mexico
\item \Idef{org3}Bogolyubov Institute for Theoretical Physics, Kiev, Ukraine
\item \Idef{org4}Bose Institute, Department of Physics and Centre for Astroparticle Physics and Space Science (CAPSS), Kolkata, India
\item \Idef{org5}Budker Institute for Nuclear Physics, Novosibirsk, Russia
\item \Idef{org6}California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California, United States
\item \Idef{org7}Central China Normal University, Wuhan, China
\item \Idef{org8}Centre de Calcul de l'IN2P3, Villeurbanne, France
\item \Idef{org9}Centro de Aplicaciones Tecnol\'{o}gicas y Desarrollo Nuclear (CEADEN), Havana, Cuba
\item \Idef{org10}Centro de Investigaciones Energ\'{e}ticas Medioambientales y Tecnol\'{o}gicas (CIEMAT), Madrid, Spain
\item \Idef{org11}Centro de Investigaci\'{o}n y de Estudios Avanzados (CINVESTAV), Mexico City and M\'{e}rida, Mexico
\item \Idef{org12}Centro Fermi - Museo Storico della Fisica e Centro Studi e Ricerche ``Enrico Fermi'', Rome, Italy
\item \Idef{org13}Chicago State University, Chicago, Illinois, USA
\item \Idef{org14}China Institute of Atomic Energy, Beijing, China
\item \Idef{org15}Commissariat \`{a} l'Energie Atomique, IRFU, Saclay, France
\item \Idef{org16}COMSATS Institute of Information Technology (CIIT), Islamabad, Pakistan
\item \Idef{org17}Departamento de F\'{\i}sica de Part\'{\i}culas and IGFAE, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain
\item \Idef{org18}Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
\item \Idef{org19}Department of Physics, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, India
\item \Idef{org20}Department of Physics, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States
\item \Idef{org21}Department of Physics, Sejong University, Seoul, South Korea
\item \Idef{org22}Department of Physics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
\item \Idef{org23}Dipartimento di Elettrotecnica ed Elettronica del Politecnico, Bari, Italy
\item \Idef{org24}Dipartimento di Fisica dell'Universit\`{a} 'La Sapienza' and Sezione INFN Rome, Italy
\item \Idef{org25}Dipartimento di Fisica dell'Universit\`{a} and Sezione INFN, Cagliari, Italy
\item \Idef{org26}Dipartimento di Fisica dell'Universit\`{a} and Sezione INFN, Trieste, Italy
\item \Idef{org27}Dipartimento di Fisica dell'Universit\`{a} and Sezione INFN, Turin, Italy
\item \Idef{org28}Dipartimento di Fisica e Astronomia dell'Universit\`{a} and Sezione INFN, Bologna, Italy
\item \Idef{org29}Dipartimento di Fisica e Astronomia dell'Universit\`{a} and Sezione INFN, Catania, Italy
\item \Idef{org30}Dipartimento di Fisica e Astronomia dell'Universit\`{a} and Sezione INFN, Padova, Italy
\item \Idef{org31}Dipartimento di Fisica `E.R.~Caianiello' dell'Universit\`{a} and Gruppo Collegato INFN, Salerno, Italy
\item \Idef{org32}Dipartimento di Scienze e Innovazione Tecnologica dell'Universit\`{a} del Piemonte Orientale and Gruppo Collegato INFN, Alessandria, Italy
\item \Idef{org33}Dipartimento Interateneo di Fisica `M.~Merlin' and Sezione INFN, Bari, Italy
\item \Idef{org34}Division of Experimental High Energy Physics, University of Lund, Lund, Sweden
\item \Idef{org35}Eberhard Karls Universit\"{a}t T\"{u}bingen, T\"{u}bingen, Germany
\item \Idef{org36}European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland
\item \Idef{org37}Faculty of Engineering, Bergen University College, Bergen, Norway
\item \Idef{org38}Faculty of Mathematics, Physics and Informatics, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovakia
\item \Idef{org39}Faculty of Nuclear Sciences and Physical Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic
\item \Idef{org40}Faculty of Science, P.J.~\v{S}af\'{a}rik University, Ko\v{s}ice, Slovakia
\item \Idef{org41}Faculty of Technology, Buskerud and Vestfold University College, Vestfold, Norway
\item \Idef{org42}Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universit\"{a}t Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
\item \Idef{org43}Gangneung-Wonju National University, Gangneung, South Korea
\item \Idef{org44}Gauhati University, Department of Physics, Guwahati, India
\item \Idef{org45}Helsinki Institute of Physics (HIP), Helsinki, Finland
\item \Idef{org46}Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan
\item \Idef{org47}Indian Institute of Technology Bombay (IIT), Mumbai, India
\item \Idef{org48}Indian Institute of Technology Indore, Indore (IITI), India
\item \Idef{org49}Inha University, Incheon, South Korea
\item \Idef{org50}Institut de Physique Nucl\'eaire d'Orsay (IPNO), Universit\'e Paris-Sud, CNRS-IN2P3, Orsay, France
\item \Idef{org51}Institut f\"{u}r Informatik, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universit\"{a}t Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
\item \Idef{org52}Institut f\"{u}r Kernphysik, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universit\"{a}t Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
\item \Idef{org53}Institut f\"{u}r Kernphysik, Westf\"{a}lische Wilhelms-Universit\"{a}t M\"{u}nster, M\"{u}nster, Germany
\item \Idef{org54}Institut Pluridisciplinaire Hubert Curien (IPHC), Universit\'{e} de Strasbourg, CNRS-IN2P3, Strasbourg, France
\item \Idef{org55}Institute for Nuclear Research, Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia
\item \Idef{org56}Institute for Subatomic Physics of Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands
\item \Idef{org57}Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia
\item \Idef{org58}Institute of Experimental Physics, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Ko\v{s}ice, Slovakia
\item \Idef{org59}Institute of Physics, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Prague, Czech Republic
\item \Idef{org60}Institute of Physics, Bhubaneswar, India
\item \Idef{org61}Institute of Space Science (ISS), Bucharest, Romania
\item \Idef{org62}Instituto de Ciencias Nucleares, Universidad Nacional Aut\'{o}noma de M\'{e}xico, Mexico City, Mexico
\item \Idef{org63}Instituto de F\'{\i}sica, Universidad Nacional Aut\'{o}noma de M\'{e}xico, Mexico City, Mexico
\item \Idef{org64}iThemba LABS, National Research Foundation, Somerset West, South Africa
\item \Idef{org65}Joint Institute for Nuclear Research (JINR), Dubna, Russia
\item \Idef{org66}Konkuk University, Seoul, South Korea
\item \Idef{org67}Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information, Daejeon, South Korea
\item \Idef{org68}KTO Karatay University, Konya, Turkey
\item \Idef{org69}Laboratoire de Physique Corpusculaire (LPC), Clermont Universit\'{e}, Universit\'{e} Blaise Pascal, CNRS--IN2P3, Clermont-Ferrand, France
\item \Idef{org70}Laboratoire de Physique Subatomique et de Cosmologie, Universit\'{e} Grenoble-Alpes, CNRS-IN2P3, Grenoble, France
\item \Idef{org71}Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, INFN, Frascati, Italy
\item \Idef{org72}Laboratori Nazionali di Legnaro, INFN, Legnaro, Italy
\item \Idef{org73}Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California, United States
\item \Idef{org74}Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California, United States
\item \Idef{org75}Moscow Engineering Physics Institute, Moscow, Russia
\item \Idef{org76}National Centre for Nuclear Studies, Warsaw, Poland
\item \Idef{org77}National Institute for Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest, Romania
\item \Idef{org78}National Institute of Science Education and Research, Bhubaneswar, India
\item \Idef{org79}Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
\item \Idef{org80}Nikhef, National Institute for Subatomic Physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands
\item \Idef{org81}Nuclear Physics Group, STFC Daresbury Laboratory, Daresbury, United Kingdom
\item \Idef{org82}Nuclear Physics Institute, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, \v{R}e\v{z} u Prahy, Czech Republic
\item \Idef{org83}Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, United States
\item \Idef{org84}Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute, Gatchina, Russia
\item \Idef{org85}Physics Department, Creighton University, Omaha, Nebraska, United States
\item \Idef{org86}Physics Department, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India
\item \Idef{org87}Physics Department, University of Athens, Athens, Greece
\item \Idef{org88}Physics Department, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
\item \Idef{org89}Physics Department, University of Jammu, Jammu, India
\item \Idef{org90}Physics Department, University of Rajasthan, Jaipur, India
\item \Idef{org91}Physik Department, Technische Universit\"{a}t M\"{u}nchen, Munich, Germany
\item \Idef{org92}Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universit\"{a}t Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
\item \Idef{org93}Politecnico di Torino, Turin, Italy
\item \Idef{org94}Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, United States
\item \Idef{org95}Pusan National University, Pusan, South Korea
\item \Idef{org96}Research Division and ExtreMe Matter Institute EMMI, GSI Helmholtzzentrum f\"ur Schwerionenforschung, Darmstadt, Germany
\item \Idef{org97}Rudjer Bo\v{s}kovi\'{c} Institute, Zagreb, Croatia
\item \Idef{org98}Russian Federal Nuclear Center (VNIIEF), Sarov, Russia
\item \Idef{org99}Russian Research Centre Kurchatov Institute, Moscow, Russia
\item \Idef{org100}Saha Institute of Nuclear Physics, Kolkata, India
\item \Idef{org101}School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
\item \Idef{org102}Secci\'{o}n F\'{\i}sica, Departamento de Ciencias, Pontificia Universidad Cat\'{o}lica del Per\'{u}, Lima, Peru
\item \Idef{org103}Sezione INFN, Bari, Italy
\item \Idef{org104}Sezione INFN, Bologna, Italy
\item \Idef{org105}Sezione INFN, Cagliari, Italy
\item \Idef{org106}Sezione INFN, Catania, Italy
\item \Idef{org107}Sezione INFN, Padova, Italy
\item \Idef{org108}Sezione INFN, Rome, Italy
\item \Idef{org109}Sezione INFN, Trieste, Italy
\item \Idef{org110}Sezione INFN, Turin, Italy
\item \Idef{org111}SSC IHEP of NRC Kurchatov institute, Protvino, Russia
\item \Idef{org112}SUBATECH, Ecole des Mines de Nantes, Universit\'{e} de Nantes, CNRS-IN2P3, Nantes, France
\item \Idef{org113}Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand
\item \Idef{org114}Technical University of Split FESB, Split, Croatia
\item \Idef{org115}The Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Cracow, Poland
\item \Idef{org116}The University of Texas at Austin, Physics Department, Austin, Texas, USA
\item \Idef{org117}Universidad Aut\'{o}noma de Sinaloa, Culiac\'{a}n, Mexico
\item \Idef{org118}Universidade de S\~{a}o Paulo (USP), S\~{a}o Paulo, Brazil
\item \Idef{org119}Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, Brazil
\item \Idef{org120}University of Houston, Houston, Texas, United States
\item \Idef{org121}University of Jyv\"{a}skyl\"{a}, Jyv\"{a}skyl\"{a}, Finland
\item \Idef{org122}University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
\item \Idef{org123}University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee, United States
\item \Idef{org124}University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa
\item \Idef{org125}University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
\item \Idef{org126}University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan
\item \Idef{org127}University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
\item \Idef{org128}Universit\'{e} de Lyon, Universit\'{e} Lyon 1, CNRS/IN2P3, IPN-Lyon, Villeurbanne, France
\item \Idef{org129}V.~Fock Institute for Physics, St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg, Russia
\item \Idef{org130}Variable Energy Cyclotron Centre, Kolkata, India
\item \Idef{org131}Vin\v{c}a Institute of Nuclear Sciences, Belgrade, Serbia
\item \Idef{org132}Warsaw University of Technology, Warsaw, Poland
\item \Idef{org133}Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, United States
\item \Idef{org134}Wigner Research Centre for Physics, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, Hungary
\item \Idef{org135}Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, United States
\item \Idef{org136}Yonsei University, Seoul, South Korea
\item \Idef{org137}Zentrum f\"{u}r Technologietransfer und Telekommunikation (ZTT), Fachhochschule Worms, Worms, Germany
\end{Authlist}
\endgroup
\section{Conclusion}
The dijet acoplanarity in p--Pb{} collisions was studied by measuring dijet transverse momentum \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}. The evolution of \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} as function of the transverse momentum of the full jet, associated charged jet and event multiplicity was presented. The \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} spectra for different full and associated charged jet transverse momentum ranges in the 0-40\% V0A event multiplicity class were found consistent with the PYTHIA prediction. The observed increase with jet energy from the mean \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} of $6.6\pm0.4\rom{(stat.)}\pm0.2\rom{(syst.)}$~\text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}{} to $18.8\pm1.3\rom{(stat.)}\pm1.5\rom{(syst.)}$~\text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}{} as well as the observed narrowing of \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} for more balanced jets suggests that the dijet \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} spectrum for large $Q^2$ processes is mainly sensitive to the increased available phase-space for QCD radiation processes. Furthermore the dijet acoplanarity was found to be consistent (within $1.2\sigma$) in the two event multiplicity classes analyzed in this study, indicating that in the
measured kinematical region no strong nuclear matter effects in p--Pb{} collisions are observed. Since these results indicate that nuclear {$k_{\rm T}$}{} effects are small, the \ensuremath{p_\rom{T}}{} imbalance of jet correlations in Pb-Pb results \cite{Aad:2010bu,Chatrchyan:2011sx} are unlikely to originate from multiple scatterings in the nuclear target.
\subsection{Corrections and Systematic Uncertainties}\label{sec:corrections}
The measured dijet \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} distributions are corrected to the particle level, defined as the dijet \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} from jets clustered from all prompt particles produced in the collision including all decay products, except those from weak decays of light flavor hadrons and muons. Both full and charged jets are accepted at particle level in the full azimuthal acceptance and in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta_{\rom{jet}}|<0.5$. The correction to particle level is based on a data-driven method to correct for the influence of the underlying event fluctuations and on simulated PYTHIA events (tune Perugia-2011 \cite{Skands:2010ak}) transported through the ALICE detectors layout with GEANT3 \cite{Brun1994}. The correction procedure takes into account the \ensuremath{p_\rom{T}}{} and angular resolution of the measured dijets.
Detector-level jets are defined as jets reconstructed from reconstructed tracks and EMCal clusters after subtraction of the charged energy deposits. The jet energy scale and resolution are affected by unmeasured particles (predominantly $\rom{K}^{0}_{\rom{L}}$ and neutrons), fluctuations of the energy deposit by charged tracks in the EMCal, the EMCal energy scale and the charged particle tracking efficiency and \ensuremath{p_\rom{T}}{} resolution.
A response matrix as a function of \ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}}{} of the full and associated charged jet, \ensuremath{\Delta\varphi_{\rom{dijet}}}{} and \ensuremath{k_{\rm Ty}}{} is created after matching the detector-level to the particle-level jets as described in \cite{Abelev:2013kqa}.
The \ensuremath{p_\rom{T}}-smearing due to fluctuations of the underlying event is estimated with the random-cones technique which is also applied in the analysis of Pb--Pb{} data \cite{Abelev:2012ej}. Cones with a radius equal to the resolution parameter $R$ are placed in the measured p--Pb{} events at random positions in the $\eta-\varphi$ plane ensuring the cone is fully contained in the detector acceptance. The fluctuations of the background are characterized by the difference between the summed \ensuremath{p_\rom{T}}{} of all the tracks and clusters in the random cone (RC) and the estimated background:
$\ensuremath{\rom{\delta}\pt} = \sum_{i}^{\rom{RC}}p_{\rm T,i} - A \cdot \rho$, where $A$ is the area of the random cone ($A = \pi R^2$) and the subscript $i$ indicates a cluster or track pointing inside the random cone. A random cone can overlap with a jet but to avoid oversampling in small systems like p--Pb{}, a partial exclusion of overlap with the leading jet in the event is applied. This is achieved by excluding random cones overlapping with a leading jet with a given probability, $p=1/N_{\rom{coll}}$ where $N_{\rom{coll}}$ is the number of binary collisions. $N_{\rom{coll}}$ is taken from estimates applying a Glauber fit to the multiplicity measured in the V0A detector resulting in values between $14.7$ and $1.52$ depending on the event activity measured in the V0A detector. The width of the background fluctuations for full (charged) jets varies between $2.12$ ($1.59$) and $0.73$ ($0.56$) \text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}{} depending on the multiplicity of the event.
The influence of background fluctuations is added to the response extracted from detector simulation through a Monte Carlo model assuming that the background fluctuation for the full and associated charged jet are uncorrelated within 20\% wide bins of V0A multiplicity classes. Within these selected multiplicity classes the variation of the background fluctuations is negligible. Since the Monte Carlo model does not generate full events and only accounts for the \ensuremath{\rom{\delta}\pt}{} smearing on a jet-by-jet basis, additional jet finding inefficiencies and worsening of angular resolution due to the background fluctuation are not taken into account. These effects are negligible since the contribution of the underlying event to the jets in p--Pb{} collisions is small.
No correction for the angular resolution of the charged jet due to missing neutral fragments is applied. This effect increases the width of \ensuremath{\Delta\varphi_{\rom{dijet}}}{} by $\sim0.03$ and is present, and of the same magnitude, in the p--Pb{} data and the PYTHIA reference.
The most probable correction to the jet energy, taking into account detector effects and background fluctuations, for fully reconstructed jets is 28\% at $\ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}=20$ \text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}{} and decreases to 20\% for jets with $\ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}>40$ \text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}. The uncertainty on the jet energy scale is evaluated by changing the tracking efficiency in data and full detector simulation \cite{ALICE:2014dla}, varying the double counting correction for the hadronic energy deposit in the EMCal and by using different estimates of the underlying-event fluctuations. The final uncertainty on the jet energy scale is 4\%. The jet energy resolution for full jets is 22\% at $\ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}=20$ \text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}{} and decreases gradually to 18\% at $\ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}=120$ \text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}. The influence of the uncertainties on the jet energy scale and resolution on the dijet \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} measurement are discussed in the following.
The measured \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} distributions are corrected to the particle level by applying bin-by-bin correction factors, which are parametrized by a linear fit to the ratio between the particle- and detector-level \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} distributions for a given dijet selection. The correction factors take into account the effects of feed-in and feed-out of the selected kinematic and angular intervals of the full and associated charged jets. These effects slightly change the shape of the \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} distributions resulting in correction factors which vary between $0.9$ for small \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} to $1.2$ at large \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}. The correction is relatively small, because while feed-in from lower \ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}{} narrows the \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} distribution, feed-in from higher \ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}{} broadens the distribution resulting in a cancellation. Similarly the feed-out to high and low \ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}{} has a small effect on the observable. By using a linear fit to the correction factors the statistical fluctuations of the detector simulation are not propagated
to the
measurement. The 95\% confidence limit of the parametrization using the linear fit is included in the systematic uncertainty of the measurement. Correction factors are extracted as a function of V0A event multiplicity class and kinematic intervals of the full and associated charged jet.
The dominant systematic uncertainty on the measurement originates from the extraction of bin-by-bin correction factors. The uncertainty of the parametrization of the correction factors results in 10--20\% correlated systematic uncertainty on the dijet \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} yields. An additional 2.5\% uncertainty arises from the uncertainty on the tracking efficiency which is 4\%. Systematic uncertainties originating from the charged hadron energy deposit in EMCal towers, background fluctuations and the average momentum density $\rho$ were evaluated and found to be negligible.
\section{Experimental Setup and Data Sample}\label{sec:DataSample}
Collisions of proton and lead beams were provided by the LHC in the first months of 2013. The beam energies were 4 TeV for the proton beam and 1.58 TeV per nucleon for the lead beam, resulting in collisions at a center of mass energy $\ensuremath{\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02$ TeV. The nucleon-nucleon center-of-mass system moves in rapidity with respect to the ALICE reference frame by -0.465 in the direction of the proton beam \cite{ALICE:2012xs}. In the following $\eta$ refers to the pseudorapidity in the ALICE reference frame.
The V0 detectors, two arrays of scintillator tiles covering the full azimuth within $2.8<\eta<5.1$ (V0A) and $-3.7<\eta<-1.7$ (V0C), were used for online minimum bias event triggering, offline event selection and characterization of events in different particle multiplicity classes. The minimum bias trigger required a signal from a charged particle in both the V0A and V0C. The total integrated luminosity of the minimum bias event sample is 37 $\rom{\mu b}^{-1}$.
The electromagnetic calorimeter (EMCal) in ALICE \cite{oai:arXiv.org:1008.0413} covers 100 degrees in azimuth, $1.4<\varphi<\pi$, and $|\eta|<0.7$.
For the analyzed data set an online jet patch trigger of $32\times32$ adjacent towers, corresponding to an area of approximately $0.2$ $\mathrm{rad}$ was used. This jet patch trigger fired if an integrated patch energy of at least $10$~GeV{} (low-energy trigger) or $20$~GeV{} (high-energy trigger) was found. The low-energy triggered event sample provided a significant overlap in jet energy between the minimum bias and high-energy trigger event samples, allowing assessment of the trigger biases. The event sample obtained with the low-energy trigger corresponds to a total integrated luminosity of 21 $\rom{\mu b}^{-1}$. The event sample with the high energy threshold has a total integrated luminosity of 1.6 $\rom{nb}^{-1}$.
The position of the primary vertex was determined using reconstructed charged particle tracks in the ALICE tracking systems, Inner Tracking System (ITS) \cite{Aamodt:2010aa} and Time Projection Chamber (TPC) \cite{Alme:2010ke}. The algorithm to reconstruct the primary vertex is fully efficient for events with at least one primary track within $|\eta|<1.4$ \cite{Abelev:2014ffa}. To ensure a high tracking efficiency uniform in $\eta$, events are accepted if the coordinate of the vertex along the beam direction is within $\pm10$ cm from the center of the detector.
The total event sample is divided into two multiplicity classes based on the total charge deposited in the V0A detector \cite{Abelev:2014mva}. For the data sample used in this analysis, the V0A detector is located in the direction of the Pb remnants and thus sensitive to the fragmentation of the nucleus limiting a correlation in the definition of the multiplicity class with the dijet measurement at midrapidity. Two multiplicity classes 0-40\% and 40-100\% are used in this analysis. The higher multiplicity class \mbox{(0-40\%)} corresponds to $\langle\rom{d}N/\rom{d}\eta\rangle_{|\eta|<0.5} = 37.2 \pm 0.8$ and the lower multiplicity class \mbox{(40-100\%)} to $\langle\rom{d}N/\rom{d}\eta\rangle_{|\eta|<0.5} = 9.4 \pm 0.2$.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
\input{acknowledgements_jan2015.tex}
\end{acknowledgement}
\bibliographystyle{utphys}
\section{Introduction}
Dijets produced in $2\rightarrow2$ leading-order (LO) scattering processes are balanced in transverse momentum and back-to-back in azimuth. In proton-proton collisions a small acoplanarity appears due to intrisic transverse momentum {$k_{\rm T}$}{} from partonic Fermi motion \cite{Feynman:1977yr} and initial state gluon radiation \cite{PhysRevLett.81.2642,PhysRevD.59.074007}. At large momentum transfer between the incoming partons, the phase space for hard gluon radiation in the parton shower or from next-to-leading-order (NLO) processes increases, resulting in acoplanarity of the dijet system \cite{Abazov:2004hm,Khachatryan:2011zj,daCosta:2011ni}. This also results in an imbalance of the jet transverse momenta also referred to as a broadening of the dijet transverse momentum. The relative contribution of hard QCD radiation to the dijet {$k_{\rm T}$}{} can be varied by applying kinematic and acceptance selections to the dijet sample.
In p--Pb{} collisions the dijet kinematics are potentially modified due to nuclear matter effects which are expected to induce a momentum imbalance and acoplanarity of dijet pairs with respect to pp collisions, so-called transverse momentum broadening \cite{Albacete:2013ei}. For instance, multiple scatterings inside the nucleus of the initial- and final-state partons in hard scatterings can lead to such a transverse momentum broadening.
In heavy-ion collisions, jets produced in hard scattering processes are used to probe the properties of the produced medium. Highly energetic partons propagate through the medium, which modifies the parton shower resulting in a modified fragmentation pattern of the final hadronization products \cite{Gyulassy:1990ye,Baier:1994bd}. Heavy-ion jet measurements are compared to measurements in pp collisions to determine the effect of hot nuclear matter on jet observables \cite{Aad:2014bxa,Aad:2014wha,Chatrchyan:2014ava,Chatrchyan:2013kwa}. In the context of such studies, measurements in p--Pb{} collisions serve as a benchmark to study hard scattering processes in a nuclear target.
Measurements presented in \cite{Chatrchyan:2014hqa} of the dijet transverse momentum imbalance and dijet azimuthal angle distributions show results which are comparable to results obtained with pp{} data and independent of the event activity. This letter presents a measurement of dijet acoplanarity in p--Pb{} collisions at $\ensuremath{\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}}=5.02$ TeV, recorded with the ALICE detector at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). The jet azimuthal correlations are measured at mid-rapidity for jet transverse momentum between 15 and 120 \text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}. Jets entering in the acceptance of electomagnetic calorimeter are reconstructed from charged and neutral particles (full jet) while the recoil jet is reconstructed from charged particles only (charged jet). Measurements are presented as a function of the full and associated charged jet transverse momentum in two event \mbox{multiplicity} classes which are correlated to the centrality of the p--Pb{} collisions \cite{Adam:2014qja}.
\section{Jet reconstruction and dijet $\mathbf{{\it k}_{Ty}}$}
\subsection{Jet Reconstuction}
Jets are reconstructed with the anti-{$k_{\rm T}$}{} jet algorithm of the FastJet package \cite{Cacciari2011, Cacciari2006} combining charged tracks measured in the central tracking detectors, ITS and TPC, and neutral fragments measured with the EMCal \cite{oai:arXiv.org:1008.0413}. Tracks from the combined ITS and TPC track reconstruction algorithm are used. Quality criteria for track selection follow the same strategy as in \cite{Abelev:2012ej}. The tracking efficiency is 70\% for tracks with a transverse momentum $\ensuremath{p_\rom{T,track}}=0.15$~\text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}{} and increases to 85\% at $\ensuremath{p_\rom{T,track}}=1$~\text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}{} and above. The \ensuremath{p_\rom{T}}{} resolution of tracks is 0.8\% (3.8\%) for $\ensuremath{p_\rom{T,track}}=1$~\text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}{} ($50$~\text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}). EMCal clusters are formed by a clustering algorithm that combines signals from adjacent EMCal towers, with cluster size limited by the requirement that each cluster contains only one local energy maximum. Energy deposited by charged particles in the EMCal is subtracted from the measured energy in the EMCal clusters which prevents counting
the charged energy twice \cite{Abelev:2013fn,Abelev:2014ffa}. ALICE also reconstructs jets from charged particles only. These jets are referred to as `charged jets', while jets reconstructed from charged and neutral fragments are called `full jets' in this letter.
In this analysis, anti-{$k_{\rm T}$}{} jets are reconstructed using the boost-invariant \ensuremath{p_\rom{T}}{} recombination scheme and a jet resolution parameter of $R=0.4$. A jet is only accepted if it is fully contained in the acceptance in which the constituents are measured: for charged jets in the full azimuth and $|\eta_\rom{jet}^\rom{ch}|<0.9-R$ while for full jets $1.4+R<\varphi_\rom{jet}^\rom{ch+ne}<\pi-R$ and $|\eta_\rom{jet}^\rom{ch+ne}|<0.7-R$. It was verified that reducing the acceptance with 0.05 on all edges, in $\eta_\rom{jet}$ and $\varphi_\rom{jet}$, has a negligible effect on the measurement. Tracks with $\ensuremath{p_\rom{T,track}}>0.15$~\text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}{} and neutral constituents with $E_{\rm T}>0.3$ GeV are considered. The minimum required area for jets with a resolution parameter $R=0.4$ is equal to $0.3$ ($\approx60\%$ of the area of a rigid cone with $R=0.4$). This selection does not affect the jet finding efficiency for jets (full and charged) with transverse momentum $p_\rom{T,jet} > 15$~\text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}. In addition, jets containing a track with $\ensuremath{p_\rom{T,track}}>100$~\text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}{}, for which the track momentum resolution exceeds 6.5\%, are tagged and rejected. This last requirement has negligible effect in the reported range of jet momenta. The measurement is corrected to particle level as will be explained in Section \ref{sec:corrections}.
The measured transverse momentum of the anti-{$k_{\rm T}$}{} jet is corrected for the contribution of the underlying event by subtracting the average background momentum density, $\rho$ for full jets and $\rho_{\rom{ch}}$ for charged jets, multiplied by the area of the considered jet.
The contribution of the underlying event to the charged jets is estimated using clusters reconstructed with the {$k_{\rm T}$}{} jet algorithm using only charged tracks. This is achieved by calculating event-by-event the median charged background density, $\rho_{\rom{ch}}$, from all {$k_{\rm T}$}{} clusters in the event with in addition a correction for the sparsely populated p--Pb{} events \cite{Chatrchyan:2012tt,Adam:2015hoa}.
The average $\rho_{\rom{ch}}$ in minimum-bias events is equal to $1.9$~\text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}{} for the 0--40\% multiplicity class and $0.7$~\text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}{} for the 40--100\% event multiplicity class with a negligible statistical uncertainty in both cases. Finally, $\rho_{\rom{ch}}$ is multiplied by a scale factor to account for the neutral energy to estimate $\rho$. The scale factor is determined by measuring the ratio between the energy of all the EMCal clusters and the charged tracks pointing into the EMCal acceptance in the minimum-bias event sample. The extracted scale factor $1.28$ is independent of event multiplicity. The influence of background fluctuations is quantified and corrected for on an inclusive basis, see Section \ref{sec:corrections}.
\subsection{Dijet $\mathbf{{\it k}_{Ty}}$}
Each measured full jet is correlated with the charged jet of highest transverse momentum in the opposite hemisphere. Only pairs for which the full jet has a larger transverse momentum than the associated charged jet are considered. Furthermore only dijets pairs with $|\Delta \varphi_{\rom{dijet}}-\pi| < \pi/3$, with $\Delta\varphi_{\rom{dijet}}$ the angle between the jet axis of the full and charged jet, are considered in the analysis. The selection in $\Delta \varphi_{\rom{dijet}}$ rejects 5--8\% of the dijet pairs depending on the kinematic selection of the full and associated charged jet.
The azimuthal acoplanarity of dijets is studied by measuring the transverse component of the {$k_{\rm T}$}{} vector of the dijet system, \ensuremath{k_{\rm Ty}}, defined as
\begin{equation}
\ensuremath{k_{\rm Ty}} = \ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}} \; \rom{sin}(\Delta\varphi_{\rom{dijet}}),
\end{equation}
with \ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}{} the transverse momentum of the full jet. It should be noted that this definition differs from the one used in previous publications, for example \cite{Angelis1980163}.
Since $\rom{d}N\rom{/}\rom{d}\ensuremath{k_{\rm Ty}}$ is a symmetric distribution around zero, \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} is reported throughout the paper.
For events from the minimum-bias sample full jets with $\ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}>20$~\text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}{} are considered, while in the jet-triggered data samples (see Section \ref{sec:DataSample}) only jets with $\ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}>40$~\text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}{} for the low energy trigger and $\ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}>60$~\text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}{} for the higher energy trigger are used. In these kinematic regimes the triggers are fully efficient and no fragmentation bias is observed with respect to the minimum-bias jet sample. The \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} distributions are reported at particle level involving a correction for detector effects and \ensuremath{p_\rom{T}}-smearing due to the underlying event, see Section \ref{sec:corrections}.
The dijet sample is biased due to the requirement that the full jet has a larger transverse momentum than the associated charged jet, while the full jet momentum is used to estimate \ensuremath{k_{\rm Ty}}.
In an unbiased measurement, the full jet would correspond to the leading jet of the event in only 50\% of the cases.
A PYTHIA \cite{Sjostrand2006,Sjostrand:2007gs} study was performed in which the particle-level jet was defined as the jet containing all final state particles (no kinematic selection on constituents and full azimuthal acceptance). Applying the selection of this analysis to detector-level reconstructed jets, results in a correct tagging of the leading jet in 70\% of the dijet events. This results in a slightly harder \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} distribution with a 10\% smaller yield at low \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} and 20\% higher yield at large \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}. The results of the \mbox{p--Pb{}} data analysis will be compared to particle-level PYTHIA with the same dijet selection incorporating the mentioned bias.
The dijet acoplanarity is measured as a function of the transverse momentum of the full jet while the kinematic interval of the associated charged jet is also varied to explore \ensuremath{k_{\rm Ty}}{} for more or less balanced dijets in transverse momentum. In addition \ensuremath{k_{\rm Ty}}{} distributions are also presented for two event multiplicity classes.
\section{Results}
The dijet \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} distributions are presented as functions of the full-jet transverse momentum, the transverse momentum of the associated charged jet and event multiplicity classes. The results are compared to the predictions of the PYTHIA8.176 event generator with tune 4C and $K=0.7$ \cite{Sjostrand2006,Sjostrand:2007gs}. This tune has been found to give a reasonable description of jet production at the LHC. The final state particles are shifted in pseudorapidity with $\eta_{\rm shift}=-0.465$ to mimic the rapidity shift of the laboratory frame due to the energy difference of the proton and Pb beams.
\subsection{Evolution with full-jet transverse momentum}\label{sec:EvoFullJetPt}
Figure \ref{fig:KtPtTrigPythiaFuCh} shows the corrected \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} distributions for several kinematic intervals for the full jet, from $\ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}=20$~\text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}{} to $\ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}=120$~\text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}, in the 0--40\% V0A multiplicity class. The associated charged jet has a minimum transverse momentum, \ensuremath{p_\rom{T,assoc\;jet}^\rom{ch}}, of 15~\text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}{} and is always of lower transverse momentum than the full jet. The mean \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} increases with the transverse momentum of the full jet.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/kTDataPythiaRatio}
\caption{\label{fig:KtPtTrigPythiaFuCh}Dijet \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} distributions in p--Pb{} collisions in the 0-40\% V0A multiplicity event class for several kinematic intervals of the full jet (\ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}). The measurement is compared to PYTHIA8 (tune 4C, $K=0.7$) with and without initial state radiation. The lower panels show the ratio between the measurement and PYTHIA8 including initial state radiation.
}
\end{figure}
Increasing the transverse momentum of the full jet extends the kinematic reach of \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} by opening phase-space for more gluon radiation. This results in a harder \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} distribution which drops at large \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} because the kinematic limit $\ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}_{\rm max} = p_{\rom{T,jet,max}}^{\rom{ch+ne}}\;\rom{sin}(2\pi/3)$ is reached.
The p--Pb{} data points and the PYTHIA8 calculation show a similar dependence on \ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}.
The lower panels of Fig.~\ref{fig:KtPtTrigPythiaFuCh} show the ratio between data and PYTHIA8, including initial state radiation (ISR), which is observed to be consistent with unity for all transverse momentum ranges studied. In the upper panels PYTHIA without the initial state radiation option is shown in addition (dashed line). Without ISR the amount of QCD radiation (which includes NLO corrections) is reduced, resulting in a steeper \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} spectrum. The effect is most pronounced for the $\ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}>40$~\text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}{} where the p--Pb{} measurement is in agreement with full PYTHIA simulation but differs significantly from PYTHIA without ISR. This observation suggests that the dijet \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} spectrum for large $Q^2$ processes is highly sensitive to the increased available phase-space of QCD radiation processes.
Measurements presented in \cite{Chatrchyan:2014hqa} of the dijet transverse momentum imbalance for more energetic jets than the measurement presented here also show results which are comparable to simulated pp{} reference and independent of the forward transverse energy.
\subsection{Evolution with event multiplicity and $\mathbf{{\it p}_{T,assoc\;jet}^{ch}}$}
In addition to the measurement of \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} in the highest multiplicity p--Pb{} events, the \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} distribution is also measured in the lower multiplicity V0A event class \mbox{40-100\%}. If strong nuclear effects are present they are expected to be stronger in the high multiplicity events due to the larger number of participants in the collision. A comparison is shown in the left panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:KtMultPtAss}. The systematic uncertainties between the two measurements are fully correlated since they originate from the uncertainty on the jet energy scale of the full jet. The consistency between the \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} distributions in the high and low multiplicity event class was evaluated by taking the ratio and performing a constant fit taking into account only the statistical errors. The fit is within 1.2$\sigma$ consistent with unity.
This result shows that in the measured kinematical region, possible nuclear matter effects and/or shadowing in the \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} distributions in p--Pb{} collisions are not observed for dijets at midrapidity.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/KtVsV0AMultPtAssocPanels}
\caption{\label{fig:KtMultPtAss}Distributions of \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} for two V0A event classes (left panel) and three \ensuremath{p_\rom{T,assoc\;jet}^\rom{ch}}{} ranges (right panel).}
\end{figure}
The sensitivity to dijet acoplanarity is enhanced by selecting more \ensuremath{p_\rom{T}}{} imbalanced jet pairs.
The \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} distribution for full jets with $70<\ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}<120$~\text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}{} for various \ensuremath{p_\rom{T,assoc\;jet}^\rom{ch}}{} ranges is shown in the right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:KtMultPtAss}.
The \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} distribution tends to become steeper if jets are more balanced indicating that the influence of QCD radiation decreases. This behavior supports the previous observation (Sec.~\ref{sec:EvoFullJetPt}) that the dijet \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} observable for highly energetic jets is over a wide range of \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} mainly sensitive to QCD radiation processes rather than elastic scatterings.
\subsection{Evolution and characterization via $\mathbf{\langle |{\it k}_{Ty}| \rangle}$}
The measured \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} distributions are further characterized by reporting the mean ($\langle\ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}\rangle$) of the distribution. To avoid that the extracted moment is biased by statistical fluctuations for large values of \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}, the distributions are extrapolated using a template generated with PYTHIA8 (tune 4C, $K=0.7$), which agrees well with the p--Pb measurement (see Fig.~\ref{fig:KtPtTrigPythiaFuCh}). The PYTHIA \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} distribution is normalized to minimize the \ensuremath{\chi^{2}}{} between data and PYTHIA. The transition from the data to the normalized template is fixed at 60\% of the kinematic limit $\ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}_{\rm max}$. The transition point is varied to estimate the systematic uncertainty from this extrapolation procedure. In addition, the normalization of the PYTHIA template is varied by one standard deviation of the fit uncertainty. This results in an additional systematic uncertainty on the extraction of $\langle\ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}\rangle$. For low \ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}{} the uncertainty on the extracted mean is
equal to 2.9\% and increases to 8.1\% for the highest \ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}{} values.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{figures/ktMeanDataPyhia}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{figures/MeanKtPtAssocVariationWithPythia}
\caption{\label{fig:MeanKtPythiaFuCh}Mean of the \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} distributions as a function of the full jet transverse momentum \ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}{} (left) and the associated charged jet transverse momentum \ensuremath{p_\rom{T,assoc\;jet}^\rom{ch}}{} (right) compared to PYTHIA8.
}
\end{figure}
The left panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:MeanKtPythiaFuCh} shows the mean of the measured \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} distributions as a function of the full jet transverse momentum and is compared to the PYTHIA values.
The measured moment in p--Pb{} collisions agrees within the uncertainties of the measurement with the PYTHIA8 expectation. The mean increases with \ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}{} since the additional {$k_{\rm T}$}{} due to radiative QCD processes increases with \ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}.
\begin{table}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.3}
\begin{tabular}{>{\small}l|>{\small}c>{\small}c>{\small}c}
& 0-40\% & 40-100\% & PYTHIA8 pp \\
\hline
$\langle \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|} \rangle$ (\text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}) & $14.7 \pm 0.8 \pm 0.3$ & $13.6 \pm 1.1 \pm 0.5$ & $15.1 \pm 0.1$ \\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{tab:MomentsV0AEventClass}Mean of the \ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}{} distributions for $60<\ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}<80$~\text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}{} and $15<\ensuremath{p_\rom{T,assoc\;jet}^\rom{ch}}<\ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}$~\text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}{} in a high (0-40\%) and low (40-100\%) V0A multiplicity event class. The first quoted uncertainty is statistical while the second is systematic. The last column corresponds to the values from the PYTHIA8 calculation at particle level with the same kinematic selection. The uncertainty on the PYTHIA calculation is statistical.}
\end{table}
The right panel of Fig.~\ref{fig:MeanKtPythiaFuCh} shows the evolution of $\langle\ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}\rangle$ as a function of \ensuremath{p_\rom{T,assoc\;jet}^\rom{ch}}{} for $70<\ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}<120$~\text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}. The mean, $\langle\ensuremath{|k_{\rm Ty}|}\rangle$, is compared to the earlier presented PYTHIA8 tune in Sec. \ref{sec:EvoFullJetPt} and is in agreement within the uncertainties of the measurement. The mean for $60<\ensuremath{p_\rom{T,jet}^\rom{ch+ne}}<80$~\text{\GeV/}\ensuremath{c}{} is reported for two multiplicity event classes in Tab.~\ref{tab:MomentsV0AEventClass}. No significant difference is observed as a function of the multiplicity measured with V0A.
|
\section{Introduction}
Film and television are an integral part of culture and one way that people understand and interact with it.
Onscreen scenarios reflect the values from some real or imagined story, but also inform the viewers expectations.
However, attempting to directly study film and television presents some issues.
Watching video for analysis does not scale well to large datasets without significant manual effort.
This limits most large-scale study to easily digestible data sources: film popularity, box-office figures, reviews, scripts and other metadata.
Although non-video data sources may be easier to study, they limit the types of questions researchers can ask.
For example, box office figures do not allow detailed analysis of cinematography.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\fbox{\includegraphics[width=.42\textwidth]{cast.png}}
\caption{Excerpt from the cast list for ``The Big Lebowski''.}
\label{cast-list}
\end{figure}
Our research question is whether web science can provide viable proxies that let us answer interesting social science research questions at scale.
We use data available from a popular film and television website and examine \emph{cast lists}.
Figure \ref{cast-list} is a section of the Internet Movie Database (IMDb\xspace)\footnote{Alexa ranking 49 (global), 24 (US) as of 22/1/15.} cast list from ``The Big Lebowski''\footnote{\url{www.imdb.com/title/tt0118715}}, showing performer names and images on the left, with their character name on the right.
Some character names are names (e.g. \txt{Arthur Digby Sellers}), but some are professional roles (e.g. \txt{Doctor}) or combinations of role and relation to other characters (e.g. \txt{Nihilist Woman, Franz's Girlfriend}).
We exploit three factors from the data: productions are listed with their release date, male and female performers are distinguished in the data, and unnamed characters are usually listed by their role or profession.
This lets us count gendered performances of a particular role over time, which can be used to explore social science questions.
This paper is structured as follows: we discuss related work in media gender studies and IMDb\xspace in Section \ref{s:rw}.
Section \ref{s:data} describes the dataset and the methodology we use to handle noisy user-generated data.\footnote{Code at \url{https://github.com/wejradford/castminer}}
We then explore what roles are found onscreen and how that changes over time in Section \ref{s:roles}.
In Section \ref{s:gender}, we examine how roles interact with gender over time and how this compares to real-world gender distributions.
We believe that web science methodologies can augment traditional manual analysis to enable comparison of online and onscreen gender depictions.
\newpage
\section{Background}
\label{s:rw}
Gender is a complex sociocultural phenomenon with a vast academic literature and we stress that this work makes limited exploration of gender itself.
Instead we focus on some of the issues relating to gender in media as much as our data allows.
Under-representation of women is a long-standing gender issue in media, both in terms of the gender of performers and also the subject matter, for example proportions of news stories that focus on females \cite{Wood94}.
Moreover, Wood notes stereoptypical portrayals of hypermasculine, yet domestically incompetent, male characters and the female characters dependent on them, and complex relationships of power and image.
This trend is confirmed in a more recent meta-study of articles in a special issue of the \emph{Sex Roles} journal \cite{Collins11}, which adds to this observations about the role of race and interesting conjecture about the effect of under-representation and the importance of also finding positive representations of women in media.
Many of gender media research questions require manual analysis.
In their study of screen portrayals and media employment, Smith et al. consider \numprint{26225} characters\footnote{\numprint{4506} of these were speaking roles.} from the 600 top-grossing films from 2007--2013 \cite{Smith14}.
They find a low percentage of female speaking characters -- consistently around 30\% over each year of their sample, and only 2\% of films features more female than male characters.
They also study sexualisation of female characters, finding them more likely to be shown in revealing clothing, nude or referred to as attractive.
They note the dearth of female content creators, noting that the number of female writers and directors is at a six year low circa 2014.
This extensive and detailed study is only made possible with a team of 71 highly-trained student coders and to apply this depth of research at scale would be difficult and costly.
IMDb\xspace is an interesting source of data due to its size and popularity on the internet.
Boyle notes that ``IMDb\xspace has been the focus of surprisingly little academic attention'' in her study of gender and movie reviews \cite{Boyle14}.
This consisted of analysing how gender is expressed (or not) in textual reviews for three different films and the online profiles of the reviewers.
Data from IMDb\xspace has been used for research in the natural language processing and computational linguistics domain, primarily as the source of a corpus of movie reviews annotated with sentiment \cite{pang-lee-vaithyanathan:2002:EMNLP02}.
Other resources for gender information have been gathered from the US Census and automatically processed web text \cite{Bergsma:05,bergsma-lin:2006:COLACL}.
A possible application for gender data is in coreference resolution \cite{pradhan-EtAl:2011:CoNLL-ST}, the task of clustering \emph{mentions} that refer to the same entity in a document.
For example, lists of male and female names may provide evidence whether the mentions \txt{he}, \txt{Bob} and \txt{manager} should be matched together.
Detailed gender analyses of media are compelling yet difficult to conduct at scale.
We hope to use metadata about screen media as a proxy for the original media to explore, albeit in a limited way, issues about gender and its onscreen representation.
Web science methodologies, such as those used to study scanned books \cite{Michel14012011}, suggest useful starting points.
The dataset in this study allows us to study how people report onscreen media using the web, but this kind of data can also influence other media.
Specifically, cast information is part of the ecosystem of media reporting, advertising, review and commentary, and this can have real-world impact.
A study focussing on the dynamics of online film reviews found that volume significantly impacts box office sales, rather than content and ratings \cite{journals/dss/DuanGW08}.
The authors attribute this to an indicator of underlying word-of-mouth information flow and that online reviews spread awareness of the film.
User data is increasingly being directly used to assist decisions about what media a studio should produce\footnote{\url{http://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/hollywoods-big-data-big-deal}} and this is indicative of the complex relationship between onscreen media and the web.
\section{Dataset and methods}
\label{s:data}
Our methodology requires two simplifying assumptions.
We assume that IMDb\xspace is a good proxy for onscreen entertainment, which we believe is a reasonable assumption for recent productions, but less so for older productions as we discuss below.
We also assume that popular film and television is more likely to appear in a database like IMDb\xspace, and as such its aggregated content is a good estimator of what a random person would watch.
Following from this, we ask the question: \emph{``What are viewers likely to learn about roles and gender over time from onscreen entertainment?''}.
We downloaded the plain text data files \texttt{actors.list.gz} and \texttt{actresses.list.gz}\footnote{Accessed on 24/10/14 from \url{http://www.imdb.com/interfaces}.} and applied several cleaning phases.
The files list the performer name and the titles and dates of productions they appear in.
Unfortunately, these lists do not distinguish between films, television, so it is difficult to distinguish between media -- clearly an important methodological question.
We exclude records where the performer is listed using an alternative name \txt{(as \ldots)}, and generate one record per appearance in a film or television episode.
We further process records based on the role, filtering roles marked \txt{n/a}, or those that reference selves (e.g. \txt{himself, herself or themselves}).
We also remove markers of multiple similar roles: ordinal prefixes (e.g. \txt{first} or \txt{1st}) from 1 to 5 and suffixes (e.g. \txt{(1)} or \txt{(\#1)}).
Finally, we remove any text in parentheses and split multi-role characters (e.g. \txt{model/actress}), generating one count for each lower-cased role.
We aggregate roles by year and calculate a gender distribution for each role $r$ and year $y$.
Specifically, $p(\text{F}|r,y)$ is the count of records with role $r$ in year $y$ by a performer from the actresses list, normalised by the count of all $r$ and $y$ records.\footnote{$p(\text{M}|r,y) = 1 - p(\text{F}|r,y)$.}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{role_counts}
\caption{Count of roles over time.}
\label{role_counts}
\end{figure}
As with most user-generated content, there are a number of caveats that apply to the data and our analysis.
It is possible that performers can be misclassified and added to the wrong list file, or records listed with incorrect years.
We would expect this to be the result of data entry error and focus our analysis on those with higher count, as to avoid this hopefully rare occurrence.
There is also a significant observation bias as while it may be common for film and television to be listed as it enters production today, older productions are only listed if a user takes the effort to document them.
As a result, older counts are susceptible to skew towards television productions with a strong internet-based community dedicated to listing each and every episode.
\begin{table*}
\centering
{\small
\begin{tabular}{cccccc}
\toprule
1900-1920 & 1920-1940 & 1940-1960 & 1960-1980 & 1980-2000 & 2000-2020\\
\midrule
undetermined role & minor role & newsreader & host & host & host\\
mary & henchman & host & model & hostess & contestant\\
jack & reporter & reporter & announcer & newsreader & narrator\\
the girl & dancer & narrator & presenter & presenter & presenter\\
the wife & policeman & panelist & various & announcer & guest\\
the sheriff & undetermined role & townsman & narrator & narrator & judge\\
minor role & townsman & announcer & singer & guest & panelist\\
the husband & detective & sports newsreader & guest & various & various characters\\
policeman & party guest & singer & reporter & additional voices & hostess\\
daughter & waiter & weather forecaster & various characters & reporter & reporter\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Top 10 roles for 20 year periods from 1920.}
\label{role_double_decade_counts}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}
\centering
{\small
\begin{tabular}{cccccc}
\toprule
1900-1920 & 1920-1940 & 1940-1960 & 1960-1980 & 1980-2000 & 2000-2020\\
\midrule
undetermined role & henchman & newsreader & model & additional voices & zombie\\
mary & reporter & host & various & anchor & housemate\\
jack & dancer & panelist & various characters & contestant & police officer\\
the girl & townsman & announcer & member of the short circus & musical director & alex\\
the wife & waiter & sports newsreader & paul williams & lexicographer & laura\\
the sheriff & narrator & weather forecaster & victor newman & interviewer & audience member\\
minor role & barfly & corresponsal & brady black & ridge forrester & david\\
the husband & doctor & correspondent & jack abbott & phil & bar patron\\
policeman & bit role & presenter & george & emcee & sam\\
daughter & bartender & sports reporter & roman brady & co-hostess & sarah\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Top 10 \textbf{newly popular} roles for 20 year periods from 1920.}
\label{role_double_decade_counts_emerging}
\end{table*}
We do not distinguish between films and television, and our processing considers a television episode equal to a film.
This skews the data in favour of television and future work may be able to map to other resources to tease them apart.
Likewise, we do not distinguish between the production country, which rules out potentially interesting national comparisons and language processing.
We do not further process roles and so some may be character names and others professions.
We might expect that professions will have higher counts, as it is more likely that generic roles are repeated in many records than character names.
This means that we are comparing names and roles, which is somewhat inelegant, but extracting roles for main characters would require linking to external structured (e.g. Freebase) or unstructured plot data (e.g. Wikipedia).
Moreover, central characters are more important, but it's not immediately clear how to weight their influence so we believe that our approach is a pragmatic compromise.
If we were able to map to media country, the language-dependent processing would be possible.
This might include mapping \txt{host} and \txt{hostess} using stemming, but this comes at the cost of conflating dissimilar concepts within or across languages.
Finally, the role descriptions do not follow a fixed schema, so some equivalent role counts may be split by virtue of general synonymy (e.g. \txt{director} and \txt{filmmaker}) or different gender forms (e.g. \txt{policeman}, \txt{policewoman}, \txt{cop}, \txt{police officer}).
This problem may be alleviated by mapping IMDb\xspace roles onto a semantic ontology such as WordNet \cite{Miller95wordnet:a}.
After preprocessing, we retain \numprint{15468002} role records from between 1900 and 2020 (Figure~\ref{role_double_decade_counts_emerging}).
The number of entries grows from the early 20th century and increase steadily until the 1990s, when the rate of growth increases.
Note that, although the data was collected in 2014, there are records dated later than that, as IMDb\xspace lists ongoing and planned productions.\footnote{We consider all data for counts, but graphs do not show data after 2014.}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{gender_counts}
\caption{Count of roles from each gender over time, as well as the gender distribution $p(\text{F})$.}
\label{gender_counts}
\end{figure}
\section{Roles}
\label{s:roles}
The dataset allows us to track, at a very coarse level, what roles are popular in onscreen media and how has this changed over time.
Table \ref{role_double_decade_counts} shows the top 10 most common roles in 20 year periods from 1900.
This shows how roles have changed over time and reflects what roles are reported and seen on screen.
Initial roles from 1900 are most often \txt{undetermined} or stock characters (\txt{mary}, \txt{jack}, \txt{the girl}, \txt{the wife}, \txt{daughter}, \txt{husband}).
Roles from 1920-1940 are made up of dramatic roles that appear to be drawn from a crime or noir genre: \txt{henchman}, \txt{policeman}, \txt{detective}.
Others are ambiguous, as \txt{reporter} and \txt{dancer} could either be in a dramatic or actual role in a news broadcast or variety show.
For the two decades from 1940, there seems to be a shift towards news broadcasting (i.e. \txt{newsreader}, \txt{sports newsreader}, \txt{weather forecaster}), narration (i.e. \txt{announcer}, \txt{narrator}) and hosted television with \txt{host}, \txt{singer} and \txt{panelist}.
The trend of hosted television is maintained for the rest of the dataset, but we see evidence of shifts in trend: \txt{model} from 1960--1980, \txt{additional voices} for cartoons from 1980--2000, and finally reality television roles from 2000 (i.e. \txt{contestant}, \txt{judge}).
While the above analysis shows the enduring popularity of hosted screen entertainment, this can obscure some of the emerging roles through time.
Table \ref{role_double_decade_counts_emerging} shows, for the same period, which roles are new and did not appear in the top 50 roles of the previous period.
The 1900s list is the same as Table \ref{role_double_decade_counts} as this is the first period used.
The 1920s sees different descriptions of underspecified roles (\txt{bit role} vs \txt{undetermined role}).
There is a strong focus on hosted and news media from the 1940s and evidence of non-English-speaking entries (\txt{corresponsal} is Spanish for \txt{correspondent}).
From the 1960s, there is evidence of popular roles in children's television (\txt{member of the short circus} from ``The Electric Company''), television soap operas (\txt{paul williams}, \txt{victor newman}\footnote{This character seems to first appear in 1980, so may be listed under an incorrect year. In lieu of canonical sources for ``The Young and the Restless'': \url{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victor_Newman}} from ``The Young and the Restless'').
Newly popular roles in the 1980s and 1990s included game and quiz shows (\txt{contestant}, \txt{lexicographer} from ``Countdown Masters''), different television soap operas (\txt{ridge forrester} from ``The Bold and the Beautiful'') and new terms (\txt{anchor} and the gendered form \txt{co-hostess}).
Roles thusfar from the two decades from 2000 reflects the recent trend for \txt{zombie} characters in television, driven in part by the success of productions such as ``The Walking Dead'', which typically feature many unnammed zombie characters and thus has a large impact on the count data.
We see a continued trend of more first-name roles (\txt{laura}, \txt{david} and the gender-ambiguous \txt{alex} and \txt{sam}), and roles that reflect current naming conventions (\txt{police officer} rather than \txt{policeman}, the generic role \txt{mother} and \txt{bar patron} rather than the earlier \txt{bar fly}).
One concern with this method is that by only considering roles that have not been seen in a previous top 50, then we may find that the listed roles are low rank or count with respect to the overall roles (i.e. as per Table \ref{role_double_decade_counts}).
The lowest rank was 40 (\txt{sarah} in 2000--2020) and the lowest count was 614 (\txt{bartender} in 1920--1940).
We propose that the dataset is an interesting way to explore how onscreen roles change over time.
We see evidence for a main hosted model of onscreen entertainment, with secondary trends, such as reality television.
In older performances there seems also to be evidence of a skew towards television programmes that have been comprehensively documented, presumably by a dedicated internet-based community.
\section{Gender}
\label{s:gender}
One of the most valuable characteristics of our dataset is that each performer has gender information.
Aggregating by role allows us to consider biases of the gender of onscreen roles.
Figure \ref{gender_counts} shows how roles over time are split between two genders, with counts for each gender and also the proportion of female roles ($p(F)$).
From 1940, we see a gradual increase in the proportion of roles played by female actors from 0.25 to 0.4.
Before this period, total counts are somewhat lower, so it is difficult to draw conclusions.
The higher female proportion around 1920 may reflect the fact that records correspond to film, not television, but this is difficult to establish without taking extra metadata into account.
\begin{table}[t!]
\centering
{\tiny
\begin{tabular}{lrlr}
\toprule
Role & F & Role & M \\
\midrule
host & \numprint{123775} & host & \numprint{370187} \\
hostess & \numprint{74856} & narrator & \numprint{75736} \\
presenter & \numprint{39551} & announcer & \numprint{58356} \\
newsreader & \numprint{34145} & presenter & \numprint{51762} \\
model & \numprint{30289} & guest & \numprint{46107} \\
guest & \numprint{29296} & various & \numprint{33917} \\
contestant & \numprint{28651} & newsreader & \numprint{32289} \\
reporter & \numprint{25911} & various characters & \numprint{31785} \\
nurse & \numprint{20852} & contestant & \numprint{31739} \\
dancer & \numprint{19039} & reporter & \numprint{31190} \\
panelist & \numprint{17820} & panelist & \numprint{25999} \\
various & \numprint{14541} & judge & \numprint{25036} \\
judge & \numprint{14123} & additional voices & \numprint{22906} \\
narrator & \numprint{13714} & co-host & \numprint{22177} \\
co-host & \numprint{12314} & doctor & \numprint{18299} \\
various characters & \numprint{12047} & policeman & \numprint{16590} \\
girl & \numprint{11595} & performer & \numprint{15964} \\
singer & \numprint{11509} & man & \numprint{13680} \\
woman & \numprint{11197} & bartender & \numprint{13327} \\
waitress & \numprint{11147} & various roles & \numprint{12522} \\
correspondent & \numprint{10691} & singer & \numprint{12463} \\
mother & \numprint{10009} & correspondent & \numprint{12356} \\
laura & \numprint{9930} & dancer & \numprint{12173} \\
maria & \numprint{9860} & musical guest & \numprint{11937} \\
additional & \numprint{9652} & waiter & \numprint{11876} \\
performer & \numprint{8582} & police officer & \numprint{11206} \\
sarah & \numprint{8235} & cop & \numprint{10812} \\
lisa & \numprint{8122} & soldier & \numprint{10185} \\
anna & \numprint{8002} & david & \numprint{10087} \\
co-hostess & \numprint{7847} & student & \numprint{10070} \\
student & \numprint{7624} & guard & \numprint{9906} \\
mary & \numprint{6960} & detective & \numprint{9720} \\
rita & \numprint{6908} & paul & \numprint{9315} \\
alice & \numprint{6744} & tom & \numprint{9124} \\
rosa & \numprint{6730} & sports newsreader & \numprint{9078} \\
jane & \numprint{6022} & john & \numprint{9068} \\
various roles & \numprint{5922} & jack & \numprint{8978} \\
julie & \numprint{5790} & commentator & \numprint{8864} \\
secretary & \numprint{5692} & mike & \numprint{8536} \\
sara & \numprint{5546} & townsman & \numprint{8522} \\
linda & \numprint{5427} & max & \numprint{8508} \\
receptionist & \numprint{5419} & extra & \numprint{8363} \\
extra & \numprint{5221} & frank & \numprint{8281} \\
eva & \numprint{5135} & boy & \numprint{8271} \\
marta & \numprint{5013} & mark & \numprint{7999} \\
jenny & \numprint{5002} & tony & \numprint{7936} \\
sandra & \numprint{4930} & george & \numprint{7895} \\
ana & \numprint{4860} & musician & \numprint{7840} \\
teresa & \numprint{4800} & interviewee & \numprint{7822} \\
clara & \numprint{4775} & joe & \numprint{7803} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}}
\caption{The 50 most frequent female and male roles.}
\label{tb:top_gender_roles}
\end{table}
\begin{table*}[t!]
\centering
{\tiny
\begin{tabular}{lrlrlrlrlr}
\toprule
\multicolumn{2}{c}{Strongly male} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Moderately male} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Gender neutral} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Moderately female} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Stongly female} \\
\midrule
Role & $p(F)$& Role & $p(F)$& Role & $p(F)$& Role & $p(F)$& Role & $p(F)$\\
\midrule
delivery man & 0.00 & band & 0.05 & emt & 0.17 & corresponsal & 0.35 & member of the short circus & 0.60 \\
color commentator & 0.00 & little boy & 0.05 & player & 0.18 & center square & 0.35 & secretary & 0.88 \\
father & 0.00 & basketball player & 0.07 & additional voice & 0.20 & patient & 0.35 & mother & 0.93 \\
boyfriend & 0.00 & biker & 0.07 & trainer & 0.22 & co-host & 0.36 & nurse & 0.94 \\
policeman & 0.00 & moderator & 0.09 & host & 0.25 & hotel guest & 0.36 & old woman & 0.96 \\
musical director & 0.00 & coroner & 0.10 & mentor & 0.26 & office worker & 0.40 & model & 0.97 \\
truck driver & 0.01 & fbi agent & 0.10 & guest co-host & 0.27 & news anchor & 0.42 & actress & 0.98 \\
inspector & 0.02 & bailiff & 0.11 & inmate & 0.28 & android & 0.43 & maid & 0.98 \\
monk & 0.02 & bartender & 0.13 & passerby & 0.29 & candidate & 0.44 & stewardess & 0.99 \\
soldier & 0.02 & staff humorist & 0.14 & journalist & 0.31 & participant & 0.47 & secretaria & 1.00 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Examples of common roles with different gender distributions.}
\label{role_examples}
\end{table*}
Table~\ref{tb:top_gender_roles} shows the 50 most frequent roles per gender.
Of course, some of the roles of Table~\ref{role_double_decade_counts} appear again here, but it is already possible to see biases towards one of the genders.
\txt{model} and \txt{receptionist} are frequent roles which are mostly female, as are \txt{hostess}, \txt{girl}, \txt{woman}, \txt{waitress} and \txt{mother}, together with a series of frequent female first names.
On the male side side, there seems to be strong bias for \txt{narrator}, \txt{announcer}, \txt{doctor}, \txt{detective}, \txt{bartender} together with a series of security or military roles (\txt{police officer}, \txt{cop}, \txt{soldier}, \txt{guard}), and again some gender-specific roles like \txt{policemen}, \txt{men}, \txt{boy}, \txt{waiter}.
We can also analyse the gender distribution of common roles to characterise how gender relates to roles at a high level.
As an example, we filtered the most common mentions with an overall count above \numprint{1000} that did not belong to a list of common names from the US Census.
To try and characterise the space of roles, we ordered them by $p(\text{F})$ and partitioned them into five equal bins and randomly sampled 10 entries from each.
Table \ref{role_examples} shows the results: on both extremes there are again gendered roles (\txt{boyfriend}, \txt{actress}), while more towards the middle section some more interesting biases can be observed (\txt{biker} and \txt{basketball player} as male and \txt{secretary} as female).
Note that due to the overall higher count of male occurrences, the midpoint of gender distribution is between the ``moderately'' and ``strongly'' female classes.
\begin{table}[t!]
\centering
{\small
\begin{tabular}{lcr}
\toprule
Profession & Keywords & $p(F)$ \\
\midrule
IT & software, computer, hacker & 0.51 \\
\multirow{2}{*}{Doctor} & medical, dr, dr., doctor & \multirow{2}{*}{0.23} \\
& md, physician & \\
Corporate & corporate, ceo, coo & 0.18 \\
Law & prosecutor, lawyer & 0.15 \\
\multirow{2}{*}{Politics} & minister, dictator, parlament & \multirow{2}{*}{0.09} \\
& senator, president & \\
Science & science, professor & 0.09 \\
\multirow{4}{*}{Religion} & priest, priestess, reverend & \multirow{4}{*}{0.08} \\
& pastor, prior, allamah & \\
& imam, rabbi, guru, lama & \\
& bishop, ayatollah, swami & \\
Engineering & engineer & 0.05 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Gender distribution grouped by profession.}
\label{tb:genderBias}
\end{table}
In~\cite{Smith14},
the authors analyze 120 movies and show strong biases in the representation of executive roles.
Inspired by that report, we looked for key roles in areas such as law, IT and religion and looked at the aggregated count of male and female actor in these roles.
For each keyword listed in Table~\ref{tb:genderBias}, we looked for all roles that contained that word.
We made exceptions for \txt{president} where we looked only for exact matches, and \txt{bishop} where we ignored those mentions that end with it to avoid including surnames.
Law and corporate professions had around 15\% of female representation, which coincides with the values reported in~\cite{Smith14} for Law but not for corporate professions, while the medical domain (doctors) had a female probability of $0.23$.
In contrast to the results in \cite{Smith14}, Religion does not score at the bottom with regards to female presentation (although very low with $0.08$).
From the professions we selected, Engineering was the lowest (0.05).
The highest scoring profession was IT (0.52), which is partly due to the fact that many computer voices were female (\txt{computer} had 460 female occurrences, versus 247 male ones; and \txt{enterprise computer} from ``Star Trek'' was almost exclusively female).
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\begin{subfigure}{\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{rolePerYear_nurse}
\caption{\txt{nurse}}
\label{nurse}
\end{subfigure}%
\begin{subfigure}{\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{rolePerYear_reporter}
\caption{\txt{reporter}}
\label{reporter}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Gender counts and proportions over time for various roles.}
\label{gender-roles}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{imdbVsCensus}
\caption{Proportion of female in movie dataset vs. US Census}
\label{fig:movieVsReality}
\end{figure}
We can also examine role gender over time, searching for qualitative evidence that the gender associated with a specific role changes.
Figure \ref{gender-roles} shows the distribution of several roles, where we matched any role containing the query term (e.g. \txt{manage} would match \txt{bar manager}).
Onscreen \txt{nurses} have been traditionally almost uniformly female until the 1990s and now one in five nurses are played by male performers.
Conversely, the initial low proportion of onscreen female \txt{reporters} has risen and the proportion is now relatively even.
Our analyses to this point have only referenced IMDb\xspace data, but it is also interesting to examine how onscreen gender distributions compare with their real-world counterparts.
Figure \ref{fig:movieVsReality} shows how onscreen gender distributions map to those listed in the US Census\footnote{\url{http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat11.pdf}}.
Points on the diagonal line have a portrayal consistent with the census distributions.
If a point is above the line (\txt{cook} and \txt{reporter}), then those roles are over-represented onscreen by female performers.
Conversely, points below the line suggest an under-representation onscreen by female performers.
For example, \txt{janitors}, \txt{surgeons} and \txt{managers} are mostly played by male performers in contrast to census data.
We also see under-representation of \txt{science}, \txt{baker} and \txt{cashiers}.
There are several limitations of this analysis.
Firstly, comparing user-generated roles with strict census roles introduces bias since we selected the mapping and selected roles.
Linking roles from the different sources to a common ontology would present a useful way to reduce manual effort in this step.
Secondly, we do not distinguish between US productions and those from other countries, so comparing with the US Census may introduce some noise.
Despite these factors, this analysis lets us draw an interesting counterpoint between onscreen gender representation and real-world figures.
\section{Conclusion}
Future work would concentrate on refining the data processing and adding useful structure for more rigorous statistical analysis.
This includes linguistic analysis to aggregate role synonyms, many of which are multi-word expressions.
Discriminating between media types (film, television) and genres may reveal interesting disparities on the gender proportion in them.
Identifying a production country would also be useful for analysis and language identification.
The IMDb\xspace data release does not report this information directly and it would have to be inferred.
Our current model emphasises the importance of secondary characters and treats them equally.
Extracting their roles from other data sources such as plot summaries or reviews would allow us to include major character roles and may motivate a ``central role'' weighting scheme.
Finally, contrasting on-screen gender representation with real data has the highest potential from a web science standpoint.
We provide exploratory analysis in Figure~\ref{fig:movieVsReality}, but further analysis must match the informal IMDb\xspace and formal census role ontologies.
This paper presents methodologies for mining information about onscreen media gender from cast lists.
Despite the noise inherent in user-generated data, we assert that large-scale screen production metadata is a useful proxy for framing and answering questions about the evolution of roles over time, and how gender balances evolve.
We propose that the methodologies make for a compelling adjunct to traditional manual analyses and can help study how onscreen media is reflected onto the web, and eventually, how the web influences onscreen media.
\section{Acknowledgements}
The authors wish to thank \scterm{xrce} colleagues and Kellie Webster for thoughtful early feedback.
\clearpage
\bibliographystyle{abbrv}
|
\section{introduction}
It is well known that black hole behaves as a thermodynamic system
and it can be interpreted with a physical temperature and an
entropy \cite{1}. Finding the connection between the laws of black
hole mechanics and the laws of ordinary thermodynamics is one of
the remarkable achievements of theoretical physics during the last
forty years. Therefore, it is very natural to study various
thermodynamic aspects of black holes, such as thermal stability,
phase transition and black hole evaporation. Studying phase
transition in black holes would be one of the fascinating topics
in this regard because this phenomena plays an important role in
order to explore thermodynamic properties of various systems near
the critical points. The first attempt to investigate the phase
transition of the black holes has been done by Hut and Davies
\cite{2}.
In general, there are four different approaches for studying the
phase transition of the black holes, theoretically. First, the
cosmological constant, $\Lambda$, is considered to be pressure of
the system, in which its related conjugate quantity will be
volume. By this consideration, the critical behavior can be
studied through phase diagrams. Second, studying phase transition
in black holes by using the Clausius-Clapeyron-Ehrenfest's
equations \cite{3}. Considering the analogy between the
thermodynamic state variables and various black hole parameters
($V\leftrightarrow Q$ and $P\leftrightarrow -\Phi$), puts us in a
position to write down the Ehrenfest's equations for the black
holes \cite{4} and study their phase transition. Third, an
alternative approach to investigate the phase transition was
suggested by Ruppeiner in 1979 \cite{5} in which proposed a
geometrical way to study thermodynamical phase transitions.
Fourth, investigating the phase transitions of black holes through
the canonical ensemble by calculating heat capacity \cite{6}.
In this paper, we are going to investigate the phase transition of
black hole solutions in the asymptotically AdS spacetime by
considering the first mentioned approach (the cosmological
constant as a pressure of the system) in both Einstein and
Gauss-Bonnet (GB) gravities. In context of AdS/CFT correspondence,
it was proposed that variation of $\Lambda $ corresponds to
variation of the number of the colors on boundary of the
Yang-Mills theory with chemical potential interpretation
\cite{ADSCFT,9}. There are two main reasons to investigate the
asymptotically AdS black holes. First reason is that the AdS/CFT
correspondence attracts attentions to the physics of
asymptotically AdS black holes in recent years; the main focus is
on understanding strongly coupled thermal field theories living on
the AdS boundary. Even from a bulk perspective such black holes
and their thermodynamics which exhibits various phase transitions,
are quite interesting. Second, the behavior of the black hole
phase transition in the asymptotically AdS spacetime is like the
Van der Waals liquid/gas \cite{Chamblin,Goldenfeld}, and also, is
different from those of black holes in the flat space
\cite{7,Vahidinia}. Studying thermodynamic behavior of black holes
in an asymptotically AdS spacetime has been done first by Hawking
and Page in 1983 \cite{8}. After that, the critical behaviors of
the black holes by including the cosmological constant as a
thermodynamic pressure have been investigated in
\cite{Chamblin,9}. In this approach, the black hole mass $M$ is
considered as the Enthalpy of the system. Studying phase
transition of
black holes with Einstein gravity has been done in many literatures \cit
{KubiznakMann}. In addition, the critical behavior of charged
AdS-GB black holes has been investigated in
\cite{10,GBMaxwell,maximal pressure}.
One the other hand, in electrodynamic point of view, the
self-energy of a point-like charge has a divergency at the origin.
In order to remove this singularity, Born and Infeld introduced an
interesting kind of nonlinear electrodynamics (NED) in 1934
\cite{11}. Coupling of NED with the gravity was first done by
Hoffmann \cite{12}. The effects of Born-Infeld NED coupled to the
gravitational field have been studied in various contexts such as
superconductors \cite{13}, wormholes \cite{14,15}, static black holes \cit
{16} and rotating black objects \cite{17}. In addition, another motivation
for considering Born-Infeld NED comes from the fact that it naturally arises
in the low-energy limit of the heterotic string theory \cite{18}. Recently,
two different Born-Infeld types of NED have been introduced by Soleng \cit
{19} and Hendi \cite{20}. The Soleng Lagrangian has a logarithmic form and,
like Born-Infeld theory, removes divergency of the electric field while the
Lagrangian proposed by Hendi has an exponential form and does not cancel the
divergency of the electric field but its singularity is much weaker than
that in Maxwell theory. Investigation of black object solutions coupled to
these two nonlinear fields has been done in \cite{15,21}. The Lagrangian of
mentioned Born-Infeld type nonlinear theories, for weak nonlinearity, can be
written with the following form
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{F})=-\mathcal{F}+\beta \mathcal{F}^{2}+O\left( \beta
^{2}\right) , \label{Lagrangian}
\end{equation
where $\beta $ is proportional to the inverse value of square
nonlinearity parameter in Born-Infeld-type theories, so it gets
just positive values. In Eq. (\ref{Lagrangian}),
$\mathcal{F}=F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }$ is the Maxwell invariant,
$F_{\mu \nu }=\partial _{\mu }A_{\nu }-\partial _{\nu }A_{\mu }$
is the electromagnetic field tensor and $A_{\mu } $ is the gauge
potential. In addition, $\beta $ denotes nonlinearity
parameter which is small. For $\beta \longrightarrow 0$, $\mathcal{L}
\mathcal{F})$ reduces to the standard Maxwell Lagrangian, $\mathcal{L
_{Maxwell}(\mathcal{F})=-\mathcal{F}$, as it should be. In this paper, we
take into account the Eq. (\ref{Lagrangian}) as a NED source coupled to the
Einstein and GB gravities and investigate the effects of nonlinearity on the
properties of the phase transition.
It is worthwhile to mention the motivations for considering the
NED Lagrangian and specially Lagrangian (\ref{Lagrangian}).
Nonlinear field theories are of interest to different branches of
mathematical physics because most physical systems are inherently
nonlinear in the nature. The main reason to consider NED comes
from the fact that these theories are considerably richer than the
Maxwell field and in special case they reduce to the linear
Maxwell theory. Various limitations of the Maxwell theory, such as
description of the self-interaction of virtual electron-positron
pairs \cite{22} and the radiation propagation inside specific
materials \cite{Lorenci}, motivate one to consider NED \cite{22}.
Besides, NED improves the basic concept of gravitational redshift
and its dependency of any background magnetic field as compared to
the well-established method introduced by standard general
relativity. In addition, it was recently shown that NED
objects can remove both of the big bang and black hole singularities \cit
{AyonBeato1,AyonBeato2,Corda}. Moreover, from astrophysical point
of view, one finds that the effects of NED become indeed quite
important in superstrongly magnetized compact objects, such as
pulsars and particular neutron stars (also the so-called magnetars
and strange quark magnetars) \cite{Mosquera}. Also, since the
gravitational redshift of magnetized compact objects is connected
to the mass--radius relation of the objects, it is important to
note that NED affects the mass--radius relation of the objects. It
is worthwhile to mention that one can find regular black hole
solutions of the Einstein field equations coupled to a suitable NED \cit
{AyonBeato1,AyonBeato2}. In addition, an interesting property
which is common to all the NED models is that these models satisfy
the zeroth and first laws of black hole mechanics. The appropriate
world-volume dynamics on a curved $D3$-brane may provide a
plausible frame-work at Planck scale by incorporating the
Einstein-NED. At this point, elimination of
strong intrinsic curvature in the regime by the strong nonlinearity in the
U(1)$ gauge theory is remarkable \cite{AyonBeato2,Gopakumar}. From
the point of view of AdS/CFT correspondence in hydrodynamic
models, it has been shown that, unlike gravitational correction,
higher-derivative terms for abelian fields in the form of NED do
not affect the ratio of shear viscosity to entropy density
\cite{Brigante}. Motivated by the recent results mentioned above
and the fact that we accepted NED as a generalization of the
Maxwell theory, it is natural to apply NED theories for charged
objects such as black holes.
Now, we focus on motivations of considering the nonlinear term of the
electromagnetic field perturbatively. Although various theories of NED have
been created with different primitive motivations, only for the weak
nonlinearity (Eq. (\ref{Lagrangian})), they contain physical and
experimental importances. As we know, using the Maxwell theory in various
branches leads to near accurate or acceptable consequences. So, in
transition from the Maxwell theory to NED, the logical decision is to
consider the effects of weak nonlinearity variations, not strong ones. This
means that, one can expect to obtain precise physical results with
experimental agreements, provided one regards the nonlinearity as a
correction to the Maxwell field. On the other hand, several reasonable
papers have been published by considering Eq. (\ref{Lagrangian}) as an
effective Lagrangian of electrodynamics \cit
{22,23,HendiMomen,ThreeMag,HendiEPJC,HendiPanah,HendiIJMPD}. Heisenberg and
Euler have shown that quantum corrections lead to nonlinear properties of
vacuum \cite{22}. Also, it was proved that in the low energy limit of
heterotic string theory, a quartic correction of the Maxwell field strength
tensor appears \cite{23}. So it is natural to consider Eq. (\ref{Lagrangian
) as an effective and suitable Lagrangian of electrodynamics instead of the
Maxwell one. Investigating the effects of nonlinearity parameter of Eq. (\re
{Lagrangian}) coupled to the Einstein, GB and third order Lovelock
gravities have been done in \cite{HendiMomen,ThreeMag},
\cite{HendiEPJC,HendiPanah} and \cite{HendiIJMPD}, respectively.
In this paper, we are dealing with stringy corrected
electrodynamics, and therefore, obtained results are applicable in
context of string theory. In order to separate the valid domains
of the stringy corrected and classical Born-Infeld theories, we
will present a limiting point (vertical line in the figures).
Motivations for considering GB gravity can be found in literature.
For example, we refer the reader to the interesting nontrivial
causal structure of GB gravity with superluminal graviton modes
\cite{SL}. Finally, we should note that although most of
thermodynamic works in black hole physics related to
asymptotically AdS solutions, there were some attempts to
investigate thermodynamical behavior of dS black holes \cite{dS}.
The outline of our paper is as follows. Section II is devoted to
introduction to Einstein and GB black hole solutions and their conserved
quantities. Next, we extend the phase space by considering cosmological
constant as thermodynamic pressure and calculate critical values and then we
plot diagrams for different cases. We give a detailed discussion regarding
diagrams, their physical interpretations, and the effects of both nonlinear
electromagnetic and gravitational parameters. We finish our paper with some
closing remarks.
\section{Field equations and conserved quantities}
In order to study phase transition of Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet gravity in
presence of a generalized nonlinear electromagnetic field, one can employ
the following Lagrangian
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{tot}}=\mathcal{L}_{EN}-2\Lambda +\alpha \mathcal{L
_{GB}+\mathcal{L}(\mathcal{F}), \label{fieldLagrangian}
\end{equation
where the Lagrangian of Einstein gravity is the Ricci scalar, $\mathcal{L
_{EN}=\mathcal{R}$, and $\Lambda $ is the negative cosmological
constant. In third term of Eq. (\ref{fieldLagrangian}), $\alpha $
is the GB coefficient with dimension (Length)$^{2}$ and
$\mathcal{L}_{GB}$ is the Lagrangian of GB gravity with following
form
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_{GB}=R_{abcd}R^{abcd}-4R_{ab}R^{ab}+\mathcal{R}^{2}. \label{LGB}
\end{equation}
Using variational method, we obtain the following field equations
\begin{equation}
G_{ab}^{E}+\Lambda g_{ab}+\alpha G_{ab}^{GB}=\frac{1}{2}g_{ab}\mathcal{L}
\mathcal{F})-2\mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{F}}F_{ac}F_{b}^{c}, \label{Feq1}
\end{equation
\begin{equation}
\partial _{a}\left( \sqrt{-g}\mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{F}}F^{ab}\right) =0,
\label{Feq2}
\end{equation
where $G_{ab}^{E}$ is the Einstein tensor, $G_{ab}^{GB}=2\left(
R_{acde}R_{b}^{cde}-2R_{acbd}R^{cd}-2R_{ac}R_{b}^{c}+\mathcal{R
R_{ab}\right) -1/2\mathcal{L}_{GB}g_{ab}$ and $L_{\mathcal{F}}=d\mathcal{L}
\mathcal{F})/d\mathcal{F}$.
Now, we are interested in studying topological black holes and their phase
diagrams, therefore, we employ the following static metric
\begin{equation}
ds^{2}=-f(r)dt^{2}+\frac{dr^{2}}{f(r)}+r^{2}d\Omega _{n-1}^{2},
\label{metric}
\end{equation
in whic
\begin{equation}
d\Omega _{n-1}^{2}=\left\{
\begin{array}{cc}
d\theta _{1}^{2}+\sum\limits_{i=2}^{n-1}\prod\limits_{j=1}^{i-1}\sin
^{2}\theta _{j}d\theta _{i}^{2} & k=1 \\
d\theta _{1}^{2}+\sinh ^{2}\theta _{1}d\theta _{2}^{2}+\sinh ^{2}\theta
_{1}\sum\limits_{i=3}^{n-1}\prod\limits_{j=2}^{i-1}\sin ^{2}\theta
_{j}d\theta _{i}^{2} & k=-1 \\
\sum\limits_{i=1}^{n-1}d\theta _{i}^{2} & k=
\end{array
\right. , \label{dOmega}
\end{equation
with volume $\omega _{n-1}$.
We use Eq. (\ref{Feq2}) and mentioned metric to obtain radial
electromagnetic field tensor as \cite{HendiMomen,HendiPanah}
\begin{equation}
F_{tr}=\frac{q}{r^{n-1}}-\frac{4q^{3}\beta }{r^{3n-3}}+O(\beta ^{2}).
\label{Ftr}
\end{equation}
In order to find Einstein solutions one can use two methods: one, by putting
$\alpha =0$ and using mentioned field equations. Second approach is
obtaining GB metric function through use of field equations and series
expanding it for small values of GB parameter. In order to give more
specific details, we use the second approach. Therefore, in case of GB
gravity, one can obtain metric function in form of \cite{HendiPanah}
\begin{equation}
f(r)=k+\frac{r^{2}}{2\alpha ^{\prime }}\left( 1-\sqrt{\Psi (r)}\right) ,
\label{f(r)}
\end{equation
with
\begin{equation}
\Psi (r)=1+\frac{8\alpha ^{\prime }}{n(n-1)}\left( \Lambda +\frac{n(n-1)m}
2r^{n}}-\frac{nq^{2}}{(n-2)r^{2n-2}}+\frac{2nq^{4}\beta }{r^{4n-4}(3n-4)
\right) +O\left( \beta ^{2}\right) , \label{Psi(r)}
\end{equation
where $m$ is an integration constant that is related to mass and $\alpha
^{\prime }=(n-2)(n-3)\alpha $. It is evident that for case of small values
of nonlinearity, the metric function will lead to the GB-Maxwell gravity. As
for Einstein gravity, series expanding of GB metric function for small
values of $\alpha ^{\prime }$ will lead to
\begin{equation}
f\left( r\right) =f_{EN}-\frac{4q^{4}}{\left( n-1\right) \left( 3n-4\right)
r^{4n-6}}\beta +\frac{f_{EN}^{2}}{r^{2}}\alpha ^{\prime }+O\left( \alpha
^{\prime }\beta ,\alpha ^{\prime 2},\beta ^{2}\right) , \label{f(r)expand}
\end{equation
where the metric function of Einstein-Maxwell gravity is
\begin{equation}
f_{EN}=k-\frac{2\Lambda r^{2}}{n\left( n-1\right) }-\frac{m}{r^{n-2}}+\frac
2q^{2}}{\left( n-1\right) \left( n-2\right) r^{2n-4}}. \label{f(r)EM}
\end{equation}
Next step is devoted to calculating conserved quantities. In general, for
both Einstein and GB gravities one can find total mass of black hole in form
of \cite{HendiMomen,HendiPanah}
\begin{equation}
M=\frac{\omega _{n-1}\left( n-1\right) m}{16\pi }. \label{Mass}
\end{equation}
It is notable that, although the form of total mass in GB and
Einstein gravities seems to be the same, its value is different
for Einstein and GB branches ($k\neq 0$). In other words, the
geometrical mass for GB gravity will be
\begin{equation}
m_{GB}=k\left( k\alpha ^{\prime }+r_{+}^{2}\right) r_{+}^{n-4}-\frac
2r_{+}^{n}\Lambda }{n\left( n-1\right) }+\frac{2q^{2}}{\left( n-1\right)
\left( n-2\right) r_{+}^{n-2}}-\frac{4q^{4}\beta }{\left( n-1\right) \left(
3n-4\right) r_{+}^{3n-4}}+O\left( \beta ^{2}\right) , \label{GB mass}
\end{equation
where $r_{+}$\ satisfies $f(r=r_{+})=0$, and Eq. (\ref{GB mass})
reduces to geometrical mass for Einstein gravity in case of
$\alpha ^{\prime }=0$.
Previously, it was seen that obtained metric functions are
representing black holes with essential singularity located at
$r=0$. Geometrical properties of the solutions were investigated
in \cite{HendiMomen,HendiPanah} and it was shown that these
solutions can be interpreted as asymptotically AdS black holes.
Therefore, by using the definition of surface gravity and its
relation with Hawking temperature we find temperature of these two
black holes as \cite{HendiPanah}
\begin{equation}
T=\frac{k(n-1)(n-2)r_{+}^{4n-6}\left( 1+\frac{(n-4)\alpha ^{\prime }}
(n-2)r_{+}^{2}}\right) -2r_{+}^{4n-4}\Lambda -2r_{+}^{2n-2}q^{2}+4q^{4}\beta
}{4\pi (n-1)r_{+}^{4n-5}\left( 1+\frac{2k\alpha ^{\prime }}{r_{+}^{2}
\right) }+O\left( \beta ^{2}\right) , \label{T}
\end{equation
where in order to find temperature of Einstein gravity, it is sufficient to
set $\alpha ^{\prime }=0$ \cite{HendiMomen}.
Due to the fact that solutions are asymptotically AdS, in order to
find entropy of these two gravities, one can use Gibbs-Duhem
relation. Therefore, we obtain the following relation
\cite{HendiPanah}
\begin{equation}
S=\frac{V_{n-1}}{4}\left( 1+\frac{2\left( n-1\right) \alpha ^{\prime }}
(n-3)r_{+}^{2}}k\right) r_{+}^{n-1}, \label{S}
\end{equation
where in order to find entropy related to Einstein gravity, one
should set GB parameter to zero \cite{HendiMomen}.
Generally, as one can see, the topological structure of spacetime
modifies the amount of contribution of GB parameter, for the GB
gravity. Although the presence of GB gravity in flat case is
evident in metric function, regarding to conserved and
thermodynamic quantities no contribution of GB gravity was seen
and obtained values are same as Einstein gravity. Considering this
fact and equation of Gibbs free energy, the thermodynamic behavior
and phase diagrams of GB and Einstein gravities in case of flat
horizon are same. In addition, it was shown that
\cite{HendiMomen,HendiPanah} obtained conserved and thermodynamic
quantities satisfy the first law of thermodynamics with the
following form
\begin{equation}
dM=TdS+\Phi dQ, \label{First1}
\end{equation
where $Q=\frac{q}{4\pi }$ and $\Phi =\int F_{tr}dr|_{r=r_{+}}$.
\section{Extended phase space and phase diagrams}
In order to investigate the phase structure of the solutions, we employ the
approach in which the cosmological constant is a thermodynamic variable
corresponding to thermodynamical pressure with the following relation
\begin{equation}
P=-\frac{\Lambda }{8\pi }. \label{P}
\end{equation}
This consideration could be justified due to the fact that in
quantum context, fundamental fixed parameters could vary and they
are not fixed. In the absence of cosmological constant, a
sourceless solution of the Einstein's equation is Minkowski
spacetime where the isometry transformations are governed by
Poincare group. In the presence of cosmological constant,
Minkowski is no longer a valid solution and it is replaced by the
(anti-)de Sitter spacetime with (anti-)de Sitter group
description. Considering that we are now employing the (anti-)de
Sitter group for describing kinematics, the ordinary notions of
energy and momentum, as well as the relationship between them and
the causal structure of spacetime will be modified \cite{Cosm}.
Therefore, we expect to see the effects of this distortion on
spacetime of black holes and its corresponding thermodynamical
values which is evident from calculated thermodynamical values. As
one can see the conjugating thermodynamic variable to this
assumption (cosmological constant as pressure) will be volume
where in literature the derived volume for different types of
black
holes are same as that for the topology of the spacetime \cit
{KubiznakMann,10}. In order to calculate the volume of these thermodynamical
systems, we use the following relation
\begin{equation}
V=\left( \frac{\partial H}{\partial P}\right) _{S,Q}. \label{V}
\end{equation}
In addition, it was proven that the Smarr formula should be
extended to Lovelock gravity as well as nonlinear theories of
electrodynamics \cite {KubiznakMann,GBMaxwell,Smarr}. Scaling
argument was used to derive an extension of the first law and its
related modified Smarr relation that includes variations in the
cosmological constant, Lovelock coefficient, and also the
nonlinearity parameter \cite{KubiznakMann,GBMaxwell,Smarr}. In our
case, perturbative Lovelock gravity with NED, $M$ can be a
function of entropy, pressure, charge, Lovelock parameter,
nonlinearity coupling coefficient. Regarding the previous section,
we find that those thermodynamic quantities satisfy the following
differential form,
\begin{equation}
dM=TdS+\Phi dQ+VdP+\mathcal{A}d\alpha +\mathcal{B}d\beta , \label{First2}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathcal{A} &=&\left( \frac{dM}{d\alpha }\right) _{S,Q,P,\beta }=\frac
(n-1)k^{2}r_{+}^{n-4}}{16\pi }, \\
\mathcal{B} &=&\left( \frac{dM}{d\beta }\right) _{S,Q,P,\alpha }=-\frac{q^{4
}{4(3n-4)\pi r_{+}^{3n-4}}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Moreover, scaling argument helps us to obtain the generalized
Smarr relation for our black hole solutions in the extended phase
space
\begin{equation}
M=\frac{n-1}{n-2}TS+\Phi dQ-\frac{2}{n-2}PV-\frac{2(n-1)}{(n-2)(n-3)
\mathcal{A}\alpha +\frac{2}{n-2}\mathcal{B}d\beta . \label{Smarr}
\end{equation}
We should note that the obtained relations is valid for
perturbative Lovelock gravity with NED. Hereafter, we treat the
cosmological constant as a thermodynamical variable, while
Gauss-Bonnet coefficient and nonlinearity parameter of NED as two
constants. With doing so the total finite mass of the black hole
will play the role of Enthalpy and the corresponding Gibbs free
energy will be in form of
\begin{equation}
G=H-TS=M-TS. \label{G}
\end{equation}
The obtained volume for our considered cases is
\begin{equation}
V=\frac{\omega _{n-1}{r_{+}}^{n}}{n}, \label{V2}
\end{equation
which is consistent with topological structure of spherical symmetric
spacetime. This result is consistent with what was derived previously \cit
{KubiznakMann,10} and shows the fact that although considering GB gravity
modifies the metric function and some conserved quantities of the black
hole, it does not change the volume of the black hole. In other words, the
volume of the black hole is solely dependant on the cosmological constant
(pressure). Due to relation between volume and radius of the black hole, we
use horizon radius (specific volume) in order to investigate the critical
behavior of these systems \cite{KubiznakMann,10}.
Next step will be calculating critical values. In order to do so,
we use the method in which critical values are obtained through
the use of $P-r_{+}$ diagrams. Since the critical point is an
inflection point on the critical isotherm $P-r_{+}$ diagram, we
use the following relations to obtain the proper equations for
critical quantities
\begin{equation}
\left( \frac{\partial P}{\partial r_{+}}\right) _{T}=\left( \frac{\partial
^{2}P}{\partial r_{+}^{2}}\right) _{T}=0. \label{inflection}
\end{equation}
It will be constructive to give a short description regarding
different phase diagrams and the information they contain before
presenting tables and phase diagrams. $G-T$ diagrams are
representing energy level of different states that phase
transition takes place between them. The characteristic swallow
tail that is seen in these diagrams shows the process that we know
as phase transition. It also gives interesting information
regarding temperature of critical points. For $T-r_{+}$ diagrams,
it contains information regarding critical temperature and horizon
radius in which phase transition takes place. Also, it gives some
insight about single state regions which in our case is
small/large black holes. It also helps us to understand the
effects of different parameters on critical temperature and
horizon radius, and whether by changing value of a parameter,
system needs more or less energy in order to have phase
transition. If one is interested in studying
conductor/superconductor transition that these nonlinear
electromagnetic fields are representing, studying these diagrams
will give more information regarding to conductivity and
superconductivity regions. Studying $P-r_{+}$ diagrams gives us
information regarding the behavior of pressure as a function of
horizon radius, and critical pressure and horizon radius of phase
transition. Finally, using the fact that the free energy,
temperature, and the pressure of the system are constant during
the phase transition, one can plot the coexistence curve of two
phases. One of the reasons for studying these diagrams is the
similarity between phase structure of black holes and the Van der
Waals thermodynamical systems. Here, we have used the geometric
units and investigate thermodynamic behavior and critical point of
the solutions, qualitatively.
Using Eq. (\ref{inflection}) one can find $T_{c}$ in one of the
equations and replace it in other equation which leads to the
following relations for calculating critical horizon radius
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{array}{cc}
k\left( n-2\right) r_{+}^{4}+8\left( 4n-5\right) \beta
q^{4}r_{+}^{10-4n}-2\left( 2n-3\right) q^{2}r_{+}^{8-2n}=0, &
\begin{array}{c}
Einstein \\
\end{array}
\\
& \\
\begin{array}{c}
\left( 12n-48\right) \alpha ^{\prime 2}k^{3}-12\alpha ^{\prime
}k^{2}r_{+}^{2}+\left\{ 4\left( 4n-5\right) \beta q^{2}r_{+}^{10-4n}-\left(
2n-3\right) r_{+}^{8-2n}\right\} 2q^{2}\vspace{0.23cm} \\
+\left[ \left\{ 4\left( 4n-7\right) \beta q^{2}r_{+}^{8-4n}-\left(
2n-5\right) r_{+}^{6-2n}\right\} 12q^{2}\alpha ^{\prime }+\left( n-2\right)
r_{+}^{4}\right] k=0
\end{array}
& G
\end{array
\right. . \label{rc}
\end{equation}
As one can see, due to complexity of the obtained relation for
critical horizon radius, it is not possible to find critical
horizon radius analytically. Therefore, we employ the numerical
method in order to calculate critical quantities and study the
effects of variation of parameters in case of spherical horizon
($k=1$). The numerical calculations show that for cases of flat
($k=0$) and hyperbolic ($k=-1$) horizons, the critical pressure
and critical temperature for both Einstein and GB gravities are
negative, so like GB-Maxwell black holes \cite{GBMaxwell}, the
phase transition does not take place. Here, we present various
tables in order to study the effects of different parameters
on critical values. Next, by using the information of these tables, we plot
P-r_{+}$, $T-r_{+}$ and $G-T$ diagrams for Einstein and GB gravities in the
presence of nonlinear corrected Maxwell field (Figs. \ref{EMbeta0dim} -- \re
{GBn456}). It is notable that following results for critical
pressure and temperature are obtained by using larger critical
horizon radius. In order for higher orders of corrections to be
small enough and do not acquire values higher than Maxwell term,
we have plotted a vertical line which represents the limit for
different cases.
It is notable to mention that in order to have a well-defined
vacuum solution with $m=q=0$, the pressure $P$ has to satisfy the
following constraint \cite{GBMaxwell,maximal pressure
\begin{equation}
0\leq \frac{64\pi \alpha ^{\prime }P}{n(n-1)}\leq 1, \label{Pmax1}
\end{equation
which puts a large bound for the pressure as maximal pressure
\begin{equation}
P\leq P_{\max }=\frac{n(n-1)}{64\pi \alpha ^{\prime }}. \label{Pmax2}
\end{equation}
It means that only for sufficiently small pressures, the solution
Eq. (\ref{f(r)}) possesses an asymptotic AdS region. However, in
this paper, we choose suitable parameters for pressure to be
smaller than maximal pressure everywhere.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{array}{ccc}
\epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{PVEMbeta0dim.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm
\epsffile{TVEMbeta0dim.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{GTEMbeta0dim.eps
\end{array}
\caption{\textbf{\emph{Maxwell solutions for Einstein gravity:}} $P-r_{+}$
for $T=T_{c}$ (Left), $T-r_{+}$ for $P=P_{c}$ (Middle) and $G-T$ for
P=0.5P_{c}$ (Right) diagrams for $k=1$, $q=1$, $n=3$ (continuous line), $n=4$
(dotted line) and $n=5$ (dashed line).}
\label{EMbeta0dim}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{array}{ccc}
\epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{PVGBbeta0dim.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm
\epsffile{TVGBbeta0dim.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{GTGBbeta0dim.eps
\end{array}
\caption{\textbf{\emph{Maxwell solutions for GB gravity:}} $P-r_{+}$ for
T=T_{c}$ (Left), $T-r_{+}$ for $P=P_{c}$ (Middle) and $G-T$ for $P=0.5P_{c}$
(Right) diagrams for $k=1$, $q=1$, $\protect\alpha ^{\prime }=10^{-4}$, $n=4$
(continuous line), $n=5$ (dotted line) and $n=6$ (dashed line).}
\label{GBbeta0dim}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{array}{ccc}
\epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{comparPVEandGBbeta0n4.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm
\epsffile{comparTVEandGBbeta0n4.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm
\epsffile{comparGTEandGBbeta0n4.eps
\end{array}
\caption{\textbf{\emph{Maxwell solutions for Einstein and GB gravities:}}
P-r_{+}$ for $T=T_{c}$ (Left), $T-r_{+}$ for $P=P_{c}$ (Middle) and $G-T$
for $P=0.5P_{c}$ (Right) diagrams for $k=1$, $n=4$, $q=1$, $\protect\alpha
^{\prime }=0.1$ for Einstein (continuous line) and GB (dashed line)
gravities.}
\label{comparEandGBbeta0n4}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{array}{ccc}
\epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{PVEbeta045.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm
\epsffile{TVEbeta045.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{GTEbeta045.eps
\end{array}
\caption{\textbf{\emph{Einstein solutions:}} $P-r_{+}$ (Left), $T-r_{+}$
(Middle) and $G-T$ (Right) diagrams for $k=1$, $n=4$, $q=1$ and $\protec
\beta =0.045$. \newline
$P-r_{+}$ diagram: $T=0.8T_{c}$ (continuous line), $T=T_{c}$ (dotted line)
and $T=1.2T_{c}$ (dashed line). \newline
$T-r_{+}$ diagram: $P=0.5P_{c}$ (continuous line), $P=P_{c}$ (dotted line)
and $P=1.5P_{c}$ (dashed line). \newline
$G-T$ diagram: $P=0.5P_{c}$ (continuous line), $P=P_{c}$ (dotted line) and
P=1.5P_{c}$ (dashed line).}
\label{Ebeta045n4}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{array}{ccc}
\epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{PVEbeta07.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm
\epsffile{TVEbeta07.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{GTEbeta07.eps
\end{array}
\caption{\textbf{\emph{Einstein solutions:}} $P-r_{+}$ (Left), $T-r_{+}$
(Middle) and $G-T$ (Right) diagrams for $k=1$, $n=4$, $q=1$ and $\protec
\beta =0.07$. \newline
$P-r_{+}$ diagram: $T=0.8T_{c}$ (continuous line), $T=T_{c}$ (dotted line)
and $T=1.2T_{c}$ (dashed line). \newline
$T-r_{+}$ diagram: $P=0.5P_{c}$ (continuous line), $P=P_{c}$ (dotted line)
and $P=1.5P_{c}$ (dashed line). \newline
$G-T$ diagram: $P=0.5P_{c}$ (continuous line), $P=P_{c}$ (dotted line) and
P=1.5P_{c}$ (dashed line).}
\label{Ebeta07n4}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{array}{ccc}
\epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{comparPVEbeta04507n4.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm
\epsffile{comparTVEbeta04507n4.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm
\epsffile{comparGTEbeta04507n4.eps
\end{array}
\caption{\textbf{\emph{Einstein solutions:}} $P-r_{+}$ for $T=T_{c}$ (Left),
$T-r_{+}$ for $P=P_{c}$ (Middle) and $G-T$ for $P=0.5P_{c}$ (Right) diagrams
for $k=1$, $n=4$, $q=1$, $\protect\beta =0.045$ (continuous line) and
\protect\beta =0.07$ (dashed line).}
\label{comparEbeta04507n4}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{array}{ccc}
\epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{comparPVGBbeta010507alpha0001.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm
\epsffile{comparTVGBbeta010507alpha0001.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm
\epsffile{comparGTGBbeta010507alpha0001.eps
\end{array}
\caption{\textbf{\emph{GB solutions:}} $P-r_{+}$ for $T=T_{c}$ (Left),
T-r_{+}$ for $P=P_{c}$ (Middle) and $G-T$ for $P=0.5P_{c}$ (Right) diagrams
for $k=1$, $n=4$, $q=1$, $\protect\alpha ^{\prime }=10^{-4}$, and $\protec
\beta =0$ (continuous line), $\protect\beta =0.03$ (dotted line) and
\protect\beta =0.06$ (dashed line).}
\label{comparGBbeta010507alpha0001n4}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{array}{ccc}
\epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{comparPVGBalpha0515beta07.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm
\epsffile{comparTVGBalpha0515beta07.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm
\epsffile{comparGTGBalpha0515beta07.eps
\end{array}
\caption{\textbf{\emph{GB solutions:}} $P-r_{+}$ (Left), $T-r_{+}$ (Middle)
and $G-T$ (Right) diagrams for $k=1$, $n=4$, $q=1$ and $\protect\beta =0.07
. \newline
$P-r_{+}$ diagram: $T=T_{c}$ and $\protect\alpha ^{\prime }=0.05$
(continuous line), $\protect\alpha ^{\prime }=0.1$ (dotted line) and
\protect\alpha ^{\prime }=0.5$ (dashed line). \newline
$T-r_{+}$ diagram: $P=P_{c}$ and $\protect\alpha ^{\prime }=0.05$
(continuous line), $\protect\alpha ^{\prime }=0.1$ (dotted line) and
\protect\alpha ^{\prime }=0.5$ (dashed line). \newline
$G-T$ diagram: $P=0.5P_{c}$ and $\protect\alpha ^{\prime }=0.05$ (continuous
line), $\protect\alpha ^{\prime }=0.1$ (dotted line) and $\protect\alpha
^{\prime }=0.5$ (dashed line).}
\label{comparGBalpha010515beta07n4}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{array}{ccc}
\epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{PVEn789.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{TVEn789.eps}
& \epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{GTEn789.eps
\end{array}
\caption{\textbf{\emph{Einstein solutions:}} $P-r_{+}$ for $T=T_{c}$ (Left),
$T-r_{+}$ for $P=P_{c}$ (Middle) and $G-T$ for $P=0.5P_{c}$ (Right) diagrams
for $k=1$, $q=1$, $\protect\beta =0.001$, $n=7$ (continuous line), $n=8$
(dotted line) and $n=9$ (dashed line).}
\label{En789}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{array}{ccc}
\epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{PVGBn456.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm
\epsffile{TVGBn456.eps} & \epsfxsize=5cm \epsffile{GTGBn456.eps
\end{array}
\caption{\textbf{\emph{GB solutions:}} $P-r_{+}$ for $T=T_{c}$ (Left),
T-r_{+}$ for $P=P_{c}$ (Middle) and $G-T$ for $P=0.5P_{c}$ (Right) diagrams
for $k=1$, $q=1$, $\protect\beta =0.06$, $\protect\alpha ^{\prime }=0.5$,
n=4$ (continuous line), $n=5$ (dotted line) and $n=6$ (dashed line).}
\label{GBn456}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{array}{ccc}
\epsfxsize=7cm \epsffile{PTEbeta04507.eps} & \epsfxsize=7cm
\epsffile{PTGBbeta0306.eps} &
\end{array}
\caption{\textbf{\emph{Coexistence line for Einstein (Left) and GB (Right)
gravities:}} $P-T$ for $k=1$, $n=4$ and $q=1$.\newline
Left diagram: $\protect\beta =0.045$ (continuous line) and $\protect\beta
=0.07$ (dotted line). \newline
Right diagram: $\protect\alpha^{\prime }=10^{-4}$ and $\protect\beta =0$
(continuous line) and $\protect\beta =0.06$ (dotted line).}
\label{PTbeta}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{array}{ccc}
\epsfxsize=7cm \epsffile{PTEn789.eps} & \epsfxsize=7cm
\epsffile{PTGBn456.eps} &
\end{array}
\caption{\textbf{\emph{Coexistence line for Einstein (Left) and GB (Right)
gravities:}} $P-T$ for $k=1$, $n=4$ and $q=1$.\newline
Left diagram: $\protect\beta =0.001$ and $n=7$ (continuous line), $n=8$
(dotted line) and $n=9$ (dashed line). \newline
Right diagram: $\protect\beta =0.06$, $\protect\alpha ^{\prime }=0.5$ and
n=4$ (continuous line), $n=5$ (dotted line) and $n=6$ (dashed line).}
\label{PTn}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{array}{ccc}
\epsfxsize=7cm \epsffile{PTGBalpha0515.eps} & &
\end{array}
\caption{\textbf{\emph{Coexistence line for GB gravity:}} $P-T$ for $k=1$,
n=4$, $q=1$, $\protect\beta =0.07$ and $\protect\alpha ^{\prime }=0.05$
(continuous line), $\protect\alpha ^{\prime }=0.1$ (dotted line) and
\protect\alpha ^{\prime }=0.5$ (dashed line).}
\label{PTalpha}
\end{figure}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\hline\hline
$\beta $ & $r_{c}$ & $T_{c}$ & $P_{c}$ & $\frac{P_{c}v_{c}}{T_{c}}$ \\
\hline\hline
$0$ & $2.44948$ & $0.04330$ & $0.00331$ & $0.18750$ \\ \hline
$0.00100$ &
\begin{array}{c}
0.31209 \\
2.4491
\end{array
$ & $0.04331$ & $0.00332$ & $0.18748$ \\ \hline
$0.05000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
0.85371 \\
2.4331
\end{array
$ & $0.04343$ & $0.00333$ & $0.18569$ \\ \hline
$0.10000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
1.03212 \\
2.4156
\end{array
$ & $0.04356$ & $0.00336$ & $0.18635$ \\ \hline
$0.15000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
1.15889 \\
2.3969
\end{array
$ & $0.04370$ & $0.00338$ & $0.18569$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
& \;\;\;\;\;\;\;\;\; &
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\hline\hline
$\beta $ & $r_{c}$ & $T_{c}$ & $P_{c}$ & $\frac{P_{c}v_{c}}{T_{c}}$ \\
\hline\hline
$0$ & $1.49534$ & $0.17029$ & $0.03558$ & $0.31250$ \\ \hline
$0.00100$ &
\begin{array}{c}
0.45502 \\
1.4950
\end{array
$ & $0.17030$ & $0.03559$ & $0.31247$ \\ \hline
$0.05000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
0.89202 \\
1.4794
\end{array
$ & $0.17110$ & $0.03596$ & $0.31093$ \\ \hline
$0.10000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
1.01944 \\
1.4601
\end{array
$ & $0.17201$ & $0.03639$ & $0.30890$ \\ \hline
$0.15000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
1.11349 \\
1.4354
\end{array
$ & $0.17310$ & $0.03690$ & $0.30603$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\\[0pt]
Table $1$ (left): Einstein gravity for $q=1$ and $n=3$. Table $2$ (right):
Einstein gravity for $q=1$ and $n=4$.
\end{center}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\hline\hline
$\beta $ & $r_{c}$ & $T_{c}$ & $P_{c}$ & $\frac{P_{c}v_{c}}{T_{c}}$ \\
\hline\hline
$0$ & $1.29271$ & $0.31658$ & $0.10714$ & $0.43750$ \\ \hline
$0.00100$ &
\begin{array}{c}
0.55202 \\
1.2924
\end{array
$ & $0.31661$ & $0.10716$ & $0.43746$ \\ \hline
$0.05000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
0.91471 \\
1.2795
\end{array
$ & $0.31804$ & $0.10820$ & $0.43532$ \\ \hline
$0.10000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
1.01396 \\
1.2623
\end{array
$ & $0.31978$ & $0.10949$ & $0.43221$ \\ \hline
$0.15000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
1.09170 \\
1.2359
\end{array
$ & $0.32202$ & $0.11117$ & $0.42668$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
& \;\;\;\;\;\; &
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\hline\hline
$\beta $ & $r_{c}$ & $T_{c}$ & $P_{c}$ & $\frac{P_{c}v_{c}}{T_{c}}$ \\
\hline\hline
$0$ & $1.49550$ & $0.17024$ & $0.03557$ & $0.31248$ \\ \hline
$0.01000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
0.67158 \\
1.4925
\end{array
$ & $0.17040$ & $0.03564$ & $0.31219$ \\ \hline
$0.03000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
0.81326 \\
1.4862
\end{array
$ & $0.17071$ & $0.03579$ & $0.31158$ \\ \hline
$0.05000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
0.89202 \\
1.4795
\end{array
$ & $0.17105$ & $0.03594$ & $0.31091$ \\ \hline
$0.07000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
0.95018 \\
1.4723
\end{array
$ & $0.17140$ & $0.03610$ & $0.31017$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\\[0pt]
Table $3$ (left): Einstein gravity for $q=1$ and $n=5$. Table $4$ (right):
GB gravity for $q=1$, $\alpha =10^{-4}$ and $n=4$.
\end{center}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|}
\hline
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\hline\hline
$\alpha $ & $r_{c}$ & $T_{c}$ & $P_{c}$ & $\frac{P_{c}v_{c}}{T_{c}}$ \\
\hline\hline
$0.01000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
0.94914 \\
1.4898
\end{array
$ & $0.16688$ & $0.03458$ & $0.30873$ \\ \hline
$0.05000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
0.94608 \\
1.5557
\end{array
$ & $0.15157$ & $0.02955$ & $0.30333$ \\ \hline
$0.10000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
0.94374 \\
1.6311
\end{array
$ & $0.13707$ & $0.02499$ & $0.29747$ \\ \hline
$0.50000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
0.93836 \\
2.1285
\end{array
$ & $0.08560$ & $0.01089$ & $0.27103$ \\ \hline
$1.00000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
0.89005 \\
2.6582
\end{array
$ & $0.06346$ & $0.00619$ & $0.25942$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
& \;\;\;\;\;\; &
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\hline\hline
$\beta $ & $r_{c}$ & $T_{c}$ & $P_{c}$ & $\frac{P_{c}v_{c}}{T_{c}}$ \\
\hline\hline
$0$ & $1.49550$ & $0.17024$ & $0.03557$ & $0.31248$ \\ \hline
$0.01000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
0.67158 \\
1.4925
\end{array
$ & $0.17040$ & $0.03564$ & $0.31219$ \\ \hline
$0.03000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
0.81326 \\
1.4862
\end{array
$ & $0.17071$ & $0.03579$ & $0.31158$ \\ \hline
$0.05000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
0.89202 \\
1.4795
\end{array
$ & $0.17105$ & $0.03594$ & $0.31091$ \\ \hline
$0.07000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
0.95018 \\
1.4723
\end{array
$ & $0.17140$ & $0.03610$ & $0.31017$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\\[0pt]
Table $5$ (left): GB gravity for $q=1$, $\beta =0.07$ and $n=4$. Table $6$
(right): GB gravity for $q=1$, $\alpha =10^{-4}$ and $n=5$.
\end{center}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\hline\hline
$\alpha $ & $r_{c}$ & $T_{c}$ & $P_{c}$ & $\frac{P_{c}v_{c}}{T_{c}}$ \\
\hline\hline
$0.01000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
0.95884 \\
1.2853
\end{array
$ & $0.30889$ & $0.10367$ & $0.43139$ \\ \hline
$0.05000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
0.95598 \\
1.3289
\end{array
$ & $0.27681$ & $0.08766$ & $0.42089$ \\ \hline
$0.10000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
0.95414 \\
1.3766
\end{array
$ & $0.24745$ & $0.07358$ & $0.40937$ \\ \hline
$0.50000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
0.95469 \\
1.6536
\end{array
$ & $0.15000$ & $0.03196$ & $0.35241$ \\ \hline
$1.00000$ &
\begin{array}{c}
0.96227 \\
1.9132
\end{array
$ & $0.11049$ & $0.01837$ & $0.31815$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\\[0pt]
\vspace{0.1cm} Table ($7$): GB gravity for $q=1$, $\beta =0.07$ and $n=5$.
\end{center}
It is a well-known fact that inclusion of higher order polynomial
terms (e.g. $r_{+}^d$, $d\in\mathbb{N}$) in the Van der Waals
equation of state changes the location of critical point in
thermodynamic space ($P, V, T$), but does not change the
universality class and therefore leads to the same exponents as
the Van der Waals fluid (see \cite{Vahidinia,GBMaxwell} for more
details). This is different from the case of pure Lovelock gravity
solutions \cite{DolanMann}, which the equation of state is no
longer a polynomial form.
\section{Discussion on the results of diagrams}
In order to study the behavior of phase transition for these black
holes in more details, we have plotted $P-r_{+}$, $T-r_{+}$ and
$G-T$ diagrams. For having better insight regarding the effects of
correction on critical behavior of the system, we have also
plotted some diagrams for the case of $\beta =0$ which is the
Maxwell theory.
like Van der Waals system, the usual characteristic swallow tail
is seen in black holes only in the presence of linear Maxwell
field (right panels of Figs. \ref{EMbeta0dim} and
\ref{GBbeta0dim}). In other words, considering Maxwell
electromagnetic field leads to a Van der Waals like behavior and
usual phase transition. The existence and usual behavior of phase
transition are also evident from studying $P-r_{+}$ and $T-r_{+}$
diagrams. In case of the absence of nonlinearity parameter, for
$P-r_{+}$ (left panels of Figs. \ref{EMbeta0dim} and
\ref{GBbeta0dim}), pressure is a decreasing function of horizon
radius but for a range of horizon radius, it is an increasing
function of it which is not a physical behavior. Before and after
this region there are two values of horizon with same pressure.
The phase transition takes place between these two points which in
case of black holes, it is small/large black hole phase
transition. It is crucial to mention that, this region is only
seen for case of $T\leq T_{c}$ whereas for $T>T_{c}$ pressure is
only a decreasing function of horizon radius. On the other hand,
for $\beta =0$ in case of $T-r_{+}$ diagrams (middle panels of
Figs. \ref{EMbeta0dim} and \ref{GBbeta0dim}), if $P=P_{c}$ the
temperature is an increasing function of horizon radius and for a
region of horizon radius, temperature is fixed. This place is the
region where phase transition takes place and known as subcritical
isobar.
As for the effects of dimensions on the critical behavior of the system in
the presence of linear Maxwell field Figs. \ref{EMbeta0dim} and \re
{GBbeta0dim} are plotted. As one can see, the swallow tail (right
panels of Figs. \ref{EMbeta0dim} and \ref{GBbeta0dim}), critical
pressure (left panels of Figs. \ref{EMbeta0dim} and
\ref{GBbeta0dim}) and temperature (middle panels of Figs.
\ref{EMbeta0dim} and \ref{GBbeta0dim}) are increasing functions of
dimension while critical horizon radius and subcritical isobars
are decreasing functions of it.
In addition, for the case of absence of nonlinearity parameter, we compare
critical behavior of these two gravities with each other (Fig. \re
{comparEandGBbeta0n4}). As one can see considering GB gravity leads to
increasing the size of swallow tail (right panel of Fig. \re
{comparEandGBbeta0n4}). The place of swallow tail is also shifted to lower
values of temperature. On the other hand, pressure (left panel of Fig. \re
{comparEandGBbeta0n4}) and temperature (middle panel of Fig. \re
{comparEandGBbeta0n4}) of the critical point are greater in Einstein gravity
whereas the length of subcritical isobar and the critical horizon radius are
greater in GB gravity. Also, the needed energy for the phase transition in
Einstein gravity is more than GB case.
Next, we are considering $\beta \neq 0$ and plot one set of graphs for
Einstein gravity for variation of nonlinearity parameter (Figs. \re
{Ebeta045n4}-\ref{comparEbeta04507n4}) and Figs. \re
{comparGBbeta010507alpha0001n4} and \ref{comparGBalpha010515beta07n4}\ for
variation of nonlinearity and GB parameters for GB gravity. Also, we plot
Figs. \ref{En789} and \ref{GBn456} to investigate the effects of dimensions
on the solutions of Einstein and GB gravities, respectively. It is notable
that in these figures physical solutions exist only after the vertical line.
This means that before these vertical lines the second term in Eq. (\ref{Ftr
) is not small enough (with respect to Maxwell term). The vertical lines in
P-r_{+}$ ($T-r_{+}$) and $G-T$ diagrams are interpreted as the minimum value
of the authorized horizon radius and temperature, respectively. In comparing
figures there are more than one vertical line. Because of overlapping of
these vertical lines with the vertical line of $G-T$ diagrams, these lines
are not presented.
In case of variation of nonlinearity parameter same behavior is
observed for Einstein and GB gravities. For this case the
following results are obtained. Interestingly, contrary to Maxwell
theory, in this case ($\beta \neq 0$), the Van der Waals like
behavior is not preserved. The plotted graphs for Gibbs free
energy versus temperature show the existence of a phase
transition, a turning point. In other words, the characteristic
swallow tail of phase transition in this nonlinear theory is
modified and its shape is different from the usual thermodynamical
systems. For small values of nonlinearity parameter (right panel
of Fig. \ref{Ebeta045n4}), the usual swallow tail is observed with
a turning point and a minimum temperature (vertical line) which
are located before swallow tail. It is evident that the minimum
energy and the distance between turning point and swallow tail,
are decreasing functions of $\beta$ whereas the minimum
temperature is an increasing function(see Figs.
\ref{comparEbeta04507n4} and \ref{comparGBbeta010507alpha0001n4}).
It is worthwhile to mention that minimum temperature and critical
temperature are two different quantities.
As for the $P-r_{+}$ , it is evident that the related graphs are modified
like $G-T$ diagrams. First, pressure is an increasing function of horizon
radius, then after a turning point, it changes into being a decreasing
function of $r_{+}$. In this case, a part of the graphs shows the usual
behavior of phase transition whereas there is another part which is
irregular (left panels of Figs. \ref{Ebeta045n4} and \ref{Ebeta07n4}). In
case of $T=T_{c}$, one can find two horizon radii for critical pressure. In
this case the critical horizon radius is a decreasing function of
nonlinearity parameter whereas the turning point and critical pressure are
increasing functions of it (Tables $1-4$ and $6$).
Moreover, in studying $T-r_{+},$ same abnormal behavior is
observed (middle panels of Figs. \ref{Ebeta045n4} and
\ref{Ebeta07n4}). Usually, we are expecting temperature to be a
decreasing function of horizon radius except in place of phase
transition in which temperature is fixed and horizon radius
increases. This region is know as subcritical isobars. But in this
case, first temperature is a decreasing function of $r_{+}$ then
it becomes an increasing function of it. As one can see in case of
$P=P_{c}$ the subcritical isobar is observed but another value of
horizon radius exists which has the same temperature as
subcritical isobar. This may show that in this place phase
transition takes place. The critical temperature is an increasing
function of nonlinearity parameter.
Comparing the variational effects of GB and nonlinearity parameters, we find
that they have opposite effects (Figs. \ref{comparGBbeta010507alpha0001n4}
and \ref{comparGBalpha010515beta07n4}). Thus, we leave out discussions of GB
parameter for reasons of economy.
It is worthwhile to mention a few characteristic behavior of graphs. As one
can see, in case of small values of nonlinearity parameter, the distance
between the critical point and turning point is large (right panels of Figs.
\ref{Ebeta045n4} and \ref{Ebeta07n4}). Similarly, in case of $P-r_{+}$ (
T-r_{+}$) the region of $r_{+}$ in which pressure being increasing
(decreasing) function of $r_{+}$ is large too. As nonlinearity
parameter increases, the distance between these points decreases
in $G-T$ diagrams, and interestingly, in case of $P-r_{+}$
($T-r_{+}$) the region of r+, distance between the critical
horizon radius, and turning point decrease (Figs.
\ref{comparEbeta04507n4} and \ref{comparGBbeta010507alpha0001n4}).
In the end, we mention that $P_{c}r_{c}/T_{c}$ is a decreasing
function of nonlinearity and GB parameters.
Next, we have considered the effects of dimensions on the critical
behavior. As one can see, the temperature of swallow tail
formation, energy gap between two states and minimum of
temperature (turning point), critical horizon (middle panels of
Figs. \ref{En789} and \ref{GBn456}), pressure (left panels of Figs. \re
{En789} and \ref{GBn456}) and $P_{c}r_{c}/T_{c}$ are increasing
functions of dimensions. An abnormal behavior for $4$-dimension is
observed in $G-T$ diagrams for Einstein gravity. This behavior is
due to power of $r_{+}$ in the last term of Gibbs free energy. The
same abnormality could be obtained for the case of GB gravity in
$5$-dimension which is due to structure of Gibbs free energy,
temperature and pressure. In other words, there are terms in these
equations that vanish in case of $n=4$.
Finally, we have plotted the coexistence line in which along this
curve, small and large black holes have alike temperature and
pressure (Figs. \ref{PTbeta}, \ref{PTn}, and \ref{PTalpha}).
Critical points are located at the end of the coexistence line
where above these points the phase transition does not occur. In
addition, Fig. \ref{PTbeta} indicates that nonlinearity parameter
does not significantly affect the coexistence line. For both
Einstein and GB gravities as dimension increases the critical
pressure and critical temperature increase too (Fig. \ref{PTn}).
In case of GB parameter, the critical pressure and critical
temperature are decreasing functions of GB parameter (Fig.
\ref{PTalpha} and table 5).
\section{Phase transition points through heat capacity}
Since we have observed an abnormal behavior in plotted phase
diagrams, it will be worthwhile to test the existence of reentrant
phase transitions through another method. In Ref. \cite{HendiIJMD}
a new method for studying critical behaviors was introduced. The
method is based on obtaining a relation for thermodynamical
pressure by using the denominator of the heat capacity. In other
words, by replacing the cosmological constant with its
corresponding thermodynamical pressure and solving the denominator
of the heat capacity with respect to this pressure a relation is
obtained. This relation is different from the pressure which is
obtainable from Eq. (\ref{T}). The maximums of this relation are
representing places in which phase transitions take place.
Therefore, the maximums in plotting a $P-r_{+}$ diagram for this
relation will give us critical pressure and horizon radius. This
method was employed to obtain critical pressure in several papers
which has proven to be an successful one
\cite{HendiIJMD,HendiJHEP}.
The heat capacity is obtained by
\begin{equation}
C_{Q}=\left( \frac{\partial M}{\partial S}\right) _{Q}\left( \frac{\partial
^{2}M}{\partial S^{2}}\right) _{Q}^{-1}. \label{CQ}
\end{equation}
Using Eqs. (\ref{T}) and (\ref{S}) and replacing cosmological
constant with its corresponding relation with pressure and solving
its denominator with respect to pressure will lead to a relation
for pressure which for economical reasons we will not bring it. We
will present the results of this relation by considering mentioned
values in different tables in following diagrams (Fig. \ref{NEW}).
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{array}{ccc}
\epsfxsize=5.5cm \epsffile{New-EN-beta.eps} & \epsfxsize=5.5cm
\epsffile{New-GB-beta.eps} & \epsfxsize=5.5cm \epsffile{New-GB-alpha.eps
\end{array}
\caption{$P$ versus $r_{+}$ diagrams for $q=1$ and $k=1$. \newline
left panel: $\protect\alpha=0$ and $\protect\beta=0$ (bold continues line),
P=0.03558$ (continues line), $\protect\beta=0.05$ (bold dotted line),
P=0.03596$ (dotted line), $\protect\beta=0.15$ (bold dashed line), $P=0.03690
$ (dashed line). \newline
middle panel: $\protect\alpha=10^{-4}$ and $\protect\beta=0$ (bold continues
line), $P=0.03557$ (continues line), $\protect\beta=0.03$ (bold dotted
line), $P=0.03579$ (dotted line), $\protect\beta=0.07$ (bold dashed line),
P=0.03610$ (dashed line). \newline
right panel: $\protect\beta=0.07$ and $\protect\alpha=0.1$ (bold continues
line), $P=0.02499$ (continues line), $\protect\alpha=0.5$ (bold dotted
line), $P=0.01089$ (dotted line), $\protect\alpha=1$ (bold dashed line),
P=0.00619$ (dashed line).}
\label{NEW}
\end{figure}
First of all, in absence of the nonlinearity, the plotted diagrams
shows existence of only one maximum. The pressure and horizon
radius of this maximum is exactly located where phase transition
takes place. Interestingly, by adding the nonlinearity to the
system, two extrema are observed: a minimum and a maximum. The
place of this maximum is exactly where phase transition occurs for
mentioned vales for different parameters. But as one can see, no
other maximum exists which indicates that, at least no other
second order phase transition is observed. In other words,
although for specific critical pressure in these diagrams two
critical horizons are observed, the type of these critical points
are not the same. Therefore, one can conclude that no reentrant
phase transitions happens which is consistent with what was
observed in coexistence diagrams.
\section{Conclusions}
In this paper we have considered a quadratic Maxwell invariant as
a correction term to the Maxwell Lagrangian. We studied the
thermodynamic behavior of these solutions in Einstein and GB
gravities. We considered cosmological constant as thermodynamic
pressure and related conjugated quantity as volume of the black
hole. By doing so, the interpretation of the mass as internal
energy was changed into Enthalpy of the system. Therefore, not
only the interpretation of the mass of the black hole was changed,
but also we extended phase space.
It is worthwhile to make some discussion regarding mass of the
black hole in this case. Usually, the interpretation of mass is
internal energy. In this point of view mass is a conserved
quantity which is representing only the total internal energy. But
in case of the new interpretation, mass of the black hole is a
combination of internal energy and pressure. In other words, not
only the mass of the black holes determines the internal energy
and the shape of the black hole, but also we are expecting it to
have information regarding interaction of constituents of black
holes which is known as pressure of the system. Although, one may
state that due to natural properties of black holes, it is
impossible to study the interaction of constituents of black
holes, one must take the approach of string theory to the matter
into consideration. In other words, in context of string theory
some attempts were made to study microstates of the black holes
and their interpretation which can be extended by considering this
point of view.
The volume of the black hole is determined by topological structure of
metric. Therefore, one expects that the calculated value of this quantity
and the topological structure of the metric be in agreement. This result was
obtained in calculation of volume.
In linear electromagnetic field, the critical behavior of the system for
both gravities were usual ones. One critical horizon radius was found, hence
one phase transition was expected. The formation of the characteristic
swallow tail was observed in $G-T$ diagrams. In $T-r_{+}$ and $P-r_{+}$
diagrams the properties of phase transition were seen. But amazingly, in
consideration of additional term the behavior of the system differed
completely.
By considering this nonlinear electromagnetic field, the structure of the
phase diagrams and the thermodynamic behavior of the system were highly
modified. Calculations regarding critical horizon radius lead to \textbf
existence of two critical horizon radii}. It is not unusual to find two
critical horizon radii for black holes \cite{7}, but in our case the
presence of the second critical horizon radius was observed in plotted
graphs. In other words, in case of this nonlinear electromagnetic field,
contrary to other cases of nonlinear theories, a phase transition and a
turning point were observed. The existence of these two points is related to
existence of number of critical horizon radius. This result is evident by
comparing Maxwell theory with this nonlinear theory. In case of Maxwell
theory only one positive critical horizon radius was found which resulted
into existence of one phase transition whereas for this case of nonlinear
electromagnetic field, two critical horizon radii were found which resulted
into existence of the phase transition and turning point.
In case of $G-T$ , three points were observed in which the behavior of the
system changed in them. These points are representing different phases. In
P-r_{+},$ for $T=T_{c}$, three horizon radii were found with same pressure
(critical pressure) which indicates the existence of three phases and one
turning point. For $T-r_{+},$ in case of $P=P_{c}$, two horizon radii were
found with same temperature (critical temperature). One of these horizons
was located on subcritical isobar which is the usual phase transition point
and the other one was out of the subcritical isobar.
Another interesting issue was the effects of nonlinearity and GB
parameters were opposite of each other. In case of nonlinearity
parameter, the smaller critical horizon radius was an increasing
function of nonlinearity parameter whereas the larger critical
horizon radius was a decreasing function of $\beta $. In this case
the smaller critical horizon radius was highly function of
nonlinearity parameter comparing to larger critical horizon
radius. Therefore, in case of increasing nonlinearity parameter,
the distance between these two critical horizon radii decreased.
The critical temperature and pressure were increasing functions of
nonlinearity parameter whereas $P_{c}r_{c}/T_{c}$ was a decreasing
function of it. Interestingly, in case of GB parameter, the
smaller critical horizon radius was a decreasing function of GB
parameter and the larger critical horizon radius was an increasing
function of it. The value of larger critical horizon radius was
highly function of variation of GB parameter. Therefore, the
distance between two critical horizon radii was an increasing
function of GB parameter. As for the critical temperature and
pressure, they were decreasing functions of GB parameter. In this
case, $P_{c}r_{c}/T_{c}$ was also a decreasing function of GB
parameter.
These two parameters ($\alpha $ and $\beta $) are describing two aspects of
the black holes; gravitational and matter fields. In case of increasing
\beta $, the nonlinearity behavior of the system increases. In context of
electromagnetic tensor, increasing this parameter leads to decreasing value
of this tensor (\ref{Ftr}). Therefore, the values of the electromagnetic
tensor are decreasing functions of nonlinearity parameter. This fact leads
to a conclusion that increasing the power of nonlinearity leads to
decreasing power of electromagnetic field. But in case of GB parameter, by
increasing its value, the power of the gravitational field increases. In
case of this generalization due to considering higher orders of curvature
scalar, we are increasing the gravitational force. As one can see,
increasing gravitational force causes the critical temperature and pressure
decrease which indicating that in this case phase transition is taking place
in lower temperature, hence lower energy. Therefore, increasing the power of
the gravitational force causes the system to have higher value of internal
energy. This can also be seen in studying entropy of the GB gravity. As one
can see, in case of spherical symmetric, entropy is an increasing function
of GB parameter. In comparing GB and Einstein gravities, it is evident that
GB gravity has higher entropy. Having higher entropy means that system has
higher internal energy which causes the system to have phase transition in
lower temperature. This result was found in studying phase diagrams of the
GB and Einstein diagrams.
By what was mentioned in last paragraph one can conclude following
results: first of all generalization of GB gravity causes the
internal energy of the system increases and the black hole has
phase transition faster comparing to Einstein gravity. Therefore,
in this theory black holes need to absorb less mass to have phase
transition. Second, the entropy may be a function of the
complexity of the black holes structure. Considering higher orders
of curvature scalar causes the system to have more complicated
structure. Therefore, it is arguable that the entropy and the
complexity of the structure of the system are related to each
other. In other words, complexity of the structure is a
measurement for entropy of the system. Nonlinearity of the system
and gravitational force are two opposing factors. They are
decreasing each others effects and at some points they may cancel
each others effects. This argument is stating that it may be
possible to fix parameters in a way which system has critical
values same as ones in Einstein-Maxwell theory.
Due to existence of the abnormal behavior in phase diagrams a
question regarding the existence of reentrant phase transitions
could rise which was answered through two methods. The coexistence
diagrams and a new method showed that only one of the critical
horizons are representing second order phase transition, while the
other one could be another type of the phase transition.
As for the effects of the dimensions, the smaller critical
horizon, pressure, temperature and $P_{c}r_{c}/T_{c}$ were
increasing functions of dimensions whereas, the subcritical
isobars and larger critical horizon radius were decreasing
functions of it. This behavior is indicating that the higher
dimensional black holes need to absorb more mass to have phase
transition. It is worthwhile to mention that case $n=3$ for
Einstein gravity and $n=4$ for GB gravity are considered to be
special cases in these gravities. As for the GB gravity, in this
specific dimension, some terms in Eqs. (\ref{T}) and (\ref{rc})
vanish. In case of Einstein gravity, it is evident from Eq.
(\ref{rc}) that for case of $n=3$ the power of the horizon radius
is different from other dimensions in a way which causes the Gibbs
free energy to have abnormal behavior which was observed in
studying phase diagrams.
As it was pointed out, considering whether we are working in
context of stringy correction or classical Born-Infeld theories,
the results may be different. As it was seen, in case of later
correction, there was a limiting point which for specific values
makes the system never acquire non-Van der Waals behavior, whereas
in case of stringy corrected electromagnetic field such limitation
did not exist and the system would have non-Van der Waals like
behavior. This points out that in stringy corrected version of the
theory, different terms have different dominant regions which
correspondingly modify phase structure and phase transitions of
the solutions.
Finally, it is worthwhile to mention that regarding string theory,
the quadratic Maxwell invariant arises independent of Born-Infeld
electromagnetic field. If one conducts the study that was done in
this paper by motivations of string theory (not correction to
Maxwell theory), there will be no limitation for considered
values. Therefore, one can omit vertical limiting lines in plotted
graphs. In addition, we should note that modification in phase
diagrams, previously was obtained by changing the gravitational
part of action. Here in this paper, the modification of matter
field caused the abnormal behavior of the phase diagrams.
\begin{acknowledgements}
We also thank the Shiraz University Research Council. This work
has been supported financially by the Research Institute for
Astronomy and Astrophysics of Maragha, Iran.
\end{acknowledgements}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{Introduction}
Massive (M$_\star\lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel > \over \sim \;$} 10^{11}\,{\rm M}_\odot$) compact (R$_{\rm e}\lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel < \over \sim \;$} 1.5$\,kpc) galaxies are extremely rare in the present-day Universe, several groups estimating their number density to be currently $n<10^{-6}$Mpc$^{-3}$ \citep[]{Trujillo09,Taylor10}. As well as for their scarcity, these objects are of great interest because their structural properties \cite[]{Trujillo12} are comparable to a large fraction of the massive galaxy population 10 Gyr ago at a redshift of $z\sim 2$ \citep[e.g.][]{Trujillo07,Buitrago08,Carrasco10,Chevance12,Szomoru12}, when compact massive galaxies were significantly more abundant \citep[ $>10^{-4}$\,Mpc$^{-3}$;][]{Taylor10}.
As cosmic time has evolved, these galaxies have progressively disappeared \citep{Stockton10,Valentinuzzi10,Cassata11,Poggianti13,Damjanov14,Hsu14}. The decline in the number of these galaxies has been linked with merging \cite[]{Lopez12,Newman12,Oser12,Bedorf13,Hilz13,Quilis13,Shankar13} and this scenario can explain a large number of observations \citep[e.g.][and references therein]{Trujillo11}.
The recent discovery of a nearby compact massive `relic' galaxy, NGC 1277, with similar structural properties to typical galaxies of the same mass at z$\sim$2 \cite[]{Trujillo14}, has opened the possibility of exploring the properties of this galaxy population in unprecedented detail, including in particular some hints about the dark matter halo properties \cite[]{vandenBosch12}. Having access to these characteristics is one key to understanding this type of object in a cosmological context. In fact, we lack knowledge about the connection of these compact massive galaxies with the cosmic structures which they inhabit. In particular, which kind of dark matter halo they occupy and how these halos evolve with time.
In this paper we aim to fill this gap, and address the following questions: How do these particular dark matter structure properties compare with the rest of the population? Are they substructures of larger dark matter halos or are they isolated objects? How have the structural properties of these dark matter halos evolved with time?
We confront these questions from a cosmological perspective by taking the dark matter structure properties that would be consistent with our knowledge of this real system (\S\ref{CaseStudy}), and then looking for structures in a numerical simulation that share these properties (\S\ref{z0}). These candidate structures thus identified, we can then begin asking where they came from and what has dictated their evolution (\S\ref{z1}).
\section{Associating compact galaxies and compact structures}\label{CaseStudy}
We begin by characterising the properties of one particularly well-known compact massive galaxy, NGC 1277, described in \cite{Trujillo14} to have a stellar mass of $M_\star = 1.2 \pm 0.4 \times 10^{11} M_\odot$, half of which is contained within a circularised radius of just $r_{\rm e} = 1.2\pm 0.1$\,kpc.
To make the association between real systems such as this, and the structures in a cold dark matter (CDM) simulation, we can draw on both empirical, semi-empirical and theoretical arguments.
Ideally, we might rely entirely on the empirical measurement of the real system's mass profile, but unfortunately the profile is only marginally constrained by direct measurement. However, we can still note the best fitting profile parameters, found from a full analysis of the stellar kinematics by \citet{vandenBosch12}. These are: $\rho_{\rm s} = 0.027\,{\rm M}_\odot {\rm pc}^{-3}$ and $r_{\rm s}=26$\,kpc, where these apply to the `NFW profile', the standard fitting function of \citet{Navarro95,Navarro96,Navarro97} for density as a function of radius (\ref{NFW}).
To use these figures directly to seek analogue structures in CDM-only simulations is of course to neglect the effects of the formation of the galaxy itself on the profile. But given the already stated uncertainty in $\rho_{\rm s}$ and $r_{\rm s}$, a detailed attempt to analytically reverse-model the effects of collapse and ejection of the normal matter component would be inappropriate. Appealing also to numerical work on this issue, a recent study by \citet[][]{Schaller14} compared the density profiles of structures in the hydrodynamical {\sc eagle} simulations \citep{Schaye15} with the equivalent structures from a `dark matter only' version. Though both $r_{\rm s}$ and $\rho_{\rm s}$ did differ between the two cases, with standard deviations at the relevant mass range of about a factor of two, the {\em expectation} change was always close to zero. There was no clear tendency for the absence, or presence, of normal matter in the numerical simulations to shift these parameters systematically one way or other.
To add to these empirical measurements of profile parameters, we can also use the stellar mass of NGC 1277 to indicate a likely structure mass range, by appealing to the abundance-matching hypothesis \citep[e.g.][]{Behroozi10,Moster10}. In particular, the expected halo mass for a given stellar mass\footnote{as opposed to the expected stellar mass for a given halo mass.}, calculated in this way by \citet{Behroozi10}, would associate our stellar mass range here, $M_\star \approx 0.8 - 1.6 \times 10^{11} M_\odot$, with halo masses of:
\begin{equation}
M_{\rm v} \approx 2\times10^{12} - 10^{13} M_\odot~, \label{mass_range}
\end{equation}
where this approximate range incorporates both the uncertainty in $M_\star$ and the scatter in the mapping to $M_{\rm v}$.
As well as using the stellar mass as a guide, we can also draw on standard theoretical arguments which would expect the {\em radial} extent of the final galaxy to broadly reflect the quantity and distribution of angular momentum in the structure in which it formed \cite[e.g.][]{Fall80,Fall83,Mo98}. This idea has recently received a boost of empirical support from \cite{Kravtsov13}, who showed that galactic radii and host structure radii linked by the abundance-matching ansatz are directly proportional: $\langle R_{\rm e}\rangle \approx 0.015\,\langle R_{\rm 200}\rangle$ with a scatter of $\approx 0.2$ dex ($R_{\rm 200}$ being the radius that encloses 200 times the critical density).
This correlation would pair a galaxy of $R_{\rm e}\approx 1.2$\,kpc with a structure of $R_{\rm 200}\approx 80$\,kpc, which at $z=0$ corresponds to $M_{200} \approx 200 H_0^2 R_{\rm 200}^3 / 2{\rm G}\approx 6 \times10^{10}{\rm M}_\odot$, or a virial mass of approximately $M_{\rm v} \approx 10^{11}{\rm M}_\odot$. The discrepancy between this mass, and the range in the preceding paragraph deduced from the stellar mass, is a reflection of the exceptional properties of NGC 1277.
To reconcile this, we need to go beyond the theory's application to mean or representative values. The standard, more detailed version is that the net {\em specific} angular momentum of material is conserved in the formation of the galaxy. This would mean that a more compact halo, with more of its mass at smaller radii, leads to a galaxy formed from material with less angular momentum -- and thus more compact -- than others of the same mass.
For the purposes of our exercise here, it would therefore seem sufficient to consider a category of compact structures whose mass exceeds the lower limit of the range indicated in (\ref{mass_range}), have highly centrally concentrated mass distributions, but with limits chosen such that our real system would be comfortably included in the sample (based at least on the best fitting parameters which are available).
We thus define our sample of interest in terms of characteristic\footnote{`Characteristic density' is the term used by \citet{Navarro97}. The mean enclosed density for their profile (\ref{NFW}) falls to this value, $\rho_{\rm s}$, at a radius $r=0.72\,r_{\rm s}$. As $r_{\rm v}\sim5-10\,r_{\rm s}$, this density $\rho_{\rm s}$ is representative of a fairly centralised region, typically just a few percent of the total volume. Hence also `inner density' \citep[][and here]{Bullock01,Wechsler02}.} or inner density, $\rho_{\rm s}$, and total virial mass, $M_{\rm v}$:
\begin{equation}
\rho_{\rm s} >0.02\,{\rm M}_\odot {\rm pc}^{-3} \hspace{0.8cm} {\rm and} \hspace{0.8cm} M_{\rm v} > 2\times 10^{12}\,{\rm M}_\odot ~,\label{limits}
\end{equation}
This total inner density value corresponds to a dark matter density of $0.02(1-\Omega_{\rm b}/\Omega_{\rm M})\approx0.016$, so the best-fitting dark matter inner density for NGC 1277 would fall within this category by about a factor of two. The sample also contains the best fitting scalelength by a similar margin, as can be seen from the upper right panel of Fig. \ref{descendants1}. In terms of concentration parameter, $c\equiv r_{\rm v}/r_{\rm s}$, the criteria in (\ref{limits}) amounts to a selection of about $c \lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel > \over \sim \;$} 20$.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[trim=20mm 39mm 30mm 21mm,clip,width=\textwidth]{{bolshoi_descendants1.0003_1}.pdf}
\caption{The position of compact structures relative to the overall distributions in the {\sc bolshoi} simulation, and to the position of their host structures, where relevant. The {\bf top panels} show the the $M_{\rm v} - r_{\rm s}$ plane (left) and the $\rho_{\rm s}-r_{\rm s}$ plane (right) using the same key. Our category of `compacts' are highlighted as dots, their hosts in circles, and the distribution of the population is indicated with background shading. The mass and density defining our nominal selection criteria (\ref{limits}) and other relevant loci, as labelled, are highlighted with dot-dashed lines. The star in the upper right panel indicates the best-fitting profile parameters for NGC 1277. The {\bf bottom panels} show the projected distributions on to the respective x-axes.}\label{descendants1}
\end{figure*}
So, based on all these combined considerations, we have a well-motivated and interesting category of compact, massive structures. The next step is to locate such structures in a large numerical simulation and investigate their whereabouts and histories. This now follows in \S\ref{Simulation}.
\section{Analogue compact structures in simulations}\label{Simulation}
The following results and figures are taken from the publicly available catalogues of structures found within the {\sc bolshoi} simulation \citep[][and references therein]{Klypin11,Behroozi13b} using the halo finding algorithm presented in \citet{Behroozi13}. The simulation is a cubic box of 250$h^{-1}$ comoving Mpc containing $2048^3$ particles of mass just under $2\times 10^8\,{\rm M}_\odot$.
Cosmological parameters were chosen to be consistent with the WMAP five year \citep{Dunkley09,Hinshaw09,Komatsu09} and seven year data \citep{Jarosik11}, notably: $h0 = 0.7,~\Omega_{\rm M}=0.27,~\Omega_{\rm b}=0.0469$, $\sigma_8=0.82$ and $n_{\rm s}=0.95$.
The virial masses, $M_{\rm v}$, and radii, $r_{\rm v}$, for structures in the simulation are defined by \citet{Klypin11} relative to the mean universal matter density at that redshift:
\begin{equation}
{\rm G}M_{\rm v} = \nicefrac{1}{2}\Delta_{\rm v}(z)H_0^2\Omega_{\rm M}(1+z)^3r_{\rm v}^3~,\label{virial_defenition}
\end{equation}
where $\Delta_{\rm v}(z)$ is the virial overdensity. For the adopted cosmology, $\Delta_{\rm v}(0)=360$, which is equivalent to $\Omega_{\rm M}\Delta_{\rm v}(0)=97$ times the {\em critical} density. The nominal resolution limit of $M_{\rm v}\approx 10^{10}\,{\rm M}_\odot$ \citep{Behroozi13}, is comfortably exceeded by all the structures that we are concerned with in this study.
\subsection{Where are they now?}\label{z0}
The final distribution of masses, radii and inner densities of structures in the simulation is shown in Fig. \ref{descendants1}, highlighting in particular the location of the 346 structures in the volume ($n\approx7\times10^{-6}{\rm Mpc}^{-3}$) that meet our nominal compact criteria defined by (\ref{limits}). This subsample constitutes the most compact 1\% of all structures in the same mass range, as can be appreciated by their location at the very bottom edge of the $M_{\rm v}-r_{\rm s}$ plane, shown in the upper left panel.
The upper right panel shows the $\rho_{\rm s}-r_{\rm s}$ plane. The best-fitting parameters for NGC 1277, indicated with a star, show that these values would place it inside our compact subsample (though the limits were motivated by a combination of factors; see \S\ref{CaseStudy}).
The lower left panel of Fig. \ref{descendants1} shows the total mass distribution of the population and the subsample, divided by distinct systems and substructures. This provides a key result that over 80\% of such compact massive systems are identified to be substructures of a larger collapsed region (as compared to 8\% of all structures in the same mass range). Furthermore, of the $\sim 20\%$ of these exceptional systems that are in fact distinct, we note that over half are found to have passed through larger structures in the past. So, in total, 94\% of the objects in this subsample are or have been influenced by a larger collapsed region.
This is in agreement with the overall results from this simulation, which showed a trend for substructures to be more compact on average than distinct systems of the same mass \citep[][eqns. 10-11]{Klypin11}, and with earlier work \citep[e.g.][]{Ghigna98,Bullock01}. It is also in agreement with the actual location of our case study, NGC 1277, in the massive Perseus Cluster.
The hosts of these compact satellites\footnote{About 10\% of the hosts contain two of the compact systems (none contain three), so there are slightly fewer hosts than there are compact substructures.} are also highlighted in Fig. \ref{descendants1}, and are shown to have very flat distribution in mass from $10^{13}-10^{15}\,{\rm M}_\odot$. So {\em given that you have a compact system} it is similarly likely to turn out to be in any sufficiently massive host.
The clause here is emphasised because the converse statement, is {\em not} true. Taking a potential host structure at random, it is overwhelmingly {\em more likely} to find one of these compact substructures if the host is more massive. This is clear when the number of hosts-of-compacts (hatched area in Fig. \ref{descendants1}) is considered as a fraction of the number of systems in general (solid line above it), which is rapidly declining. However this is to some extent a trivial result in the sense that there are just {\em more objects} inside the most massive clusters. Whatever it is you are looking for, it therefore seems a good bet that you are more likely to find it there, and compacts are apparently no exception.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[trim=1mm 2mm 12mm 79mm,clip,width=\columnwidth]{{bolshoi_fractions1.0003}.pdf}
\caption{The distribution of the compact structures in our nominal definition (highlighted in Fig. \ref{densities})
as a function of the mass of their host structure at $z=0$. Specifically, for each host structure we find the number of compact substructures within it and divide by the number of substructures that lie in the same mass range. Points show the mean of this fraction for all structures in each host mass bin that contain one or more substructures in the mass range. Outer, dashed error bars give the standard deviation in this fraction, and inner error bars indicate the error on the mean (i.e. $\sigma/\sqrt n$, where n is the number of host systems in the mass interval which contain substructures from the given mass range). Systems containing no substructures in the mass range are not included in the statistics.}\label{fractions}
\end{figure}
But with this large and detailed catalogue at our disposal, it should be possible to get a little beyond these two basic statistical effects and see if -- after these have been accounted for -- there remains any other evidence of a preferred environment for this category of system (i.e. one that is not also the case for systems in general).
For those that are still substructures, we seek some normalisation of probability that gives us a fair sense of their likely whereabouts. One such normalisation is to look at their abundance as compared with other substructures that lie in the same mass range as they do. This comparison is shown in Fig. \ref{fractions}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[trim=1mm 2mm 12mm 79mm,clip,width=\columnwidth]{{bolshoi_densities1.0003}.pdf}
\caption{The distribution of systems in the mass--density plane (left panel), showing also the projection on to the density axis (right panel). Solid and dashed lines show the mean and standard deviation of the inner density of all structures in each mass bin. The dotted line shows the mean for substructures only.}\label{densities}
\end{figure}
The result of this calculation is this: if one finds a substructure in the given mass range ($\sim2\times 10^{12}-10^{13}\,{\rm M}_\odot$), then the probability of it being from this highly compact category -- the most compact 1\% of all structures in that mass range -- increases from a few to 30\% {\em as a rising function of the mass of the host structure}.
There is considerable scatter in the results, as indicated by the dashed error bars in Fig. \ref{fractions}. This is perhaps to be expected given the low number statistics involved in the fraction itself; the number of such massive substructures contained in any one group or cluster is at most eight. Many hosts in the sample have one or more massive substructures but no `compacts' (i.e. 0\%) and some have just one massive substructure which {\em is} compact (i.e. `100\%').
However, as there are over 2,600 such hosts within the simulated sample, the trend seen in Fig. \ref{fractions}
is statistically significant. This is reinforced by the solid error bars, which show the much smaller error on the mean, $\sigma/\sqrt{n}$. Whilst a randomly selected structure from this mass range is only $\sim1\%$ likely to be so compact, a {\em substructure} from the same mass range in a $10^{14}\,{\rm M}_\odot$ cluster has about a $10\%$ chance, rising to $20-40\%$ in a $10^{15}\,{\rm M}_\odot$ cluster.
These conclusions should be followed by reiterating that these figures are specific to our choice of category, that the percentages given do not include host structures which have {\em no} massive substructures, and that 20\% of this compact category are in fact not substructures at all. But, that said, Figs. \ref{descendants1} and \ref{fractions} reveal a great deal about these systems' whereabouts in the single, $z=0$, halo catalogue.
Before moving on to higher redshifts, there are a few small points of interest concerning features of the general distribution of structures revealed in Fig. \ref{descendants1}. Firstly, the mean scale radius as a function of mass, in the upper left panels, is not far from tracking a constant mean density solution, but is a little steeper reflecting the fact that, at low redshifts, less massive halos tend to be more concentrated \citep[][fig. 5]{Klypin11}. A specific consequence of this shows up in the distribution of inner densities, to the right, showing that {\em all} the highest inner densities are found in small, lower mass systems. A glance at the lower right panel confirms also that all these very high inner density systems are substructures.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[trim=20mm 39mm 30mm 21mm,clip,width=\textwidth]{{bolshoi_descendants0.3303_1}.pdf}
\caption{The distributions of the structure population at $z=2$, using the same axes and key as Fig. \ref{descendants1}. The highlighted subsample here are the most massive progenitors of the systems that were highlighted at $z=0$.}\label{descendants2}
\end{figure*}
Having mentioned these features, it is worth taking a quick look at the mass--density plane itself, shown here for reference in Fig. \ref{densities}. This firstly reconfirms the simple point that all the top three orders of magnitude in inner density (e.g. $\lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel > \over \sim \;$} 0.1\,{\rm M}_\odot/{\rm pc}^3$) occur in low-mass substructures (i.e. $\lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel < \over \sim \;$} 10^{12}\,{\rm M}_\odot$), or former substructures. It also shows the more general feature of decreasing inner density with total structure mass. The mean varies by a factor of ten for systems in general, with a significantly more pronounced variation of a factor of a hundred seen in substructures.
Fig. \ref{densities} also includes a projection of distribution on to the density axis, as did Fig. \ref{descendants1}, but in this case using a linear scale. This emphasises that, notwithstanding these important variations, the general distribution is quite sharply peaked and most inner densities lie within an order of magnitude of this overall mode.
\subsection{Where did they come from?}\label{z1}
Having located and characterised our subsample of compact massive structures at $z=0$, it is immediately interesting to ask what the basic features of their histories are. This should help explain what has led to them being such rare objects, or at least assess any expectations we may have had already from basic structure theory.
As a first step, we can begin by taking the same axes that were used to characterise the final properties of the structure population in Fig. \ref{descendants1}, but show the state of affairs 10 Gyr previously, at $z=2$. This is shown in Fig. \ref{descendants2}.
Regarding first the two general distributions in these planes, these do not change a great deal from $z=2\rightarrow0$. There is, of course, continued growth of high mass structure but these new systems fall on the existing trends with scale radius and density. So the overall distributions stay the same in that sense.
The extremes of the density distribution become increasingly populated with time. The low-density end should not be over interpreted as the NFW fits are no longer reliable as $r_{\rm s}\rightarrow r_{\rm v}$ (see appendix \ref{NFWcheck}). The high-density end, though, is interesting. That this tail extends as time goes on is perhaps not as expected, and not all these extreme objects at $z=0$ are simply older structures that have been stuck in a cluster and not evolving; many become {\em more} dense from $z=2\rightarrow0$ (see also Fig. \ref{densitychange} and Fig. \ref{densitychange_physical}).
This is a good point to revisit our expectations concerning the relationship between the `age' of structures and their density. The familiar statement of this relationship is that structures' ``characteristic densities are just proportional to the cosmic density at the time they `formed'\,'' \citep{Navarro97}, where formation is taken to be the point at which ``half of the final mass is in collapsed progenitors more massive than 10\% of the final mass''. Here, in Fig. \ref{halfmass}, we take the opportunity to compare this statement with the much more recent simulation results we now have to hand.
Despite using the slightly later time that is recorded in the {\sc bolshoi} catalogue (the point at which half the peak mass lies in the most massive progenitor), the correlation found in Fig. \ref{halfmass} does follow this well-known rule, at least for typical formation redshifts. This can be seen by comparing the two solid lines in the bottom panel; one representing the mean half-mass redshift of structures in the simulation, and the other showing the locus $\rho_{\rm s}\propto(1+z)^3$, found by \citet{Navarro97}, normalised to go through the overall mean values here. The two lines are overlapping from $z\approx2\rightarrow0.5$, during which period the majority ($\approx 60\%$) of all these $M_{\rm v}>10^{11}\,{\rm M}_\odot$ structures attain half their peak mass.
The mean half-mass redshift for all the structures in our final $z=0$ sample turns out to be $z\approx1.3$. The mean for the compact subsample is somewhat earlier than that, but this is {\em not} necessarily what is making them exceptional. The distribution of formation times is broadly representative of the population, so we must assume that it is the later half of their evolution which makes them exceptional by $z=0$.
With this in mind we now turn back to the compact candidates' locations in Fig. \ref{descendants2}, recalling that, at $z=0$, these all end up in a very sparsely populated region at the edge of the distribution in Fig. \ref{descendants1}. At $z=2$, however, it seems that their most massive progenitors were evenly distributed around the mean trends in both planes. In fact, none of the progenitors fall within the region on the $M_{\rm v}-r_{\rm s}$ plane which their descendants will eventually occupy, and very few fall in this region in the $\rho_{\rm s}-r_{\rm s}$ plane.
The only thing which these main progenitors of this subsample seem to have in common at all, at this earlier time, is their mass. Though the spread is considerable (over an order of magnitude) it is not actually that much greater than the range of their descendants at $z=0$. And, crucially, the centres of both distributions are almost the same, meaning that the thing these compacts seem to have in common is {\em very little mass growth since $z=2$}.
To explore and quantify this, we can look specifically at the distribution of structures in terms of this property -- mass growth -- and see how this correlates with changes in inner density. This is shown in Fig. \ref{densitychange}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[trim=1mm 2.5mm 11mm 4mm,clip,width=\columnwidth]{bolshoi_halfmass}
\caption{The correlation between the final ($z=0$) inner density of structures, and the redshift or scale factor at which half their peak mass was in place. The key is as labelled, following the theme set by Figs. \ref{descendants1}-\ref{densitychange}, with the addition of a faint solid line showing the scaling relation $\rho_{\rm s}\propto(1+z)^3$, constrained to pass through the geometric means (dot-dashed lines) of both distributions.}\label{halfmass}
\end{figure}
Concerning first the properties of the population in general, this figure shows a clear anti-correlation between mass change and inner density change. As inner density for a given mass increases monotonically with concentration (see Appendix \ref{PhysicalDensity}), Fig. \ref{densitychange} can be interpreted also in this sense; lesser mass growth tending to lead to a more concentrated final structure, and mass {\em loss} even more so.
Fig \ref{densitychange} also shows that the modal\footnote{The {\em mean} density change is a little above zero, due to the skew in the distribution from systems becoming substructures, but the mode is still close to zero.} density change is close to zero. This runs alongside the prominent idea of inside-out structure growth \citep{Diemand07,Cuesta08}, which can be further corroborated by looking also at the changing density inside a fixed physical radius, shown for reference in Appendix \ref{PhysicalDensity}.
But, in particular when mentioning that notion, the scatter in all directions in this figure cannot be emphasised enough. All four quadrants of the main panel are occupied. It is fair to say that the true fraction of the population lying away from the origin is exaggerated somewhat by the logarithmic scales, but we set this visualisation issue aside by including the simple statistic in the right panel that {\em a clear majority of structures experience an inner density change of more than a factor of 2 from $z=2\rightarrow0$}.
So in this simulated universe, at least, most outcomes are possible. Some consistency with our general rules for structure formation can be seen, but they are indeed {\em general}; we should not be surprised when any one particular bit of universe -- real or simulated -- chooses not play by them.
This brings us back to the particular bits of the simulation that constitute our subsample of compacts. As might be expected from the original selection criteria, they are all in the upper half of the main panel, all experiencing an increase in inner density between the two epochs. This increase is in most cases very significant, averaging over a factor of 10 for the subsample as a whole, and in several cases exceeding a factor of 100.
Fig. \ref{densitychange} also confirms the feature identified qualitatively in Fig. \ref{descendants2}, that most of the subsample change relatively little in mass ($\langle\log[M_{\rm v}(z=0)/M_{\rm v}(z=2)]\rangle=0.12$) and some 30\% actually decrease. At the same time, about 10\% of the subsample exceed the average mass increase for the population, thus reinforcing again the point that we should expect exceptions.
\vspace{3cm}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[trim=1mm 2.5mm 11mm 4mm,clip,width=\columnwidth]{{bolshoi_densitychange0.33030}.pdf}
\caption{The correlation between mass growth and inner density change, as seen in structures from the {\sc bolshoi} simulation. Background shading in the main panel shows the masses and inner densities of all substructures at $z=0$ as fractions of the same quantities for their main progenitors at $z=2$. The dot-dashed lines show the overall mean of each quantity. The solid and dashed lines show the mean and standard deviation of the density change in each mass change bin. Our category of compact structures are highlighted as circles, and as dots if they end up as substructures at $z=2$. The peripheral panels show the projection of the distributions on to the respective axes, with dotted lines showing the distribution for those which become substructures by $z=0$. The white dashed lines and error bars show the mean and standard deviation for the compact subsample. The shaded area in the right panel highlights the fact that only a minority of structures retain their $z=2$ inner density to within a factor of 2.}\label{densitychange}
\end{figure}
\section{Summary}
This study begins by taking the parameters of a known massive, compact galaxy and looking for simulated structures in the {\sc bolshoi} CDM cosmological simulation that would broadly correspond with these properties. We find that the best-fitting inner density and NFW scale radius of the real system would indeed put it amongst the most compact 1\% of structures in the simulated population from the relevant mass-range (Fig. \ref{descendants1}).
Of these analogue compact structures in the simulation, the great majority ($\lower.5ex\hbox{$\; \buildrel > \over \sim \;$} 80\%$) are substructures within larger collapsed regions at $z=0$, and the majority of the rest were substructures in the past. The hosts at $z=0$ are evenly distributed in mass, meaning -- due to decreasing numbers overall -- that the probability of finding such a compact structure in a given host increases with the host's mass (Fig. \ref{fractions})
In terms of the {\em probability of a substructure of this mass being compact} -- which is perhaps a more relevant statistic -- we find that this also increases with host mass, the mean rising from $5\rightarrow30\%$ as $M_{\rm host}$ increases from $10^{13}\rightarrow10^{15}\,{\rm M}_\odot$.
We then trace the main progenitors of these compact analogues back to $z=2$, where they are all found to be distinct systems. At this earlier time, they also had unremarkable profile parameters (Fig. \ref{descendants2}), none of which would fall into the extreme category that would later define them at $z=0$. What the subsample did appear to have in common was that they are mostly:
\begin{itemize}
\item{distinct systems that become substructures,}
\item{increasing relatively little, or decreasing, in total mass}.
\end{itemize}
The latter conjecture was quantified, finding that the average increase in total virial mass to be just half the average growth for the population (Fig. \ref{densitychange}). Their inner densities, meanwhile, had all increased; on average by a factor of 10, and many by over 100.
Concerning the population of simulated structures as a whole, we find a clear anti-correlation in the simulation between $\Delta M_{\rm v}$ and $\Delta\rho_{\rm s}$; mass {\em loss} usually leading to higher inner densities (more centrally concentrated mass), and late mass accretion leading on average to lower eventual inner densities (less centrally concentrated).
In conclusion, the evolutionary paths of simulated structures revealed even just by this simple analysis, are much more rich and varied than our stock phrases on structure formation would encapsulate. Even the relatively small volumes of our simulated universes are now big enough that improbable things exist, and in great numbers. So we should not be afraid to seek them in the real one.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
All the authors acknowledge financial support from The Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MINECO) under the Severo Ochoa Program: Martin Stringer from grant MINECO SEV-2011-0187, Ignacio Trujillo from grant AYA2013-48226-C3-1-P and Claudio Dalla Vecchia and Inma Martinez-Valpuesta from grant AYA2013-46886-P. This research was also supported in part by the National Science Foundation under grant nos. PHYS-1066293 and PHY11-25915, a grant from the Simons Foundation, and the hospitality of the Aspen Center for Physics. Thanks go to Joel Primack and Peter Behroozi for their encouragement and assistance with the {\sc bolshoi} and {\sc rockstar} results, to Matthieu Schaller for his help interpreting the results from {\sc eagle}, and to Remco Van den Bosch for the observational data on NGC 1277. Finally, we would like to thank the referee for their insightful and constructive review.
\bibliographystyle{mn2e_Daly}
|
\section{Introduction}
Merging binary neutron stars (NS-NS), binary black holes (BH-BH), and mixed black-hole -- neutron-star binaries (BH-NS) are among the most likely sources for the advanced gravitational-wave detectors LIGO \citep{AdvLIGO} and Virgo \citep{AdvVirgo}. The rates could range from a detection every few years to a few hundred detections per year for each source type \citep{ratesdoc} once detectors reach full sensitivity toward the end of the decade, although the first detections are possible as early as the end of 2015 \citep{scenarios}. One key question is whether it will be possible to determine the type of the binary --- NS-NS, BH-NS, or BH-BH --- from its gravitational-wave signature.
The surest way of distinguishing NS and BH binaries is via tidal dissipation in neutron stars leading to additional loss of orbital energy on top of that lost through gravitational waves (GWs), and their possible eventual tidal disruption. However, the dominant GW signature through most of the LIGO-Virgo frequency band will be well-described by point-particle waveforms, with tidal effects becoming important only at higher frequencies where detectors are less sensitive, making it difficult to distinguish binary types in this way except, perhaps, for the loudest sources \citep[e.g.,][ and references therein]{Read:2013}. Electromagnetic signatures in the form of short gamma-ray bursts, afterglows, and kilonovae could also help distinguish binaries with matter that can undergo tidal disruption (NS-NS or BH-NS) from those without (BH-BH); however, electromagnetic signatures may prove difficult to observe even for most NS-NS and BH-NS binary mergers \citep[e.g.,][]{Kelley:2012}, nor could they distinguish between those binary types given the current limited understanding of emission processes. Other approaches to distinguishing subpopulations of different binary types in the overall set of GW observations would rely on classification based on clustering in the parameter space of all available information about the binaries, including spin, which appears to be observationally higher for BHs than NSs in compact binaries \citep[e.g.,][ and references therein]{MandelOShaughnessy:2010}. However, in the absence of confident predictions for NS and BH spin, here we will focus on classification based exclusively on component mass.
Mass-based binary classification depends on (i) the assumptions about the mass population of NS and BH binaries, (ii) the accuracy with which component masses can be determined from the GW signature of an individual merger observation, and (iii) inference about the source population based on a statistical analysis of multiple detections. In this Letter, we address all three of these issues in turn. We argue that (i) astrophysical models predict that NS-NS, BH-NS, and BH-BH binary subpopulations may be strongly clustered, aiding source identification; (ii) a careful analysis of parameter measurement accuracy is required to take into account possible degeneracies; (iii) even if the binary type cannot be confidently determined from an individual measurement, a set of observations can be used to constrain mass distributions and measure the rates of different merger types. We find that for our model of the compact-object binary mass distribution, based on population-synthesis simulations \citep{Dominik:2014}, we can always distinguish NS-NS and BH-NS binaries, but not necessarily BH-NS and BH-BH binaries. However, with a few tens of detections, we can identify subpopulations and measure their respective rates to an accuracy dominated by the Poisson counting statistics of each binary type rather than contamination among subpopulations.
\section{Mass distributions}
\label{sec:binaries}
If the NS and BH mass distributions are directly adjacent, then it will be impossible to confidently determine the type of an individual source from finite-accuracy mass measurements alone.
However, observations of NS binaries, particularly via radio pulsars, and BH X-ray binaries indicate that there may be a mass gap between the two populations: the highest measured NS masses just exceed $2 M_\odot$ \citep{Lattimer:2012} while BH masses may only start at $\sim 4$ -- $5.5 M_\odot$ depending on the assumed shape of the distribution \citep{Ozel:2010,Farr:2010}; but see \citet{Kreidberg:2012} for possible selection biases that could push the BH masses lower. This mass gap could be indicative of the supernova explosion mechanism \citep{Belczynski:2012}.
Previous analyses of the distinguishability of source populations based on GW observations typically relied on a mass gap individually applied to both components \citep[e.g.,][]{Hannam:2013}. However, in practice, even if NSs occupy the mass space through 2 solar masses and BH masses start at 5 solar masses, it is not necessarily the case that merging compact binaries can contain arbitrary combinations of NS and BH masses within those respective ranges. The compact-object mass distribution in binaries depends on the outcome of binary evolution. To carry out a self-consistent analysis of the distinguishability of source populations, we consider sources that arise from an astrophysically modeled population of binaries and compare their mass measurements against the joint boundaries on component masses as given by the same population.
For this study, the binary population was generated with the StarTrack population synthesis code \citep{Belczynski:2008} under the ``Standard'' model B of \citet{Dominik:2012}. This model builds on \citet{Belczynski:2008} by including the rapid supernova engine of \citet{Fryer:2012}, which allows for the formation of NSs with large natal kicks from single stars with zero-age main sequence (ZAMS) mass below $\sim 21 M_\odot$, and nearly complete fallback onto BHs with correspondingly low natal kicks from more massive progenitors, yielding minimum BH mass above $\sim 5 M_\odot$; realistic prescriptions for common-envelope binding energies and mass loss through stellar winds; potential binary disruptions in supernovae and stellar mergers within the common envelope; and a prescription for electron capture supernovae which lead $\sim 7$--$11 M_\odot$ ZAMS mass stars in binaries to form NSs with low natal kicks and masses near $1.25 M_\odot$; see \citep{Dominik:2012} for details. We note that many of the input parameters and assumptions that go into population synthesis, such as those related to mass loss and mass transfer, BH supernovae fallback and kicks, and common envelope evolution, are poorly constrained. Therefore, this is only one of many possible model variations; see the series \citep{Dominik:2012,Dominik:2013,Dominik:2014} for discussion, and \citep{PostnovYungelson:2014} for a recent review of decades of work in this field. We do not insist on this model being accurate, but only use it for illustration purposes to show how general features of the model, and particularly clustering of the subpopulations in mass space, can be used to distinguish the compact binary type.
Figure \ref{fig:binaries} shows the distribution of masses for the three binary types among the binaries detectable by the advanced-detector network as estimated by \citep{Dominik:2014}. A wide range of metallicities is included in these calculations to simulate the redshift-dependent metallicity distribution in the Universe; in fact, as \citep{Dominik:2014} showed, the local BH-BH mergers are dominated by low-metallicity massive binaries that formed in the early Universe, with long time delays between star formation and merger.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{binaries-high.png}
\caption{\label{fig:binaries}
The mass distribution in $M_c-\eta$ space of compact-object binaries detectable by advanced gravitational-wave observatories as simulated by \protect\citep{Dominik:2014}, using the standard model of \protect\citep{Dominik:2012}. NS-NS, BH-NS, and BH-BH populations occupy the top left (red), bottom middle (green) and top right (blue) regions of the plot, respectively. Each dot corresponds to a potentially detectable source, but the number of binaries plotted is increased far beyond the anticipated detection rate \protect\citep{ratesdoc} to better indicate the population distribution. Chirp mass boundaries for the three distributions are shown with dashed red, dash-dotted green, and dotted blue vertical lines, respectively. BH-BHs with chirp mass above $20 M_\odot$, which cannot be confused for another source type, are omitted from the figure.}
\end{figure}
We re-parametrize the component masses $m_1$, $m_2$ via the chirp mass $M_c=m_1^{3/5} m_2^{3/5} (m_1+m_2)^{-1/5}$, which is generally well-measured with gravitational waves, and the symmetric mass ratio $\eta=m_1 m_2 (m_1+m_2)^{-2}$. The main features of the model become apparent from the figure: the three source types are in general clearly separated in the chirp mass --- mass ratio space.
NS-NS systems are very strongly clustered near equal masses ($\eta > 0.2477$, or $m_2/m_1 > 0.82$). This clustering of the NS-NS mass ratio reflects their nearly equal-- (and typically low--) mass progenitor binaries, preferred since they allow the primary to form through an electron-capture supernova which avoids disrupting the binary; mass transfer after the first supernova leads to a growth in the mass of the primary by no more than $\sim 7\%$, keeping the mass ratio nearly equal. BH-BH systems also cluster near equal masses at solar metallicity, in part because a large difference in initial masses causes unstable mass transfer and a common-envelope merger during the first mass transfer phase, and in part because of the very efficient mass loss through stellar winds which tends to cluster BH masses despite a very broad range of ZAMS masses. Mass loss rates are reduced for lower metallicities; therefore, more unequal mass ratios are possible for lower metallicities, with mass ratios down to $\eta \sim 0.1$ for BH-BHs that formed at $0.01 Z_\odot$. Meanwhile, BH-NS systems have more extreme mass ratios, ranging between $\eta \sim 0.03$ and $\eta \sim 0.2$, consistent with the supernova fallback prescription that naturally generates the mass gap.
The chirp mass is lowest for NS-NS systems given the constraints on the maximum component masses. In fact, there's a gap between the highest NS-NS chirp mass ($M_c=1.67 M_\odot$, for a $1.92 M_\odot + 1.91 M_\odot$ binary formed at $0.1 Z_\odot$) and the lowest BH-NS chirp mass ($M_c=2.11 M_\odot$, for a $6.10 M_\odot + 1.10 M_\odot$ binary formed at $0.75 Z_\odot$). Meanwhile, BH-BH systems do overlap with BH-NS binaries in chirp mass, as the lowest-mass equal-mass BH-BH systems ($5.55 M_\odot + 5.53 M_\odot$ forming at $0.025 Z_\odot$) can have a lower chirp mass ($M_c = 4.82 M_\odot$) than the highest-chirp mass, extreme-mass-ratio BH-NS system ($M_c = 6.42 M_\odot$ for a $48.0 M_\odot + 1.70 M_\odot$ binary that formed at $0.005 Z_\odot$).
\section{Measurement accuracy}
We estimate the accuracy of mass measurements on individual events through the \texttt{LALInference} parameter-estimation toolkit, designed for efficient stochastic exploration of the parameter space of GW signals \citep{Veitch:2014}. We eschew the large-scale mock data challenges attempted elsewhere \citep[e.g.,][]{Singer:2014,Berry:2015} and instead consider several events placed at the boundaries of the regions described in the previous section.
We analyze mock injections of the highest-chirp-mass NS-NS system labeled as detectable in our population-synthesis simulation, with ($1.92 M_\odot $, $1.91 M_\odot$) components; the lowest-chirp-mass BH-NS system with ($6.10 M_\odot $, $1.10 M_\odot$) components; the highest-mass-ratio BH-NS system with ($5.60 M_\odot$, $2.10 M_\odot$) components; the highest-chirp-mass BH-NS system with ($48.0 M_\odot$, $1.70 M_\odot$) components; and the lowest-chrip-mass BH-BH system with ($5.55 M_\odot$, $5.53 M_\odot$) components. Given the uncertainty about NS and BH spins, we consider four variations of each injection: non-spinning components, components with aligned spins, and spinning components with two randomly chosen arbitrary spin directions. In all cases when components are spinning, the BH dimensionless spin parameter is $\chi=0.8$; the NS is not spinning in BH-NS injections and only the higher-mass NS is spinning with a dimensionless spin parameter of $\chi=0.05$ in spinning NS-NS injections (representative of the fastest known NS spin in a confirmed merging Galactic NS-NS binary, J0737-3039A). For NS-NS and BH-BH systems, as well as the highest-mass-ratio BH-NS system, we use for all injections and templates the IMRPhenomP precessing waveform family \citep{Hannam:2013waveform}, which models all phases of the waveform: inspiral, merger, and ringdown. However, since this waveform model is restricted to mass ratios less extreme than $1:4$, i.e., $\eta\ge 0.16$, BH-NS injections (other than the high-mass-ratio injection) are made and analyzed with SpinTaylorT4 waveforms that include only the post-Newtonian inspiral phase \citep{BuonannoChenVallisneri:2003b}, not the merger and ringdown \citep[see][ for an analysis of BH-BH signals with SpinTaylor waveforms, which shows somewhat greater typical mass measurement uncertainty]{Littenberg:2015}.
In all analyses, we allow for arbitrary, precessing spins in the templates. We use flat priors on the component masses, flat priors on dimensionless spin magnitudes $\chi \in [0,1]$ ($\chi \in [0,0.9]$ for IMRPhenomP analyses because of limitations in that waveform's region of validity)
and isotropic priors on spin directions for the Bayesian analysis. All analyses are carried out from a starting frequency of $40$ Hz with mock signal-only data from a LIGO--Virgo detector network operating at advanced LIGO sensitivity in the zero-detuned, high-power configuration \citep{PSD:AL}. The injected distance was chosen to yield a network signal-to-noise ratio of 12, roughly at the lower limit of detectability \citep[e.g.,][]{scenarios,Berry:2015}, thereby yielding conservative predictions on parameter-estimation accuracy.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{Super_plot_3IFO.png}
\caption{\label{fig:PEall}
Posterior PDF samples for the 20 injections described in the text: NS-NS (red), BH-BH (blue), and three BH-NS (green), each with four spin variants. Point opacity corresponds to the relative value of the posterior probability density function. Chirp mass measurements are typically very accurate (with the exception of the very massive, extreme-mass-ratio BH-NS binary on the bottom right of the plot), while mass ratios are partly degenerate with spins, and their measurement accuracy depends on the exact injected spin configuration.}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:PEall} shows the posterior probability density functions (PDF) for the 20 analyses described above (four injections -- non-spinning, spin-aligned, and two precessing -- for each of 5 events). Several thousand samples for each event are drawn from the posterior by \texttt{LALInference}; the opacity of plotted points rises with the value of the posterior PDF. The injected masses are denoted with black crosses.
The chirp masses are typically very well measured (posteriors look like narrow nearly-vertical lines), except for the extreme-mass-ratio, high-mass BH-NS injection that appears on the bottom right of the plot. This is consistent with other analyses \citep[e.g.,][]{S6PE,Rodriguez:2013BNS,Hannam:2013}, and is readily understood from the governing role played by the chirp mass in the phase evolution of the binary during the inspiral \citep[e.g.,][]{PNwaveforms:2009,Ohme:2013}. The 90\% credible regions in chirp mass spanning all four spin variations for the given component mass combinations are $\lesssim 0.01 M_\odot$ for the NS-NS injections and $\lesssim 0.1 M_\odot$ for the BH-BH injections. For BH-NS injections, the 90\% credible regions in chirp mass span $\lesssim 0.03 M_\odot$, except for the very poorly measured extreme-mass-ratio, high-mass injections discussed below, for which the combined 90\% credible region in chirp mass spans $\sim 2 M_\odot$. Hence, measurement of the chirp mass alone allows us to distinguish NS-NS and BH-NS binaries, which are separated by a chirp-mass gap of $0.45 M_\odot$ -- much larger than the chirp-mass measurement uncertainty -- if we trust the model described in the previous section. Conversely, a single source falling into the chirp-mass gap between NS-NS and BH-NS binaries would allow us to disprove this model. Of course, we do not necessarily trust the population-synthesis predictions for the exact boundaries of the NS-NS, BH-NS, and BH-BH clusters in the mass plane; this will be addressed in the following section.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{BBH_m2-m1_3IFO.png}
\caption{\label{fig:BH-BH}
90\% credible regions for the four BH-BH injections in component mass space ($m_1$ defined to be the larger component mass, $m_1 > m_2$). All injections have $5.55 M_\odot$, $5.53 M_\odot$ components, but differ in spin magnitudes (0 for NoS, 0.8 for each of the dimensionless spins for the other injections) and directions (aligned for AS, random and precessing for the two PS injections). Mass measurements are more accurate when precession breaks degeneracies between intrinsic parameters. The second precessing injection may be atypically favorable for mass measurement
\citep[cf.][]{Littenberg:2015} and is shown as an example of what could be achieved for a nearly edge-on precessing binary.
}
\end{figure}
On the other hand, the mass ratio $\eta$ is more poorly measured, and partly degenerate with spin \citep[e.g.,][]{Ohme:2013}. The difficulty of measuring the mass ratio is apparent from the very elongated posteriors in Fig.~\ref{fig:PEall}, and from the typical ``banana-shaped'' plots of posteriors in component-mass space shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:BH-BH}. The latter plot moreover illustrates the dependence of measurement accuracy on the configuration of spins in the injected system. Systems with precession typically have the best-measured masses at a fixed signal-to-noise ratio, as evidence of precession allows for more accurate spin measurements, partly breaking the mass-ratio--spin degeneracy \citep{vanderSluys:2008b,Chatz:2014,Chatz:2015}. The limited accuracy of measuring the mass ratio $\eta$ means that posteriors for BH-BH and BH-NS events could overlap, making it difficult to distinguish between the two. However, our present attempts to estimate the extent of the posterior for massive, extreme-mass-ratio BH-NS binaries that could overlap with the BH-BH distribution are limited by the lack of waveforms that include both precession and mergers and ringdowns for such systems. By injecting and analyzing the BH-NS system on the bottom right of Fig.~\ref{fig:PEall}, which has a total mass of $\sim 50 M_\odot$, with inspiral-only waveforms, we are losing significant information and may be artificially extending the measurement uncertainty, creating, in our plot color scheme, ``the green-eyed monster which doth mock''. Moreover, if we are sufficiently fortunate to have significant precession in the binaries \citet[see Fig.~\ref{fig:BH-BH} and][]{Chatz:2015}, the posteriors will be narrowed and more accurate parameter estimation will be possible. Furthermore, we considered parameter estimation at a signal-to-noise ratio near the threshold for detectability \citep[e.g.,][]{scenarios, Berry:2015}; louder signals will lead to more accurate inference.
In any case, if the population boundaries are known in advance (e.g., if we have sufficient trust in population synthesis models models of Sec.~\ref{sec:binaries}) we anticipate being able to readily distinguish $\gg 99\%$ of the BH-NS and BH-BH populations on the basis of chirp mass measurements alone for the model we have considered: the 99th percentile of the BH-NS chirp-mass distribution, $4.76 M_\odot$, is readily distinguishable from the 1st percentile of the BH-BH chirp-mass distribution, $5.67 M_\odot$, given chirp mass measurement uncertainties $\lesssim 0.1 M_\odot$.
\section{Population statistics}
We now focus on the question of distinguishing types of compact binary sources within the observed population. Given the uncertainty in the claimed range of a putative mass gap between NS and BH masses, and the fact that the mass combinations of merging binaries may be more restrictive than suggested by the mass gap, as discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:binaries}, we address the question of {\it classification using only the observed population itself}, rather than relying on any a priori assumptions about subpopulation boundaries or mass gaps. We provide approximate scaling arguments and typical useful constraints. The exact accuracy of classification depends on the details of the true distribution; the plausible two-dimensional mass distribution described in Sec.~\ref{sec:binaries} is used as an illustration.
{\it Measuring a distribution boundary from the observed population.} A boundary of a distribution, if abrupt, is generally easier to measure than other distribution parameters \citep[cf.][]{Mandel:2014}. For example, with perfect accuracy on individual measurements, the accuracy of the estimate of the mean of a sampled distribution scales inversely with the square root of the number of observations (samples) -- but the location of a sharp boundary in the distribution can be estimated with an accuracy that scales inversely with the number of observations. If observations have an individual measurement uncertainty $\sigma$, and $N$ observations are spread over a parameter range $\Delta$, an abrupt boundary can be estimated with accuracy $\sim \sqrt{\frac{\sigma^2}{N} + \frac{\Delta^2}{N^2}}$. Of course, the boundary is harder to measure if the edge is gradual rather than abrupt. However, our specific two-dimensional mass distributions do, in fact, have fairly sharp one-dimensional boundaries following suitable coordinate transformations; e.g., in our model, the mass of the lower-mass BH-BH companion has a boundary of $m_2 \gtrsim 5.5 M_\odot$. The smaller companion mass has a one--sigma uncertainty of $\sim 1.2 M_\odot$ for comparable-mass binaries (taking the worst-case credible region of Fig.~\ref{fig:BH-BH}, which shows 90\% credible intervals),
and the BH-BH $m_2$ population width is $\Delta \sim 10 M_\odot$, so $\sim 10$ observations confidently known to be BH-BHs are needed to constrain the lower boundary on BH mass in the BH-BH distribution to an accuracy of $\lesssim 1 M_\odot$.
{\it Establishing the existence of a break in the distribution.} Observing the existence of a break between subpopulations need not rely on very precise individual measurements. In fact, even perfectly accurate measurements cannot individually confirm the presence of break in the distribution (although a single perfect measurement that falls into an expected break would disprove its existence). Rather, the existence of a break is indicated by a drop in the density of observations in the parameter range of the break. Critically, this is observable even when the parameter measurement accuracy is comparable to or even exceeds the width of the break. Denoting the width of the break by $\Delta_\textrm{break}$ (as opposed to the net distribution width $\Delta$), the measurement error in the parameter direction across the break by $\sigma$, and the total number of observations by $N$, the expected number of observations in the break is $\sim N \frac{\sigma}{\Delta} \erf \left({\frac{\Delta_\textrm{break}}{\sqrt{2} \sigma}}\right)$. By comparison, if there were no break in the underlying distribution, $N \frac{\Delta_\textrm{break}}{\Delta}$ observations would be expected in that region. Therefore, the dearth in the number of observations in the break will be significant when the difference between the actual number of observations and $N \frac{\Delta_\textrm {break}}{\Delta}$ is large relative to the Poisson fluctuations in the latter, $\sqrt{N \frac{\Delta_\textrm{break}}{\Delta}}$.
[This does not indicate an absolute break, which cannot be established with a finite number of observations, but a significant local drop in the probability density function of the inferred underlying distribution.] Again, using the break between BH-NS and BH-BH distributions as an example, with $\Delta_\textrm{break} \approx 3.3 M_\odot$ in $m_2$, approximately 60 observations are required for a confident detection of a break at a three-sigma significance. In a contemporaneous study, \citet{Littenberg:2015} find that hundreds of observations may be necessary to measure a break or gap in the mass distribution when considering an ad hoc population that is flat in component masses; this is consistent with the application of our analysis to their distribution.
{\it Classifying observations into sub-populations.} As mentioned earlier, we do not wish to rely on a priori divisions of the compact-binary mass parameter space into regions, but instead to measure these regions from observations. \citet{Mandel:2010stat} described the statistical procedure for inference on population parameters based on a limited set of uncertain observations. \citet{Farr:2013} introduced a classification process based on models for subpopulation distributions whereby model parameters are fit as part of the classification process. Meanwhile, a number of unmodeled or weakly modeled schemes for extracting a distribution and classifying subpopulations exist, ranging from Dirichlet processes to k-means clustering (using the weighted posterior probability density functions of individual observations). The preferred algorithm depends on the priors that one wishes to place on the population distribution: modeled approaches require a choice of the shape (model) of the underlying distribution, which can aid measurement accuracy over unmodeled classification schemes at the expense of introducing bias if the model shape does not match the observed population. In general, however, clustering should be successful whenever the presence of a break in the distribution can be established. As discussed above, for the BH-NS -- BH-BH division this requires several tens of observations of each binary type if the distribution is similar to that described in Sec.~\ref{sec:binaries}. By contrast, the NS-NS and BH-NS subpopulation are cleanly separated in chirp mass, i.e., the measurement uncertainty $\sigma$ is very small relative to the size of the break in the chirp-mass distribution. In this case, the existence of a break can be established as long as $\sqrt{N \frac{\Delta_\textrm{break}}{\Delta}}$ is at least a few, i.e., $\sim 10$ observations are sufficient.
{\it Counting sources.} Even if the subpopulations are classified and their boundaries are accurately determined, individual sources cannot necessarily be perfectly classified as belonging to a given subpopulation. Nonetheless, the number of sources in each subpopulation can be measured with some accuracy \citep{Farr:2013}. The total mis-classified source fraction due to the uncertainty in cluster boundaries is $\lesssim \sqrt{\frac{\sigma^2}{N} + \frac{\Delta^2}{N^2}} \Delta^{-1}$ --- which, for the typical parameters we have considered here, is less than the fractional Poisson fluctuation in the subpopulation counts, $\sim \frac{1}{\sqrt{N}}$. Therefore, we expect estimates of merger rates for various binary types to be limited by Poisson counting statistics on the number of events rather than classification errors.
\section{Summary and future directions}
We considered a plausible distribution of masses of merging NS-NS, BH-NS, and BH-BH binaries, whose gravitational-wave signatures would be detectable by advanced ground-based gravitational-wave interferometers LIGO and Virgo. We found that NS-NS and BH-NS binaries were clearly separated in chirp mass, while BH-NS and BH-BH distributions had some overlap in chirp mass, but were widely separated in the mass ratio. We evaluated the measurement accuracy of mass parameters using the \texttt{LALInference} toolkit that will be used for parameter estimation on LIGO-Virgo candidates, considering a variety of spin configurations. We concluded that if the mass distributions are known in advance, there will be no confusion on the NS-NS -- BH-NS interface, and less than 1\% of binaries could be incorrectly classified on the BH-NS -- BH-BH interface. We then considered the case where mass distributions are not known in advance, and determined that a few tens of detections are sufficient to correctly cluster the subpopulations in the two-dimensional mass space if the underlying population is similar to the standard model of \citet{Dominik:2014}. Although individual sources may still be mis-classified, we anticipate that this will not be a significant source of error in the estimates of merger rates for various subpopulations.
We considered a population synthesis model in which the supernova prescription, particularly the amount of fallback on a newly formed BH, is designed to reproduce the apparent observational mass gap between NS and BH masses. If the NS and BH mass distributions are instead assumed to be continuous, as in the delayed supernova model of \citet{Belczynski:2012}, the quantitative results change: NS-NS and BH-NS chirp mass distributions overlap \citep{Dominik:2014}. However, the first percentile of the BH-NS chirp mass distribution is still significantly larger than the 99th percentile of the NS-NS chirp mass distribution, and similarly for the second and 98th percentiles of the BH-BH and BH-NS chirp mass distributions, respectively. In fact, the subpopulations are sufficiently concentrated away from the boundaries that the conclusions we have reached remain robust, and clustering for the delayed supernova model is still possible with tens of observations.
Another complication could be the low number of observations of a particular species of binaries; for example, in the high BH supernova kick model of \citet{Dominik:2014}, rates of BH-NS binaries are very strongly suppressed relative to the other binary types. In this case, the number of BH-NS detections may be too small to identify a distinct cluster and appropriately classify them in the absence of a priori distribution models.
This Letter shows that, at least for the physical models considered, it should be possible to cluster and classify populations of NS-NS, BH-NS, and BH-BH merging binaries based on their gravitational-wave signatures. However, further rapid progress is required to address a number of practical challenges given the short timescale to anticipated GW detections \citep{ratesdoc,scenarios}. Actual clustering and classification schemes need to be implemented and tested for robustness on a variety of plausible source populations, evaluating the relative trade-offs of modeled approaches which require a choice of the shape (model) of the underlying distribution \citep{Farr:2013} vs.~unmodeled classification schemes which are less sensitive to a priori assumptions about the distribution shape. Subpopulation rate estimates must take selection biases into account \citep{Berry:2015,Mandel:2015selection}. The impact of other sources of parameter-estimation errors \citep[e.g., systematics due to imperfect waveform knowledge,][]{S6PE,Favata:2014} needs to be evaluated. Classification should also be extended to consider other parameters beyond component masses, such as spins and spin-orbit misalignment angles \citep[e.g..][]{Vitale:2014}, as well as additional subpopulations, such as dynamically formed binaries in dense stellar environments.
\section*{Acknowledgments\\}
IM acknowledges STFC funding and the hospitality of the Monash Center for Astrophysics supported by a Monash Research Acceleration Grant (PI Y.~Levin). CJH acknowledges support from CIERA and an RAS grant. MD and KB acknowledge support from the Polish Science Foundation ``Master2013'' Subsidy, by Polish NCN grant SONATA BIS 2. MD acknowledges support from the National Science Center grant DEC-2011/01/N/ST9/00383.
We are grateful for computational resources provided by the Leonard E Parker Center for Gravitation, Cosmology and Astrophysics at University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.
MD and KB would like to thank the N.~Copernicus Astronomical Centre in Warsaw, Poland, and
the University Of Texas, Brownsville, TX, for their courtesy, enabling us to use their
computational resources. IM and KB are grateful to the Aspen Center for Physics, supported by NSF grant \# 1066293, where some of the discussions leading to this Letter took place. We are grateful to Tyson Littenberg, Ben Farr, Vicky Kalogera, Daniel Holz, Will Farr, and Alex Nielsen for comments and suggestions.
\bibliographystyle{hapj}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Basically, the \emph{shadow} of a black hole is the region on the
observer's sky that is left dark if the light sources are anywhere
in the universe but not between the observer and the black hole.
For a mathematical description, it is convenient to consider light
rays that are sent from the observer's position into the past.
Some of them are deflected by the black hole and then go out to bigger
radii again; because they can reach one of the light sources, we assign
brightness to their initial directions. Others stay
close to the radial line and go to the horizon without meeting one of
the light sources; to their initial directions we assign darkness.
The resulting dark region on the sky is called the
\emph{shadow} of the black hole. The boundary of the shadow is
determined by light rays that spiral towards a lightlike geodesic
which stays on a sphere. The region outside of the black hole filled
with these spherical lightlike geodesics is called the exterior
\emph{photon region}. Recently, the shadow of a black has attracted
even Hollywood's attention. In the movie \emph{Interstellar},
which was released in 2014, it was shown how nearby observers would
see the shadow of an almost extremal rotating (Kerr) black hole with
an accretion disk\cite{JamesTunzelmann.2014}.
In the near future astronomers actually expect to observe the shadow of a black hole.
Currently there are two cooperating projects---the US-led Event Horizon
Telescope project\cite{DoelemanWeintroub.2008} and the European
BlackHoleCam project---who try to image the shadow of galactic black holes.
It has been predicted since several years that there are supermassive
black holes at the centers of most---if not all---galaxies. There
is strong evidence for a black hole at the center of our own Galaxy,
associated with the radio source Sagittarius~A* (Sgr~A*):
Infrared observations of orbits of stars near the
center\cite{EckartGenzel.1996,GillessenEisenhauerEtAl.2009} demonstrate
that there has to be a heavy object with a mass of approximately
$4.3$ million Solar masses within a small volume. The most convincing
candidate for such an object is a black hole. Another good candidate for
a supermassive black hole is the object at the center of M87
($m>10^{9}$ Solar masses). Because of the large distance, the
diameter of the shadow of galactic black holes will be tiny. Even for the
nearest candidate Sgr~A*
($8.3\unit{kpc}$ away\cite{GhezSalim.2008,GillessenEisenhauerEtAl.2009}),
the predicted diameter of the shadow is only about
$50\unit{microarcseconds}$, see Sec.~\ref{sec:angrad}. Although tiny, such
a diameter should be resolvable with very large baseline interferometry
(VLBI)\cite{DoelemanWeintroub.2008,HuangCai.2007}. Numerical studies
taking scattering into account suggest that the shadow can be
observed only at sub-millimeter wavelengths, see Falcke, Melia and
Agol\cite{FalckeMelia.2000}.
The resolution of interferometric measurements in this wavelength regime
will be further improved if the 10-meter space-based radio-telescope
\emph{Millimetron}\cite{KardashevNovikov.2014} goes
into operation, probably in the mid-2020s.
With this Russian satellite the Earth-based telescope network is upgraded
with an extra-long Space-Earth baseline of $1.5\unit{million\, km}$.
If the shadow of a black hole will be observed, its shape will give
important information on the parameters of the black hole. Therefore, it
is necessary to provide the observers with theoretical calculations of the
shape of the shadow for different black-hole models. In an earlier
paper~\cite{GrenzebachPerlick.2014}, we have given an analytic
formula for the shadow of black holes of the Pleba{\'n}ski class, which are
also known as Kerr--Newman--NUT--(anti-)de Sitter space-times. Black holes
of this class are characterized by mass, spin, electric or
magnetic charge, a NUT-parameter and a cosmological constant. In the
present paper we extend this analysis to the bigger class of
Pleba{\'n}ski--Demia{\'n}ski space-times, which include in addition
a so-called acceleration parameter. The Pleba{\'n}ski--Demia{\'n}ski
space-times are axially symmetric stationary solutions to the
Einstein--Maxwell equations with a cosmological constant and they
are of Petrov type D. Before determining the boundary
curve of the shadow in these space-times, we have to study the photon
region. We develop the relevant formulas for the whole class of
Pleba{\'n}ski--Demia{\'n}ski space-times. However, when studying
the effect of the acceleration parameter onto the photon region and
onto the shadow in terms of pictures, we restrict to black holes for
which only the mass, the spin and the acceleration parameter are
different from zero. This is because the effect of the other parameters
-- electric and magnetic charge, NUT-parameter and cosmological constant
-- has been studied already in our earlier paper and the presence of
the acceleration does not change this significantly. The metric of these
black hole space-times characterized by mass, spin and acceleration alone
is known as the rotating $C$-metric or the accelerated Kerr metric.
If only the mass and the acceleration parameter are different from
zero, we have the so-called $C$-metric which describes a space-time
with boost-rotation symmetry. This solution to the vacuum Einstein
field equation was found by Levi-Civita
(1919)\cite{Levi-Civita.1919} and Weyl (1919)\cite{Weyl.1917,Weyl.1919}.
The name $C$-metric refers to the classification in the
review of Ehlers and Kundt (1962)\cite{EhlersKundt.1962}. The rotating
version of the $C$-metric was considered by Hong and Teo\cite{HongTeo.2005}
while a detailed discussion of accelerated space-times in general can be
found in the book by Griffiths and Podolsk{\'y}\cite{GriffithsPodolsky.2009}.
Commonly the $C$-metric is given in the form introduced by Hong and
Teo\cite{HongTeo.2003}
\begin{equation}
g_{\mu \nu}^C \@ifstar{\mathrm{d}}{\:\mathrm{d}} x^{\mu} \@ifstar{\mathrm{d}}{\:\mathrm{d}} x^{\nu} = \frac{1}{\alpha^{2}(x+y)^{2}}
\Bigl( -F \@ifstar{\mathrm{d}}{\:\mathrm{d}} \tau^2 + \frac{\@ifstar{\mathrm{d}}{\:\mathrm{d}} y^{2}}{F} +
\frac{\@ifstar{\mathrm{d}}{\:\mathrm{d}} x^{2}}{G} + G \@ifstar{\mathrm{d}}{\:\mathrm{d}} \varphi^2 \Bigr)
\end{equation}
with cubic functions $G=(1-x^2)(1+2\alpha mx)$ and $F=-(1-y^2)(1-2\alpha my)$.
The metric depends on two
parameters, the mass $m$ and the acceleration parameter $\alpha$.
The domain covered by the coordinates $(\tau, x,y,\varphi)$
actually contains \emph{two} black holes accelerating away from each
other with a conical singularity (a ``strut'') on the axis of
rotational symmetry\cite{GriffithsPodolsky.2009,KinnersleyWalker.1970,
Bonnor.1983,BonnorDavidson.1992}. For our purposes, Boyer--Lindquist
coordinates are more suitable, see
Eq.~\eqref{eq:Metric} below, which cover only one of the two black holes.
There are several earlier papers on the shadows of black holes. Here we
just mention some important works, for a more comprehensive list we refer
to the introduction of our earlier paper\cite{GrenzebachPerlick.2014}.
The first analytic calculations of the shadow of a black hole were done
by Synge\cite{Synge.1966} for the Schwarzschild metric (Synge used
the word ``escape cone'' for the complement of the shadow) and by
Bardeen\cite{Bardeen.1973} for the Kerr metric. In the Schwarzschild
case the photon region reduces to the ``photon sphere'' at $r=3m$
and the shadow is circular. In the Kerr case, the photon region is
spatially three-dimensional and the shadow is non-circular.
The deviation of the shadow from a circle could be used as a measure
for the spin\cite{HiokiMaeda.2009}. %
With ray-tracing algorithms it is possible to include effects of matter
on the light rays like emission regions and
scattering\cite{BardeenCunningham.1973,Luminet.1979,DexterAgol.2012,YounsiWu.2012,
MoscibrodzkaFalcke.2014,MoscibrodzkaShiokawa.2012,DexterFragile.2013}.
Here we do not take such effects into account but restrict ourselves
to the purely geometric construction of the shadow based on the assumption
that light rays are lightlike geodesics and that there are no light sources
between us and the black hole. It is our goal to derive an analytical
formula for the shape of the shadow from which, in future work, the
parameters of the black hole could be extracted with analytical means.
After a discussion of relevant properties of the
Pleba{\'n}ski--Demia{\'n}ski space-times (Sec.~\ref{sec:PD}) we
determine the photon region
(Sec.~\ref{sec:regionK}) which is essential for calculating the
boundary of the shadow of the black hole for an observer
at Boyer--Lindquist coordinates $(r_O, \vartheta_O)$
(Sec.~\ref{sec:shadow}). We derive all relevant formulas for the whole
Pleba{\'n}ski--Demia{\'n}ski class. However, when illustrating the results
with pictures of the photon region and of the shadow in
Secs.~\ref{sec:regionK} and \ref{sec:shadow} we restrict to the
accelerated Kerr metric.
In Sec.~\ref{sec:angrad} we discuss how our analytical formulas
can be used for calculating the angular diameters of the shadow. We
use these equations for estimating the angular diameters of the
shadows of Sgr~A* and M87.
\section{The Pleba{\'n}ski--Demia{\'n}ski metrics}
\label{sec:PD}
We consider the general Pleba{\'n}ski--Demia{\'n}ski class of stationary,
axially symmetric type D solutions of the Einstein--Maxwell equations
with a cosmological constant.
As a matter of fact, these solutions were first found by Debever \cite{Debever.1971}
in 1971 but are better known in the form of Pleba{\'n}ski and Demia{\'n}ski
\cite{PlebanskiDemianski.1976} from 1976.
The Pleba{\'n}ski--Demia{\'n}ski metrics are discussed in detail
by Griffiths and Podolsk{\'y}\cite{GriffithsPodolsky.2009} and by
Stephani et al. \cite{StephaniKramer.2003}.
It is common to use rescaled units, i.e. units so that the speed
of light and the gravitational constant are normalized ($c=1$, $G=1$).
In Boyer--Lindquist coordinates this metric is then given by,
see Ref.~\citen{GriffithsPodolsky.2009}, p.~311
\begin{multline}
g_{\mu \nu} \@ifstar{\mathrm{d}}{\:\mathrm{d}} x^{\mu} \@ifstar{\mathrm{d}}{\:\mathrm{d}} x^{\nu} = \frac{1}{\Omega^{2}} \biggl(
\Sigma \bigl( \tfrac{1}{\Delta_{r}}\@ifstar{\mathrm{d}}{\:\mathrm{d}} r^2
+ \tfrac{1}{\Delta_{\vartheta}}\@ifstar{\mathrm{d}}{\:\mathrm{d}} \vartheta^2 \bigr)
+ \frac{1}{\Sigma}
\Bigl( (\Sigma + a\chi)^2 \Delta_{\vartheta}\sin^2\vartheta
- \Delta_{r} \chi^2 \Bigr) \@ifstar{\mathrm{d}}{\:\mathrm{d}} \varphi^2 \\
+ \frac{2}{\Sigma}
\Bigl( \Delta_{r}\chi - a(\Sigma + a\chi)
\Delta_{\vartheta}\sin^2\vartheta \Bigr) \@ifstar{\mathrm{d}}{\:\mathrm{d}} t \@ifstar{\mathrm{d}}{\:\mathrm{d}} \varphi
- \frac{1}{\Sigma}
\Bigl( \Delta_{r} - a^2\Delta_{\vartheta}\sin^2\vartheta \Bigr) \@ifstar{\mathrm{d}}{\:\mathrm{d}} t^2
\biggr)
\label{eq:Metric}
\end{multline}
with the abbreviations
\begin{align}
&\begin{aligned}
\Omega &= 1 - \tfrac{\alpha}{\omega} (\ell + a \cos\vartheta) r, \\
\Sigma &= r^2 + (\ell + a\cos\vartheta)^2, \\
\chi &= a\sin^2\vartheta - 2\ell(\cos\vartheta + C),
\end{aligned}
&
&\begin{aligned}
\Delta_{\vartheta} &= 1 - a_{3}\cos\vartheta - a_{4}\cos^{2}\vartheta, \\
\Delta_{r} &= b_{0} + b_{1}r + b_{2}r^{2} + b_{3}r^{3} + b_{4}r^{4}.
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:MetricFunc}
\end{align}
The coefficients of the polynomials $\Delta_{\vartheta}$ and $\Delta_{r}$ are
\begin{align}
&
\label{eq:MetricFunc_ai}
\begin{aligned}
a_{3} &= 2\tfrac{\alpha}{\omega}am - 4a\ell\bigl(
\tfrac{\alpha^{2}}{\omega^{2}}(k+\beta) + \tfrac{\Lambda}{3} \bigr),\\
a_{4} &= -a^{2} \bigl(
\tfrac{\alpha^{2}}{\omega^{2}}(k+\beta) + \tfrac{\Lambda}{3} \bigr),
\end{aligned} \\[\medskipamount]
&
\label{eq:MetricFunc_bi}
\begin{aligned}
b_{0} &= k+\beta, \\
b_{1} &= -2m, \\
b_{2} &= \tfrac{k}{a^{2}-\ell^{2}} + 4\tfrac{\alpha}{\omega}\ell m
- (a^{2}+3\ell^{2})\bigl(
\tfrac{\alpha^{2}}{\omega^{2}}(k+\beta) + \tfrac{\Lambda}{3} \bigr), \\
b_{3} &= -2\tfrac{\alpha}{\omega} \Bigl( \tfrac{k\ell}{a^{2}-\ell^{2}}
- (a^{2}-\ell^{2}) \Bigl( \tfrac{\alpha}{\omega}m - \ell \bigl(
\tfrac{\alpha^{2}}{\omega^{2}}(k+\beta) + \tfrac{\Lambda}{3} \bigr)
\Bigr) \Bigr), \\
b_{4} &= -\bigl(\tfrac{\alpha^{2}}{\omega^{2}}k + \tfrac{\Lambda}{3} \bigr)
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
with
\begin{align}
k &= \frac{1 + 2\tfrac{\alpha}{\omega}\ell m - 3\ell^{2}\bigl(
\tfrac{\alpha^{2}}{\omega^{2}}\beta + \tfrac{\Lambda}{3} \bigr)}{
1 + 3\tfrac{\alpha^{2}}{\omega^{2}}\ell^{2}(a^{2}-\ell^{2})}
(a^{2}-\ell^{2}), &
\omega &= \sqrt{a^{2}+\ell^{2}}.
\label{eq:MetricFunc_k_omega}
\end{align}
Basically, the coordinates $t$ and $r$ may range over all of $\mathbb{R}$
while $\vartheta$ and $\varphi$ are standard coordinates on the two-sphere.
Note, however, that for some values of the black-hole parameters $r$
and $\vartheta$ have to be restricted, see below.
The Pleba{\'n}ski--Demia{\'n}ski space-time depends on seven parameters,
$m$, $a$, $\beta$, $\ell$, $\alpha$, $\Lambda$ and $C$, which are to be
interpreted in the following way. $m$ is the mass of the black hole and
$a$ is its spin. $\beta$ is a parameter that comprises electric and magnetic
charge, $\beta=q_{e}^{2}+q_{m}^{2}$, if non-negative; if $\beta$ is negative,
the metric cannot be interpreted as a solution to the Einstein--Maxwell
equations but metrics of this form occur in some brane-world scenarios
\cite{AlievGumrukcuoglu.2005}. The NUT parameter $\ell$ is to be interpreted
as a gravitomagnetic charge.
The parameter $\alpha$ gives the acceleration of the black hole which is at
the center of our investigation while $\Lambda$ is the cosmological constant.
The parameter $C$, which was introduced by Manko and Ruiz\cite{MankoRuiz.2005},
is relevant only if $\ell\neq 0$. In this case there is a (conic) singularity
somewhere on the $z$ axis and by choosing $C$ appropriately this singularity
can be distributed symmetrically or asymmetrically on the positive and the
negative $z$ axis. Note that this parameter $C$ has nothing to do with the
name \blqq $C$-metric\brqq\ for the accelerated Schwarzschild space-time.
All the parameters, $m$, $a$, $\ell$, $\beta$, $\Lambda$, $\alpha$ and $C$,
may take arbitrary real values in principle, albeit not all possibilities
are physically relevant.
If $\alpha=0$, the Pleba{\'n}ski--Demia{\'n}ski
class reduces to the Pleba{\'n}ski space-times\cite{Plebanski.1975}
which are also known as the Kerr--Newman--NUT--(anti-)de Sitter
space-times. For this more special class of metrics the photon regions
and the shadows have been discussed in our earlier paper, see
Ref.~\citen{GrenzebachPerlick.2014}. The Pleba{\'n}ski--Demia{\'n}ski class
covers many well-known non-accelerated ($\alpha=0$) space-times like the
Schwarzschild ($a=\beta=\ell=\Lambda=0$), Kerr ($\beta=\ell=\Lambda=0$),
or Reissner--Nordstr{\"o}m space-time ($a=\ell=\Lambda=0$) as well as
the accelerated $C$-metric ($a=\beta=\ell=\Lambda=0$) or their rotating version
($\beta=\ell=\Lambda=0$) which we will call \emph{accelerated Kerr space-time}.
The metric \eqref{eq:Metric} becomes singular at the roots of $\Omega$,
$\Sigma$, $\Delta_{r}$, $\Delta_{\vartheta}$ and $\sin\vartheta$.
Some of them are mere coordinate singularities while others are
true (curvature) singularities. In the following we briefly discuss
the influence of $\alpha$ on these singularities.
$\Omega$ becomes zero if
\begin{equation}
r = \frac{\sqrt{a^{2}+\ell^{2}}}{\alpha(\ell + a \cos\vartheta)}.
\label{eq:OmegaSing}
\end{equation}
As the metric blows up if $\Omega \to 0$, Eq. (\ref{eq:OmegaSing})
determines the boundary of the space-time, i.e., we have to restrict
to the region where $\Omega$ is positive. The allowed region is a half-space
bounded by a plane ($\ell=0$), a half-space bounded by one sheet of a
two-sheeted hyperboloid ($\ell^2 < a^2$), a domain bounded by a
cylinder ($\ell^2 = a^2$), or a domain bounded by an ellipsoid ($\ell^2 > a^2$),
see Fig.~\ref{fig:horizons}. For $\alpha=0$ there is no restriction
because $\Omega\equiv 1$.
$\Sigma$ becomes zero at the ring singularity
\begin{equation}
r=0 \quad \text{and} \quad \cos\vartheta = -\ell/a.
\label{eq:RingSing}
\end{equation}
It exists for $\ell^2 < a^2$ and is a curvature singularity (if $m \neq 0$).
Outside of this singularity the sphere $r=0$ is regular, so it is possible
to travel through one of these two hemispheres (``throats'') from the
region $r>0$ to the region $r<0$ and vice versa. If
$\ell^2 > a^2$, there is no ring singularity and the sphere $r=0$ is
regular everywhere. In the limiting case where $\ell^2 = a^2$ the ring
singularity degenerates into a point on the axis. It becomes a point
singularity for $\ell = a = 0$ that disconnects the space-time into the
regions $r>0$ and $r<0$. The ring singularity is unaffected by $\alpha$.
Moreover, the metric is singular on the $z$ axis, i.e. if $\sin \vartheta
=0$. If $\alpha\neq0$ oder $\ell\neq0$, this is a true (conical) singularity
on (at least a part of) the rotational axis. In the NUT case the singularity
depends on the Manko-Ruiz parameter $C$.
For further details we refer to the book by Griffiths and
Podolsk{\'y}\cite{GriffithsPodolsky.2009}.
The real roots of $\Delta_{r}$ yield coordinate singularities which
correspond to the up to $4$ horizons $r_1 > r_2 > \ldots$ of the space-time.
If $\alpha=0$ and $\Lambda=0$, then $\Delta_{r}$ reduces to a second-degree
polynomial, $\Delta_{r} = r^2 - 2mr + a^2 - \ell^2 + \beta$, and horizons
can be found at
\begin{equation}
r_{\pm} = m \pm \sqrt{m^2 -a^2 +\ell^2 - \beta}
\label{eq:InOutHorizon}
\end{equation}
if $a^{2} \le a_{\mathrm{max}}^{2} := m^{2}+\ell^{2}-\beta$;
then $r_{+}(=r_1)$ is the outer (event) horizon of the black hole and
$r_{-}(=r_2)$ is the inner horizon. The \emph{domain of outer
communication} is the region outside of the outer horizon where
$\Delta_r>0$. For $a^{2} > a_{\mathrm{max}}^{2}$ we would find,
instead of a black hole, a naked singularity or a regular space-time.
Since we are interested only in the black hole case, we will not
consider this possibility in the following.
In the accelerated or cosmological scenario ($\alpha\neq0$ or $\Lambda\neq0$)
the horizons could not in general be specified in a simple form because
$\Delta_{r}$ is then a polynomial of degree $4$.
Depending on the sign of the leading coefficient $b_4$, which is mostly
determined by whether $a^2>\ell^2$ and by the sign of $\Lambda$, the
vector field $\partial_r$ is timelike or spacelike for big values of $r$,
see Fig.~\ref{fig:horizons}.
In the timelike case (left column in Fig.~\ref{fig:horizons}), all real
roots of $\Delta_r$ are in the allowed region with $\Omega > 0$. Hence,
the first root $r_1$ represents a cosmological horizon and the
subsequent root $r_2$ is the black-hole horizon. In this case the
domain of outer communication is the region between $r_1$ and $r_2$ where
$\Delta_r>0$ (gray shaded and hatched region in Fig.~\ref{fig:horizons}).
In the case that $\partial _r$ is spacelike for big $r$ (right column
in Fig.~\ref{fig:horizons}), the first root $r_1$ is not in the allowed
region. Hence, we have at $r_2$ a cosmological horizon, at $r_3$ the
event horizon of the black hole, and in between the outer domain of
communication.
The horizons can be easily determined if $\beta=\ell=\Lambda =0$.
Then $k = a^{2}$ and $\omega = a$, hence
\begin{equation}
\Delta_{r} = (r^2 - 2mr + a^2) (1 - \alpha^{2}r^{2})
\label{eq:Dr0}
\end{equation}
and we find the usual (Kerr) horizons at $r=r_\pm$ given by
\eqref{eq:InOutHorizon} with $\ell =0$ and $\beta =0$, and the
additional horizons at $r=\pm\frac{1}{\alpha}$. Of course, we
must have $|\alpha| < \tfrac{1}{r_+}$.
\begin{figure}[bpt]
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{DeltarOmega.pdf}
\caption{A schematic illustration of the graph of $\Delta_r$ (upper row)
and a polar plot of the region $\Omega>0 $ (lower row) given
by \eqref{eq:OmegaSing}. Depending on the sign of the leading
coefficient $b_4$, see \eqref{eq:MetricFunc_bi}, $\Delta_r$ goes to
$+\infty$ of $- \infty$ for big radii $r$;
the space-times (with $\Lambda\geq 0$) belonging to the plots in the
left column are dominated by the Kerr property ($\ell^2 < a^2$) and in the
right column by the NUT property ($a^2 < \ell^2$).
The space-time is restricted to that region where $\Omega>0$
which is marked here with a light gray shading. Geometrically, the
boundary of this region is one sheet of a two-sheeted hyperboloid
(left) or an ellipsoid (right).
%
As in the NUT dominated case (right) the root $r_1$ of $\Delta_r$
is not inside the allowed ellipsoid $\Omega>0$, it could be no event
horizon. Thus, the event horizon of the black hole is instead at
$r_3$ (right) or at $r_2$ (left). The gray-shaded and hatched region
marks the outer domain of communication ($\Delta_r>0$) where we will
place the observers.
}
\label{fig:horizons}
\end{figure}
In general, at the roots of $\Delta_\vartheta$ would be coordinate
singularities, too; these would indicate further horizons where the
vector field $\partial_{\vartheta}$ would change the causal
character from spacelike to timelike, just as the vector field $\partial_r$
does at the roots of $\Delta_r$. However, since these horizons would lie
on cones $\vartheta = \mathrm{constant}$ instead of on spheres
$r = \mathrm{constant}$ such a situation would be hardly of any physical
relevance. Therefore, we exclude it by limiting the parameters of
the black hole appropriately. As $\Delta_\vartheta =0$ implies
\begin{equation}
\cos\vartheta_{\pm} = \frac{-a_{3} \pm \sqrt{a_{3}^{2} + 4a_{4}}}{2a_{4}},
\label{eq:ConicSing}
\end{equation}
$\Delta_{\vartheta} \neq 0$ is guaranteed for all real $\vartheta$
if the radicand in (\ref{eq:ConicSing}) is negative. Therefore, we
agree to choose the black-hole parameters such that $0>a_{3}^{2} + 4a_{4}$.
If $\beta=\ell=\Lambda =0$, this condition can be simplified.
Then $k = a^{2}$ and $\omega = a$, hence
\begin{equation}
\Delta_{\vartheta} = 1 - 2\alpha m \cos\vartheta + \alpha^{2}
a^{2}\cos^{2}\vartheta,
\label{eq:Dtheta0}
\end{equation}
and $\Delta _{\vartheta} \neq 0$ is assured if
\begin{equation}
| \alpha | <
\begin{cases}
\frac{1}{2m} &
\text{if $a=0$},\\
\frac{r_{-}}{a^{2}}=\frac{m-\sqrt{m^{2}-a^{2}}}{a^{2}} &
\text{if $a\neq0$}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
There are some other interesting regions around a black hole characterized by
the change of the causal character of the Killing vector fields $\partial_t$
and $\partial_{\varphi}$.
In that region where $\partial_t$ becomes spacelike, i.e. $g_{tt}>0$, no
observer can move on a $t$-line. Thus, any observer in this
region has to rotate (in $\varphi$ direction). This region with
$g_{tt}>0$ is known as the \emph{ergosphere} or the
\emph{ergoregion}\footnote{Some authors call only the intersection of the
region where $g_{tt}>0$ with the domain of outer communication the
\emph{ergoregion}. This is that part of the region $g_{tt}>0$ which an
outside observer would be able to see.}. %
An ergoregion only exists if $a\neq 0$.
Note that at the horizons, i.e. at the roots of $\Delta_r$, the metric
coefficient $g_{tt}= -\frac{1}{\Omega^{2}\Sigma} \bigl(\Delta_{r}
- a^2\Delta_{\vartheta}\sin^2\vartheta \bigr)$ is positive.
Hence, the horizons are always contained within the ergoregion.
For $\alpha\neq0$ or $\Lambda\neq0$ there are ``cosmological'' horizons
in addition to the black-hole horizons; then the ergoregion consists
of several connected components.
The boundary of (a component of) the ergoregion is always tangential to
the horizon on the rotational axis, i.\,e. at $\vartheta=0, \pi$.
If $a \neq 0$ or $\ell \neq 0$, there are regions where the Killing
field $\partial_{\varphi}$ becomes timelike, $g_{\varphi \varphi} =0$.
This indicates causality violation, because the $\varphi$-lines are
closed timelike curves. For $\ell=0$ the region where $g_{\varphi \varphi} =0$
is completely contained in the domain where $r<0$ and, thus, hidden
behind the horizon for an observer in the domain of outer communication.
In the case $\ell \neq 0$, however, there is a causality violating
region in the domain of outer communication around the axial singularity.
In the following, we will only consider the black-hole case where we have
at least one positive root of $\Delta_r$. Observers will be placed in the
domain of outer communication.
\section{Photon Regions}
\label{sec:regionK}
In the Pleba{\'n}ski class of space-times, i.e., for $\alpha = 0$,
the geodesic equation is completely integrable; in addition to the
obvious constants of motion, there is a fourth constant of motion,
known as the Carter constant, which is associated with a second-rank
Killing tensor. If $\alpha \neq 0$, instead of this Killing tensor
we only have a conformal Killing tensor. This is sufficient to
assure complete integrability for \emph{lightlike} geodesics. The
four constants of motion are the Lagrangian
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L} &= \tfrac{1}{2} g_{\mu\nu}\dot{x}^{\mu}\dot{x}^{\nu}, &
\mathcal{L} &= 0 \quad \text{for light},
\label{eq:L}
\end{align}
the energy $E$ and the $z$-component $L_z$ of the angular momentum
\begin{align}
E :&= -\frac{\partial\mathcal{L}}{\partial\dot{t}}
= -g_{\varphi t}\dot{\varphi} -g_{tt}\dot{t},
&
L_{z} :&= \frac{\partial\mathcal{L}}{\partial\dot{\varphi}}
= g_{\varphi\varphi}\dot{\varphi} +g_{\varphi t}\dot{t},
\label{eq:E_Lz}
\end{align}
and the Carter constant $K$, see Ref.~\citen{Carter.1968b}, which is
now associated only with a conformal Killing tensor.
The Carter constant may be viewed as the separation constant
for the $r$ and the $\vartheta$ motion of lightlike geodesics. %
The four constants of motion allow us to write the lightlike
geodesic equation in separated first-order form,
\begin{subequations}\label{eq:EoM}
\begin{align}
\frac{\Sigma}{\Omega^{2}} \dot{t}
&= \frac{\chi(L_{z}-E\chi)}{\Delta_{\vartheta} \sin^{2}\vartheta}
+\frac{(\Sigma + a\chi) \bigl((\Sigma + a\chi)E - aL_{z}\bigr)}{\Delta_{r}},
\label{eq:EoM_t} \\
\frac{\Sigma}{\Omega^{2}} \dot{\varphi}
&= \frac{L_{z}-E\chi}{\Delta_{\vartheta} \sin^{2}\vartheta}
+\frac{a\bigl((\Sigma + a\chi)E - aL_{z}\bigr)}{\Delta_{r}},
\label{eq:EoM_phi} \\
\biggl(\frac{\Sigma}{\Omega^{2}}\biggr)^{2} \dot{\vartheta}^{2}
&= \Delta_{\vartheta}K - \frac{(\chi E - L_{z})^{2}}{\sin^{2}\vartheta}
=: \Theta(\vartheta),
\label{eq:EoM_theta} \\
\biggl(\frac{\Sigma}{\Omega^{2}}\biggr)^{2} \dot{r}^{2}
&= \bigl((\Sigma + a\chi)E-aL_{z}\bigr)^{2} - \Delta_{r}K
=: R(r).
\label{eq:EoM_r}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
In order to derive an equation for the shadow of accelerated
black holes, we proceed in the same way as for the Pleba{\'n}ski
space-times. As a first step, we have to determine the spherical
lightlike geodesics, i.e., lightlike geodesics staying on a sphere
$r = \mathrm{constant}$. The region filled by these spherical geodesics is
called the \emph{photon region} $\mathcal{K}$. Mathematically, spherical orbits
are characterized by $\dot{r}=0$ and $\ddot{r}=0$ which requires by
\eqref{eq:EoM_r} that $R(r)=0$ and $R'(r)=0$. Thus
\begin{align}
K_{E} &= \frac{\bigl((\Sigma + a\chi)-aL_{E}\bigr)^{2}}{\Delta_{r}}, &
K_{E} &= \frac{4r\bigl((\Sigma + a\chi)-aL_{E}\bigr)}{\Delta_{r}'},
\label{eq:2xKE}
\end{align}
where $\Delta_{r}'$ is the derivative of $\Delta _r$ with respect to $r$
and $K_{E}$, $L_{E}$ are abbreviations
\begin{align}
K_{E} &= \frac{K}{E^{2}}, & L_{E} &= \frac{L_{z}}{E}.
\label{eq:LEKE}
\end{align}
After solving \eqref{eq:2xKE} for the constants of motion
\begin{align}
K_{E} &= \frac{16r^{2}\Delta_{r}}{(\Delta_{r}')^{2}}, &
aL_{E} &= \bigl(\Sigma + a\chi\bigr) - \frac{4r\Delta_{r}}{\Delta_{r}'},
\label{eq:KL_SphLR}
\end{align}
we can substitute these expressions into \eqref{eq:EoM_theta}. As the
left-hand side of \eqref{eq:EoM_theta} is non-negative, we find
an inequality that determines the photon region
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{K}\colon \bigl(4r\Delta_{r} - \Sigma \Delta_{r}' \bigr)^{2}
\leq 16 a^{2} r^{2} \Delta_{r} \Delta_{\vartheta} \sin^{2}\vartheta.
\label{eq:regionK}
\end{equation}
Of course, the equality sign determines the boundary of the photon region.
Just as in the non-accelerated space-times\cite{Perlick.2004,GrenzebachPerlick.2014}
for every point ($r_{p}, \vartheta_{p}$) of $\mathcal{K}$ there is a lightlike
geodesic through ($r_{p}, \vartheta_{p}$) that stays on the sphere $r=r_{p}$.
The $\vartheta$ motion is an oscillation bounded by the boundary of $\mathcal{K}$
while the $\varphi$ motion given by \eqref{eq:EoM_phi} might be
rather complicated.
The stability of these spherical geodesic with respect to radial perturbations
is determined by the sign of $R''$; a spherical geodesic at $r=r_{p}$ is unstable
if $R''(r_{p})>0$, and stable if $R''(r_{p})<0$. From \eqref{eq:EoM_r}
we get with \eqref{eq:KL_SphLR}
\begin{equation}
\frac{R''(r)}{8 E^{2}} \Delta_{r}'^{2} =
2r\Delta_{r}\Delta_{r}' + r^{2} \Delta_{r}'^{2}
- 2r^{2} \Delta_{r} \Delta_{r}''.
\label{eq:stability}
\end{equation}
A non-rotating black hole ($a=0$) is surrounded by a \emph{photon sphere},
rather than by a photon region, since the inequality \eqref{eq:regionK}
defining $\mathcal{K}$ reduces to an equality
\begin{equation}
4r\Delta_{r} = (r^2+\ell ^2 ) \Delta_{r}'.
\label{eq:ps}
\end{equation}
The best known example is the photon sphere at $r=3m$ in the Schwarzschild
space-time.
Because of the rotational symmetry it is convenient to plot a meridional
section through space-time for illustrating the regions around a black hole.
The resulting pictures, which are ($r$,$\vartheta$) polar diagrams where
$\vartheta$ is measured from the positive $z$-axis, are shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:Photonregion}. Each figure contains the photon region $\mathcal{K}$,
where unstable and stable spherical light rays are distinguished according
to \eqref{eq:stability}, the horizons $r_\pm$ of the black hole
given as boundaries of the region where $\Delta_{r}\leq 0$,
the ergoregion, the causality violating region, and the ring singularity.
The dashed circle marks the throats at the sphere $r=0$.
For viewing the whole range of the space-time, we use two different scales
for the radial coordinate:
In the inner region $r<0$ (inside the sphere $r=0$) the radial coordinate
is plotted as $m \exp \big( r/m \big)$; this is continuously extended with
$r+m$ in the outer region $r>0$ (outside the sphere $r=0$).
By not plotting just the exponential of the Boyer--Lindquist coordinate $r$,
as suggested by O'Neill\cite{ONeill.1995}, we avoid a strong deformation of
the outer part.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics{Photonregions.pdf}
\caption[Photon regions in accelerated Kerr space-time.]{%
Photon regions in accelerated Kerr space-time for spins
$a=\lambda a_{\mathrm{max}}$, where $a_{\mathrm{max}}=m$.
In each column the plot for the unaccelerated Kerr space-time (left)
is compared to the plot for an accelerated Kerr space-time (right). %
The specific acceleration parameters are listed in the bottom row. %
A legend for the plotted regions is given at the top.}
\label{fig:Photonregion}
\end{figure}
While our formulas apply to black holes of the entire
Pleba{\'n}ski--Demia{\'n}ski class, in the pictures we restrict to
accelerated Kerr space-times ($\beta = \ell = \Lambda = 0$) because
we want to focus on the effect of the acceleration.
Fig.~\ref{fig:Photonregion} comprises various images of photon regions
$\mathcal{K}$ for different spin and acceleration parameters,
where the spin is varied in the rows and the acceleration in the columns.
For the spin we choose fractions of the value for an extremal black
hole $a=\lambda a_{\mathrm{max}}$ with
$\lambda\in\bigl\{\frac{1}{50}, \frac{2}{5}, \frac{4}{5}, 1\bigr\}$
and $a_{\mathrm{max}}=m$, cf.~\eqref{eq:InOutHorizon} and \eqref{eq:Dr0}.
Although one would expect only very small acceleration parameters in reality,
we choose relatively big values ($\alpha\in\bigl\{0, \frac{1}{8m},
\frac{1}{6m}, \frac{1}{4m}\bigl\}$) for a better illustration of the effects.
For each of the three values of the acceleration the figure is
compared with the ordinary Kerr case.
In the ordinary Kerr space-time ($\alpha=0$), see the left half of the images
in the columns of Fig.~\ref{fig:Photonregion}, we see two photon regions:
one with unstable orbits in the exterior region of the black hole at $r>r_+$
and one in the interior region at $r<r_-$ which contains unstable orbits as
well as stable ones. %
For spinning black holes the exterior photon region develops a
crescent-shaped cross-section which grows with increasing spin $a$. %
The inner photon region consists of two parts divided by the ring singularity. %
Note that also in the rotating case there are circular photon orbits,
namely at that five points on the boundary of $\mathcal{K}$ which are tangent to a
sphere $r=\mathrm{constant}$: there are three circular photon orbits
in the equatorial plane---two at the boundary of the exterior photon region
and one at the boundary of the interior photon region---and two more
off the equatorial plane at the boundary of the interior photon region
where $r<0$. %
Furthermore, we find the ergoregion containing the horizons of the black
hole, and in the interior adjacent to the ring singularity a
causality violating region. If $a^2 > m^2/2$ the ergoregion intersects
the exterior photon region. %
All of these regions are symmetric with respect to the equatorial plane.
The plots for the accelerated Kerr space-times look similar to the
non-accelerated ones but there are two significant differences. Firstly,
a non-zero acceleration parameter gives rise to additional horizons,
similarly to a cosmological constant. Secondly, the plots are no longer
symmetric with respect to the equatorial plane which is similar to the
NUT case. The additional outer horizon, a cosmological one, is best seen
in the illustration for the highest acceleration $\alpha=\frac{1}{4m}$.
In principle, such a horizon also appears in all other plots but most or
even all of it is located outside of the shown clipping. %
The asymmetry with respect to the equatorial plane is best seen for
$\alpha=\frac{1}{4m}$. With the exception of the causality violating region,
the entire picture looks as if pushed into the negative $z$ direction, i.e.,
into the direction against the direction of the acceleration. For a better
view, Fig.~\ref{fig:Photonregion2} shows bigger versions of the two plots
shown in the fourth row of the third column in Fig.~\ref{fig:Photonregion}.
As one would expect, the photon region, the ergoregion and the causality
violating region depend on the signs of $a$ and $\alpha$. While the
photon region is reflected at the equatorial plane if the sign of
$\alpha$ is changed, the ergoregion and the causality violating region are
reflected if the sign of $a\alpha$ is changed.
The effects of $\beta$, $\ell$ and $\Lambda$ on the photon regions
have been discussed in our earlier paper, see
Ref.~\citen{GrenzebachPerlick.2014}. We do not repeat this here
because there are no new qualitative aspects if $\alpha$ is present.
\begin{figure}[htbp
\centering
\includegraphics{Photonregions2.pdf}
\caption[Photon regions in accelerated Kerr space-time.]{%
Bigger versions of both plots shown in the fourth row of the third
column in Fig.~\ref{fig:Photonregion}. %
Illustrated are the photon regions of spinning Kerr black holes
($a=\frac{4}{5}m$) where the left plot belongs to the ordinary
space-time ($\alpha=0$) and the right plot to an accelerated
space-time ($\alpha=\frac{1}{4m}$).}
\label{fig:Photonregion2}
\end{figure}
\section{Shadows of Black Holes}
\label{sec:shadow}
If one looks into the direction of a black hole then there is a region
on the sky which stays dark, provided that there are no light sources
between the observer and the black hole. This dark region is called
the \emph{shadow} of the black hole.
To determine the shape of the shadow we consider light rays
which are sent into the \emph{past} from the position $(r_O, \vartheta_O)$ of a
fixed\footnote{Because of the symmetry, it is enough to specify the $r$ and
$\vartheta$ coordinate to define a fixed position in space-time.} observer
in the domain of outer communication.
Then we can distinguish between two types of lightlike geodesics: Those
where the radial coordinate increases after possibly passing through
a minimum and those where the radial coordinate decreases until reaching
the horizon at $r=r_+$. %
If we assume that there are light sources distributed in the universe,
but not between the observer and the black hole, geodesics of the first
kind could reach a light source; so we assign brightness to the initial
direction of such a light ray. Correspondingly, we assign darkness
to the initial directions of light rays of the second kind, i.e.,
these initial directions determine the shadow of the black hole. %
The boundary of the shadow corresponds to light rays on the borderline
between the two kinds. These are light rays that spiral asymptotically
towards one of the unstable spherical light orbits in the exterior photon
region $\mathcal{K}$.
Hence, the essential information for determining the shadow of a black hole
is in the surrounding photon region. One may even say that the shadow
is an image of the photon region (but not of the event horizon).
For deriving an analytical formula for the boundary curve of the
shadow we proceed, again, as in the case without acceleration.
First, we choose an orthonormal tetrad, cf. page 307 in
Ref.~\citen{GriffithsPodolsky.2009}, for our fixed observer at
$(r_{O},\vartheta_{O})$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
e_{0} &= \Omega \left.
\frac{(\Sigma + a \chi) \partial_t + a \partial_{\varphi}}{
\sqrt{\Sigma \Delta_r}}\right|_{(r_O,\vartheta_O)}, \quad &
e_{2} &= -\Omega \left.
\frac{(\partial_{\varphi} + \chi \partial_t)}{
\sqrt{\Sigma \Delta_{\vartheta}} \sin \vartheta}
\right|_{(r_O,\vartheta_O)}, \\[\smallskipamount]
e_{1} &= \Omega \left.
\sqrt{\dfrac{\Delta _{\vartheta}}{\Sigma}} \, \partial_{\vartheta}
\right|_{(r_O,\vartheta_O)}, &
e_{3} &= -\Omega \left.
\sqrt{\frac{\Delta_r}{\Sigma}} \, \partial_r
\right|_{(r_O,\vartheta_O)}.
\end{aligned}
\label{eq:newcoord}
\end{equation}
Since our observer is in the domain of outer communication, $\Delta_r$ is
positive. $\Sigma$ is positive everywhere (except at the ring singularity
which is not part of the space-time and, moreover, away from the domain of
outer communication) and $\Delta_{\vartheta}$ is positive by assumption.
This guarantees real coefficients in Eqs.~\eqref{eq:newcoord}. It is easy
to check that the $e_i$ are orthonormal. %
As usual, the timelike vector $e_0$ is interpreted as the four-velocity
of our observer. By our choice of the tetrad, $e_0 \pm e_3$ are tangential
to the \emph{principal null congruences} of our metric; $e_3$ points into
the spatial direction towards the center of the black hole. So we have
chosen the four-velocity of our observer adapted to the symmetries of the
space-time in the sense that $e_0$ is in the intersection of the
$t$-$\varphi$-plane and the plane spanned by the two principal null
directions.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{Beob.pdf}
\caption{Eq. \eqref{eq:dotlambda2} defines celestial coordinates
$\theta$ and $\psi$ for the light rays at the observer's position,
as illustrated in the left figure. With this choice, $\theta=0$ is
the direction towards the black hole.
Every direction of a light ray represented by a point $(\theta, \psi)$
on the celestial sphere (black ball) is visualized by its
stereographic projection (red ball) on a plane. The
dotted (red) circles are the celestial equator $\theta = \pi/2$
and its image under stereographic projection.}
\label{fig:LightObserv}
\end{figure}
For any light ray $\lambda(s) = \bigl(r(s),\vartheta(s),\varphi(s),t(s)\bigr)$,
the tangent vector at the position of the observer can be written in two
different ways, using either the coordinate basis or the tetrad
introduced above,
\begin{align}
\dot{\lambda} &= \dot{r} \partial_{r} + \dot{\vartheta} \partial_{\vartheta}
+ \dot{\varphi} \partial_{\varphi} + \dot{t} \partial_{t},
\label{eq:dotlambda1} \\
\dot{\lambda} &= \sigma \big( -e_{0} + \sin\theta \cos\psi e_{1}
+ \sin\theta \sin\psi e_{2} + \cos\theta e_{3} \big).
\label{eq:dotlambda2}
\end{align}
The second equation defines the celestial coordinates $\theta$ and
$\psi$, see Fig.~\ref{fig:LightObserv}.
For the scalar factor $\sigma$ we obtain with \eqref{eq:E_Lz}
\begin{equation}
\sigma = g\big(\dot{\lambda},e_0 \big)
= \Omega \left.
\frac{a L_z - (\Sigma+a\chi)E}{\sqrt{\Sigma \Delta_r}}
\right|_{(r_O,\vartheta_O)}.
\label{eq:sigma}
\end{equation}
We substitute $\dot{\varphi}$ and $\dot{r}$ from
\eqref{eq:EoM_phi} and \eqref{eq:EoM_r} into \eqref{eq:dotlambda1},
and we insert the expressions of $e_i$ from \eqref{eq:newcoord}
into \eqref{eq:dotlambda2}. Then comparing the coefficients of
$\partial_{\varphi}$ and $\partial_r$ in the resulting two
equations yields
\begin{subequations}
\label{eq:thetapsi}
\begin{alignat}{3}
T &:= & \sin\theta &= \left.
\frac{\sqrt{\Delta_r K_E}}{r^2 + \ell^2 - a\widetilde{L}_E}
\right|_{r=r_O},
\label{eq:theta}
\\[\smallskipamount]
P &:= & \sin\psi &= \left.
\frac{\widetilde{L}_E + a\cos^2\vartheta + 2\ell \cos\vartheta}{
\sqrt{\Delta_{\vartheta} K_E} \sin\vartheta}
\right|_{\vartheta = \vartheta_O},
\label{eq:psi}
\end{alignat}
\end{subequations}
where
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{L}_E = L_E - a + 2 \ell C.
\label{eq:tLE}
\end{equation}
If a light ray asymptotically approaches a spherical lightlike geodesic
at a radius $r_p$ in the photon region, it must have the same constants
of motion as this limiting spherical geodesic. By \eqref{eq:KL_SphLR} and
\eqref{eq:tLE}, this implies that the constants of motion of light rays
that correspond to boundary points of the shadow are given by
\begin{align}
K_{E}(r_p) &= \left. \frac{16r^{2}\Delta_{r}}{(\Delta_{r}')^{2}} \right|_{r=r_p},
&
a\widetilde{L}_{E}(r_p) &= \left. \Big(r^2 + \ell^2 - \frac{4r\Delta_{r}}{
\Delta_{r}'} \Big)\right|_{r=r_p}.
\label{eq:LEKEc}
\end{align}
Here the range of $r_p$ is determined by the
intersection of the exterior photon region \eqref{eq:regionK} with the cone
$\vartheta = \vartheta_O$, cf. Ref.~\citen{GrenzebachPerlick.2014}.
Thus, for a rotating black hole $r_p$ ranges over
an interval at whose boundary points \eqref{eq:regionK} holds for
$\vartheta = \vartheta_O$ with equality.
If we insert \eqref{eq:LEKEc} into \eqref{eq:thetapsi}, we get the
boundary curve of the shadow on the observer's sky parametrized with $r_p$.
In the case $a=0$ the photon region degenerates into a photon sphere
$r=r_p$. This unique value $r_p$ defines a unique $K_E(r_p)$ but
does not restrict $\widetilde{L}_E$. Calculating the corresponding
$\theta$ from \eqref{eq:thetapsi} gives the radius of the shadow which
is circular in this case. We may use $\widetilde{L}_E$ as a parameter
for the boundary curve, where $\widetilde{L}_E$ varies between the
extremal values given by \eqref{eq:EoM_theta}
for $\Theta(\vartheta_O)=0$.
Comparison with Ref.~\citen{GrenzebachPerlick.2014} shows that the
formula \eqref{eq:regionK} for the photon region as well as the formulas
(\ref{eq:thetapsi}, \ref{eq:tLE}, \ref{eq:LEKEc})
for the boundary curve of the shadow are identical with those of the
non-accelerated case. However, the metric functions \eqref{eq:MetricFunc}
have now a more general meaning because they include the acceleration
parameter. %
Several properties of the shadow are preserved, even with the
acceleration parameter added. A non-rotating black hole still
has a circular shadow since \eqref{eq:theta} depends on the unique
$K_E(r_p)$ but not on $\widetilde{L}_E$, so $\theta = \mathrm{constant}$
in this case. As the acceleration parameter breaks the spherical
symmetry, this is a non-trivial result. %
Furthermore, the shadow is still independent of the Manko-Ruiz parameter $C$
which is relevant only in the case $\ell \neq 0$.
As in the non-accelerated case, the shadow is always symmetric with
respect to a horizontal axis, because
$(\psi,\theta)$ and $(\pi-\psi, \theta)$ are determined by the same
constants of motion $K_E$ and $\widetilde{L}_E$. Again, this is a
non-trivial result because it is not implied by an underlying
symmetry unless $\ell = 0$,
$\alpha = 0$ and $\vartheta _O = \pi /2$.
It is to be emphasized that we have calculated the shape of the
shadow for an observer with a particular four-velocity, adapted to
the principal null directions of the space-time. For an observer
in a different state of motion, the shadow is distorted by
aberration. These aberration effects have been discussed in
detail in Ref.~\citen{Grenzebach.2015}. As the aberration formula
maps circles onto circles, the statement that a non-rotating
black hole produces a circular shadow is true for an observer
in \emph{any} state of motion.
Figures~\ref{fig:Shadow} and \ref{fig:ShadowObserv} comprise images of
shadows for different space-times seen by an observer at $r_O=3.8 m$
with varying inclination $\vartheta_O$. %
As explained in Fig.~\ref{fig:LightObserv}, we map the shadow onto a
plane by stereographic projection.
Standard Cartesian coordinates in that plane of projection are given by
\begin{equation}
\begin{pmatrix}
x(\rho) \\
y(\rho)
\end{pmatrix}
= -2 \tan \big( \tfrac{1}{2}\theta(\rho) \big)
\begin{pmatrix}
\sin \psi(\rho) \\
\cos \psi(\rho)
\end{pmatrix}
\label{eq:stereo}
\end{equation}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:Shadow} we show the shadow for accelerated Kerr
space-times where we have chosen the same values for $\alpha$ and $a$
as in Fig.~\ref{fig:Photonregion}. Here, the observer is fixed at
Boyer--Lindquist coordinates $r_{O}=3.8m$ and $\vartheta_{O} = \pi/2$
(in the domain of outer communication). The different values of
$\alpha$ are encoded into different shadings.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\centering
\includegraphics{Shadow.pdf}
\caption[Shadows for accelerated Kerr space-times.]{Shadows of accelerated
Kerr black holes ($a_{\mathrm{max}}=m$) seen by an observer at $r_O=3.8 m$
and $\vartheta_O = \pi /2$ for different spin values. The magnitude
of the acceleration is color-coded where the specific values of q
$\alpha$ are listed below the plots.
%
The dashed (red) circle marks the projection of the celestial equator,
cf. Fig.~\ref{fig:LightObserv}.}
\label{fig:Shadow}
\end{figure}
Also with acceleration, the shape of the shadow is largely determined by
the spin $a$ of the black hole. Hence, the shadow becomes more and more
asymmetric with respect to a vertical axis with increasing spin $a$ where
the asymmetry results from the \blqq dragging effect\brqq\ of the rotation
on the light rays.
The shadow is reflected at a vertical axis if the sign of $a$,
i.\,e. the spin direction, is changed. One might have expected a
similar effect with respect to a horizontal axis if the sign of
$\alpha$ is changed. However, this is not true. As the
shadow stays symmetric with respect to a horizontal axis even
if $\alpha\neq 0$, the shadow is independent of the direction
of the acceleration, i.\,e. of the sign of $\alpha$.
The acceleration has an effect on the \emph{size} of the
shadow, as is visible with the naked eye. This, however, has little
relevance in view of observations because the size also scales with
$r_O$ and a comparison of the radius coordinates in different
space-times has no direct operational meaning.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{5pt}
\centering
\includegraphics{ShadowObserver.pdf}
\caption[Plots of black hole's shadow for different observer
positions]{Shadow of a black hole in accelerated Kerr space-time
($\alpha=\frac{1}{6m}$, $a=m=a_{\mathrm{max}}$) for an observer at
$r_O = 3.8 m$ with different inclination angles $\vartheta_O$.
As in Fig.~\ref{fig:Shadow}, the dashed (red) circle indicates
the celestial equator.}
\label{fig:ShadowObserv}
\end{figure}
With the plots in Fig.~\ref{fig:ShadowObserv} we investigate the influence
of the observer's inclination $\vartheta _O$ on the shadow of an
extremal Kerr black hole ($a=a_{\mathrm{max}}=m$) with acceleration
$\alpha=\frac{1}{6m}$.
As in Fig.~\ref{fig:Shadow} the observer ist fixed at $r_O=3.8m$.
Clearly, for $\vartheta _O \to 0$ the shadow becomes circular.
We have already emphasized the remarkable fact that the shadow is
always symmetric with respect to the horizontal axis.
\section{Angular Diameters of the Shadow of Black Holes}
\label{sec:angrad}
From the analytical formulas \eqref{eq:thetapsi} and \eqref{eq:LEKEc} for
the boundary curve of the shadow we can deduce expressions for the
horizontal and vertical angular diameters of the shadow.
These correspond to the dashed lines in Fig.~\ref{fig:AngRad}.
Owing to the symmetry, the angular diameters $\delta_h$ and $\delta_v$ are
determined by three angular radii $\varrho_{h_1}$, $\varrho_{h_2}$,
and $\varrho_{v}$ as indicated in Fig.~\ref{fig:AngRad},
\begin{alignat}{5}
\delta_h &= \varrho_{h_1} + \varrho_{h_2}, & \qquad
\sin\varrho_{h_i} &= \sin\psi_{h_i}\sin\theta_{h_i} &&= P(r_{h_i}) T(r_{h_i}),
\label{eq:AngDia_h} \\
\delta_v &= 2\varrho_{v}, & \qquad
\sin\varrho_v &= \cos\psi_v \sin\theta)v &&= \sqrt{1-P^2(r_v)} T(r_v),
\label{eq:AngDia_v}
\end{alignat}
where $T$ and $P$ have the same meaning as in (\ref{eq:thetapsi}).
\begin{figure}[bp]
\floatbox[{\capbeside\thisfloatsetup{capbesideposition={right,bottom}}}]{figure}%
{\caption{Angular radii of the shadow of a black hole. Owing to the symmetry
with respect to a horizontal axis, the two angular diameters (dashed lines)
of the shadow are given by three angular radii: two horizontal radii
$\varrho_{h_i}$ and one vertical radius $\varrho_{v}$. The angular
diameters are calculated as $\delta_h = \varrho_{h_1} + \varrho_{h_2}$
and $\delta_v = 2\varrho_{v}$, respectively.}%
\label{fig:AngRad}}%
{\includegraphics[scale=1]{AngRad.pdf}}
\end{figure}
In the following we restrict to the Kerr space-time
with an observer in the equatorial plane, $\vartheta_O=\tfrac{\pi}{2}$.
Even in this case, a formula for the angular diameters of the shadow
was not known before, as far as we know. In the general case, the angular
diameters can be calculated analogously; it is true that then the radius
values $r_{h_i}$ and $r_{v}$ are zeros of a polynomial of higher than
fourth order, so they cannot be determined in closed form. In terms of
these radii, however, one gets analytical formulas for the angular
diameters also in the general case.
The horizontal angular radii $\varrho_{h_i}$ are characterized by
$\psi _{h_i}=\pm\tfrac{\pi}{2}$, so we must solve the equation
$1= \sin^2\psi(r_h) = P^2(r_h)$ which in the Kerr case simplifies to
(use Eq.~\eqref{eq:psi} with Eq.~\eqref{eq:LEKEc})
\begin{gather}
r_h(r_h-3m)^2 = 4ma^2 \kern4cm \\[\smallskipamount]
\begin{subequations}
\label{eq:rh}
\begin{align}
\Rightarrow\quad
r_{h_1} &= 2m + 2m \cos(\zeta/3), \\
r_{h_2} &= 2m - m \cos(\zeta/3) - \sqrt{3}m \sin(\zeta/3), \\
r_{h_3} &= 2m - m \cos(\zeta/3) + \sqrt{3}m \sin(\zeta/3),
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
\end{gather}
where $\zeta=\arg\bigl((2a^2 m-m^3) - i (2am\sqrt{m^2-a^2})\bigr)$.
Here we have to choose the solutions $r_{h_1}$ and $r_{h_2}$ which
are the radii of the two circular photon orbits in the exterior
photon region.
Evaluating $P T$ for $r_{h_1}$ and $r_{h_2}$ yields
by \eqref{eq:AngDia_h} the horizontal angular diameter $\delta_h$
of the shadow.
The vertical angular radius corresponds to those boundary points
where the tangent is horizontal. By \eqref{eq:AngDia_v} we have
$f(r_v) :=\sin^2\varrho_v = \bigl(1-P^2(r_v)\bigr)T^2(r_v)$, so
the tangent is horizontal if $\frac{\@ifstar{\mathrm{d}}{\:\mathrm{d}} f}{\@ifstar{\mathrm{d}}{\:\mathrm{d}} r_v}(r_v) = 0$.
This yields
\begin{align}
0 &= (1-P^2) T' - PP'T \, \vert_{r_v} \\
&= \frac{\sqrt{\Delta(r_O)}\, r_v \, \bigl(r_v (2a^2 + r_O^2) - 3m r_O^2\bigr)
\bigl(a^2m - r_v(3m^2 - 3m r_v + r_v^2)\bigr)}{a^2\sqrt{\Delta(r_v)}
\bigl(r_v(2a^2+r_O^2+r_v^2)-m(r_O^2+3r_v^2)\bigr)^2}
\end{align}
where we have to choose the unique solution inside the
exterior photon region
\begin{equation}
r_{v} = \frac{3m r_O^2}{2a^2 + r_O^2}.
\label{eq:rv}
\end{equation}
With this value $r_v$ we get an analytic expression of the vertical
angular radius
\begin{align}
\sin^2\varrho_v = (1-P^2) & T^2 \vert_{r_v}
= \frac{27m^2 r_O^2 \bigl(a^2+ r_O (r_O-2 m)\bigr)}{
r_O^6 + 6a^2 r_O^4+ 3a^2 (4a^2 - 9m^2) r_O^2 + 8a^6 }.
\label{eq:AngRad_v}
\end{align}
For $a=0$, we recover from (\ref{eq:AngRad_v}) Synge's formula
\cite{Synge.1966} for a Schwarzschild black hole,
\begin{equation}
\sin^2 \varrho = \frac{27 m^2 (r_O - 2m)}{r_O^{3}}.
\label{eq:Synge}
\end{equation}
Since the shadow of a non-rotating black hole is always circular,
the horizontal angular radii $\varrho_{h_i}$ are also given by
\eqref{eq:Synge} in this case.\footnote{For
$a=0$ one finds $\zeta=\arg(-m^3)=-\pi$ and $r_{h_{1,2}}=3m$.
Then $T^2(3m)$ reproduces \eqref{eq:Synge}.}
Note that for all values $0 \le a^2 \le m^2$ (\ref{eq:AngRad_v})
gives the same value as (\ref{eq:Synge}), $27 m^2 /r_O^2$, if $m$ is
negligibly small in comparison to $r_O$. This means that for observers
far away from the black hole the vertical diameter of the shadow is
independent of $a$.
In the extremal Kerr space-time, $a=m$, the circular photon orbits are at
$r_{h_1}=4m$ and $r_{h_2}=m$ since $\zeta=\arg(m^3)=0$. Together with
\eqref{eq:rv} this results in the following formulas for the angular radii
\begin{gather}
\begin{aligned}
\sin^2 \varrho_{h_1} &= \frac{64 m^2 (r_O - m)^2}{(r_O^2 + 8m^2)^2}, \\
\sin^2 \varrho_{h_2} &= \frac{m^2 }{(r_O + m)^2},
\end{aligned}
\qquad
\sin^2 \varrho_{v} = \frac{27m^2 r_O^2}{(r_O + m)^2 (r_O^2 + 8m^2)}.
\label{eq:AngRad_am}
\end{gather}
Finally, we use \eqref{eq:Synge} and \eqref{eq:AngRad_am} to determine the
angular diameters given by \eqref{eq:AngDia_h} and \eqref{eq:AngDia_v}
for the shadow of the black hole in the center of our Galaxy near Sgr~A*
and of that in M87. The resulting values are given in Table~\ref{tab:angdia}
together with the corresponding values for the mass $M$ (in multiples of
the Solar mass $M_{\odot}$) and the distance $r_O$ of the black holes. We
use two sets of parameters for M87 because the mass estimation based on the
modeling of stellar dynamics yields a mass twice as big as the estimation
based on gas dynamical measurements, compare
Refs.~\citen{Broderick.2015,KormendyHo.2013,GebhardtAdams.2011,WalshBarth.2013}.
The horizontal angular diameter for the extremal rotating black holes is
always about $13\%$ smaller than for the Schwarzschild case while the
vertical angular diameters $\delta_v$ coincide in all cases. We have
already observed that the latter is a consequence of the fact that $r_O$
is large in comparison to $m$. It turns out that the shadow of the
black hole in M87 is not much smaller than that of the black hole
at the center of our Galaxy; the bigger distance of M87 is almost
compensated by its bigger mass.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\tbl{Horizontal and vertical angular diameter $\delta_h$, $\delta_v$ of the
shadow for Sgr~A* and M87 for a non-rotating Schwarzschild model
($a=0$) or an extremal rotating Kerr model ($a=m$) of their black holes\hfill\ }%
{ \begin{tabular}{c|cc|cc|cc}
& \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Sgr A*} &
\multicolumn{2}{c|}{M87} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{M87} \\
& $\delta_h$ & $\delta_v$ &
$\delta_h$ & $\delta_v$ & $\delta_h$ & $\delta_v$ \\
\colrule
$a=0$ & $53.1\unit{\text{\textmu}as}$ & $53.1\unit{\text{\textmu}as}$ &
$37.8\unit{\text{\textmu}as}$ & $37.8\unit{\text{\textmu}as}$ &
$20.1\unit{\text{\textmu}as}$ & $20.1\unit{\text{\textmu}as}$ \\
$a=m$ & $46.0\unit{\text{\textmu}as}$ & $53.1\unit{\text{\textmu}as}$ &
$32.8\unit{\text{\textmu}as}$ & $37.8\unit{\text{\textmu}as}$ &
$17.4\unit{\text{\textmu}as}$ & $20.1\unit{\text{\textmu}as}$ \\
\colrule
& \multicolumn{2}{l|}{$M = 4.31 \times 10^6 M_{\odot}$,} &
\multicolumn{2}{l|}{$M = 6.2 \times 10^9 M_{\odot}$,} &
\multicolumn{2}{l}{$M = 3.5 \times 10^9 M_{\odot}$,} \\
$m = \frac{M G}{c^2}$ & \multicolumn{2}{l|}{$r_O = 8.33\unit{kpc}$
\cite{GhezSalim.2008,GillessenEisenhauerEtAl.2009}} &
\multicolumn{2}{l|}{$r_O = 16.68\unit{Mpc}$
\cite{Broderick.2015,KormendyHo.2013,GebhardtAdams.2011}} &
\multicolumn{2}{l}{$r_O = 17.9\unit{Mpc}$
\cite{Broderick.2015,WalshBarth.2013}}
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:angdia}}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusions and Outlook}
We have seen that knowing the photon region surrounding a black hole
is essential for calculating the shadow. For both the photon region
and the boundary curve of the shadow we have found analytical formulas
in the general type D class of Pleba{\'n}ski--Demia{\'n}ski space-times.
Since these space-times are not in general asymptotically flat and
possess additional cosmological horizons, it is not possible to
restrict to observers at infinity as it was done in many other articles
on shadows of black holes. We have placed our observer at any
Boyer--Lindquist coordinates in the outer domain of communication
instead, and we have calculated the shadow for the case that the
four-velocity of the observer is adapted to the symmetries of the
space-time in the sense that it lies in the intersection of the
$t$-$\varphi$-plane with the plane spanned by the principal null
directions. Interestingly, for such an observer the shadow
is always symmetric with respect to a horizontal axis, independently
of an acceleration $\alpha \neq 0$, an inclination $\vartheta _O
\neq \pi/2$ of the observer, or a gravitomagnetic NUT charge $\ell \neq 0$.
The boundary curve of the shadow depends on the space-time parameters
$m$, $a$, $\ell$, $\beta$, $\alpha$, and $\Lambda$, as well as on the
observer's position $(r_O,\vartheta_O)$. For an observer whose four-velocity
is not adapted to the symmetries of the space-time, the boundary
curve of the shadow also depends on the 3 components of the spatial
velocity with respect to our standard observer.
Although the acceleration parameter does not destroy the symmetry of the
shadow with respect to a horizontal axis, it does have such an effect on
the photon region, the ergosphere and the causality violating region.
The photon region is reflected at the equatorial plane if the sign of
$\alpha$ is changed whereas the ergoregion and the causality violating region
are reflected at the equatorial plane if the sign of $a\alpha$ is changed.
Our estimates of the angular diameters for the shadows of the black holes
in the centers of our Galaxy and of M87 show that the shadows are roughly
of the same size. Hence the planned observations may provide us with
shadow images not only of the black hole in our Galaxy but also of that
in M87. If the current attempts of observing the shadow are successful,
this will give us a chance to deduce the parameters of the black
hole from the boundary curve of the shadow. Our analytical
formula combined with a Fourier analysis should be a promising
tool for achieving this goal. We are planning to investigate this
in a follow-up article.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
Our thanks for helpful discussions go to Nico Giulini, Norman G\"urlebeck,
David Kofron, Eva Hackmann, and Eugen Radu.
We gratefully acknowledge support from the DFG within the Research
Training Group 1620 \blqq Models of Gravity\brqq.
|
\section{Introduction}
The space-dependent spin dynamics in ferromagnetic metals have been the subject of considerable investigation over the past several years.
This subject is of great significance for technological applications such as spin-transfer torque random-access memory (STT-RAM) and microwave generators or detectors.
In the spintronics devices, which are nanoscale magnetic multilayer systems,
inhomogeneous magnetization dynamics are caused by an external applied field or thermal excitations
due to the finite size effects\cite{Shaw2009,Nembach2013} and the interface effects \cite{UrbanWoltersdorfHeinrich2001}.
The spin torques, which arise in non-equilibrium conditions include some terms with different forms \cite{ZhangLi2004,Kohno2006,KohnoShibat2007,TataraKohnoShibataLemahoLee2007,SakaiKohno2014},
and
the space-dependent spin torques caused by inhomogeneous magnetization dynamics are different from the current-induced spin torques,
namely, the spin transfer torque\cite{Slonczewski1996,BazaliyJonesZhang1998,BarnesMaekawa2005,XiaoZangwillStiles2006,TserkovnyakSkadsemBrataasBauer2006} and the spin-orbit torque
\cite{ObataTatara2008,PiWonBaeLeeChoKimSeo2010,MihaiGaudinAuffretRodmacqSchuhlPizziniVogelGambardella2010,LiuPaiLiTsengRalphBuhrman2012,KhvalkovskiyCrosApalkovNikitinKrounbiZvezdinAnaneGrollierFert2013,LinderAlidoust2013}.
The former torque is due to the indirect interaction between magnetization through conduction electrons,
while the latter torque is due to the direct interaction between magnetization and conduction electrons.
Generally, the space-dependent torque acting on magnetization at $\bm{r}$ can be represented by
$\int{\rm d}\bm{r}'{\rm d}t\,\bm{M}(\bm{r},t)\times\tilde{\chi}(\bm{r},\bm{r}',t,t')\bm{M}(\bm{r}',t')$,
where $\tilde{\chi}(\bm{r},\bm{r}',t,t')$ is the spin susceptibility tensor (in detail, see \eqref{eq:chilm}).
We are interested in the dynamic part of this torque,
which describes the interaction between magnetization $\bm{M}\left(\bm{r}\right)$
and the time-derivative of other magnetization $\dot{\bm{M}}\left(\bm{r}'\right)$,
and it corresponds to Gilbert damping torque $\alpha\bm{M}\times\dot{\bm{M}}$ when magnetization precesses uniformly,
where $\alpha$ is the Gilbert damping constant\cite{Gilbert2004}.
Although a large number of studies have considered magnetization damping in uniform precession systems
\cite{Siimanek2003,TserkovnyakBrataasBauerHalperinI.2005,Kohno2006,Duine2007,Kambersky2007,Gilmore2007,Garate2009} (i.e., local damping),
little is known about the damping mechanism in inhomogeneous magnetization dynamics\cite{KorenmanPrange1972,Tserkovnyak2009,UmetsuMiuraSakuma2012a,Sakuma2015} (i.e., nonlocal damping).
Owing to the development of recent experimental techniques, detailed and unified theories of nonlocal damping are more desirable for spintronics applications.
Previous theoretical studies show that magnetic damping arising from spin diffusion
is enhanced by the spin wave
that describes the plane wave dynamics of magnetization\cite{Tserkovnyak2009}.
The damping coefficient is represented by $\alpha=\alpha_0+\eta q^2$, especially in the long wavelength limit,
where the first term represents damping for uniform precession systems and
the second term is the contribution from spin wave motion with wave vector $\bm{q}$.
The coefficient $\eta$ is the diffusion constant, which depends strongly on the lifetime of the conduction electrons.
Moreover, experimental evidence for nonlocal damping has been reported by the recent work \cite{Nembach2013}, where
the Gilbert damping constants for two modes (center mode and edge mode)
depend on the size of the nanoscale magnets, implying that additional damping torque was caused by finite size effects.
The purpose of our work is to calculate the dynamic part of the spin torque
induced by the spin wave motion of magnetization in a Rashba spin-orbit coupling (RSOC) system.
No previous studies have discussed the inhomogeneous magnetization dynamics in SOC systems.
In our previous work\cite{UmetsuMiuraSakuma2015},
we discuss qualitatively the effects of SOC in the RSOC system without electrons scattering by impurities.
In this paper, we show the results including effects of the impurity scattering beyond the previous results in the clean limit
and discuss the effects of impurity-ladder-sum vertex corrections.
The reminder of this paper is organized as follows.
In Sec. II, we explain our model and formulation.
In Sec. III, we show our calculation results for the dynamic part of the spin-wave-induced spin torque.
Finally, a summary of our work is given in Sec. IV.
\section{Model and Formulation}
The exchange coupling between electrons and magnetization is represented by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{H}_{{\rm ex}}\left( t\right)=-2\Delta\int{\rm d}\bm{r}\bm{n}\left(\bm{r},t\right)\cdot\bm{s}\left(\bm{r}\right),
\end{equation}
where $\bm{n}\left(\bm{r},t\right)=\bm{M}\left(\bm{r},t\right)/M$ is the unit vector of the time-dependent magnetization at $\bm{r}$ and
$\Delta$ is the exchange energy. Here, $\bm{s}\left(\bm{r}\right)=\psi^{\dagger}\left(\bm{r}\right)\hat{\bm{\sigma}}\psi\left(\bm{r}\right)/2$
is the electron spin density with the electron field operator
$\psi^{\left(\dagger\right)}\left(\bm{r}\right)=[\psi^{(\dagger)}_\uparrow\left(\bm{r}\right),\psi^{(\dagger)}_\downarrow\left(\bm{r}\right)]$
and Pauli matrix vector $\hat{\bm{\sigma}}$ (the hat symbol indicates a $2\times 2$ matrix).
The direction of magnetization is parallel to $z$-axis at the equilibrium state,
and the contributions from the transverse component (denoted by $\perp$) are treated perturbatively.
Based on linear response theory, the time-dependent energy is written as
\begin{align}
&E_{\rm ex}\left(t \right)=\frac{1}{{\rm i}\hbar}\int_{-\infty}^{t}{\rm d}t'\left\langle \left[\mathcal{H}_{{\rm ex}}\left(t\right),\mathcal{H}_{{\rm ex}}\left(t'\right)\right]\right\rangle \nonumber \\
=&-4\Delta^2N\int{\rm d}t'\int{\rm d}\bm{r}' \bm{n}^\perp\left(\bm{r},t\right)\tilde{\chi}\left(\bm{r},t,\bm{r}',t'\right) \bm{n}^\perp\left(\bm{r}',t'\right),
\end{align}
where $N$ is the number of unit cells. The spin susceptibility tensor $\tilde{\chi}$ contains elements $(l,m)$, which are given by
\begin{equation}
\chi^{lm}\left(\bm{r},t,\bm{r}',t'\right)=-N^{-1}\frac{1}{{\rm i}\hbar}\left\langle \left[s^{l}\left(\bm{r},t\right),s^{m}\left(\bm{r}',t'\right)\right]\right\rangle \Theta\left(t-t'\right).
\label{eq:chilm}
\end{equation}
The effective field is derived from
$\bm{H}_{\rm ex}\left( t \right)=M^{-1}E_{\rm ex}\left(t \right)/\partial \bm{n}\left(\bm{r},t\right)$,
and the spin torque is obtained by
$\bm{T}_{\rm st}\left(\bm{r},t\right)=-\gamma \bm{n}\left(\bm{r},t\right)\times\bm{H}_{\rm ex}\left(t\right)$,
where $\gamma$ is the gyromagnetic ratio.
In the first approximation, neglecting the products of perturbed quantities,
the spin torque is written as
\begin{equation}
\bm{T}_{\rm st}\left(\bm{r},t\right)=\gamma\frac{2\Delta}{M}\bm{n}^z\times\left<\bm{s}^\perp\left(\bm{r},t\right)\right>,
\end{equation}
where $\left\langle \bm{s}^{\perp}\left(\bm{r},t\right)\right\rangle
=2\Delta \int{\rm d}t' \int{\rm d}\bm{r}' \tilde{\chi}\left(\bm{r},t,\bm{r}',t'\right) \bm{n}^\perp\left(\bm{r}',t'\right)$
is the transverse component of the electron spin density expectation value.
In slow modulations of the magnetization motion,
$\bm{n}^{\perp}\left(\bm{r}',t'\right)\approx\bm{n}^{\perp}\left(\bm{r}',t\right)+\left(t'-t\right)\dot{\bm{n}}^{\perp}\left(\bm{r}',t\right)$
is satisfied, and the spin torque is rewritten as
\begin{equation}
\bm{T}_{\rm st}\left(\bm{r},t\right)\approx
\int{\rm d}\bm{r}'\bm{n}^z\times
\left[\tilde{\beta}\left(\bm{r}-\bm{r}'\right)\bm{n}^{\perp}\left(\bm{r}',t\right)
+\tilde{\alpha}\left(\bm{r}-\bm{r}'\right)\dot{\bm{n}}^{\perp}\left(\bm{r}',t\right)
\right],
\label{eq:Tst}
\end{equation}
in an electron system with translation symmetry.
Here,
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\beta}\left(\bm{r}\right)=\frac{4\gamma\Delta^{2}N}{M}
\tilde{\chi}\left(\bm{r},\omega=0\right),
\end{equation}
is the coefficient tensor of the static part, and
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\alpha}\left(\bm{r}\right)
={\rm i}\frac{4\gamma\Delta^{2}N}{M}
\lim_{\omega \to 0}\frac{\partial}{\partial\omega}\tilde{\chi}\left(\bm{r},\omega\right),
\end{equation}
is the coefficient tensor of the dynamic part.
The Fourier transformation of spin susceptibility is defined as
$\tilde{\chi}\left(\omega\right)=\int{{\rm d}t}{\rm e}^{{\rm i}\omega t}\tilde{\chi}\left(t\right)$.
The first term on the right-hand side of Eq.\eqref{eq:Tst} is the RKKY-type interaction,
which is regarded as the time-dependent correction for precession torque caused by the static magnetic field; however,
this term is irrelevant for our work.
In this study, we focus only on the dynamic spin torque, which is described in second term on the right-hand side of Eq.\eqref{eq:Tst}.
Expanding the magnetization motion using a plane wave with wave vector $\bm{q}$,
the dynamic part of $\bm{T}_{\rm st}$ in $\bm{q}$-space is written as $\bm{n}^z\times\tilde{\alpha}_{\bm{q}}\dot{\bm{n}}^{\perp}_{\bm{q}}$.
Here,
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\alpha}_{\bm{q}}=\frac{4\Delta^2}{\hbar S}
\lim_{\omega \to 0}\frac{\partial}{\partial \omega}{\rm Im}\tilde{\chi}_{\bm{q}}\left(\omega\right),
\label{tildealpha}
\end{equation}
where $\hbar S$ is the spin angular momentum of magnetization in a unit volume $v=V/N$.
Using a simple calculation, it can be shown that the $\omega$-derivative of the real part of $\tilde{\chi}_{\bm{q}}=\int{\rm d}\bm{r}\tilde{\chi}\left(\bm{r}\right){\rm e}^{-{\rm i}\bm{q}\cdot\bm{r}}$
vanishes in $\omega\to 0$.
Hereafter, the matrix elements related to the $z$-component of $\tilde{\alpha}_{\bm{q}}$ are neglected
because we are not concerned with the longitudinal motion in this study.
We calculate $\tilde{\chi}_{\bm{q}}\left(\omega\right)$ using a Green function technique
that considers the electron-impurity (spin-independent) interaction within the first Born approximation \cite{Garate2009}.
The spin susceptibility is obtained using analytic continuation of the Matsubara Green's function, which is written as
\begin{align}
&\chi_{\bm{q}}^{lm}\left({\rm i}\nu_{n}\right)
=\int_{0}^{1/T}{\rm d}{\eta}{\rm e}^{{\rm i}\nu_{n}\eta}\left\langle {\rm T}s_{\bm{q}}^{l}\left(\eta\right)s_{-\bm{q}}^{m}\right\rangle \nonumber \\
=&-\frac{T}{4}\sum_{\bm{k}}\sum_{n'}{\rm Tr}
\Bigl[\hat{g}\left({\rm i}\omega_{n'},\bm{k}\right)
\hat{\Gamma}^l\left({\rm i}\omega_{n'},{\rm i}\omega_{n'}+{\rm i}\nu_n,\bm{q}\right)
\hat{g}\left({\rm i}\omega_{n'}+{\rm i}\nu_{n},\bm{k}+\bm{q}\right)\hat{\sigma}^m
\Bigr],
\label{eq:chilm}
\end{align}
where $\hat{g}\left({\rm i}\omega_{n},\bm{k}\right)=-\int^{1/T}_0{\rm d}{\eta}{\rm e}^{{\rm i}\omega_{n}\eta} \left<{\rm T}\psi_{\bm{k}}\left(\eta\right)\psi^\dagger_{\bm{k}}\right>$
is the one-particle Green's function and
$\hat{\Gamma}^l\left({\rm i}\omega_{n'},{\rm i}\omega_{n'}+{\rm i}\nu_n,\bm{q}\right)$
is the vertex function.
This vertex function satisfies the following Ward identity:
\begin{align}
\Gamma_{\sigma_1\sigma_2}^{l}
&\left({\rm i}\omega_{n'},{\rm i}\omega_{n'}+{\rm i}\nu_n,\bm{q}\right)
=\, \sigma_{\sigma_1\sigma_2}^{\mu} \nonumber \\
&+\frac{\hbar/\tau}{\epsilon_{\rm F}}\sum_{\rho_{1}\rho_{2}}\Pi_{\sigma_1\rho_{1}\rho_{2}\sigma_2}
\left({\rm i}\omega_{n'},{\rm i}\omega_{n'}+{\rm i}\nu_n,\bm{q}\right)
\Gamma_{\rho_{1}\rho_{2}}^{l}\left({\rm i}\omega_{n'},{\rm i}\omega_{n'}+{\rm i}\nu_n,\bm{q}\right),
\label{eq:vertex}
\end{align}
where
\begin{equation}
\Pi_{\sigma_1\rho_{1}\rho_{2}\sigma_2}\left({\rm i}\omega_{n'},{\rm i}\omega_{n'}+{\rm i}\nu_n,\bm{q}\right)
=\frac{\epsilon_{{\rm F}}}{\pi\nu_{{\rm F}}N}\sum_{\bm{k}}g_{\sigma_1\rho_{1}}\left({\rm i}\omega_{n'}+{\rm i}\nu_n,\bm{k}+\bm{q}\right)
g_{\rho_{2}\sigma_2}\left({\rm i}\omega_{n'},\bm{k}\right).
\label{eq:Pi_element}
\end{equation}
Here, $\hbar/\tau=\pi\nu_{\rm F} n_0u^2$ is the inverse electron lifetime $\tau$
[$\nu_{\rm F}$ is the density of states per volume at the Fermi level, $n_0$ is the density of impurities, and
$u$ is the scattering constant of the short range potential $uv\delta(\bm{r})$].
We define the following $4\times 4$ matrices:
\begin{equation}
\check{K}=\left(1-\frac{\hbar/\tau}{\epsilon_{\rm F}}\check{\Pi}\right)^{-1},\qquad
\check{\Pi}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}
\Pi_{\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow} & \Pi_{\uparrow\uparrow\downarrow\uparrow} & \Pi_{\uparrow\downarrow\uparrow\uparrow} & \Pi_{\uparrow\downarrow\downarrow\uparrow}\\
\Pi_{\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow\downarrow} & \Pi_{\uparrow\uparrow\downarrow\downarrow} & \Pi_{\uparrow\downarrow\uparrow\downarrow} & \Pi_{\uparrow\downarrow\downarrow\downarrow}\\
\Pi_{\downarrow\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow} & \Pi_{\downarrow\uparrow\downarrow\uparrow} & \Pi_{\downarrow\downarrow\uparrow\uparrow} & \Pi_{\downarrow\downarrow\downarrow\uparrow}\\
\Pi_{\downarrow\uparrow\uparrow\downarrow} & \Pi_{\downarrow\uparrow\downarrow\downarrow} & \Pi_{\downarrow\downarrow\uparrow\downarrow} & \Pi_{\downarrow\downarrow\downarrow\downarrow}
\end{array}\right).
\label{eq:K_matrix}
\end{equation}
Then, the vertex function is given by
\begin{align}
\Gamma_{\sigma_1\sigma_2}^{l}\left({\rm i}\omega_{n'},{\rm i}\omega_{n'}+{\rm i}\nu_n,\bm{q}\right) & =\sum_{\rho_{1}\rho_{2}}K_{\sigma_1\rho_{1}\rho_{2}\sigma_2}\left({\rm i}\omega_{n'},{\rm i}\omega_{n'}+{\rm i}\nu_n,\bm{q}\right)
\sigma_{\rho_{1}\rho_{2}}^{l}.
\label{eq:vertex2}
\end{align}
Substituting Eq.\eqref{eq:vertex2} into Eq.\eqref{eq:chilm} and
performing the conventional $\bm{k}$-sum and $n'$-sum in the low-temperature limit,
we obtain the following form of Eq.\eqref{tildealpha}:
\begin{align}
\tilde{\alpha}_{\bm{q}}
&=\alpha_{\bm{q}}\hat{\sigma}^{0}+\alpha^{x}_{\bm{q}}\hat{\sigma}^{x}
+\alpha^{y}_{\bm{q}}(-{\rm i})\hat{\sigma}^y+\alpha^{z}_{\bm{q}}\hat{\sigma}^z,
\nonumber \\
\alpha_{\bm{q}}&=\frac{\nu_{{\rm F}}\Delta^{2}}{2S\epsilon_{{\rm F}}}{\rm Re}\sum_\sigma
\left(\check{K}_{\bm{q}}^{{\rm AR}}\check{\Pi}_{\bm{q}}^{{\rm AR}}-\check{K}_{\bm{q}}^{{\rm AA}}\check{\Pi}_{\bm{q}}^{{\rm AA}}\right)_{\sigma\sigma\bar{\sigma}\bar{\sigma}},
\nonumber \\
\alpha_{\bm{q}}^x&=\frac{\nu_{{\rm F}}\Delta^{2}}{2S\epsilon_{{\rm F}}}{\rm Im}\sum_\sigma \sigma
\left(\check{K}_{\bm{q}}^{{\rm AR}}\check{\Pi}_{\bm{q}}^{{\rm AR}}-\check{K}_{\bm{q}}^{{\rm AA}}\check{\Pi}_{\bm{q}}^{{\rm AA}}\right)_{\bar{\sigma}\sigma\bar{\sigma}\sigma},
\nonumber \\
\alpha_{\bm{q}}^y&=\frac{\nu_{{\rm F}}\Delta^{2}}{2S\epsilon_{{\rm F}}}{\rm Im}\sum_\sigma \sigma
\left(\check{K}_{\bm{q}}^{{\rm AR}}\check{\Pi}_{\bm{q}}^{{\rm AR}}-\check{K}_{\bm{q}}^{{\rm AA}}\check{\Pi}_{\bm{q}}^{{\rm AA}}\right)_{\sigma\sigma\bar{\sigma}\bar{\sigma}},
\nonumber \\
\alpha_{\bm{q}}^z&=\frac{\nu_{{\rm F}}\Delta^{2}}{2S\epsilon_{{\rm F}}}{\rm Re}\sum_\sigma
\left(\check{K}_{\bm{q}}^{{\rm AR}}\check{\Pi}_{\bm{q}}^{{\rm AR}}-\check{K}_{\bm{q}}^{{\rm AA}}\check{\Pi}_{\bm{q}}^{{\rm AA}}\right)_{\bar{\sigma}\sigma\bar{\sigma}\sigma},
\label{eq:alpha_tilde}
\end{align}
where $(\check{\Pi}_{\bm{q}}^{\rm AR, AA})_{\sigma_1\rho_1\rho_2\sigma_2}
=(\epsilon_{\rm F}/\pi\nu_{\rm F}N)\sum_{\bm{k}}g^{\rm A}_{\sigma_1\rho_1}(\omega=0,\bm{k}+\bm{q})g^{\rm R,A}_{\rho_2\sigma_2}(\omega=0,\bm{k})$.
The superscripts $\rm R$ and $\rm A$ denote the retarded Green's function and the advanced Green's function, respectively.
In Eq.\eqref{eq:alpha_tilde}, $\alpha_{\bm{q}}$ is the conventional Gilbert damping coefficient, and
$\alpha_{\bm{q}}^y$, which is the coefficient of $\bm{n}^z\times(-{\rm i})\hat{\sigma}^y\dot{\bm{n}}^\perp_{\bm{q}}=-\dot{\bm{n}}^\perp_{\bm{q}}$,
is the correction for the equation of motion.
Neither $\alpha_{\bm{q}}^x$ nor $\alpha_{\bm{q}}^y$ have been examined in previous studies
because these terms disappear in non-SOC systems and in uniform precession systems.
The physical meaning of these terms is discussed in the next section.
The electron system of our model is a 2D electron gas incorporating RSOC\cite{Garate2009},
which is described by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{H}=\epsilon_{{\rm F}}\sum_{\bm{k}}\psi_{\bm{k}}^{\dagger}\left(\left|\bm{k}_{0}\right|^{2}+\bm{\Lambda}_{\bm{k}}\cdot\hat{\bm{\sigma}}\right)\psi_{\bm{k}},
\end{equation}
where $\epsilon_{{\rm F}}=\hbar^2 k_{{\rm F}}^{2}/2m$ is the Fermi
energy and $\bm{k}_{0}=\left(k_{x}/k_{{\rm F}},k_{y}/k_{{\rm F}}\right)$
is the normalized wave vector.
Here, $\bm{\Lambda}_{\bm{k}}$ is defined as
\begin{equation}
\bm{\Lambda}_{\bm{k}}=\lambda_{\bm{k}_{0}}\left(\sin\theta_{\bm{k}}\cos\phi_{\bm{k}},\sin\theta_{\bm{k}}\sin\phi_{\bm{k}},\cos\theta_{\bm{k}}\right),
\end{equation}
where $\phi_{\bm{k}}=-\tan^{-1}\left(k_{x}/k_{y}\right)$, $\theta_{\bm{k}}=\cos^{-1}\left(-\Delta_{0}/\lambda_{\bm{k}_{0}}\right)$, and $\lambda_{\bm{k}_{0}}=\sqrt{\lambda^{2}k_{0}^{2}+\Delta_{0}^{2}}$.
Moreover, $\Delta_{0}=\Delta/\epsilon_{{\rm F}}$, and $\lambda$ is the strength of RSOC
(the conventional Rashba parameter $\alpha_{\rm R}$ is written as $\alpha_{\rm R}=\lambda\epsilon_{\rm F}/k_{\rm F}$).
The eigenstate corresponding to the eigenenergy of $\mathcal{H}$,
$\epsilon_{\bm{k}\pm}=\epsilon_{{\rm F}}\left(k_{0}^{2}\pm\lambda_{\bm{k}_{0}}\right)$, is given by
\begin{equation}
\ket{{\bm{k}},+(-)} ={\rm e}^{-(+){\rm i}\frac{\phi_{\bm{k}}}{2}}\cos\frac{\theta_{\bm{k}}}{2}\ket{\uparrow(\downarrow)}
+(-){\rm e}^{+(-){\rm i}\frac{\phi_{\bm{k}}}{2}}{\rm sin}\frac{\theta_{\bm{k}}}{2}\ket{\downarrow(\uparrow)}.
\label{eq:eigenstate}
\end{equation}
Then, the matrix elements of the retarded and advanced Green's function are written as
\begin{align}
g_{\sigma_{1}\sigma_{2}}^{\rm R,A }\left({\rm i}\omega_n,\bm{k}\right)
&=\sum_{\alpha=\pm}\braket{\sigma_1|\alpha}_{\bm{k}}g^{\rm R,A}_{\alpha}\left({\rm i}\omega_n,\bm{k}\right)\braket{\alpha|\sigma_{2}}_{\bm{k}},
\nonumber \\
g^{\rm R, A}_{\alpha}\left({\rm i}\omega_{n},\bm{k}\right)
&=\left({\rm i}\omega_{n}+\epsilon_{{\rm F}}-\epsilon_{\bm{k}\alpha}\pm{\rm i}\hbar/\tau \right)^{-1}
,\qquad\left({\rm +\,for\,R, -\, for\, A}\right).
\label{eq:matrix_g_element}
\end{align}
We can calculate $\tilde{\alpha}_{\bm{q}}$ from Eq.\eqref{eq:K_matrix}, Eq.\eqref{eq:vertex2},
Eq.\eqref{eq:alpha_tilde}, Eq.\eqref{eq:eigenstate}, and Eq.\eqref{eq:matrix_g_element}.
\section{Results and Discussion}
In the numerical calculations, we set the following parameters:
$\Delta_0=0.1$, $\nu_{\rm F}=1/\epsilon_{\rm F}$, $\lambda=0.3$, and $S=1$.
We show the numerical results of two cases: $\hbar/\tau=0.01\epsilon_{\rm F}$ and $\hbar/\tau=0.05\epsilon_{\rm F}$.
However, we do not show the detail results of $\alpha_{\bm{q}}^y$ in this section
because we have determined that this term is sufficiently small and can be neglected.
In our results, the maximum absolute value of $\alpha^y_{\bm q}$ for $\hbar/\tau=0.01\epsilon_{\rm F}$ is about 0.07
and that for $\hbar/\tau=0.05\epsilon_{\rm F}$ is about 0.06,
which satisfies $\alpha_{\bm{q}}^y\ll 1$ (i.e., $\alpha_{\bm{q}}^y \dot{\bm{n}}^\perp\ll \dot{\bm{n}}^\perp$).
\subsection{Damping torque \label{damping}}
In this subsection, we discuss the results of ${\alpha}_{\bm{q}}$, which is the coefficient of conventional damping torque, $\bm{n}^z\times\dot{\bm{n}}^\perp_{\bm{q}}$.
The $q$-dependence of $\alpha_{q}$ is shown in Fig.\ref{fig:a}.
It can be strictly shown that $\alpha_{\bm{q}}$ does not depend on the direction of $\bm{q}$.
In the clean limit,
\begin{equation}
\alpha_{q}
=\frac{\nu_{{\rm F}}\Delta^{2}}{S\epsilon_{{\rm F}}}\sum_{\alpha\beta}\frac{\left(k_{\alpha}^{2}-k_{\beta}^{2}\right)^{2}+\alpha\beta\lambda^{2}\left(k_{\alpha}^{2}+k_{\beta}^{2}\right)}{\left(k_{-}^{2}-k_{+}^{2}\right)^{2}}I_{\alpha\beta}\left(q_{0}\right),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
I_{\alpha\beta}\left(q_{0}\right)
=\frac{\Theta\left(q_{0}-\left|k_{\alpha}-k_{\beta}\right|\right)\Theta\left(k_{\alpha}+k_{\beta}-q_{0}\right)}{\sqrt{\left[\left(k_{\alpha}+k_{\beta}\right)^{2}-q_{0}^{2}\right]\left[q_{0}^{2}-\left(k_{\alpha}-k_{\beta}\right)^{2}\right]}},
\qquad \left(q_0=\frac{q}{k_{\rm F}}\right)
\label{eq:nesting}
\end{equation}
represents the strength of the nesting effects for spin excitations between the $\alpha$-band and
the $\beta$-band. Here,
$k_{\pm}=\sqrt{1+\lambda^2/2\mp\sqrt{\lambda^2+\lambda^4/4+\Delta_0^2}}$
is the radius of the Fermi sphere of the $\pm$-band.
At $q_0=0,k_{-}\pm k_{+},2k_{\pm}$, $\alpha_q$ diverges because of the strong nesting caused by the adjoining Fermi surfaces.
However, in a non-SOC system, $\alpha_q$ diverges only at $q_0=k_-\pm k_+$ \cite{UmetsuMiuraSakuma2012a}
because intra-band transitions are forbidden (i.e., the contribution from $\alpha=\beta$ is zero).
The divergence at $q=0$ in SOC systems is well understood from previous results \cite{Kambersky2007},
but the divergence at $q_0=2k_{\pm}$ arising from the intra-band transitions is a new result
related to the inhomogeneous dynamics of magnetization.
From Fig.\ref{fig:a}, it is confirmed that the $\alpha_q$ divergence
is suppressed by the impurity scattering of electrons, and
the value at each peak decreases with decreasing electron lifetimes.
These results imply that the nesting effects are reduced by broadening the Fermi level
due to the increase in self-energy.
There are cases that $\alpha_q$ increases with decreasing $\tau$
because the line width of each peak increases with $\tau$.
These behaviors are also confirmed in the non-SOC system in our previous study \cite{UmetsuMiuraSakuma2012a}.
This implies that $\alpha_q$ increases due to spin diffusion originating in inter-band transitions.
The behaviors of $\alpha_{q}$ near $q=0$ are shown in Fig.\ref{fig:a0}.
The value of $\alpha_{q}$ at $q=0$ corresponding to the Gilbert damping constant in a uniform precession system
diverges in the clean limit, but it converges in the presence of impurities \cite{Kambersky2007}.
On the other hand, in a non-SOC system,
$\alpha_{q=0}$ is always zero regardless of the concentrations of impurities;
this behavior is required from the angular momenta conservation law, which is satisfied by taking the vertex correction (VC).
However, in the presence of $magnetic$ (spin-dependent) impurities,
$\alpha_{q=0}$ has a finite value due to the violation of the conservation law \cite{Kohno2006,UmetsuMiuraSakuma2012a}.
In a non-SOC system,
the spin-dependency of impurities causes dramatic differences in the $\alpha_q$ behavior;
however, the spin-dependence on impurities rarely appears in SOC systems\cite{Garate2009}.
Therefore, we do not need to provide a detailed analysis of the effects of magnetic impurities in our RSOC system.
From Fig.\ref{fig:a_vc}, it is clear that results including the VC term are larger than those without the VC term, especially at $q\simeq 0$.
However, in a non-SOC system,
$\alpha_q$ with VC is zero at $q=0$,
and $\alpha_q$ is smaller than the results without VC.
The VC term reduces the overvalue of the contributions from spin diffusion originating in inter-band transitions.
In an SOC system at $q\simeq 0$, the contributions from intra-band transitions are much larger than those from inter-band transitions.
We conclude that the VC term of an SOC system enhances the contributions from nesting effects, which originate in intra-band transitions.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering{}\includegraphics[scale=1.2]{a}
\caption{The $q$-dependence of $\alpha_{q}$ (divided by $\nu_{\rm F}\Delta^2/S\epsilon_{\rm F}=10^{-2}$).
The results in the clean limit are indicated by the dashed line.
\label{fig:a}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering{}\includegraphics[scale=1.2]{a0}
\caption{Behavior of $\alpha_{q}$ near $q=0$.
\label{fig:a0}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering{}\includegraphics[scale=1.2]{a_vc}
\caption{Comparison of $\alpha_q$ in $q_0<0.05$ including the vertex corrections (VC) and not including the vertex corrections (NVC).
The solid lines show the results for VC, and the dashed lines show the results for NVC.
The blue lines are results for $\hbar/\tau=0.01\epsilon_{\rm F}$, and
the red lines are results for $\hbar/\tau=0.05\epsilon_{\rm F}$.
\label{fig:a_vc}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Distorting torque}
In this subsection, we discuss the results of both ${\alpha}^{x}_{\bm{q}}\hat{\sigma}^x$ and $\alpha^z_{\bm{q}}\hat{\sigma}^z$.
In the RSOC system, these terms vanish at $q=0$, but not at $q>0$.
From our calculations, the sum of these terms is given by
\begin{equation}
{\alpha}^{x}_{\bm{q}}\hat{\sigma}+\alpha^z_{\bm{q}}\hat{\sigma}^z
=\alpha^{xz}_{q}\hat{R}_{\bm{q}},
\end{equation}
where $\hat{R}_{\bm{q}}$ is the reflection matrix in terms of the direction $\theta_{\bm{q}}=\tan^{-1}(q_y/q_x)$:
\begin{align}
\hat{R}_{\bm{q}}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
\cos 2\theta_{\bm{q}}
& \sin 2\theta_{\bm{q}} \\
\sin 2\theta_{\bm{q}}
& -\cos 2\theta_{\bm{q}}
\end{array}\right).
\end{align}
Moreover, $\alpha^{xz}_q$ is the $q$-dependent coefficient of new torque, $\bm{n}^z\times\hat{R}_{\bm{q}}\dot{\bm{n}}_{\bm{q}}^\perp$.
The direction of this torque is shown in Fig.\ref{fig:orbit1}.
We call this the $distorting$ torque because it applies $\bm{q}$-dependent force to the precession motion.
For example, the distorting torque is parallel to the damping torque when $\bm{n}^\perp_{\bm{q}}$ is perpendicular to $\bm{q}$;
on the other hand, the distorting torque is anti-parallel to the damping torque when $\bm{n}^\perp_{\bm{q}}$ is parallel to $\bm{q}$.
The $q$-dependence of $\alpha_{q}^{xz}$ is shown in Fig.\ref{fig:axz}.
We confirm that the inequality equation, $\alpha_q^{xz}\leq\alpha_q$, is satisfied in the entire $q$-range.
Therefore, the precession orbits necessarily decrease with time.
In the clean limit,
\begin{equation}
\alpha^{xz}_q
=\frac{\nu_{{\rm F}}\Delta^{2}}{S\epsilon_{{\rm F}}}\lambda^{2}\sum_{\alpha\beta}\frac{\left(k_{\alpha}^{2}-k_{\beta}^{2}\right)^{2}/q_{0}^{2}+\alpha\beta\left(k_{\alpha}^{2}+k_{\beta}^{2}\right)}{\left(k_{-}^{2}-k_{+}^{2}\right)^{2}}I_{\alpha\beta}\left(q_{0}\right).
\label{eq:a1}
\end{equation}
The peaks of $\alpha_q^{xz}$ occur at same points with those of $\alpha_q$
because the right hand side of Eq.\eqref{eq:a1} includes $I_{\alpha\beta}\left(q_{0}\right)$.
This equation implies that the distorting torque is unique to the RSOC system
because $\alpha^{xz}_q$ is proportional to the square of $\lambda$.
We find that the contribution from the intra-band transitions of $\alpha_q^{xz}$,
which are given by $2\lambda^2\nu_{\rm F}\Delta^2k_\alpha^2I_{\alpha\alpha}(q_0)/S\epsilon_{\rm F}(k_-^2-k_+^2)^2$,
is equal to that of $\alpha_q$,
but the contribution from the inter-band transitions is not equal.
These results reflect the differences in the radius of the Fermi surfaces
and in the spin directions at the nesting points
between the $+$-band and the $-$-band.
These differences are attributed to the $\bm{k}$-dependent spin states originating from RSOC.
Moreover, the negative values of $\alpha_q$ at $1.7\lesssim q_0\lesssim 2$ imply
that the larger contributions come from inter-band transitions than from intra-band transitions.
In the presence of impurities,
the divergence of $\alpha_q^{xz}$ is suppressed similarly to the results of $\alpha_q$.
The behavior of $\alpha^{xz}_{q}$ near $q=0$ is shown in Fig.\ref{fig:axz0}.
At $q=0$, $\alpha^{xz}_q$ is always zero regardless of the presence or absence of impurities.
However, in $q\to 0$,
$\alpha_q^{xz}$ diverges (i.e., discontinuity at $q=0$) in the absence of impurities,
but $\alpha_q^{xz}$ converges to zero (i.e., continuity at $q=0$) in the presence of impurities.
In the absence of impurities, $\alpha_q^{xz}=\alpha_q$ at $q<k_--k_+$
because only intra-band transitions occur,
but this equality is no longer satisfied in the absence of impurities due to spin diffusion originating in the inter-band transitions.
Consequently, $\alpha_q^{xz}$ decreases at the peak near $q=0$, and
this peak shifts right with decreasing electron lifetimes.
Fig.\ref{fig:axz_vc} shows the differences between the results including VC and those without VC.
The values with VC are larger than those without VC, and
VC for $\alpha_q^{xz}$ clearly has effects similar to those for $\alpha_q$ (see Fig.\ref{fig:a_vc}).
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering{}\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{orbit1}
\caption{Direction of $\bm{n}^z\times\hat{R}_{\bm{q}}\dot{\bm{n}}_{\bm{q}}^\perp$.
\label{fig:orbit1}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering{}\includegraphics[scale=1.2]{axz}
\caption{The $q$-dependence of $\alpha_{q}^{xz}$ (divided by $\nu_{\rm F}\Delta^2/S\epsilon_{\rm F}=10^{-2}$).
The results in the clean limit are indicated by the dashed line.
\label{fig:axz}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering{}\includegraphics[scale=1.2]{axz0}
\caption{Behavior of $\alpha_{q}^{xz}$ near $q=0$.
\label{fig:axz0}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering{}\includegraphics[scale=1.2]{axz_vc}
\caption{Comparison of $\alpha_q^{xz}$ in $q_0<0.05$ including the vertex corrections (VC) and not including the vertex corrections (NVC).
The solid lines show the results for VC, and the dashed lines show the results for NVC.
The blue lines are results for $\hbar/\tau=0.01\epsilon_{\rm F}$, and
the red lines are results for $\hbar/\tau=0.05\epsilon_{\rm F}$.
\label{fig:axz_vc}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Oscillation modes}
In the small plane wave field $\bm{h}^\perp_{\bm{q}}$,
if we can neglect $\tilde{\beta}_{\bm{q}}$, then
the linearized equation of motion is given by
\begin{equation}
\dot{\bm{n}}_{\bm{q}}^\perp=-\gamma\bm{n}_{\bm{q}}^\perp\times \bm{H}^z-\gamma\bm{n}^z\times\bm{h}_{\bm{q}}^\perp
+\bm{n}^z\times\tilde{\alpha}_{\bm{q}}\dot{\bm{n}}_{\bm{q}}^\perp.
\label{eq:linearized}
\end{equation}
We solve Eq.\eqref{eq:linearized} by assuming harmonic-time-dependence of
$\bm{h}^\perp_{\bm{q}}(\sim{\rm e}^{{\rm i}\omega t})$
without the correction term $\alpha^y_{\bm{q}}\dot{\bm{n}}^\perp_{\bm{q}}$.
We obtain the eigenequation $n_{\bm{q}}^\pm=\chi^{\pm}_{\bm{q}}h_{\bm{q}}^\pm$,
where $n^\pm_{\bm{q}}$ is the oscillation mode corresponding to each component of the magnetic field,
$h^\pm_{\bm{q}}$ ($h^+_{\bm{q}}$ is the component of right-hand rotation relative to the direction $\bm{n}^z$
and $h^-_{\bm{q}}$ is the component of the opposing direction).
Assuming $\alpha_q,\alpha_q^{xz}\ll 1$, we find
\begin{equation}
n^{\pm}_{\bm{q}}=\cos\left(\omega t\right)\pm{\rm i}\sin\left(\omega t\right)\mp{\rm i}\alpha_q^{xz}\sin\left(\omega t +\sin 2 \theta_{\bm{q}}\right),
\label{eq:elliptical}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\chi_{\bm{q}}^\pm=\frac{\gamma}{\gamma H^z\mp {\rm i}\alpha_{q}\omega}.
\label{eq:sus+-}
\end{equation}
Eq. \eqref{eq:elliptical} indicates that each magnetization precession describes an elliptical trajectory.
Stronger SOC, which generates a large magnitude of $\alpha_q^{xz}$, produces a more elongated elliptical orbit.
When $\alpha^{xz}_{\bm{q}}>0$, the major axis of the elliptical orbit is parallel to $\bm{q}$,
while the major axis is perpendicular to $\bm{q}$ when $\alpha^{xz}_{\bm{q}}<0$.
From Eq.\eqref{eq:sus+-}, it is confirmed that $\chi^{\pm}_{\bm{q}}$ is not affected by $\alpha^{xz}_{\bm{q}}$
when $\alpha_q,\alpha_q^{xz}\ll 1$.
Therefore, $\alpha^{xz}_q$ cannot be determined experimentally in the same way as the estimation of $\alpha_q$, which can be measured from the line width of magnetic susceptibility.
To experimentally estimate the value of $\alpha^{xz}_q$,
direct observation of the elliptical orbit motion is required.
We suggest that the time-resolved magneto-optical Ker effect (TRMOKE) \cite{WalowskiKaufmannLenkHamannMcCordMuenzenberg2008}
is an appropriate method for detecting the elliptical trajectory in RSOC system.
For these observations, a large value of $\alpha^{xz}_q$ is required:
both strong RSOC and nesting effects are required.
In our results for $\hbar/\tau=0.01\epsilon_{\rm F}$,
the maximum value of $\alpha^{xz}_q$ is about $0.13$, which is sufficient for detection
at $q\simeq 0.12 k_{\rm F}\simeq O(10^{-1}){\rm \AA}^{-1}$.
However, an artificial excitation of spin wave which wave number is larger than 0.01 ${\rm \AA}^{-1}$
is technically difficult at this time.
Moreover, for clear detection of the $\bm{q}$-dependent precession motion,
the spot size of TRMOKE must be reduced from 10 $\mu$m to a few nanometers, which is currently a difficult target.
Thus, new experimental techniques are necessary to resolve these issues.
\section{Summary}
We calculate the dynamic part of the spin torque induced by the plane wave dynamics of magnetization in a RSOC system.
In addition to the conventional damping torque, our results show that
distorting torque, which is a phenomenon unique to RSOC systems,
originates from the inhomogeneous dynamics of magnetization.
The magnitudes of these torques depend on the strength of the nesting effects,
and they are reduced by decreasing the electron lifetime.
The vertex corrections for these terms are sufficiently large, especially in the long wavelength limit,
correcting the deficiency of contributions from nesting effects, which originate in the intra-band transitions.
In the resonant plane wave field,
the oscillation mode of magnetization precession exhibits an elliptical trajectory
whose major axis depends on the direction of the wave vector.
However, to observe this elliptical precession motion,
improvements in measurement sensitivity and experimental techniques are required.
\begin{acknowledgments}
This work was supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (24-5058) and by JSPS KAKENHI, Grant Number 25420686.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{Introduction}
The interplay of vibrational and electronic degrees of freedom
during the charge tunneling through molecular junctions gives rise to
striking nonequilibrium effects\cite{troisi}.
These include
phonon-assisted tunneling\cite{phonass1,phonass2},
hysteresis-induced bistability\cite{bist1,bist2,bist3}, local
heating\cite{heat}, molecular
switching\cite{switch1,switch2}, and negative differential
conductance\cite{phonass2,ndrexp1,ndrexp2}.
Furthermore, if the electronic coupling to the vibrations is particularly strong
a collective phenomenon known as Franck-Condon blockade (FCB)
occurs\cite{fcb}. This manifests itself in a dramatic suppression of the tunneling
current at low bias, accompanied by the appearance of several
vibrational sidebands inside the Coulomb-blockade diamonds,
recently observed in carbon nanotubes quantum dots (QD)\cite{vonoppen}.
From the theoretical side, the quantitative description and
understanding of the above phenomena represents a challenging nonequilibrium problem.
Many observed properties can be addressed
within the Anderson-Holstein model\cite{wingreen}, that describes a single electronic level
coupled linearly to a vibrational mode and to metallic electrodes.
Despite its apparent simplicity, however, this model
does not allow for an analytic solution
and approximate approaches must be resorted.
Only very recently, numerically exact methods
to calculate its nonequilibrium properties have been
put forward\cite{rabani,albrecht,wilner,thossexact,wilner2}. Beside
providing a valuable validation of previous findings,
the exact data have also revealed novel features, especially in the
time domain, like the extraordinarily long-transient
dynamics needed to reach the stationary state in the FCB regime\cite{albrecht}.
The inclusion of electron correlations widens the range of accessible phenomena,
but at the same time
complicates the theoretical treatment even further.
While a considerable amount of work has been devoted to
study intra-molecule electron-electron ({\it e-e})
interactions\cite{review} (mainly to address the
joint effects of vibrations and Coulomb blockade or
Kondo-like correlations), the role of interfacial
repulsion between the molecule and the leads
has been explored only very recently\cite{perfetto1}.
In that paper we
developed a novel approach to study
the complex interplay between the local electron-phonon ({\it e-p}) coupling
together with the
molecule-lead {\it e-e} repulsion.
We showed that the exciton formation at the molecule-lead interface
improves significantly the polaron mobility thus competing with the FCB.
As a consequence the FCB regime is dynamically established after a
long-lasting sequence of blocking-deblocking
events\cite{albrecht}, characterized by exciton-enhanced current spikes.
In this paper we extend our previous study by computing the
time-evolution of QD
density under the application of an external bias, and by investigating
how the transient current is modified by changing the initial conditions
for the time propagation.
When possible, we also compare our results with the exact data, finding
very good agreement.
We show that different ways of connecting in time the QD and the leads
can produce qualitative differences in the transient current,
accompanied by a change of the nature of the dominant oscillations.
\section{Model and formalism}
The model we consider consists in a single-level QD attached to two
semi-infinite one-dimensional noninteracting wires. An electron occupying the level
is coupled to a single vibrational mode located in the QD, and
at the same time interacts with the electrons in the leads which are in the proximity
of the QD. The spinless Hamiltonian describing this
system is given by (in standard notation)
\begin{eqnarray}
\hat{H}&=&-t_{w}\sum_{\alpha,j=1}^{\infty}(\hat{d}^{\dagger}_{\alpha j}\hat{d}_{\alpha
j+1}+\mathrm{h.c.})
+ T_{l} \sum_{\alpha}( \hat{d}^{\dag}_{\alpha 1}\hat{d} +\mathrm{h.c.} )
\nonumber \\
&+& \epsilon_{d} \hat{n}_{d}+ \omega_{0}\hat{a}^{\dagger}\hat{a} +
\lambda \hat{n}_{d} (\hat{a}^{\dag}+\hat{a}) +
U \hat{n}_{d}\sum_{\alpha}\hat{n}_{\alpha 1}, \; \; \; \;
\label{eq1}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\alpha=L,R$ labels the Left and Right lead, and
$\hat{n}_{d}=\hat{d}^{\dag}\hat{d}$, $\hat{n}_{\alpha 0}=
\hat{d}^{\dagger}_{\alpha 0}\hat{d}_{\alpha 0}$ are the
densities on the
QD and on the first sites of the lead $\alpha$ respectively.
The system is perturbed by an
external bias given by
$\hat{H}_{V}= \sum_{\alpha} V_{\alpha} \hat{N}_{\alpha}$, with
$\hat{N}_{\alpha}=\sum_{x} \hat{n}_{\alpha x} $ the total number of
particles in wire $\alpha$ and $V=V_{L}-V_{R}$ the total
applied voltage.
In the following we consider the continuum version $\hat{H}_{c}$ of the
above model since it allows for a nonperturbative treatment of
the {\it e-e} interaction via the bosonization
technique\cite{giamarchi}.
To this end we first assume half-filled wide
band leads with linear dispersion $\epsilon_{k}=v_{F}k$ (with $v_{F}=
2t_{w} a$
the Fermi velocity and $a$ the lattice spacing) and constant tunneling amplitude
$\Gamma=2\pi T_{l}^{2} \sum_{k}\delta(\omega-\epsilon_{k})=2T_{l}^{2}/t_{w}$, and then we unfold the
left and right leads\cite{boulat,perfetto1}.
In this way the first term of Eq. (\ref{eq1}) takes the Dirac-like
form $-\sum_{\alpha} i v_{F} \int dx \, \hat{\psi}^{\dagger}_{\alpha}(x)
\partial_{x}\hat{\psi}_{\alpha}(x)$,
where the electron field operator $\hat{\psi}_{\alpha}(x)$ describes
an electron at position $x$ in the (chiral) lead $\alpha$ moving with
velocity $v_{F}$. The rest of the continuum model is simply obtained by
replacing $\hat{d}_{\alpha x} \to \hat{\psi}_{\alpha}(x)$, $\sum_{x} \to \int dx$,
and by rescaling the model parameters according to $T_{l}\to t_{l}=2\sqrt{a}T_{l}$ and
$U\to u=4aU$.
We then bosonize the electron operators as \cite{giamarchi}
$
\hat{\psi}_{\alpha}(x)=\frac{\eta_{\alpha}}{\sqrt{2\pi a}}
e^{-2\sqrt{\pi}\,i\hat{\phi}_{\alpha}(x)},
\label{bospsi}
$
with boson field $
\hat{\phi}_{\alpha}(x)= i \alpha \sum_{q>0}\zeta_{q}
(\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{\alpha q }e^{-i\alpha qx}-\mathrm{h.c.})
- \sqrt{\pi}x\hat{N}_{\alpha}/ \mathcal{L}
$, and $\eta_{\alpha}$ the anticommuting Klein factor. In the mode expansion of
the boson field it holds $\zeta_{q}=\frac{ e^{- \frac{av_{F}q}{2}}
}{\sqrt{2\mathcal{L}q}}$, with $\mathcal{L}$ the length of the system.
The electron density in the leads takes the form
$
\hat{n}_{\alpha}(x)=-\partial_{x}\hat{\phi}_{\alpha}(x)/\sqrt{\pi}$,
and hence, up to an irrelevant term\cite{irlm},
the bosonized continuum Hamiltonian reads\cite{nota}
\begin{eqnarray}
\hat{H}_{c}&=&\sum_{\alpha , q>0} v_{F} q \hat{b}^{\dagger}_{\alpha q}
\hat{b}_{\alpha q} +\varepsilon_{d}\hat{n}_{d}
+ \omega_{0}\hat{a}^{\dagger}\hat{a}
\nonumber\\
&+&
t_{l} \sum_{\alpha}
\left[
\frac{\eta^{\dagger}_{\alpha}}{\sqrt{2\pi} }
e^{-2\sqrt{\pi}\sum_{q>0}\zeta_{q}
(\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{\alpha q}- \hat{b}_{\alpha q})} \hat{d} + \mathrm{h.c.}
\right] \nonumber \\
&+& \hat{n}_{d} \left[
\lambda (\hat{a}^{\dag}+\hat{a}) -u\sum_{\alpha ,q>0}
\frac{\zeta_{q}q}{\sqrt{\pi}}\,
(\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{\alpha q} +\hat{b}_{\alpha q}) \right].
\label{hboson}
\end{eqnarray}
Next we perform a multi-boson Lang-Firsov transformation to (formally) eliminate
the {\it e-p} and {\it e-p} coupling appearing in the last
line of the above equation\cite{irlm,perfetto1}.
The unitary operator
$
\hat{\mathcal{U}}=\mathrm{exp}[-\frac{\lambda}{\omega_{0}}
(\hat{a}^{\dag}-\hat{a})+2\sqrt{\pi}u\sum_{\alpha q}
\frac{\zeta_{q}}{2\pi v}
(\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{\alpha q }-\hat{b}_{\alpha q} ) ]\hat{n}_{d}
$
transforms the continuum Hamiltonian into
$\hat{H}_{c}'=\hat{\mathcal{U}}^{\dagger}\hat{H}_{c}
\hat{\mathcal{U}}$ with (from now on all sums are over $q>0$)
\begin{equation}
\hat{H}_{c}'=\sum_{\alpha q} v_{F} q \hat{b}^{\dagger}_{\alpha q}
\hat{b}_{\alpha q} + \omega_{0}\hat{a}^{\dagger}\hat{a}
+\tilde{\varepsilon}_{d}\hat{n}_{d}
+
t_{l}\sum_{\alpha}
\left[ \hat{f}^{\dag}_{\alpha 0} \hat{d} + \mathrm{h.c.}
\right] .
\label{hambos}
\end{equation}
In the transformed Hamiltonian it appears the renormalized fermion field
\begin{equation}
\hat{f}_{\alpha x}=\frac{\eta_{\alpha}}{\sqrt{2\pi a}}
e^{-\frac{\lambda}{\omega_{0}}(\hat{a}^{\dag}-\hat{a})+ 2\sqrt{\pi}\sum_{\beta
q}\zeta_{q} W_{\alpha \beta }
(\hat{b}^{\dagger}_{\beta q} e^{-i qx}- \hat{b}_{\beta q} e^{i qx})}
\end{equation}
evaluated in $x=0$, with
the effective interactions
$W_{RR}=W_{LL}=1-u/(2\pi v_{F} )$ and
$W_{RL}=W_{LR}=-u/(2\pi v_{F} )$, and renormalized energy level
$\tilde{\varepsilon}_{d}=\varepsilon_{d}-\frac{\lambda^{2}}{\omega_{0}}-u^{2}\sum_{q}
\frac{e^{-aq}}{\pi v_{F} \mathcal{L}}$.
In the new basis we have a noninteracting QD coupled to
effective leads (bosonic baths) whose ground state for $t_{l}=0$ is $|\Psi_{0}
\rangle=| 0_{p} \rangle \otimes \prod_{\alpha q}|0_{\alpha q}\rangle $,
where $| 0_{p} \rangle $ and $|0_{\alpha q}\rangle$ are the vacua of the
boson operators $\hat{a}$ and $\hat{b}_{\alpha q}$ respectively; the tunneling
coupling occurs via the correlated-polaron operator $\hat{f}$.
\section{Equation of motion}
The great advantage of casting the Hamiltonian in the form of
Eq. (\ref{hambos}) is the possibility of
writing an approximate equation of motion for the nonequilibrium QD Green's
function, solely in presence of a {\it correlated-polaron} embedding
self-energy. The latter accounts for the presence of the biased
leads as well as for the {\it e-p} and {\it e-p} interactions
in a nonperturbative way. We define the QD Green's function on
the Keldysh contour as
$G(z,z')=\frac{1}{i} \langle {\cal T} {\hat{d}(z) \hat{d}^{\dag}(z')} \rangle,$
where ${\cal T}$ is the contour ordering, operators are in the
Heisenberg picture with respect to
$\hat{H}_{c}'+\hat{H}_{B}$ (the bias perturbation does not change after the
transformation); the average is taken over
the uncontacted ground state $|\Psi_{0}\rangle\otimes |n_{d} \rangle$,
$|n_{d}\rangle$ being the state of the QD
with density $n_{d}$, with $n_{d}$ ranging from $0$ to $1$. In Ref.
\onlinecite{perfetto1} we proposed a controlled
approximation scheme in order to derive a closed (and numerically solvable)
equation of motion for $G$, that reads
\begin{equation}
(i\partial_{z}-\tilde{\varepsilon}_{d})G(z,z') - \int_{\gamma} d\bar{z} \sum_{\alpha}
\Sigma_{\alpha}(z,\bar{z}) G(\bar{z},z')=\delta(z,z') ,
\label{eom4}
\end{equation}
where
$
\Sigma_{\alpha}(z,z')
$
is the correlated-polaron embedding self-energy. The
real-time Keldysh components of $\Sigma$
can be evaluated exactly using again the bosonization method\cite{giamarchi}
and read
\begin{eqnarray}
\Sigma^{\lessgtr}_{\alpha}(t,t')=\pm
\frac{iv_{F}\Gamma e^{-g}}{4\pi a^{1-\beta} }
e^{i[\varphi_{\alpha}(t')-\varphi_{\alpha}(t)] }
\frac{ e^{ge^{\pm i\omega_{0}(t-t')}}}{[a \mp iv_{F}(t-t')]^{\beta}},
\label{sigmalutt}
\end{eqnarray}
with adimensional {\it e-p} coupling $g=(\lambda/\omega_{0})^{2}$,
interaction dependent exponent $\beta=1+\frac{u(u-2\pi
v_{F})}{2\pi^{2}v_{F}^{2}}$ and phase $\varphi_{\alpha}(t)=\int^{t}_{0}
d\bar{t}\, V_{\alpha}(\bar{t})$.
The power-law reflects the collective excitonic response
of the lead electrons to the attractive potential due to the creation
of a hole in the QD\cite{mahan}.
In the noncorrelated case we have $\beta=1$, while electron correlations
produce $\beta<1$; the smaller the exponent is, the stronger is the exciton effect.
The integral in Eq. (\ref{eom4}) runs
over the Keldysh contour $\gamma$, and
using the Langreth rules\cite{keldysh}
it is converted into a coupled system of Kadanoff-Baym
equations\cite{dvl.2007,mssvl.2009} (KBE) which we solve
numerically.
Once the Keldysh components of $G(z,z')$ are known,
the time-dependent QD density is calculated as
$n(t)=-iG^{<}(t,t)$, while the transient current
flowing through the QD and the $\alpha$ lead can be evaluated according
to
\begin{equation}
I_{\alpha}(z)=\int_{\gamma}d\bar{z} \,\Sigma_{\alpha}(z,\bar{z}) G(\bar{z},z)
+\mathrm{h.c.}\quad
\label{tdcurr}
\end{equation}
\section{Initial conditions}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\includegraphics[width=7.25cm]{density_bench.eps}
\caption{TD density in the partitioned approach for $U=0$ with initial QD occupancy $n_{d}=0$ (red) and $n_{d}=1$
(green).
Exact data from Ref.
\onlinecite{albrecht} are also displayed (circles). The rest of parameters are $\lambda=16$, $\omega_{0}=8$, $V=26$,
$\tilde{\epsilon}_{d}=-10$, $v_{F}/a=100$. Units: $\Gamma$ for energies
and $\Gamma^{-1}$ for times. The insets displays the TD
result for a longer propagation time, in order to appreciate that the two densities reach
the same steady-state value. }
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
Before presenting the explicit numerical results, a
brief discussion about the initial conditions is in order.
To solve practically Eq. (\ref{eom4}), one has to set the initial value
$G^{<}(0,0)=-in_{d}$, that corresponds to (apart from the $-i$ factor) the initial
density in the QD. This means that our propagation scheme assumes
the system initially {\it uncontacted} ($t_{l}=0$, i.e. the leads and
the QD are in their ground states),
and the contacts and bias are switched at time $t=0$.
Therefore the subsequent transient regime accounts for two different
dynamical processes: (i) the charge rearrangement due to the QD-lead contacting
(creation of Friedel-like oscillations in the leads, etc),
and (ii) the establishment of a genuine nonequilbrium many-body state due to
external bias (the rise of the current towards its steady-state value, etc).
This scheme corresponds to the so-called {\it partitioned} approach.
However, in a more realistic situation, the bias is switched when the
system is already contacted and in equilibrium (i.e. the leads and the
QD are in the ground state with $t_{l} \neq 0$).
This is the so-called {\it partition-free} approach\cite{cini,stefalmb}.
Here the transient dynamics can be very different from the
partitioned case, since the two processes (i) and (ii)
described above are not
superimposed\cite{perfspin,perfspin2,perfgraph,perfspin,perfjosep,riku}.
In our scheme we can numerically simulate the partition-free appraoch,
since the bias function $V_{\alpha}(t)$ (appearing in the phase
$\varphi_{\alpha}$
in Eq. (\ref{sigmalutt}))
is completely arbitrary.
In practice we consider a step-like bias function
$V_{\alpha}(t)=V_{\alpha}\theta(t_{th})$, that corresponds to take the system initially
uncontacted with a given $n_{d}$ at time $t = 0$, let the system
thermalize (dynamics (i)) till a time $t_{th}$ at which no current flows across
the links, and then we switch the bias perturbation on (dynamics
(ii))\cite{gkba}.
\section{Transient density}
In Fig. \ref{fig1} we assess the accuracy of the proposed approach
by comparing our results against exact data availabale in the
literature for $U=0$, and obtained within the partitioned scheme\cite{albrecht}.
It appears that the agreement is exceptionally good for initial
density $n_{d}=1$, while for $n_{d}=0$ we predict a slower raise of the
density towards its steady-state value. We recall, however, that in
this case our results improve the state-of-the-art\cite{albrecht}.
In the inset we show the TD
density for a longer propagation time (not within reach of current numerical techniques),
in order to appreciate that the two densities reach the same
steady-state value, as it should be.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\includegraphics[width=7.25cm]{density_relaxation.eps}
\caption{TD relaxation towards the equilibrium density for $U=0$ (black) and $U=t_{w}$ (red), with initial QD
occupancy $n_{d}=0.9$ and bias $V=0$. The rest of parameters and
units are the same as in Fig. \ref{fig1}. }
\label{fig2}
\end{figure}
We now study the effects induced by the QD-lead
repulsion $U$. Fig. \ref{fig2} displays
the relaxation of the QD density
from the uncontacted value ($n_{d}=0.9$)
to the equilibrium value, after that the system has been contacted
without bias.
We see that the effect of the screening interaction is twofold:
enhance the asymptotic value of $n(t)$, and speed up
the relaxation time.
The first effect origins from the fact that
a finite electron density in the QD induces
a charge depletion in the portion of the leads which are in the proximity
of the interface; part of the repelled charge, in turn, migrates towards the
QD thus enhancing its population.
The second, instead, is a jamming effect reminiscent of the one
found in Ref. \onlinecite{irlm}, that is due to the
dynamical screening of the QD charge and
tends to stabilize faster the value of $n(t)$.
\section{Transient current}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\includegraphics[width=7.25cm]{curr_bench.eps}
\caption{TD current within the partitioned scheme for different $U$,
initial QD occupancy $n_{d}=1$, and bias voltage $V=5\Gamma$.
For $U=0$, exact data from Ref.
\cite{albrecht} are also displayed (circles). The rest of parameters and
units are the same as in Fig. \ref{fig1}.}
\label{fig3}
\end{figure}
In this section we study the TD current $I(t)=[I_{L}(t)+I_{R}(t)]/2$
flowing under the application of the external bias.
As in the case of the density, the approach is first validated by
comparing our results with the exact
results recently obtained for $U=0$ within diagrammatic Monte Carlo
simulations\cite{albrecht}.
In Fig. \ref{fig3} a remarkable agreement between the
two approaches (within the partitioned scheme) can be appreciated.
In particular our method
efficiently reproduces the very peculiar transient behavior of $I(t)$
before the steady-state is reached.
In the absence of {\it e-e} interactions
the time-dependent current displays quasi-stationary plateaus where
almost no electron tunnels across the junction. At times
$t_{n}=2n \pi / \omega_{0}$ a deblocking effect occurs, and the current
exhibits narrow bumps, signaling a sudden electron flow.
When the {\it e-e} interaction is considered, we observe a
significant enhancement of the transport properties, characterized
by larger current spikes.
As we show below, the physical interpretation of
such striking transient dynamics
provides a clue to understand how the FCB regime is dynamically
established, and how {\it e-e} interaction modify the FCB scenario.
At $t=t_{n}$ an
electron occupying the QD is in the polaron ground-state with
phonon cloud centered at $x \sim n\lambda$ (with $n\approx 1$). At this time the polaron
tunnels to the lead, causing a displacement of the oscillator to $x\to 0$
(since now $n=0$). At this point the polaron cannot hop back to
the QD since the overlap between the two shifted oscillator
wavefunctions is negligible. Only after a vibrational period $2\pi /
\omega_{0}$ the overlap returns to be large, and the polaron can hop back to the
QD.
Let us now consider the effects of {\it e-e} interaction.
The mechanism described above is modified as follows: If at time $t=t_{n}$
ane electron is on the QD, the electron density diminishes
at the site of the lead boundary, thus
overcoming the hopping suppression due to the Pauli principle
and enhancing the effective tunneling rate\cite{borda,goldstein,irlm}.
Similarly, at time $t=t_{n+1}$ the electron can easily tunnel back to the
QD, being attracted by the hole previously left.
This explains in a transparent way the $U$-induced enhancement of the current
spikes observed in Fig \ref{fig3}.
We now focus on the effects of the different initial conditions. To
this end we compare the results obtained within the partitioned scheme vs the
ones obtained within partition-free scheme.
In Fig. \ref{fig4} we plot the TD current
in the two schemes without (upper panel) and with (lower panel)
screening interaction $U$. For the partitioned scheme we
employ two different initial values of the QD density, namely
$n_{d}=1$ (red curve) and $n_{d}=0$ (blue curve).
We recall that in order to display the partition-free curves together with the partitioned
ones, we shift the former of $t_{th}$.
We observe that the three currents correctly reach the same steady-state
and do it via similar long-lasting sequences of current spikes,
(typical of the FCB regime), and, as expected, the current in presence of $U$ is
enhanced with respect to that calculated at $U=0$ (Coulomb deblocking).
In this case the partitioning effects reflect in a quantitative
change of the early transient current (see the black curves vs the
red and blue ones), even
though the qualitative FCB-like transient behavior does not change.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\includegraphics[width=7.25cm]{part_vs_pf_W0.eps}
\includegraphics[width=7.25cm]{part_vs_pf_W1.eps}
\caption{Comparison between TD currents within the partion-free
scheme (black) vs partitioned scheme with $n_{d}=0$ (blue) and
$n_{d}=1$ (red). $U=0$ in the upper panel and $U-t_{w}$ in the lower
panel. The rest of parameters and
units are the same as in Fig. \ref{fig1}. The insets display the TD
result for a longer propagation time. The TD curve of the
partition-free case has been shifted of $t_{th}=100$. }
\label{fig4}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\includegraphics[width=7.25cm]{part_vs_pf_W0_eps0.eps}
\includegraphics[width=7.25cm]{part_vs_pf_W1_eps0.eps}
\caption{Comparison between TD currents in the resonant
condition $\tilde{\varepsilon}_{d}=0$ within the partion-free
scheme (dashed black) vs partitioned scheme with $n_{d}=0.5$ (blue).
$U=0$ in the upper panel and $U=t_{w}$ in the lower
panel. The rest of parameters and
units are the same as in Fig. \ref{fig1}. The insets display the TD
result for a longer propagation time. The TD curve of the
partition-free case has been shifted of $t_{th}=100$.}
\label{fig5}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\includegraphics[width=7.25cm]{part_vs_pf_W1_eps0V5.eps}
\caption{Comparison between TD currents in the resonant
condition $\tilde{\varepsilon}_{d}=0$ within the partion-free
scheme (dashed black) vs partitioned scheme with $n_{d}=0.5$ (blue).
$U=0$ and bias $V=5\Gamma$. The rest of parameters and
units are the same as in Fig. \ref{fig1}. The TD curve of the
partition-free case has been shifted of $t_{th}=100$. }
\label{fig6}
\end{figure}
In order to magnify the partitioning effects, we
focus on the perfect resonant case, obtained by setting $\tilde{\varepsilon}_{d}=0$.
Here (see Fig. \ref{fig5}) the partition-free transient current displays
{\it qualitative differences}. If we use $n_{d}=1/2$
for partitioned scheme, the TD density is pinned in both schemes at the constant
value $n(t)=1/2$ at each time (not shown), due to symmetry constraints.
Despite the TD density is identical in the two schemes, the TD
currents are remarkably different. In particular the FCB pattern
tends to disappear in the partition-free case, and the transient
current has a smooth oscillating behavior with dominant frequency $V/2$, i.e
the energy difference between the molecular level and the Fermi energy
of the leads. Here the interaction $U$ (lower panel of Fig. \ref{fig5}) amplifies these oscillations,
thus enhancing further the difference between the two currents.
This behavior is confirmed by decreasing the bias from $V=26\Gamma$ to
$V=5\Gamma$, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig6}. It is clear that the transient frequency
of the partition-free current reduces according to the smaller value
of $V$, whereas the spikes of the partitioned current continue to
appear with periodicity given by the phonon frequency $\omega_{0}$.
This qualitative change can be interpreted as follows:
At the resonance ($\tilde{\varepsilon}_{d}=0$) and if the leads are initially
relaxed around the QD, the {\it dressed} tunneling (that involves the excitation
of a phonons with energy $\omega_{0}$) has the same probability as the {\it bare} tunneling
(that involves virtual transition between the QD and the Fermi level of
the leads). In the partitioned case, instead, the {\it bare}
tunneling is suppressed because the electron charge in the leads is
optimally rearranged in the proximity of the QD.
\section{Conclusions}
We presented a systematic study of the
time-dependent transport properties of the Anderson-Holstein model in presence
of dot-lead screening interaction.
Thanks to the analytic expression of the
correlated-polaron embedding self-energy we gained a clear
understanding of how the two interactions combine together.
The validity of the approach was also corroborated by comparing our results against
exact data available in the literature.
Our approximated scheme allows for a calculation of the time-dependent density
that improves the current state-of-the-art, and at the same incorporates the screening
effects in a physically correct way.
The transient behavior of the current was carefully analyzed by considering different
initial contacting of the leads.
We showed that at early times the current can
exhibit qualitative different behaviors, depending if the
electron liquid in the leads is relaxed or not
around the QD before the switching of the bias.
At resonance, we found that the partition-free current displays coherent
oscillations with frequency equal to the applied bias,
whereas the partitioned current has
a periodicity dictated by the phonon frequency.
We acknowledge funding by MIUR FIRB
grant No. RBFR12SW0J.
|
\section{Introduction}
The analysis of peaks in the single particle spectral function, measured, for
instance, by photoemission experiments in solids or radio frequency (RF)
spectroscopy for ultracold atoms, provides important information about
correlation effects in interacting quantum many-body systems.
In the limit of weak interactions the spectral function displays peaks close
to the energies of the free fermion energy-momentum distribution and as such
directly represents single-particle properties.
At finite temperature and energies away from the Fermi surface, peaks are
broadened and the width is indicative of interaction effects, which open up
decay channels. If spontaneous symmetry breaking occurs below a certain
temperature, such as in a superconductor below $T_c$, the single-particle
excitations become gapped out and shifted by an amount $\Delta$, the
superconducting gap.
A more peculiar behavior is that of excitations being gapped out
(or suppressed) even though no obvious symmetry breaking and thermodynamic ordering
transition occurs. This is often referred to as pseudogap (PG) physics. The
spectral gap can look very similar to a gap due to symmetry breaking at
finite temperature. Therefore, it can be difficult to clarify the origin of
PG physics and to distinguish whether it is due to some hidden order or
a different effect. A very prominent example of such physics is provided by
the experimental observations in the hole doped copper-oxide high temperature
superconductors,\cite{TS99c,Kor15} where a relatively
large part of the phase diagram is occupied by such a PG
behavior. This phenomenon has attracted an enormous amount of attention,
however, there is currently no consensus about the physical origin of the
this PG for the cuprates, and different scenarios have been invoked as
an explanation. These include hidden order,\cite{CLMN01} spin-fluctuations, \cite{Sca12}
phase fluctuations and preformed pairs,\cite{EK95,MCCN14}
and the interplay with charge fluctuations.\cite{EMP13}
Here we focus on a conceptually simpler situation where PG physics has
also been reported and that is for systems of fermions with locally attractive
interactions. In situations without nesting the dominant instability at low
temperature is superconductivity and, correspondingly, pairing processes are
expected to be most relevant. In particular, the crossover from weak coupling
\citet*{BCS57} (BCS) theory
of superconductivity to strong coupling Bose-Einstein condensation (BEC) of pairs
has been studied extensively and is a classical problem in condensed
matter physics.\cite{Eag69,Leg80,NS85,Ran95} In the last decade it has
attracted renewed interest due to experimental realizations with ultracold fermions.
Superfluidity has been reported in such
systems,\cite{GRJ03,ZSSRKK04,ZSSSK05,BDZ08} also in the case where the
fermions are confined to an optical lattice.\cite{CMLSSSXK06} Moreover, based
on RF spectroscopy PG signatures have been reported for two \cite{FFVKK11} and
three-dimensional systems without optical lattices.\cite{GSDJPPS10,Ran10}
Three non-exclusive concepts are usually invoked to discuss the origin of
PG physics for attractive fermions: (i) {\em Preformed pairs}; for
intermediate coupling strength, pair formation without condensation is expected
to occur at a certain temperature $T_{\rm p}$ which is larger than the
superfluid (SF) phase transition temperature $T_c$. These preformed pairs can lead to PG
formation as a certain binding energy is required to break the pair and resolve a single
fermion excitation.\cite{Ran95,Ran10,CLS06} This idea leads to a popular scenario for PG
physics and is illustrated in a schematic phase diagram in
Fig.~\ref{schemphase_diagram}. (ii) {\em Pairing fluctuations} above $T_c$ and
their
effect on single particle properties via a many-body self-energy can lead to
PG physics.\cite{CLS06}
(iii) {\em Phase fluctuations}; in a situation where fermions
are paired one can imagine that a finite magnitude of the order parameter
establishes locally, however, no macroscopic coherent SF phase
develops due to strong phase fluctuation.\cite{EK95} In this situation the presence of
the ordering tendency related to a gap can then lead to PG signatures in the
spectral functions.\cite{ESAH02}
This behavior, which coincides with a small SF
stiffness, is expected to be particularly pronounced in two-dimensional systems.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{fig1.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\caption{(Color online) Schematic phase diagram for the preformed pair scenario in the $T-U$
plane with critical temperature $T_c$, pairing temperature $T_{\rm p}$,
Fermi liquid (FL) regime, and PG physics below $T_{\rm p}$ (after
Randeria \cite{Ran10}).
\label{schemphase_diagram}}
\end{figure}
Within one and the same calculation it is very difficult to obtain
non-perturbative results {\em and} to include all relevant fluctuation effects.
The purpose of this work is to contribute to a better understanding of the
importance of particular effects in the lattice situation based on
non-perturbative calculations.
It is important to distinguish different setups when comparing the
occurrence of PG physics for attractive fermions. First of all, dimensionality
plays an important role in determining the strength of fluctuations, and in
particular, the two-dimensional situation has more pronounced fluctuation effects.
Moreover, results can differ in calculations for a model defined in the continuum
and one on a lattice, such as the Hubbard model.
A well known example is the $T_c$ curve which drops with the coupling strength on the
lattice as $1/U$, whereas it approaches a constant in the continuum.
Here we will analyze the attractive Hubbard model in three spatial
dimensions. We will use the dynamical mean field theory (DMFT) approximation
\cite{GKKR96} to compute the self-energies and spectral function in the normal
and SF phase. This approximation is non-perturbative in the
interaction strength and therefore can describe very well the occurrence of
preformed pairs. However, it does not include the effect of phase fluctuations
(iii) and also does not include the effect of small momentum pairing
fluctuations. The PG physics observed in our work can therefore not be related
to such effects. Phase fluctuations above $T_c$ are usually argued to be of
minor importance for spectral properties in three dimensions.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{fig2.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Phase diagram at half filling. We distinguish four
different regimes: the superfluid phase (SF); a
non-Fermi-liquid regime (NFL), which is separated into a region with
PG in $\rho(\omega)$ and a region without PG (no PG); and a Fermi liquid regime (FL) below the
temperature $T_{\rm FL}$.
\label{phase_diagram}}
\end{figure}
There is a substantial literature of previous work on BCS-BEC crossover and PG
physics for attractive fermions, which however does not provide a clear and
complete picture about PG physics.
A popular approach is the diagrammatic T-matrix approximation,\cite{CSTL05,CLS06,CGHL10}
which captures well the effect of pairing fluctuations (ii). It was applied to the 2d
Hubbard model \cite{KMS99,RM01} and PG features have been found in the {\em
non}-selfconsistent version,\cite{CLS06} also in the continuum in two
\cite{MPPPS15} and three dimensions.\cite{PPSC02,TWO09,WTO10} Selfconsistent
T-matrix calculations for the
3d continuum model have found no PG in the spectrum.\cite{Hau92,HPZ09}
However, in the two-dimensional case recently PG behavior was found.\cite{BME14}
There are also non-perturbative calculations, such as DMFT and quantum Monte Carlo (QMC)
which found PG features in the continuum model\cite{MWBD09,HLDD10,WMDBR13} and for the Hubbard
model at different filling factors.\cite{RTMS92,TR95,VT97,MALKPVT00,KW11a,KW11b,RT14} The latter
results were found to be in good agreement with a diagrammatic technique.\cite{KAT01} It is worth
noting that QMC techniques usually need to perform
analytic continuation of imaginary axis data which can lead to uncertainties
in results for spectral functions.
DMFT studies, including cellular versions, for the
attractive Hubbard model have been carried out in the normal
phase,\cite{KMS01,CCG02,KGT06,KKS14} and in the broken symmetry
phase.\cite{GKR05,TBCC05,TCC05,BH09,BHD09,KW11a,KW11b}
Our major results are the following:
\begin{itemize}
\item
For large enough coupling strength we find PG physics at temperatures
$T>T_c$. At half filling the PG remains for {\em all} temperatures above
$T_c$ and therefore a pairing temperature $T_{\rm p}$
(Fig.~\ref{schemphase_diagram}) is not decisive to invoke the PG
in the spectral function (see Fig.~\ref{phase_diagram}). For different fillings the spectral function is
shifted due to the flattening of the Fermi function, such that the main
suppression of spectral weight does not occur at $\omega=0$.
\item
The occurrence of PG physics at high temperatures can be understood via split
local excitations on lattice sites visible for strong enough interactions.
\item
PG physics in the spectral function is related to Non Fermi Liquid (NFL) properties
of the self-energy (see Fig.~\ref{fig:sigma_schematic}, detailed definition below).
\item
We demonstrate in detail how the PG transforms smoothly into the
superconducting gap, when the temperature is lowered through $T_c$ (see
Fig.~\ref{TC}).
\end{itemize}
The paper is organized as follows: In Sec.~II we briefly describe our model
and method. Sec.~III discusses conceptual background about the occurrence of
PG physics in relation to the self-energy. In Sec.~IV and V we show results
for spectra and self-energies at and away from half filling before concluding
in Sec.~VI. In the appendix we compare the DMFT-NRG calculations to iterated
perturbation theory and to T-matrix calculations.
\section{Model definition and DMFT calculations}
Our study is based on the three-dimensional attractive Hubbard
model,\cite{MRR90,Ran95} which in the grand canonical formalism reads
\begin{equation}
H=\sum_{i,j,\sigma}(t_{ij}\elcre {i}{\sigma}\elann
{j}{\sigma}+\mathrm{h.c.})-\mu\sum_{i\sigma}n_{i\sigma}-U\sum_in_{i,\uparrow}n_{i,\downarrow},
\label{attHub}
\end{equation}
with the chemical potential $\mu$, the interaction strength $U>0$ and the
hopping parameters $t_{ij}$. $\elcre {i}{\sigma}$ creates a fermion at site
$i$ with spin $\sigma$, and $n_{i,\sigma}=\elcre {i}{\sigma}\elann
{i}{\sigma}$.
We take only a nearest neighbor hopping ($-t$), so that the non-interacting
energy-dispersion relation in the three-dimensional cubic system is given as,
${\bm k}=(k_x,k_y,k_z)$,
\begin{equation}
\epsilon_{{\bm k}}=-2t[\cos(k_x)+\cos(k_y)+\cos(k_z)].
\label{eq:dispersion}
\end{equation}
The dispersion satisfies $\epsilon_{-{\bm k}}= \epsilon_{{\bm k}}$. The corresponding
density of states (DOS) is denoted by $\rho_0(\epsilon)$. In the calculations we
will use the hopping $t$ and the bandwidth $W=12t$ as energy scales.
The main method used to study the Hamiltonian (\ref{attHub}) is the dynamical
mean field theory (DMFT).\cite{GKKR96}
Within DMFT, we have to self-consistently solve a quantum impurity model
describing a single lattice site in the environment of all other lattice
sites. In order to calculate the self energy for this quantum impurity model,
we mainly use the numerical renormalization group (NRG),\cite{BCP08} which is able to
calculate accurately expectation values, Green's functions, and self energies at
zero and finite temperatures\cite{PPA06,WD07} also in the superconducting
case.\cite{BOH07,HWDB08,BH09,BHD09}
Dynamical correlation functions are calculated within the NRG by broadening of
a large number of discrete excitations in the Lehman representation, and as
such do not require analytic continuation.
For our calculations, we choose a log-normal broadening function \cite{BCV01,BCP08} with
unusually narrow and temperature-independent width, $b=0.3$. One of the main reasons
for this is to avoid a large transfer of spectral weight to high energies
which can be particularly important at higher temperatures.
Using this narrow broadening leads to artificial oscillations in the spectra,
which originate from the discretization of the bath in the
NRG-calculation. In order to produce physical spectra, we finally smooth these
oscillations by averaging over $\Delta\omega=0.01 W$. This averaging is
justified for the present purpose, because we do not expect very fine and sharp
structures in our spectra on this energy scales to determine the physics of
the PG. Furthermore, we carefully compared our NRG calculated spectra with
iterated perturbation theory (see appendix). The latter technique does not
require to broaden discrete excitations and provides therefore a useful test
in a suitable parameter regime.
\section{Features of the spectral functions and self-energy}
Before presenting the results of our calculations it is useful to discuss some
basic features of the Green's functions and self-energy, which will help
us to better understand under which conditions PG physics occurs. In the literature
PG physics is considered quite generally either for the
integrated spectral function $\rho(\omega)=\frac{1}{N}\sum_{{\bm k}}\rho_{{\bm k}}(\omega)$,
which is equivalent to the local spectrum $\rho_{ii}(\omega)$, or for ${\bm k}$-resolved spectra
$\rho_{{\bm k}}(\omega)$ close to the Fermi surface. We will consider both
quantities in this paper. We note that a PG in one of
these does not necessarily imply one in the other quantity.
Let us first note that in the limit of high temperature $T\gg W,U$
correlation lengths become small and the physics is dominated by local
processes.\cite{Geo11}
This is seen, for instance, when we consider the bare single-particle propagator in
imaginary time
\begin{equation}
G_{ij}^0(\tau)=-\frac{1}{N}\sum_{{\bm k}}\mathrm e^{i{\bm k} \vct r_{ij}}\mathrm e^{-\xi_{{\bm k}}\tau}
\mathrm e^{\beta\xi_{{\bm k}}} n_{\rm F}(\xi_{{\bm k}}),
\label{eq:G0tau}
\end{equation}
where $\xi_{{\bm k}}=\epsilon_{{\bm k}}-\mu$ and $\tau\in[0,\beta)$. In the limit of
high temperature, $\beta=1/T\to 0$ and $n_{\rm F}(\xi_{{\bm k}})\to 1/2$. Then
$G_{ij}^0(\tau)$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:G0tau}) becomes essentially local, $\sim
\delta_{ij}$, and spatial components with $i\neq j$ vanish exponentially with
length scale $\lambda\sim \frac{at}{T}$.\cite{fn1}
Quantum mechanical
hopping is largely incoherent in this situation.
This also means that DMFT based on a local self-consistent approximation
can become very accurate in this high temperature limit.
For instance, high temperature expansions for the three dimensional Hubbard
model agree well with DMFT calculations for thermodynamical quantities, and
this remains to be the case down to temperatures of the order $T\simeq
W/8$.\cite{Geo11,LBKGS11}
One should, however, note that the self-energy of the three dimensional
Hubbard model does not become completely ${\bm k}$-independent even in the limit
$T\to\infty$.\cite{KPRS14}
What are the implications from this for the spectral function and the self-energy?
The excitations in the limit where local physics dominates
are determined by the local part of the Hamiltonian, $H_{\rm
loc}=-\mu\sum_{i\sigma}n_{i\sigma}-U\sum_in_{i,\uparrow}n_{i,\downarrow}$. At
half filling the chemical potential is fixed to $\mu=-U/2$, and depending on
the occupation $n=0,1,2$ we have the energies $E_{\alpha}=0,U/2,0$,
respectively. Excitations in the spectral function have finite matrix
elements for states where the particle number differs by one. Hence, in the spectral
function excitation at energies $\Delta E=\pm U/2$ can be expected. The corresponding
self-energy for the atomic problem reads,
$\Sigma_{ii}(\omega)=\frac{U^2}{4(\omega+i\Gamma)}$, where $\Gamma\to 0$. This
implies $\delta$-function peaks at $\pm U/2$ in the spectral function. In
Sec.~IV we will see that DMFT results at high temperature and large $U$ are
indeed of a similar form,
$\mathrm{Im}\Sigma_{ii}(\omega)=-\frac{U^2\Gamma}{4(\omega^2+\Gamma^2)}$.
Away from half filling the situation is more complicated, but similar
features remain visible.
If the peak in the self-energy is strong enough,
we find in the spectral function increased weight at $\omega=\pm U/2$ and a suppression of
spectral weight at the Fermi energy. These are the signatures of the PG in the
integrated spectral function.
For strong interactions this effect remains observable down to
intermediate temperatures. In other words, the PG in $\rho(\omega)$ is
related to the existence of Hubbard bands which are visible in the spectral
function at all temperatures.
We now discuss the appearance of a gap and PG in the momentum resolved
spectral function $\rho_{{\bm k}}(\omega)$.
In the normal phase the Matsubara Green's function reads
\begin{equation}
G_{{\bm k}}(i\omega_n)=\frac{1}{i\omega_n-\xi_{{\bm k}}-\Sigma(i\omega_n)},
\end{equation}
where we have assumed a momentum
independent self-energy as appropriate for DMFT calculations.
The spectral function is obtained from analytic continuation, $i\omega_n\to
\omega+i\eta$, $\eta\to 0$, to yield
\begin{equation}
\rho_{{\bm k}}(\omega)=-\frac{1}{\pi}\frac{\Sigma^I(\omega)}{[\omega-\xi_{{\bm k}}-\Sigma^R(\omega)]^2+\Sigma^I(\omega)^2}.
\end{equation}
We have separated real (R) and imaginary (I) parts of the self-energy.
In the SF state we can include an explicit symmetry breaking term,
$\Delta_{\rm sc}^{0}$, $\Delta_{\rm sc}^{0}\to 0$ for spontaneous symmetry
breaking, and
the non-interacting Green's function matrix $\underline G_{{\bm k}}^0(i\omega_n)$ has
the form,
\begin{equation}
\underline G_{{\bm k}}^0(i\omega_n)^{-1}=
\left(\begin{array}{cc}
i\omega_n-\xi_{{\bm k}} & \Delta^0_{\rm sc} \\
\Delta^0_{\rm sc} & i\omega_n + \xi_{{\bm k}}
\end{array}\right),
\label{frGfctsc}
\end{equation}
For the interacting system we introduce the matrix self-energy $\underline\Sigma_{{\bm k}}(i\omega_n)$ such
that the inverse of the full Green's function matrix $\underline
G_{{\bm k}}(i\omega_n)$ is given by the Dyson equation
\begin{equation}
\underline G_{{\bm k}}(i\omega_n)^{-1}=
\underline G_{{\bm k}}^0(i\omega_n)^{-1}-\underline\Sigma_{{\bm k}}(i\omega_n).
\label{scdyson}
\end{equation}
The diagonal component of the ${\bm k}$-dependent Green's function reads
\begin{equation}
G_{{\bm k}}(\omega)=\frac{\zeta_{2,{\bm k}}(i\omega_n)}{\zeta_{1,{\bm k}}(i\omega_n)\zeta_{2,{\bm k}}(i\omega_n)-\Sigma_{12}(i\omega_n)\Sigma_{21}(i\omega_n)} ,
\end{equation}
with $\zeta_{1,{\bm k}}(i\omega_n)=\omega-\xi_{{\bm k}}-\Sigma_{11}(i\omega_n)$,
$\zeta_{2,{\bm k}}(i\omega_n)=i\omega_n+\xi_{{\bm k}}-\Sigma_{22}(i\omega_n)$.
The off-diagonal self-energy $\Sigma_{12}(\omega)$, in particular its real
part, plays the role of a dynamic gap function,
$\mathrm{Re}\Sigma_{12}(\omega)\sim
\Delta$. Therefore, low energy spectral excitations which correspond to
$\omega=z(\xi_{{\bm k}}-\Sigma^{R}(0))$ in the normal phase are
shifted by the gap $\Delta$ to $\pm
E_{{\bm k}}\sim\pm z\sqrt{(\xi_{{\bm k}}-\Sigma^{R}(0))^2+\Delta^2}$, where
$z^{-1}=1-\partial_{\omega}\overline{\Sigma}^R_{11}(0)$ is the renormalization
factor. Usually we associate the gap with a
binding energy of pairs and hence we can interpret this energy shift as an energy
required to break a pair and see a single-particle excitation.
We now discuss the occurrence of a PG for momenta close to the Fermi
surface in the situation where no off-diagonal self-energy is present. Thus
consider ${\bm k}=\vk_{{\scriptscriptstyle \mathrm{F}}}$ (interacting Fermi surface) such that
$\xi_{\vk_{{\scriptscriptstyle \mathrm{F}}}}-\Sigma^R(0)=0$.\cite{fn2}
Then we can write
\begin{equation}
\rho_{\vk_{{\scriptscriptstyle \mathrm{F}}}}(\omega)=-\frac{1}{\pi}\frac{\Sigma^I(\omega)}{[\omega-\overline{\Sigma}^R(\omega)]^2+\Sigma^I(\omega)^2},
\end{equation}
where $\overline{\Sigma}^R(\omega)=\Sigma^R(\omega)-\Sigma^R(0)$.
Provided that $\Sigma^I(\omega)$ does not vary rapidly, we expect $\rho_{\vk_{{\scriptscriptstyle \mathrm{F}}}}(\omega)$ to be peaked when
the implicit equation $\omega=\overline{\Sigma}^R(\omega)$ is
satisfied. According to our definitions there is always a solution to this
equation for $\omega=0$. In a weakly interacting system at low
temperature $|\Sigma^I(\omega)|$ usually has a local minimum at $\omega=0$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:FL}
\mathrm{Im} \Sigma(\omega)=-a(T)-b\omega^2,
\end{equation}
where $a(T)\to 0$ for $T\to 0$ and $a,b>0$.
By the Kramers-Kronig relation $\partial_{\omega}\overline{\Sigma}^R(0)<0$ [see
Fig.~\ref{fig:sigma_schematic} (left)]. Then the only solution
of $\omega=\overline{\Sigma}^R(\omega)$ is the one at $\omega=0$. This is the
Fermi liquid peak in the spectral function at $\omega=0$ with width $\sim z
|\Sigma^I(0)|$ and weight $z$, where $z^{-1}=1-\partial_{\omega}\overline{\Sigma}^R(0)$.
We define the low energy behavior in Eq.~(\ref{eq:FL}) as Fermi liquid (FL) regime.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\columnwidth]{fig3a.pdf}
\hspace{0.1cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\columnwidth]{fig3b.pdf}
\vspace{-1cm}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Schematic plot for real and imaginary part of the
self-energy $\Sigma(\omega)$ in the FL (left) and NFL (right) regime. We
also show the corresponding spectral function $\rho(\vk_{{\scriptscriptstyle \mathrm{F}}},\omega)$ which
shows PG behavior in the NFL regime. The dashed diagonal line, $\omega$,
helps to identify the solutions of the equation
$\omega=\mathrm{Re}\Sigma(\omega)$, and those positions roughly coincide with
the PG peaks.}
\label{fig:sigma_schematic}
\end{figure}
A PG is obtained with different behavior.\cite{KS90a,KS90b}
If $|\Sigma^I(\omega)|$ possesses a local maximum at $\omega=0$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:NFL}
\mathrm{Im} \Sigma(\omega)=-a(T)+b\omega^2,
\end{equation}
then $\partial_{\omega}\overline{\Sigma}^R(0)>0$. If the slope is large enough we
will then encounter additional solutions of
$\omega=\overline{\Sigma}^R(\omega)$ as can be easily seen
graphically [see Fig.~\ref{fig:sigma_schematic} (right)]. Whether this is the
case depends on the interaction strength, filling fraction and
temperature. Since $|\Sigma^I(\omega)|$ is decreasing, we obtain a local
minimum at $\omega=0$ in the spectral function and broadened peaks at finite
energies.
This means that the original peak at $\omega=0$ is split and hence
we obtain a PG. Notice that a local maximum of $|\Sigma^I(\omega)|$
does not necessarily lead to a PG, if the self-energy is not large enough.
In the following we call the low energy behavior of Eq.~(\ref{eq:NFL})
Non-Fermi liquid (NFL) behavior.
As we have discussed above $|\Sigma^I(\omega)|$ is typically maximal at
$\omega=0$ at high temperature when the physics becomes dominated by local
interactions. It is also directly visible in the phase space factor appearing
in the second order perturbation theory in $U$ (see appendix).
Therefore, at high temperature we expect NFL behavior, and at low
temperature we usually have FL behavior.
We define the crossover scale as $T_{\rm FL}$, i.e., where the behavior of
$\Sigma^I(\omega)$ changes from Eq.~(\ref{eq:NFL}) to (\ref{eq:FL}).
In this picture PG behavior in $\rho_{\vk_{{\scriptscriptstyle \mathrm{F}}}}(\omega)$ occurs therefore as long
as (i) $U$ is large enough ($\sim W$) and (ii) $T> T_{\rm FL}(U)$. In
particular, the PG is always present above $T_c$ if $T_c>T_{\rm FL}(U)$.
\section{PG physics at half filling}
In this section we analyze results from the DMFT calculations for spectral
functions and self-energies and
focus on the situation at half filling.
An overview of the different regimes as function of $U$ and $T$ is shown
in Fig.~\ref{phase_diagram}.
The phase diagram includes the SF phase and the regimes where the self-energy shows FL and
NFL behavior as defined in Eq.~(\ref{eq:FL}) and Eq.~(\ref{eq:NFL}),
respectively. By performing calculations suppressing the SF phase below $T_c$,
we find that the boundary between FL and NFL regimes (not shown) is connected
to the bipolaron transition at $T=0$, which is equivalent to the Mott
transition for repulsive interactions.
The NFL regime in the phase diagram is separated into a region for stronger
interactions where we observe a PG in the integrated spectral function, and a region without PG (no PG) for weaker
couplings.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{fig4a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{fig4b.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Integrated DOS, $\rho_{11}(\omega)$, and imaginary
part of the self-energy, $\Sigma_{11}(\omega)$, for different interaction
strengths and temperatures.\label{compare}}
\end{figure}
In the upper panels of Fig.~\ref{compare} we show the interacting local
DOS $\rho(\omega)$. At weak coupling and intermediate temperatures, $\rho(\omega)$ very much
resembles the non-interaction DOS, $\rho_0(\omega)$, and the small
self-energy does not have a pronounced effect.
Although $|\mathrm{Im}\Sigma|$ is peaked at the Fermi energy for $U=0.4W$ at high
temperatures, there is no PG structure in the DOS.
In contrast, for larger interactions, $U/W=0.6$, $U/W=1$, we find at high
temperatures a PG structure of two peaks at $\pm U/2$ and
a suppression of the density of states at $\omega=0$. The behavior
is more pronounced for larger interactions. In both cases the magnitude of the
PG is clearly related to $U$.
This structure is induced by the NFL peak in the $|\mathrm{Im}\Sigma|$ (lower
panels). As discussed in the previous section III this result
can be understood in terms of the local excitations dominating the physics at
high temperature.
At weak and intermediate interaction strengths the system crosses
over to a FL regime before $T_c$ is reached when decreasing the
temperature. For $U/W=0.4$ and $U/W=0.6$, $|\mathrm{Im}\Sigma(\omega)|$ exhibits a dip at
the Fermi energy at low enough temperature,
$T/W<0.1$, which is accompanied with a peak structure in the DOS. Such a
change in the behavior of self-energy and DOS cannot be observed for strong
coupling, where the PG structure exists for all temperatures above $T_c$. At
very low temperatures, the system is in the SF
phase in all cases, which is characterized by a gap in the DOS, which
coincides with a dip in $\mathrm{Im}\Sigma(\omega)$.
So even though the two cases, $U/W=0.6$, $U/W=1$, in Fig.~\ref{compare} look similar at high
temperature (PG) and very low temperature (SF gap), they display
a striking difference for intermediate temperatures. For the larger
coupling strength the SF transition occurs from a PG state (see also
Fig.~\ref{TC}); in contrast for $U/W=0.6$, the SF instability happens in the
FL regime.
Further insights can be obtained by studying the behavior of the double
occupancy or local pair density, $\langle n_\uparrow n_\downarrow\rangle$,
which is shown in Fig.~\ref{double} for different temperatures and interaction
strengths.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{fig5.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) The local pair density $\langle n_\uparrow n_\downarrow\rangle$
for different temperatures and interaction strengths. The black arrow marks
the transition from non-Fermi-liquid to Fermi-liquid behavior. The red
arrow marks the transition into the SF phase. \label{double}}
\end{figure}
Independent of the interaction strength, in the high temperature limit, $T\gg
W,U$, the pair densities approach the non-interacting values $n_{\sigma}^2$, where
$n_{\sigma}$ is the density for one spin component, at half filling $\langle n_\uparrow
n_\downarrow\rangle=0.25$.
In the atomic limit, $t=0$, the double occupancy can be easily calculated.
At half filling, all atomic states are occupied with equal probability, so
that the double occupancy reads
\begin{equation}
\langle n_\uparrow n_\downarrow\rangle=\frac{1}{2+2\exp(-U/(2T))}.
\end{equation}
At high temperature, $T/W>0.5$, this formula agrees very well with the results in
Fig.~\ref{double}, demonstrating again that the physics at high temperature
is dominated by local processes.
Decreasing the temperature, $\langle n_\uparrow n_\downarrow\rangle$
increases due to the attractive interaction. This
effect is stronger for stronger interaction. For interaction strengths $U/W<0.8$, we
find a maximum {\em before} the system enters the
SF phase at $T_c$. This maximum appears to be correlated with the crossover
temperature $T_{\rm FL}$ (black arrows) between FL and NFL behavior in the
self-energy. The disappearance of the maximum in the pair density for
interaction strengths $U/W>0.8$ agrees with the vanishing of the FL regime
phase in the phase diagram. For $U/W<0.8$, the pair density
decreases when lowering the temperature below $T_{\rm FL}$, but then increases again when entering the SF
phase (arrow at $T_c$). For strong interactions ($U/W>0.8$) on the other hand,
the pair density increases with decreasing temperature until $T_c$ is
reached and then decreases. This agrees with the
known fact that the superfluidity is driven by interaction
energy gain for weak coupling, as opposed to kinetic energy gain for
strongly coupled systems.\cite{TCC05}
With these insights we can comment on how our results compare to the preformed
pair scenario in Fig.~\ref{schemphase_diagram}.
It is interesting to note that for very high temperatures the PG
behavior in Fig.~\ref{compare} does not change significantly anymore. In other
words the PG persists and no $T_{\rm p}$ for its appearance can be identified.
This is the case even for temperatures where the pair density has decreased to values
close to the non-interacting result.
Furthermore we found PG behavior for the two cases $U/W=0.6$, $U/W=1$ at high
temperature, but for intermediate temperatures ($T/W \sim 0.05$) the case
$U/W=0.6$ shows FL behavior. In both cases we observe a strongly enhanced
local pair density for such temperatures, which can be interpreted as a preformed pair
state, however, the manifestation in the spectral function is different.
Both of these observations are in clear contrast to the preformed pair
scenario, where the existence of the PG behavior is linked to the presence of an enhanced pair
density.\cite{Ran10,CLS06}
In Fig.~\ref{TC}, we take a closer look at dynamic response functions close to the
SF transition temperature $T_c$.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{fig6a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{fig6b.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) $\rho(\omega)$ and $\Sigma(\omega)$ close to the
SF phase transition. We use the same legend for the self-energies as
for the Greens functions. The transition temperatures are $T_c/W=0.32$ for
$U/W=0.6$ and $T_c/W=0.35$ for $U/W=1.0$.\label{TC}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}[!ht]
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig7a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig7b.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig7c.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig7d.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig7e.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig7f.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig7g.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig7h.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig7i.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) Momentum resolved spectral
function for $U/W=0.4$ (upper panel), $U/W=0.6$ (middle panels) and $U/W=1$ (lower panels). The
temperature are $T/W=0.2, 0.08, 0.01$ from left to right. The red line
corresponds to the non-interacting system, the green line corresponds to the
Fermi energy.\label{spec_momentum}}
\end{figure*}
The plots in the upper part of figure show $\rho(\omega)$ for $U/W=0.6$
and $U/W=1$, which correspond to a transition into the SF phase from the FL
and NFL regime, respectively. The lower part of the figure
displays the corresponding diagonal and off-diagonal self-energies (real and
imaginary parts). For the weaker coupling case, $U/W=0.6$, at $T>T_c$
there is the usual FL dip in $\mathrm{Im}\Sigma_{11}(\omega)$ and the corresponding peak in $\rho(\omega)$.
When the temperature is lowered through $T_c$ the off-diagonal self-energy
becomes finite and a dip in $\rho(\omega)$ is induced.
Very close below the transition temperature, the main effects for this come
from $\mathrm{Re}\Sigma_{12}(\omega)$. Lowering the temperature further, the
amplitude of the diagonal part of the self-energies decreases without showing
new features.
As discussed in Sec.~III the gapping out of excitation is dominated by
contributions from $\mathrm{Re}\Sigma_{12}(\omega)$.
In the case of stronger interaction, $U/W=1$, superfluidity sets in
the NFL regime with a PG at the Fermi energy.
When lowering the temperature through $T_c$, the off-diagonal
self-energy becomes finite, but at first the diagonal part of the self-energy
remains nearly unchanged (The orange line, $T/T_c=1$, overlaps with the dark
green line, $T/T_c=1.1$).
On further reducing the temperature the off-diagonal self-energy increases
substantially and $\mathrm{Im}\Sigma_{11}(\omega)$ is strongly reduced developing a FL dip at
the Fermi energy.
The gap in $\rho(\omega)$ changes smoothly from the PG with broad peaks separated by $U$
to the sharper structures (coherence peaks) in the
SF phase. It is interesting to note that the gap, if defined as
the distance between the maxima is larger above $T_c$ in the PG regime than in the SF
phase. One should also note that for low temperatures the gap becomes much
more pronounced with a suppression of spectral weight at $\omega=0$ and as such
is approaching a full gap in the limit $T\to 0$.
A remarkable observation is that the qualitative behavior of the off-diagonal
part of the self-energy can change within the SF phase.
Generally, $|\mathrm{Re}\Sigma_{12}(\omega)|$ approaches the mean field result $U\langle
c_{i,\uparrow} c_{i,\downarrow}\rangle$ for $|\omega|\to \infty$.\cite{BHD09}
At weaker coupling ($U/W=0.6$) and low temperature it is minimal for small $\omega$.
Decreasing the temperature, the anomalous expectation value increases and this
is reflected in the results for $\Sigma_{12}(\omega)$. The $\omega$-dependence
can be understood at weak coupling from the effective interaction for inducing
superfluidity, which possesses a repulsive component which is peaked for small
$\omega$.\cite{fn3}
However, when entering the SF phase from the PG regime at
stronger coupling ($U/W=1$), $|\mathrm{Re} \Sigma_{12}(\omega)|$ first develops a
strong maximum at $\omega=0$. When the temperature is lowered further this
behavior continually reverts to the one of the weak coupling situation. The form of the
spectral function changes at $T_c$ and there is a shift from the gap feature
being induced by $\Sigma_{11}(\omega)$ (above $T_c$) to $\Sigma_{12}(\omega)$
(below $T_c$). The observed strong changes are related to this shift and
a more thorough understanding requires further investigation.
We now turn our attention to features in the momentum resolved spectral function
$\rho_{{\bm k}}(\omega)$. A good overview of the behavior for different
interactions and temperatures can be obtained in the intensity plots in
Fig.~\ref{spec_momentum}.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{fig8.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) $\rho_{\vk_{{\scriptscriptstyle \mathrm{F}}}}(\omega)$ for $\vk_{{\scriptscriptstyle \mathrm{F}}}=(\pi/2,\pi/2,\pi/2)$ for $U/W=0.4$,
$U/W=0.6$ and $U/W=1$ for different temperatures.\label{compare2}}
\end{figure}
We show $\rho_{{\bm k}}(\omega)$ for three
interaction strengths [$U/W=0.4$ (upper panels), $U/W=0.6$ (middle panels),
and $U/W=1$ (lower panels)] for three different temperatures [$T/W=0.2$ (left), $T/W=0.08$ (middle), and
$T/W=0.01$ (right)]. We also show the Fermi level (dashed line) and the
non-interacting dispersion (full red line) as an orientation.
At weak coupling, $U/W=0.4$, the spectral function only displays a weak
modification from the non-interacting result with certain broadening of the
peaks and a minor shift of spectral weight. At low temperature the system is
SF and excitations at $\vk_{{\scriptscriptstyle \mathrm{F}}}$ are gapped out. Notice that the width of the
Bogoliubov peaks at the gap edge is overestimated by our broadening
procedure.\cite{BHD09}
For $U/W=0.6$, we find similar features for $\rho_{{\bm k}}(\omega)$ as what has
been found for the integrated spectral function, $\rho(\omega)$, as far as the PG is concerned. At high
temperatures we see a broadened dispersion similar but shifted from the
non-interacting one. Spectral weight is suppressed at the Fermi energy such
that PG features are realized at high temperatures. Curiously, this PG closes at
intermediated temperatures $\sim T_{\rm FL}$ where the behavior of the
self-energy changes. Below $T_c$ the spectrum is gapped again. Notice that
band renormalization features appear somewhat weaker than at high
temperatures.
For $U/W=1$ the NFL regime extends from high temperatures down to
$T_c$. The self-energy undergoes only very slight changes
when decreasing the temperature in the NFL regime. Accordingly, the
momentum-resolved spectral function for $T/W=0.2$ and $T/W=0.08$
(lower left panel and lower middle
panel) are nearly the same. We observe a large PG around the
Fermi energy; the spectral weight at the Fermi energy is very small. When
entering the SF phase, gap features are visible and the dispersion changes in
the vicinity of $\omega=0$. For this interaction strength, we observe a clear
deviation between the non-interacting band structure and the interacting
spectral function.
In the SF phase we find a mirror or ``shadow''
band appearing as reflected from $\omega=0$.
These bands can be understood due to a particle-hole doubling
in the Nambu representation. This is an effect also observed in the
antiferromagnetically ordered phase with zone doubling.\cite{BH07c}
In Fig.~\ref{compare2} we show particular cuts for $\rho_{\vk_{{\scriptscriptstyle \mathrm{F}}}}(\omega)$ as a
function of $\omega$. Here we can see the PG features even more
clearly. Similar as in the integrated spectrum, $\rho(\omega)$, the PG is absent for the weak coupling
case, $U/W=0.4$, but present at high temperature for stronger interactions, $U/W=0.6$ and
$U/W=1$. For $U/W=0.6$ the PG disappears in the FL regime,
whereas it remains for $U/W=1$. We also
show the real part of the diagonal self-energy. As discussed in Sec.~III,
the peak splitting in $\rho_{\vk_{{\scriptscriptstyle \mathrm{F}}}}(\omega)$ can be induced from non-trivial
solutions of $\omega=\mathrm{Re}\overline{\Sigma}_{11}(\omega)$, and we have
included a dashed line to see this graphically. As can be clearly seen, this
condition is not satisfied in the weak coupling case. In contrast, at strong
coupling, $U/W=1$, the intersection points characterize the peak positions
well. The spectral function changes in the SF phase (lowest temperatures), where the
coherence peaks at the gap edge become visible.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{fig9a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{fig9b.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) The DOS and imaginary part of the self-energy for
$U/W=0.6$ and $U/W=1$ for different temperatures. The filling of the system
is fixed to $n=0.5$.\label{compare_doped}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{fig10.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) The DOS and imaginary part of the self-energy for
$U/W=0.6$, and $U/W=1$ for different fillings. The temperature of the system
is $T/W=0.05$. All data shown corresponds to the normal phase.\label{compare_diff_doped}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig11a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig11b.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig11c.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig11d.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig11e.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig11f.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig11g.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig11h.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.32\linewidth]{fig11i.pdf}
\caption{(Color online) Momentum resolved spectral function
$\rho_{{\bm k}}(\omega)$ for $n=0.5$ from top to bottom $U/W=0.4$, $U/W=0.6$, and $U/W=1$;
and from left to right $T/W=0.2$, $T/W=0.08$, and $T/W=0.01$. The red line
corresponds to the non-interacting dispersion $\epsilon_{{\bm k}}$, the dashed green line
corresponds to the Fermi energy.\label{spec_momentum_doped}}
\end{figure*}
\section{PG physics away from half filling}
So far we have focused on the situation at half filling where the discussion
is somewhat simplified due to the particle-hole symmetry. In this section we
show results for different filling factors ($n<1$) to see
how the PG behavior is affected. This is important for comparison with
experiments with ultracold atoms, where due to the
trapping potential no homogeneous filling fraction can be expected.
In Fig.~\ref{compare_doped} results for $\rho(\omega)$ and
$\mathrm{Im}\Sigma(\omega)$ analogous to the ones in Fig.~\ref{compare} for the
half-filled case are displayed for $n=0.5$ over a wide temperature range. The
lowest temperature corresponds to a gapped SF state.
Looking at the self-energies in the lower panel, we can clearly see
that the classification into FL and NFL regions is still applicable and
$|\mathrm{Im}\Sigma(\omega)|$ can either show a double peak with dip in the vicinity of
$\omega=0$ (FL) or a strong single peak (NFL). It is useful here to distinguish
temperatures $T/W\lesssim 0.2$, where features are close to $\omega=0$, and
higher temperatures, where the NFL peak in $|\mathrm{Im}\Sigma(\omega)|$ moves
systematically to higher energies. In contrast to the half filled situation
the case $U/W=0.6$ does not show a clear PG in $\rho(\omega)$. However, for
$U/W=1$ the PG is clearly visible. For lower temperatures the minimum in
$\rho(\omega)$ is close to $\omega=0$ and for higher temperatures it moves to
higher energies together with the NFL peak in $|\mathrm{Im}\Sigma(\omega)|$. Notice,
however, that the minimum in $\rho(\omega)$ and the peak in
$|\mathrm{Im}\Sigma(\omega)|$ do not coincide as they do for $n=1$.
The shift of the PG with temperature can be understood by recalling that at
high temperature the Fermi distribution becomes flatter such that higher
energies contribute to the particle number, $n=\int d\omega \rho(\omega)n_{\rm
F}(\omega)$. To satisfy this relation at higher temperature the spectrum has
to be shifted.
The PG structure in $\rho(\omega)$ at elevated temperature can still be
understood from the local picture. For $n<1$, we can write
$\mu=-U/2-\Delta\mu$ ($U>0$) assuming $\Delta\mu>0$,
and the atomic energies are $E_{\alpha}=0,U/2+\Delta\mu, 2\Delta\mu$.
The partition function reads
\begin{equation}
Z=1+2\mathrm e^{-\beta(U/2+\Delta\mu)}+\mathrm e^{-\beta
2\Delta\mu}
\end{equation}
There are now excitations at $\omega_+=U/2+\Delta\mu$ and
$\omega_-=-U/2+\Delta\mu$ with generally asymmetric weights
\begin{equation}
w_+=\frac{1}{Z}[1+\mathrm e^{-\beta(U/2+\Delta\mu)}],
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
w_-=\frac{1}{Z}[\mathrm e^{-\beta 2 \Delta\mu}+\mathrm e^{-\beta(U/2+\Delta\mu)}],
\end{equation}
respectively.
Without showing explicit results we note that the pair density $\langle
n_\uparrow n_\downarrow\rangle$ displays a similar temperature dependence for
$n=0.5$ to what was shown in Fig.~\ref{double}, increasing from $n_{\sigma}^2$ at
large $T$ to larger values (maximal $n/2$). Therefore, similarly to the
half filled case PG behavior can coincide with an enhanced pair density for
large interactions and $T_c\lesssim T$. However, we also find cases,
e.g. $U/W=0.6$, $T/W=0.05$, with enhanced pair density ($\langle
n_\uparrow n_\downarrow\rangle \approx 0.17$) and no PG behavior, in
contrast to the expected relation in the preformed pair scenario.
In order to get an insight to overall trends, we compare several different fillings
in Fig.~\ref{compare_diff_doped}. We show $\rho(\omega)$ and $\mathrm{Im}\Sigma(\omega)$
for $U/W=0.6$ and $U/W=1$ for low temperature, $T/W=0.05$, in the normal phase.
For $U/W=0.6$ $\rho(\omega)$ exhibits a FL dip in $\mathrm{Im}\Sigma(\omega)$. It
is clearly visible, even for $n=0.1$, that the self-energy does not change its
structure when reducing the filling further. The frequency dependence in this
FL regime is relatively symmetric with respect to $\omega=0$.
The DOS, on the other hand, changes with $n$. While for $n =0.5$ a clear
peak close to the Fermi energy is visible in the DOS at low temperature, such
a peak is hardly noticeable for $n=0.2$, and it has disappeared for $n=0.1$. The
amplitude of the self-energy has become too weak to change the spectrum and we
essentially see a shifted non-interacting DOS.
For $U/W=1$, we find a NFL peak in $\mathrm{Im}\Sigma(\omega)$ for all fillings in
Fig.~\ref{compare_diff_doped}. We observe similar effects as for weaker
interactions when reducing the filling as far as the strength of the self-energy is concerned.
However, we find a clear PG structure in the DOS.
Whilst the PG structure at low temperature is pinned to
$\omega=0$, at high temperature the whole spectrum including the PG is shifted
to high frequencies (see Fig.~\ref{compare_doped}).
Note that at high temperature due to the flattening of $n_{\rm F}(\omega)$ the
Fermi energy ($\omega=0$) does not play such an important role as it does
for low temperatures.
In summary, when analyzing $\rho(\omega)$ and $\mathrm{Im}\Sigma(\omega)$ we can
find similar features to the ones of the half filled situation and a PG
appears for suitable parameters. However, depending on filling, temperature,
and interaction strength, the occurrence of the PG may be limited. At high
temperatures it can be shifted away from $\omega=0$, although it is still
clearly visible in the spectrum. Moreover, the impact of the local
Hubbard interaction becomes weaker for a system with smaller filling factor.
Momentum resolved spectra for $n=0.5$ and various values of $T$ and $U$ are displayed in
Fig.~\ref{spec_momentum_doped}. Generally, the features are similar to the
half filled case. For weak coupling ($U/W=0.4$) we find a shifted and
broadened spectrum which shows a SF gap at low temperature.
For intermediate coupling ($U/W=0.6$) interaction effects are more visible in
the spectrum, resulting in stronger band renormalization effects and shifts of
spectral weight. However, in contrast to $n=1$ no clear PG becomes visible in
$\rho_{{\bm k}}(\omega)$.
For $U/W=1$, we see strong interaction effects and PG features at all
temperatures above $T_c$. We also clearly observe an asymmetry in the
intensity, which is substantially lower for the $\omega<0$ part of the spectrum.
Particular cuts along $\omega$ for momenta which satisfy $\xi_{\vk_{{\scriptscriptstyle \mathrm{F}}}}+\mathrm{Re}\Sigma(0)=0$ are
shown in Fig.~\ref{Gk_doped}.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{fig12.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) $\rho_{\vk_{{\scriptscriptstyle \mathrm{F}}}}(\omega)$ for $U/W=0.4$, $U/W=0.6$ and $U/W=1$ and different
temperatures. Notice that the lowest temperature $T/W=0.01$ is below $T_c$
in all cases.
The lower panels show the real part of the self-energy including the line
$y=\omega$. \label{Gk_doped}}
\end{figure}
At weak coupling ($U/W=0.4$) the FL peak is gapped out when the temperature is
lowered below $T_c$. For intermediate coupling ($U/W=0.6$) above $T_c$ we find
that the FL peak is shifted away from $\omega=0$ to higher energies. Also the
coherence peaks below $T_c$ show some asymmetry due to self-energy effects.
A clear PG is only visible for larger interactions, $U/W=1$. The lower panel
shows again the real part of the self-energy. In
contrast to the situation at half filling, the peaks in $\rho_{\vk_{{\scriptscriptstyle \mathrm{F}}}}(\omega)$
are not well explained by the intersection, $\omega=\mathrm{Re}\overline{\Sigma}(\omega)$. In
this situation the variation of $\mathrm{Im}\Sigma(\omega)$ is too strong invalidating
the simple arguments of Sec.~III. Nevertheless a NFL peak form of the
self-energy is clearly important for the PG behavior.
\section{Discussion and Conclusions}
We have analyzed the occurrence of PG features in the integrated and
${\bm k}$-resolved spectral function of the three-dimensional attractive Hubbard
model for different temperatures, interactions and filling factors. Properties
of the spectral functions have been traced back to the characteristic behavior
of the self-energy. We find PG behavior as long as the interaction $U$ is
large enough ($\sim W$) and the self-energy shows NFL behavior, i.e., $T>
T_{\rm FL}(U)$.
Our results show marked deviations from the popular preformed pair scenario,
where PG behavior is directly linked to the formation of pairs at a temperature
$T_{\rm p}>T_c$: (i) We find that PG behavior persists up to large temperatures
and is not bounded by some temperature scale $T_{\rm p}$. (ii) We find cases
with a substantially enhanced pair density where no PG behavior occurs.
The first effect is related to the fact that we are working with a lattice
model, such that local excitations are always well defined and related to
the chemical potential $\mu$ and $U$. This might be different in the continuum
where it is conceivable that the preformed pair scenario of Fig.~1 is
applicable. On the other hand we expect the PG to be present at large
temperatures as a non-perturbative local lattice effect also in
the two-dimensional lattice model.
Certainly, other effects like strong phase fluctuations and small momentum
pairing fluctuations, not contained in our calculations, can lead to an
extension of the regimes where PG behavior occurs.
A word of caution is in order when discussing the large temperatures addressed
in this paper. Here we dealt with a strict one-band model where the kinetic energy is limited by
the bandwidth. In most real systems very high temperature would activate
higher bands, and in solid state systems, it can lead to the melting of the
crystal structure; such effects are obviously not allowed in our setup.
Experiments with ultracold atoms in optical lattices provide an excellent
platform to test our predictions. Interactions can be tuned in a wide range by
Feshbach resonances, the lattices can be loaded with different filling factors
and a temperature range $T/W=0.1-0.2$ is routinely accessible
\cite{BDZ08}. Integrated and momentum resolved spectra can be measured such
that a direct comparison with our predictions is possible.
Thus, we hope that our work will stimulate further efforts in this field which contribute to a
better understanding of the intriguing PG physics.
\paragraph*{Acknowledgments -} We wish to thank M. Capone, N. Dupuis,
A. Georges, O. Gunnarsson, B. Halperin, A. Koga, W. Metzner, E. Perepelitsky, M. Punk,
P. Strack, and A. Toschi for very helpful discussions and suggestions during
different stages of this work. JB acknowledges financial support from the DFG
through grant number BA 4371/1-1. RP is supported by the FPR program of
RIKEN. Computer calculations have been done at the RICC supercomputer at RIKEN
and the Kashiwa supercomputer of the Institute of Solid State Physics in
Japan.
\begin{appendix}
\section*{Appendix}
\subsection{T-matrix approximation}
A popular approximation for the self-energy is the so-called $T$-matrix
approximation, which corresponds essentially to summing the scattering
processes in the particle-particle channel. One has,\cite{Hau92,KMS99}
\begin{equation}
\Sigma^{(1)}=TU\sum_{m,{\bm q}}\mathrm e^{i\omega_m\eta}
G({\bm q},i\omega_m) ,
\label{eq:sigmaiw}
\end{equation}
or equivalently,
\begin{equation}
\Sigma^{(1)}=U\sum_{{\bm q}}\integral{\omega}{}{}\rho({\bm q},\omega)n_{\rm
F}(\omega) ,
\label{eq:sigmaiw}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\Sigma_{{\bm k}}^{\rm T}(i\omega_n)=T\sum_{m,{\bm q}}\mathrm e^{i\omega_n\eta}\Gamma({\bm q},i\omega_m)
G({\bm q}-{\bm k},i\omega_m-i\omega_n) ,
\label{eq:sigmaiw}
\end{equation}
with $\eta\to0$. Here we defined
\begin{equation}
\Gamma({\bm q},i\omega_m)=\frac{U^2K({\bm q},i\omega_m)}{1-U K({\bm q},i\omega_m)},
\end{equation}
with the particle-particle propagator
\begin{equation}
K({\bm q},i\omega_m)=-T\sum_{n,{\bm q}} G({\bm q}-{\bm k},i\omega_m-i\omega_n)G({\bm k},i\omega_n).
\end{equation}
The self-energy is
$\Sigma_{{\bm k}}(i\omega_n)=\Sigma_{{\bm k}}^{(1)}(i\omega_n)+\Sigma_{{\bm k}}^{\rm T}(i\omega_n)$.
In the local approximation, the expression simplify. We find the following
result after analytic continuation,
\begin{equation}
\Sigma^{(1)} =U\integral{\omega}{}{}\rho_G(\omega)n_{\rm F}(\omega) ,
\label{eq:sigmalociw}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\Sigma^{\rm T}(\omega)=\integral{\omega_1}{}{}\integral{\omega_2}{}{}\frac{\rho_{\Gamma}(\omega_1)
\rho_G(\omega_2)}{\omega^+-\omega_1+\omega_2}[n_{\rm B}(\omega_1)+n_{\rm F}(\omega_2)] .
\end{equation}
We have
\begin{equation}
K(i\omega_m)=-T\sum_{n} G(i\omega_m-i\omega_n)G(i\omega_n),
\end{equation}
and $\rho_{\Gamma}=-\frac{1}{\pi}\mathrm{Im}\Gamma(\omega^+)$.
Introducing spectral functions we can also write,
\begin{equation}
K(\omega^+)=\integral{\omega_1}{}{}\integral{\omega_2}{}{}\frac{\rho_G(\omega_1)\rho_G(\omega_2)}
{\omega^+-\omega_1-\omega_2}[n_{\rm F}(\omega_1)-n_{\rm F}(-\omega_2)],
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\Gamma(i\omega_m)=\frac{U^2K(i\omega_m)}{1-U K(i\omega_m)}.
\end{equation}
The $T$-matrix calculations can be done non-self-consistently (Tnsc) and
self-consistently (Tsc).
\subsection{Comparison of NRG-DMFT with IPT and T-matrix}
We start with a comparison of the DMFT results obtained using NRG calculations
for the effective impurity model with DMFT calculations using second order
perturbation theory, usually termed iterated perturbation theory (IPT). IPT gives
qualitatively reliable results in the half filled Hubbard model.\cite{GKKR96}
Since IPT does not require a prescription of broadening discrete excitations,
this comparison helps to validate the finite temperature broadening procedure
described in Sec.~II. We focus on results at half filling in this section.
In Fig.~\ref{comp_ipt} we show a comparison of the imaginary part of the
self-energy, $\mathrm{Im}\Sigma (\omega)$, and the integrated spectral function,
$\rho(\omega)$, for $U/W=0.6$ (left) and $U/W=1$ (right) and different temperatures.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\vspace{0.2cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\columnwidth]{fig13a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\columnwidth]{fig13b.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\columnwidth]{fig13c.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\columnwidth]{fig13d.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\caption{(Color online) Comparison of DMFT-NRG (full lines)
and IPT (dashed lines) results for $U/W=0.6$ (left) and $U/W=1$ (right) for
$\mathrm{Im}\Sigma (\omega)$ and $\rho(\omega)$.
\label{comp_ipt}}
\end{figure}
\noindent
Overall the agreement is good with minor deviations in the tails. There is
a particularly visible difference for $U/W=1$, where the IPT result for
$\mathrm{Im}\Sigma (\omega)$ shows a somewhat stronger peak. This leads to a more
pronounced PG in $\rho(\omega)$.
We conclude that the DMFT-NRG results at high temperatures have the
qualitative correct form and the PG remains there.
We also provide a comparison of the DMFT-NRG results with T-matrix
calculations. In particular, we use the Eq.~(\ref{eq:sigmalociw}) and
following, and include self-consistent (Tsc) and non-selfconsistent
(Tnsc) results. Note that the T-matrix calculations are only sensible as long as
$1-U \mathrm{Re} K(\omega)$ does not become zero, which is particularly important for
the non-selfconsistent case.
At weak coupling ($U/W= 0.2$, not shown) one can find reasonable agreement of
T-matrix calculations with the DMFT-NRG and all calculations give no PG
behavior. However, in this situation also second order perturbation theory
gives satisfactory agreement.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\vspace{0.2cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\columnwidth]{fig14a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\columnwidth]{fig14b.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\caption{(Color online) Comparison of DMFT-NRG result with self-consistent
(Tsc) and non-selfconsistent (Tnsc) T-matrix calculations for $\mathrm{Im}\Sigma
(\omega)$ and $\rho(\omega)$ for $U/W=0.4$ and $T/W=0.1$.}
\label{comp_tmatU04}
\end{figure}
\noindent
As seen in Fig.~\ref{comp_tmatU04} for $U/W= 0.4$ and $T/W=0.1$, Tsc and DMFT still show
reasonable agreement, whereas Tnsc calculations can lead to a strong
overestimate for $\mathrm{Im}\Sigma (\omega)$. This can lead to a PG feature in $\rho(\omega)$, even though
calculations with the DMFT-NRG give no PG behavior.
For intermediate coupling, $U/W=0.6$, and $T/W=0.2$, we show a further comparison
in Fig.~\ref{comp_tmatU06}.
\begin{figure}[!ht]
\begin{center}
\vspace{0.2cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\columnwidth]{fig15a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\columnwidth]{fig15b.pdf}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\caption{(Color online) Comparison of DMFT-NRG result with self-consistent
(Tsc) and non-selfconsistent (Tnsc) T-matrix calculations for $\mathrm{Im}\Sigma
(\omega)$ and $\rho(\omega)$ for $U/W=0.6$ and $T/W=0.2$.
\label{comp_tmatU06}}
\end{figure}
\noindent
In this case both T-matrix calculations give unreliable results. The
self-energy of the self-consistent version is too small and $\rho(\omega)$
shows no PG. The non-selfconsistent calculation shows a PG but its magnitude
is largely overestimated.
For larger interactions, for instance, $U/W=1$, the deviations get worse. We
therefore conclude that T-matrix calculations - both self-consistent and
non-selfconsistent - within the local approximation do not give reliable
results for the PG physics of the three dimensional Hubbard model at half
filling.
\subsection{Second order self-energy and phase space factor}
The result for the second order retarded self-energy reads,\cite{SC91}
\begin{equation}
\Sigma^r(\omega,{\bm k}) = U^2\integral{\epsilon}{}{}
\frac{F^r(\epsilon,{\bm k})}{\omega+i\eta-\epsilon}.
\end{equation}
The imaginary part of the retarded self-energy is then given by
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{Im}\Sigma^r_{{\bm k}}(\omega)=-\pi U^2 F^r(\omega,{\bm k}),
\end{equation}
where $F^r(\epsilon,{\bm k})=f_1(\epsilon,{\bm k})+f_2(\epsilon,{\bm k})$,
with the phase space factors,
\begin{widetext}
\begin{equation}
f_1(\epsilon,{\bm k})=\sum_{{\bm k}_1,{\bm k}_2,{\bm k}_3}\delta(\xi_{{\bm k}_2}+\xi_{{\bm k}_3}-\xi_{{\bm k}_1}-\epsilon)
\delta({\bm k}+{\bm k}_1,{\bm k}_2+{\bm k}_3)n_{{\bm k}_1}(1-n_{{\bm k}_2})(1-n_{{\bm k}_3}).
\end{equation}
and,
\begin{equation}
f_2(\epsilon,{\bm k})=\sum_{{\bm k}_1,{\bm k}_2,{\bm k}_3}\delta(\xi_{{\bm k}_2}+\xi_{{\bm k}_3}-\xi_{{\bm k}_1}-\epsilon)
\delta({\bm k}+{\bm k}_1,{\bm k}_2+{\bm k}_3)(1-n_{{\bm k}_1})n_{{\bm k}_2}n_{{\bm k}_3}.
\end{equation}
The expressions can be simplified in the limit of large dimensions. The momentum
integrations can be replaced by integrals over the density of states, momentum
conservation is implicit so we can omit the corresponding $\delta$-function
and the ${\bm k}$-dependence disappears,
\begin{equation}
f_1(\epsilon)=\integral{\epsilon_1}{}{}\!\integral{\epsilon_2}{}{}\!\integral{\epsilon_3}{}{}
\rho_0(\epsilon_1)\rho_0(\epsilon_2)\rho_0(\epsilon_3)
\delta(\epsilon_2+\epsilon_3-\epsilon_1-\epsilon-\mu)n_{\rm
F}(\epsilon_1-\mu)n_{\rm F}(-\epsilon_2+\mu)n_{\rm F}(-\epsilon_3+\mu).
\end{equation}
We can do the integration over the $\delta$-function,
\begin{equation}
f_1(\epsilon)=\integral{\epsilon_2}{}{}\!\integral{\epsilon_3}{}{}
\rho_0(\epsilon_2+\epsilon_3-\epsilon-\mu)\rho_0(\epsilon_2)\rho_0(\epsilon_3)
n_{\rm F}(\epsilon_2+\epsilon_3-\epsilon-\mu)n_{\rm F}(-\epsilon_2+\mu)n_{\rm F}(-\epsilon_3+\mu),
\end{equation}
\end{widetext}
and similarly for $f_2(\epsilon)$.
In the particle-hole symmetric case we have,
\begin{equation}
f_2(\epsilon)=f_1(-\epsilon),
\end{equation}
It is then sufficient to evaluate $f_1(\epsilon)$ and we can
write,
\begin{equation}
F^r(\epsilon,{\bm k})=F^r(\epsilon)=f_1(\epsilon)+f_1(-\epsilon).
\end{equation}
This can be evaluated as a double integral for a given temperature and
$\rho_0(\epsilon)$.
Assuming that $\rho_0(\epsilon)$ is only finite in an interval $(-D,D)$ we can
analyze the double integration as being determined by certain region in the
$\epsilon_3-\epsilon_2$ plane.
At $T=0$ a geometric analysis of the integration region shows,
$f_1(\epsilon)\sim \epsilon^2$, which gives the typical Fermi liquid behavior, Eq.~(\ref{eq:FL}),
at low temperature.
In the opposite limit, $T\to \infty$, a similar analysis shows that
$F^r(\epsilon)$ is maximal at $\epsilon=0$ and it decays for small $\epsilon$
as $-\epsilon^2$, which yields the NFL form Eq.~(\ref{eq:NFL}). One can estimate the
crossover temperature $T_{\rm FL}$ by studying when then coefficient of the
$\epsilon^2$ changes sign. Depending on the density of states and the
approximations made one finds a result of the order of a fraction of the
bandwidth, consistent with the result in Fig.~\ref{phase_diagram} for small
$U$.
\end{appendix}
|
\section{Introduction}
Classification of time-series data has attracted considerable interest in the recent decades, which is not surprising given the numerous domains where time series are collected. A recent paradigm has emerged into the perspective of classifying time series, the notion of \emph{shapelets}. Shapelets are supervised segments of series that are highly descriptive of the target variable~\cite{ye2009time}. In the recent years, shapelets have achieved a high momentum in terms of research focus \cite{ye2009time,lines2012shapelet,zakaria2012clustering,mueen2011logical,rakthanmanon2013fast}.
Distances of time series to shapelets can be perceived as new classification predictors, also baptized as \emph{"the shapelet-transformed data"} \cite{lines2012shapelet,hills2013transform}. It has been shown by various researchers that shapelet-derived predictors boost the classification accuracy \cite{ye2011time,lines2012shapelet,mueen2011logical}. In particular, shapelets are efficient in datasets where the class discrimination is attributed to local variations of the series content, instead of the global structure \cite{ye2009time}. Even though not explicitly mentioned by the related work, the discovery of shapelets can be categorized as a supervised dimensionality reduction technique. In addition, shapelets also provide interpretive features that help domain experts understand the differences between the target classes.
The discovery of shapelets, on the other hand, has not been as enthusiastic as their prediction accuracy. The current discovery methods need to search for the most predictive shapelets from all the possible segments of a time series dataset \cite{ye2009time,mueen2011logical,lines2012shapelet}. Since the number of possible candidates is high, the required time for evaluating the prediction quality of each candidate is prohibitive for large datasets. Therefore, the time series research community has proposed different speed-up techniques \cite{ye2009time,mueen2011logical,rakthanmanon2013fast}, aiming at making shapelet discovery \textbf{feasible} in terms of time.
This paper proposes a novel method that discovers time-series shapelets considerably faster than the fastest existing method. Our method follows the knowledge that time-series instances contain lots of similar segments. Often inter-class variations of time series depend on differences within small segments, with the remaining parts of the series being similar. Therefore, we hypothesize that the time needed to discover shapelets can be \textbf{scaled}-up by pruning candidate segments that are similar in Euclidean distance space. We introduce a fast distance-based clustering approach to prune future segments that result similar to previously considered ones. In addition, we propose a fast supervised selection of shapelets that filters out the qualitative shapelets using an incremental nearest-neighbor classifier. Extensive experiments conducted on real-life data demonstrate a large reduction (3-4 orders of magnitude) of the discovery time, by even gaining prediction accuracy with respect to baselines. The contributions of this paper can be short-listed as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item A fast pruning strategy for similar shapelets in Euclidean space involving a distance-based clustering approach;
\item A fast supervised selection of qualitative shapelets using an incremental nearest-neighbor classifier, conducted jointly with the pruning;
\item Extensive experimental results against the fastest existing shapelet discovery methods on a large set of 45 time-series datasets.
\end{enumerate}
\section{Related Work}
Shapelets were introduced by \cite{ye2009time} as a new primitive representation of time-series that is highly predictive of the target. A large pool of candidates from all segments of a dataset were assessed as potential shapelet candidates, while the minimum distance of series to shapelets was used as a predictive feature. The best performing candidates were ranked using the information gain criteria over the target. Successively, other prediction quality metrics were also elaborated such as the Kruskal-Wallis or Mood's median \cite{hills2013transform}, as well as F-Stats \cite{lines12quality}. The minimum distance of the time-series to a set of shapelets can be categorized as a data transformation (dimensionality reduction) and is named as \emph{shapelet-transformed data} \cite{lines2012shapelet}. Standard classifiers have been shown to perform competitively over the shapelet-transformed predictors \cite{hills2013transform}.
\vspace{-0.1cm}
\begin{figure*}[]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.67, trim=2cm 15.00cm 0.0cm 7.0cm]{shapeletTransform}
\caption[]{TwoLeadECG dataset: Aligning shapelets to the closest series segments, and on right the resulting 2-dimensional shapelet-transformed training data.}
\label{fig:shapeletTransform}
\end{figure*}
The excessive amount of potential candidates makes the brute-force (exhaustive) shapelet discovery intractable for large datasets. Therefore, researchers have come up with various approaches for speeding up the search. Early abandoning of the Euclidean distance computation combined with an entropy pruning of the information gain metric is an early pioneer in that context \cite{ye2009time}. Additional papers emphasize the reuse of computations and the pruning of the search space \cite{mueen2011logical}, while the projection of series to the SAX representation was also elaborated \cite{rakthanmanon2013fast}. Furthermore, the discovery time of shapelets has been minimized by mining infrequent shapelet candidates \cite{he2012fast}. Speed-ups have also been attempted by using hardware-based implementations, such as the usage of the processing power of GPUs for boosting the search time \cite{chang2012efficient}.
In terms of applicability, shapelets have been utilized in a battery of real-life domains. Unsupervised shapelets discovery, for instance, has been shown useful in clustering time series \cite{zakaria2012clustering}. Shapelets have seen action in classifying/identifying humans through their gait patterns \cite{sivakumar2012human}. Gesture recognition is another application domain where the discovery of shapelets has played an instrumental role in improving the prediction accuracy \cite{hartmann2010gesture,hartmann2010prototype}. In the realm of medical and health informatics, interpretable shapelets have been shown to help the early classification of time-series~\cite{xing2011extracting,xing2012early}.
In comparison to the state-or-the-art methods, we propose a fast novel method that discovers shapelets by combining a pruning strategy of similar candidates with an incremental classification technique.
\section{Scalable Shapelet Discovery}
\subsection{Distances of Shapelets to Series as Classification Features}
Throughout this paper we denote a time-series dataset having $N$ series of $M$ points each, as $T \in \R^{N \times M}$. While our method can work with series of arbitrary lengths, we define a single length M for ease of mathematical formalism. The distances of shapelets to series can be used as classification features, also known as shapelet-transformed features \cite{lines2012shapelet,hills2013transform}. The distance of a candidate shapelet to the closest segment of a series can be perceived as a membership degree for that particular shapelet. Equations~\ref{eq:minDistances1} and \ref{eq:minDistances2} formalize the minimum distances between a shapelet $s \in \R^m$ and the dataset $T$ as a vector of the Euclidean distances ($\mathcal{D}$) between the shapelet and the closest segment of each series. (The notation $V_{a:b}$ denotes a sub-sequence of vector $V$ from the $a$-th element to the $b$-th element.)
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:minDistances1}
\textbf{MinDist}(s,T) &:=& \begin{bmatrix}
\mathcal{D}(s,T_1) \\
\mathcal{D}(s,T_2) \\
\vdots \\
\mathcal{D}(s,T_N)
\end{bmatrix}
\\
\mathcal{D}(s,T_i) &:=& \min_{j = 1,\dots,M-m+1} \left\| T_{i,j:j+m-1} - s \right\|^2
\label{eq:minDistances2}
\end{eqnarray}
An illustration of the minimum distances between shapelets and series is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:shapeletTransform} for the TwoLeadECG dataset. Two shapelets (purple) are matched to four time-series of two different classes (red and blue). Following the principle that Equation~\ref{eq:minDistances2} states, the distance of a shapelet is computed to the closest series segment. The distances between training time-series and the two shapelets can project the dataset to a 2-dimensional shapelet-transformed space, as shown on the right sub-plot. A nearest neighbor classifier and the corresponding classification decision boundary is also illustrated.
\subsection{Quantification of Similarity Using a Distance Threshold}
A time series dataset contains lots of similar patterns spread over various instances. Since series from the same class follow a similar structure, similar patterns repeat over time-series of the same class. Similarities can also be observed among time series of different classes, because often classes are discriminated by differences in small sub-sequences rather than the global structure. As a result, we raise the hypothesis that existing state-of-the-art techniques, which exhaustively search all candidates, inefficiently consider lots of very similar patterns.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5, trim=2.0cm 15cm 0.0cm 7cm]{epsilonThreshold}
\caption[]{\textbf{a)}Distribution of distances among random pairs of candidates; \textbf{b)} Illustration of similar segments from the SwedishLeaf dataset with pairwise distances less than the $25-$th percentile of the distribution in \textbf{a)}.}
\label{fig:epsilonThreshold}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{fig:epsilonThreshold} illustrates the distribution of distances among arbitrary pairs of candidate segments from various time series of the UCR collection of datasets~\cite{ucrDatasets}. As can be seen from sub-figure \emph{a)}, the distribution of distances is highly skewed towards zero, which indicate that most candidates are very similar to each other. However, a threshold separation on the similarity distance is required to judge segments as being similar or not. We propose to use a threshold over the percentile on the distribution of distances. For instance, Figure \emph{\ref{fig:epsilonThreshold}.b)} displays pairs of similar segments whose pairwise distances are within the 25-th percentile of the distance distribution.
\begin{algorithm}[!]
\KwData{Time series data $T \in \R^{N \times M}$, Percentile $p \in \left[ 1,\dots,100 \right]$, Shapelet Lengths $\Phi \in \N^L$}
\KwResult{ Threshold distance $\epsilon \in \R$ }
$Z \leftarrow \emptyset$\;
\For{$1,\dots,NM$}{
Draw random shapelet length $\Phi_l \sim \mathcal{U}(\Phi_1,\dots,\Phi_L)$ \;
Draw segment indices $(i,j) \sim \left( \mathcal{U}(1,\dots,N), \mathcal{U}(1,\dots,M-\Phi_l+1) \right)$ \;
Draw segment indices $(i',j') \sim \left( \mathcal{U}(1,\dots,N), \mathcal{U}(1,\dots,M-\Phi_l+1) \right)$ \;
$Z \leftarrow Z \cup \left\{ \frac{1}{\Phi_l} || T_{i,j:j+\Phi_l-1} - T_{i',j':j'+\Phi_l-1}||^2 \right\} $\;
}
$Z \leftarrow \mbox{sort}(Z)$\;
$\epsilon \leftarrow Z_{ \lceil \frac{p}{100} N \, M \rceil }$\;
\KwRet{$ \epsilon$}
\caption{ \textbf{ComputeThreshold}: Compute the pruning similarity distance threshold $\epsilon$.}
\label{alg:computeThreshold}
\end{algorithm}
The procedure of determining a distance threshold value, denoted $\epsilon$ and belonging to the $p$-th percentile of the distance distribution, is described in Algorithm~\ref{alg:computeThreshold}. The algorithm selects a pair of random segments starting at indices $(i,j), (i',j')$ and having random shapelet lengths $\Phi_l$. Then a distribution is build by accumulating the distances of random pairs of segments and the distance value that corresponds to the desired percentile $p$ is computed from the sorted list of distance values. For instance, in case all the distance values are sorted from smallest to largest, then the 25-th percentile is the value at the index that belongs to $25\%$ of the total indices.
Totally there are $N M L$ segments in a time-series dataset and the total number of pairs is $\frac{1}{2} (NML)(NML-1)$. However, in order to guess the distribution of a set of values (here distances), one doesn't need to have access to the full population of values. On the contrary, a sample of values are sufficient for estimating the distribution. In order to balance between a fast and accurate compromise we choose to select $NM$-many random segment pairs for estimating the distance distributions. The runtime speed up success of Section~\ref{resultsSec} indicates that the distance threshold estimation is accurate.
\subsection{Main Method: Scalable Discovery of Time-series Shapelets}
The scalable discovery of time series shapelets follows the two primary principles of this paper: \emph{i)} Pruning of similar candidates, and \emph{ii)} on-the-fly supervised selection of shapelets. The rationale of these principles is based on the knowledge that the majority of patterns from any specific time series are similar to patterns in other series of the same dataset. Therefore, it is computationally non-optimal to measure the quality of lots of very similar candidates. Instead, we aim at considering only a small nucleus of non-redundant candidates.
\begin{algorithm}[!t]
\KwData{Time series data $T \in \R^{N \times M}$, Labels $Y \in \R^{N}$ Distance Threshold Percentile $p \in \left[1,\dots,100\right]$, Piecewise Aggregate Approximation ratio: $r \in \{\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{4}, \dots \}$, Shapelet lengths: $\Phi \in \N^L $ }
\KwResult{Accepted shapelets list $\mathcal{A} \in \R^{* \times *}$, Minimum Distances $D \in \R^{* \times *}$ }
$\epsilon \leftarrow \mbox{ComputeThreshold}(T,p,\Phi) $\;
$\mathcal{A}~\leftarrow~\emptyset, \mathcal{R}~\leftarrow~\emptyset, D~\leftarrow~\emptyset, X~\leftarrow~\textbf{0}_{N \times N}, \mbox{prevAccuracy} \leftarrow - \infty$\;
\For{$1,\dots, N M L$}{
Draw random series: $i \sim \mathcal{U}\{1,\dots,N\} $\;
Draw random shapelet length: $\Phi_l \sim \mathcal{U}\{\Phi_1,\dots,\Phi_L\} $\;
Draw random segment start: $j \sim \mathcal{U}\{1,\dots,M-\Phi_l+1\} $\;
Selected random candidate: $s \leftarrow T_{i,j:j+\Phi_l-1}$\;
\If{ $\lnot$LookUp($s,\mathcal{A},\epsilon$) $\land$ $\lnot$LookUp($s,\mathcal{R},\epsilon$)}{
$d^s \leftarrow$ MinDist($s,T$) \;
\For{$i = 1,\dots,N; \; m = i+1,\dots,N$ }{
$X_{i,m} \leftarrow X_{i,m} {\bf +} \left(d^s_i - d^s_m\right)^2$\;
}
\eIf{ $\mbox{Accuracy}(X, Y) > \mbox{prevAccuracy}$ }{
$\mathcal{A} \leftarrow \mathcal{A} \cup \{ s \}$\;
$D \leftarrow D \cup \{ d^s \}$\;
$\mbox{prevAccuracy} \leftarrow \mbox{Accuracy}(X, Y)$\;
}
{
$\mathcal{R} \leftarrow \mathcal{R} \cup \{ s \}$\;
\For{$i = 1,\dots,N; \; m = i+1,\dots,N$ }{
$X_{i,m} \leftarrow X_{i,m} {\bf -} \left(d^s_i - d^s_m\right)^2 $\;
}
}
}
}
\KwRet{$\mathcal{A},D$}
\caption{ \textbf{DiscoverShapelets}: Scalable discovery of shapelets }
\label{alg:discoverShapelets}
\end{algorithm}
\subsubsection{Taxonomy of The Terms} By \textbf{refused} candidates we mean the candidates that are similar to previously considered ones, while by \textbf{considered} candidates we mean those who are not refused. Among the \textbf{considered} candidates, some of them will be \textbf{accepted} and the rest \textbf{rejected}. The decision tree below helps clarifying the terms.
\begin{tikzpicture}[
thick,
scale=0.85,
node/.style={
transform shape
},
]
\node [node] (A) {Is \emph{candidate} similar to previously considered ones?};
\path (A) ++(-150:25mm) node [node] (B) {\textbf{REFUSE} \emph{candidate}!};
\path (A) ++(-31:\nodeDist) node [node] (C) {Does \emph{candidate} improve accuracy?};
\path (C) ++(-150:\nodeDist) node [node] (D) {\textbf{ACCEPT} \emph{candidate}!};
\path (C) ++(-30:\nodeDist) node [node] (E) {\textbf{REJECT} \emph{candidate}!};
\draw (A) -- (B) node [left,pos=0.35] {Yes.} (A);
\draw (A) -- (C) node [right,pos=0.25] {{\footnotesize No. Then \textbf{CONSIDER} \emph{candidate}!}} (C);
\draw (C) -- (D) node [left,pos=0.25] {Yes.} (D);
\draw (C) -- (E) node [right,pos=0.25] {No.} (E);
\end{tikzpicture}
The similarity of a candidate is first evaluated by looking up whether a close candidate has been previously considered, i.e has been previously flagged as either accepted or rejected. The considered non-redundant (non-similar to previous) candidates are subsequently checked on whether they improve the classification accuracy of previously selected candidates, and are either marked as accepted or rejected.
We are presenting our method as Algorithm~\ref{alg:discoverShapelets} and incrementally walking the reader through the steps. The algorithm is started by compressing the time-series via the Piecewise Aggregate Approximation technique, to be detailed in Section~\ref{sec:paa}. In order to prune similar candidates, the threshold distance $\epsilon$ is computed using Algorithm~\ref{alg:computeThreshold}. Our method operates by populating two lists of accepted and rejected shapelets, denoted as $\mathcal{A}$ and $\mathcal{R}$, and storing a distance matrix $X$ for distances between series in the shapelet-transformed space.
\begin{figure*}[]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.69, trim=1.5cm 12.00cm 0.0cm 7.0cm]{accRejRef}
\caption[]{ \textbf{a,b,c)} Relations of refused, rejected and accepted candidate shapelets, and the resulting accuracy, for the Starlight dataset; \textbf{d,e,f)} Histograms of refused, accepted and rejected candidate percentages over all 45 UCR datasets.}
\label{fig:accRejRef}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Pruning Similar Candidates} Random shapelet candidates, denoted $s$, are drawn from the training time-series and a similarity search is conducted by looking up whether similar candidates have been previously considered (lines 4-8). Equation~\ref{eq:lookUp} formalizes the procedure as a similarity search over a list $\mathcal{L}$ (e.g., $\mathcal{A}$ or $\mathcal{R}$), considering candidates having same length ($len()$). Please note that in the concrete implementation we use a pruning of the Euclidean distance computations, by stopping comparisons exceeding the threshold $\epsilon$.
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber
\textbf{LookUp}(s, \mathcal{L},\epsilon) \;\; := \;\; \exists q \in \mathcal{L} \;\;\; | \;\;\; || s - q ||^2 < \epsilon \\ \land \, \text{length}(s) = \text{length}(q)
\label{eq:lookUp}
\end{eqnarray}
\vspace{-0.1cm}
In case a candidate is found to be novel (not similar to previously considered), then the distance of the candidate to training series are computed using Equation~\ref{eq:minDistances1} and stored as $d^s$. Our approach evaluates the \textbf{joint} accuracy of accepted shapelets, so far, using a nearest neighbor classifier over the shapelet-transformed data, i.e. distances of series to accepted shapelets. When checking how does a new $(n+1)$-st candidate influence the accuracy of $n$ currently accepted candidates, an important speed-up trick can be used. We can pre-compute the distances among shapelet-transformed features in an incremental fashion. The distances among series in the feature-transformed space are stored in a distance matrix, denoted $X$, and the contribution of a new candidate can be simply added to the distance matrix. Those steps correspond to lines 10-12 and 19-21 in Algorithm~\ref{alg:discoverShapelets}. It is trivial to verify that this technique can improve the run-time of a nearest neighbor from $\BigO{N^2 |\mathcal{A}|}$ to $\BigO{N^2}$, which means that we can avoid recomputing distances among previously accepted $|\mathcal{A}|$-many shapelets.
\begin{figure*}[!htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.7, trim=1.5cm 15.0cm 0.0cm 7.0cm]{clusterIllustration}
\caption[]{Refused (gray) candidates versus Considered ones (blue), together with the distance threshold circles, are shown for MALLAT dataset. Considered shapelets are displayed on the right. Parameters: $r=0.125$, $p=25$, (i.e. radius is $\epsilon=1.26$), $m=25$. }
\label{fig:clusterIllustration}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Supervised Shapelet Selection} In case the contribution of a unique candidate improves the classification accuracy of a nearest neighbor classifier, then the shapelet is added to the accepted list and the distance vector is stored in a shapelet-transformed data representation $\mathcal{D}$, in order to be later on used for classifying the test instances. Otherwise, the shapelet is inserted to the rejected list and the contribution of the candidate to the distance matrix $X$ is rolled back. The classification accuracy of the distances between series and a set of shapelets is measured by the nearest neighbor accuracy of the cumulative distance matrix $X$. The accuracy over the training data is formalized in Equation~\ref{eq:nearestNeighbor}.
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\begin{eqnarray}
\textbf{Accuracy}(X,Y) := \frac{1}{N} \left| \left\{ i \; | \;\; Y_i = Y_{ \argmin_{m, m \ne i } X_{i,m} } \right\} \right|_{i=1}^{N}
\label{eq:nearestNeighbor}
\end{eqnarray}
\subsubsection{Number of Sampled Candidates}
Algorithm~\ref{alg:discoverShapelets} samples shapelet candidates randomly, however the total number of sampled candidates is $NML$, that upper bounds the total possible series segments of a dataset. Our method could perform competitively even if we would sample a subset of the total possible candidates, as indicated by Figure~\ref{fig:accRejRef} plot c). That plot illustrates that the train and test accuracy on the StarLightCurves dataset converges way before trying out all the candidates. However, since the state of the art methods try out all the series segments as candidates, then we also opted for the same approach. In that way, the runtime comparison against the baselines provides an isolated hint on the impact of the pruning strategy.
\subsubsection{An Illustration of The Process}
We present the main idea of our method with the aid of Figure~\ref{fig:accRejRef}. Sub-figures \emph{a), b), c)} display the progress of the method on the StarLightCurves dataset, the largest dataset from the UCR collection~\cite{ucrDatasets}. The fraction of considered (accepted+rejected) shapelets are shown in \emph{a)} with respect to the total candidates in the X-axis. As can be seen, the first few candidates are considered until the accepted and rejected lists are populated with patterns from the dataset. Afterwards, the algorithm starts refusing (pruning/not considering) previously considered candidates within the 25-th percentile threshold, while in the end, an impressive $99.97 \%$ of candidates are pruned. In fact this behavior is not special to the StarLightCurves dataset. We run the algorithm over all the 45 datasets of the UCR collection and measured the fraction of refused candidates as displayed in the histogram of sub-figure \emph{c)}. In average, $99.14 \%$ of candidates can be pruned, with cross-validated values $p,r$ on the training data for each dataset.
Among the considered candidates, a supervised selection of shapelets is carried on by accepting only those candidates that improve the classification accuracy. Sub-figure \emph{b)} shows that the number of rejections overcomes the number of acceptances as candidates are evaluated, which validates the current belief that very few shapelets can accurately classify a dataset \cite{ye2009time}. As a consequence of the accepted shapelets, the train and test accuracy of the method on the dataset is improved as testified by sub-figure \emph{c)}. With respect to all datasets of the UCR collection, histograms of sub-figures \emph{d), e)} show that in average \textbf{only} $0.06 \%$ of candidates are accepted and $0.81 \%$ are rejected.
\subsubsection{A further intuition}
The similarity based pruning of candidates can be compared to a particular type of clustering where the considered candidates represent centroids. In principle, the mechanism resembles fast online clustering methods \cite{Allan:1998:ONE:290941.290954}. Figure~\ref{fig:clusterIllustration} illustrates how the considered shapelets (blue) can be perceived as an $\epsilon$ threshold clustering of the refused candidates (gray). Each cluster is represented by a hyper-ball of radius $\epsilon$ in a $m$-dimensional space, for $m$ being the shapelet length. For the sake of illustration we selected random points of the shapelets and printed 2-dimensional plots of the 6 considered candidates and 7036 refused candidates from the MALLAT dataset.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.7, trim=2.2cm 16.80cm 8.0cm 6.5cm,clip=true]{epsilonAnalysis}
\caption[]{Impact of alternating the distance threshold's \textbf{percentile} ($p$) value on accuracy, discovery time and the fraction of refused candidates.}
\label{fig:epsilonAnalysis}
\end{figure}
The threshold distance used for pruning similar candidates has a significant effect on the quantity of refused candidates. Figure~\ref{fig:epsilonAnalysis} analyses that the increase of the percentile parameter both deteriorates the classification accuracy (sub-figure \emph{a)}) and significantly shortens the running time (sub-figure \emph{b)}). The higher the distance threshold percentile, the more distant segments will be considered similar and subsequently more candidates will be refused. In order to avoid a severe accuracy deterioration, the percentile parameter $p$ needs to be fixed by cross-validating over the training accuracy.
\subsection{Piecewise Aggregate Approximation (PAA)}
\label{sec:paa}
The Piecewise Aggregate Approximation (PAA) is a dimensionality reduction technique that shortens time-series by averaging neighbor values \cite{Chakrabarti:2002:LAD:568518.568520}. Algorithm~\ref{alg:paa} illustrates how the time-series of a dataset can be compressed by a ratio $r$. For instance, if $r=\frac{1}{4}$ then every four consecutive points are replaced by their average values.
\begin{algorithm}[!]
\KwData{Time series data $T \in \R^{N \times M}$, PAA ratio $r \in \left\{ \frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{3},\frac{1}{4}, \dots \right\}$}
\KwResult{ $ T^\text{PAA} \in \R^{N \times \lceil M \, r \rceil } $ }
$T \leftarrow \textbf{\bf 0}_{N \times \lceil M \, r \rceil }$\;
\For{$i \in 1,\dots,N, \, j = 1,\dots,\lceil M \, r \rceil$}{
\For{$k \in \lceil \frac{1}{r} \left( j-1 \right) + 1 \rceil,\dots, \lceil \frac{j}{r} \rceil$}{
$T^\text{PAA}_{i,j} \leftarrow T^\text{PAA}_{i,j} + T_{i,k}$\;
}
$T^\text{PAA}_{i,j} \leftarrow T^\text{PAA}_{i,j} \,\, r$\;
}
\KwRet{$ T^\text{PAA}$}
\caption{ \textbf{PiecewiseAggregateApproximation}: Compress every series by a ratio $r$.}
\label{alg:paa}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{figure*}[]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.7, trim=1.5cm 16.80cm 0.0cm 7.4cm]{paaAnalysis}
\caption[]{\textbf{a,b)} Consequence of PAA into accuracy and running time; \textbf{c)} Grid sensitivity of the impact of PAA and the percentile distance threshold over accuracy.}
\label{fig:paaAnalysis}
\end{figure*}
PAA significantly reduces the discovery time of shapelets as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:paaAnalysis} (sub-figure b) for selected datasets. On the other hand, subfigure a) shows that the classification accuracy does not deteriorate significantly because time-series data often have a redundancy in length and can be compressed.
The exact amount of PAA reduction and the percentile of the pruning similarity threshold are hyper-parameters that need to be fixed per each dataset using the training data. For instance, Figure~\ref{fig:paaAnalysis} (sub-figure c) illustrates the accuracy heatmap on the 50words dataset as a result of alternating both parameters. As shown, optimal accuracy is achieved for moderate values of percentile threshold and compression. As a contrast, (i) excessive compression and (ii) high threshold percentiles can deteriorate accuracy by (i) destroying informative local patterns by compression and (ii) pruning qualitative variations of shapelet candidates.
\subsection{Algorithmic Analysis of the Runtime Speed-Up}
The running time of shapelet discovery algorithms, which explore candidates among series segments, is upper bounded by the number of candidates in a dataset. Given $N$-many training series of length $M$, the total number of shapelet candidates has an order of $\BigO{N M^2}$, while the time needed to find the best shapelet is $\BigO{N^2 M^4}$. Please note that the discovery time is quadratic in terms of the number of candidates. Applying Piecewise Aggregate Approximation (PAA), in order to reduce the length of time-series by a ratio $r \in \{\frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{3}, \frac{1}{4}, \dots,... \}$, does alter the runtime complexity into $\BigO{N^2 \left(r \,M\right)^4}$ translated to $\BigO{{\bf r^4} N^2 M^4}$. In other words, PAA reduces the running time by a factor of $\bf r^4$. Furthermore, similarity pruning of candidates has a determinant role in reducing the runtime complexity. Let us denote the fraction of considered candidates as $f := \frac{\# \text{accepted} + \# \text{rejected} }{N M^2}$. Therefore, if executed after a PAA reduction, our algorithm reduces the number of candidates to $\BigO{f N \left( rM \right)^2}$ and impacts the total runtime complexity by $\BigO{f N \left( rM \right)^2 \times \left( N \left( rM \right)^2 + 2N^2 \right) }$, which is upper bounded by $\BigO{f r^4 N^2 M^4}$, since usually $ \left( rM \right)^2 >> 2N $. Ultimately, the expected runtime reduction factor achieved by this paper is upper-bounded by $\bf f r^4$.
There is an addition term that adds up into the runtime complexity: the time needed to check whether any sampled candidate has been previously considered. Such a complexity is $\BigO{N(rM^2) \times f|r \Phi_{*}|}$, in other words, all candidates times the time needed to search for $\epsilon$ similarity on the accepted and rejected lists ($f$-considered candidates having length $|r \Phi_{*}|$). Since $|r \Phi_{*}| \sim \BigO{rM}$, then the whole operation has a final complexity of $\BigO{fr^3 NM^3}$. Such a complexity is smaller that the time needed to evaluate the accuracy of the candidates ($\BigO{f r^4 N^2 M^4}$), therefore does not alter the big-O complexity. Remember, e.g.: $\BigO{3x^3 + 7x^2 + 100x} \sim \BigO{x^3}$.
Let us illustrate the theoretically expected speed-up via an example. Assume we compress time-series into a quarter of the original lengths, i.e. $r = \frac{1}{2}$. On the other hand, the average fraction of considered shapelets in the UCR datasets is $f = 0.0086$, as previously displayed in Figure~\ref{fig:accRejRef}. Therefore, a run-time reduction factor of $f r^4 = \left(0.0086\right) \left(0.065\right) \approx 5.3 \times 10^{-4}$ is expected. As shown, the expected theoretic runtime speedup can be 4 orders of magnitude compared to the exhaustive shapelet discovery. A detailed analysis of the effects of the dimensionality reduction (PAA compression) and pruning on the runtime performance is provided in Section~\ref{sec:originResults}. Furthermore, in Section~\ref{resultsSec} we will empirically demonstrate that our method is faster than existing shapelet discovery methods.
\section{Experimental Results}
\subsection{Baselines}
In order to evaluate the efficiency of the proposed method, denoted \textbf{SD}, the fastest state-of-the-art shapelet discovery methods were selected, being:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textbf{Logical Shapelet \cite{mueen2011logical} (denoted as LS)}: advances the original shapelet discovery method \cite{ye2009time} by one order of magnitude, via: (i) caching and reusing computations, and (ii) applying an admissible pruning of the search space~\cite{mueen2011logical}.
\item \textbf{Fast Shapelet \cite{rakthanmanon2013fast} (denoted as FS)}: is a recent state-of-the-art method that proposes a random projection technique on the SAX representation by filtering potential candidates~\cite{rakthanmanon2013fast}. FS has been shown to reduce the shapelet discovery time of LS by two to three orders of magnitude~\cite{rakthanmanon2013fast}.
\item \textbf{Improved Fast Shapelet (denoted as FS++)}: is a variation of FS that we created for the sake of being fair to the FS baseline. The original FS paper iterates through all the shapelet lengths from one to the length of the series. In comparison, our method SD iterates through a subset of the possible lengths ($\Phi$) as mentioned in Section~\ref{sec:setup}. In order to be fair (with respect to runtime), we created a variant of the FS, named FS++, that also iterates through the same subsets of shapelet lengths that SD does.
\end{enumerate}
The comparison against the listed state-of-the-art methods will testify the efficiency of our method in terms of runtime scalability. When proposing a faster solution to a supervised learning task, it is crucial to also demonstrate that the speed-up does not deteriorate the prediction accuracy. For this reason, we payed attention to additionally compare the classification accuracy against the baselines.
\subsection{Setup and Reproducibility}
\label{sec:setup}
\begin{table*}[htbp!]
\scriptsize
\caption{Datasets Statistics (Number of classes (Cls.), Number of series instances (Train/Test) and their length (Len.) )}
\begin{tabular}{|r|l|r|c|r||r|l|r|c|r||r|l|r|c|r|}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\textbf{No}} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{Dataset}} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{Cls.}} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{Instances}} & \multicolumn{1}{c||}{\textbf{Len.}} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{No}} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{Dataset}} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{Cls.}} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{Instances}} & \multicolumn{1}{c||}{\textbf{Len.}} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{No}} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{Dataset}} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{Cls.}} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{Instances.}} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{Len.}} \\ \hline \hline
1 & 50words & 50 & 450 / 455 & 270 & 16 & FacesUCR & 14 & 200 / 2050 & 131 & 31 & Sony.I & 2 & 27 / 953 & 65 \\ \hline
2 & Adiac & 37 & 390 / 391 & 176 & 17 & Fish & 7 & 175 / 175 & 463 & 32 & Sony.II & 2 & 20 / 601 & 70 \\ \hline
3 & Beef & 5 & 30 / 30 & 470 & 18 & Gun\_Point & 2 & 50 / 150 & 150 & 33 & StarLight. & 3 & 1000 / 8236 & 1024 \\ \hline
4 & CBF & 3 & 30 / 900 & 128 & 19 & Haptics & 5 & 155 / 308 & 1092 & 34 & SwedishLeaf & 15 & 500 / 625 & 128 \\ \hline
5 & Chlorine. & 3 & 467 / 3840 & 166 & 20 & InlineSkate & 7 & 100 / 550 & 1882 & 35 & Symbols & 6 & 25 / 995 & 398 \\ \hline
6 & CinC\_ECG. & 4 & 40 / 1380 & 1639 & 21 & ItalyPower. & 2 & 67 / 1029 & 24 & 36 & synthetic. & 6 & 300 / 300 & 60 \\ \hline
7 & Coffee & 2 & 28 / 28 & 286 & 22 & Lighting2 & 2 & 60 / 61 & 637 & 37 & Trace & 4 & 100 / 100 & 275 \\ \hline
8 & Cricket\_X & 12 & 390 / 390 & 300 & 23 & Lighting7 & 7 & 70 / 73 & 319 & 38 & Two\_Patterns & 4 & 1000 / 4000 & 128 \\ \hline
9 & Cricket\_Y & 12 & 390 / 390 & 300 & 24 & MALLAT & 8 & 55 / 2345 & 1024 & 39 & TwoLeadECG & 2 & 23 / 1139 & 82 \\ \hline
10 & Cricket\_Z & 12 & 390 / 390 & 300 & 25 & MedicalImages & 10 & 381 / 760 & 99 & 40 & uWave.X & 8 & 896 / 3582 & 315 \\ \hline
11 & Diatom. & 4 & 16 / 306 & 345 & 26 & MoteStrain & 2 & 20 / 1252 & 84 & 41 & uWave.Y & 8 & 896 / 3582 & 315 \\ \hline
12 & ECG200 & 2 & 100 / 100 & 96 & 27 & Non.FatalECG.1 & 42 & 1800 / 1965 & 750 & 42 & uWave.Z & 8 & 896 / 3582 & 315 \\ \hline
13 & ECGFive. & 2 & 23 / 861 & 136 & 28 & Non.FatalECG.2 & 42 & 1800 / 1965 & 750 & 43 & wafer & 2 & 1000 / 6174 & 152 \\ \hline
14 & FaceAll & 14 & 560 / 1690 & 131 & 29 & OliveOil & 4 & 30 / 30 & 570 & 44 & WordsS. & 25 & 267 / 638 & 270 \\ \hline
15 & FaceFour & 4 & 24 / 88 & 350 & 30 & OSULeaf & 6 & 200 / 242 & 427 & 45 & yoga & 2 & 300 / 3000 & 426 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:dataSetInformation}
\end{table*}
In order to demonstrate the speed-up achievements of the proposed shapelet discovery method, we use the popular collection of time-series datasets from the UCR collection~\cite{ucrDatasets}. For the sake of completeness, we experimented using all the 45 datasets of the collection. The statistics of the datasets are shown in Table~\ref{tab:dataSetInformation}. For each dataset the number of series instances, the number of classes and the length of the time series is presented.
Our Scalable Shapelet Discovery method, denoted as \textbf{SD}, requires the tuning of two parameters, the aggregation ratio $r$ and the threshold percentile $p$. The parameters were searched for each dataset via cross-validation using only the training data. The combination $(r,p)$ that yielded the highest accuracy on train was selected. In case of equal train accuracy scores, then we picked the highest $(r,p)$ values. A grid search was conducted with parameter ranges being $r \in \left\{ \frac{1}{2}, \frac{1}{4}, \frac{1}{8} \right\}$ and $p \in \left\{15,25,35 \right\}$. Finally, the winning combination of parameters was applied over the test data. We would like to note that we used three shapelet lengths for all our experiments, i.e. $L=3$ and $\Phi=\left\{0.2M,0.4M,0.6M \right\}$. In order to promote reproducibility we are presenting the $p,r$ values found by our parameter search in Table~\ref{tab:resultsTab}.
We used the Java programming language to implement our method (SD), while the other baselines (LS, FS, FS++) are implemented in C++. We decided to use the C++ source codes provided and optimized by the respective baseline paper authors \cite{rakthanmanon2013fast,mueen2011logical}, in order to avoid typical allegations on inefficient re-implementations. Finally, we are presenting the exact number of accepted shapelets per each dataset and the respective percentages of the accepted, rejected and refused candidates in the columns merged under "SD Performance". \textbf{All} experiments (both our method and the baselines) were conducted in a \textit{Sun Grid Engine} distributed cluster with 40 node processors, each being \textit{Intel Xeon} E5-2670v2 with speed 2.50GHz and 64GB of shared RAM for all nodes. The operating system was \textit{Linux CentOS} 6.3. All the experiments were launched using the same cluster parameters.
\emph{The authors are devoted to promote experimental reproducibility. For this reason the source code, all the datasets, the executable file and instructions are provided unconditionally}\footnote{\url{https://www.dropbox.com/sh/btiee2pyn6a989q/AACDfzkkpdYPmgw7pgTgUoeYa}}.
\begin{table*}[htbp]
\center
\caption{ \textbf{Parameters} of SD and \textbf{Results} of SD and SOTA baselines over 45 UCR datasets in terms of shapelets' discovery time and classification accuracy (n/a denotes a 24h time-out)}
\begin{tabular}{|r|l||r|r||r|r|r|r||r|r|r|r||r|r|r|r|}
\hline
\multicolumn{ 1}{|c|}{\textbf{No}} & \multicolumn{ 1}{c||}{\textbf{Dataset}} & \multicolumn{ 2}{c||}{\textbf{SD Parameters}} & \multicolumn{ 4}{c||}{\textbf{SD Acc/Rej/Ref Statistics}} & \multicolumn{ 4}{c||}{\textbf{Discovery Time (seconds)}} & \multicolumn{ 4}{c|}{\textbf{Classification Accuracy}} \\ \cline{ 3- 16}
\multicolumn{ 1}{|c|}{} & \multicolumn{ 1}{c||}{} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{r}} & \multicolumn{1}{c||}{\textbf{p}} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{\#Acc}} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{\%Acc}} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{\%Rej}} & \multicolumn{1}{c||}{\textbf{\%Ref}} & \textbf{LS} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{FS}} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\textbf{FS++}} & \multicolumn{1}{c||}{\textbf{SD}} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{LS}} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{FS}} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\textbf{FS++}} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\textbf{SD}} \\ \hline \hline
1 & 50words & 0.250 & 35 & 39 & 0.0 & 0.1 & 99.8 & n/a & 2198.1 & 35.2 & \bf 0.36 & n/a & 0.511 & 0.446 & \textbf{0.680} \\ \hline
2 & Adiac & 0.500 & 15 & 28 & 0.0 & 0.1 & 99.9 & 12683.2 & 332.6 & 6.4 & \bf 0.25 & \textbf{0.586} & 0.574 & 0.486 & 0.583 \\ \hline
3 & Beef & 0.125 & 35 & 5 & 0.1 & 1.3 & 98.6 & 242.3 & 194.9 & 1.9 & \bf 0.03 & \textbf{0.567} & 0.513 & 0.503 & 0.507 \\ \hline
4 & CBF & 0.500 & 35 & 5 & 0.1 & 0.7 & 99.3 & 66.9 & 10.9 & 0.4 & \bf 0.03 & 0.886 & 0.935 & 0.907 & \textbf{0.975} \\ \hline
5 & Chlorine. & 0.125 & 15 & 13 & 0.1 & 0.2 & 99.7 & 36402.3 & 760.3 & 13.9 & \bf 0.17 & \textbf{0.618} & 0.579 & 0.558 & 0.553 \\ \hline
6 & CinC\_ECG. & 0.125 & 25 & 13 & 0.1 & 1.3 & 98.6 & 2150.0 & 4398.9 & 9.9 & \bf 0.34 & 0.699 & 0.751 & 0.656 & \textbf{0.773} \\ \hline
7 & Coffee & 0.250 & 35 & 4 & 0.1 & 0.3 & 99.6 & 621.9 & 22.5 & 0.2 & \bf 0.03 & \textbf{0.964} & 0.921 & 0.907 & 0.961 \\ \hline
8 & Cricket\_X & 0.250 & 35 & 43 & 0.1 & 0.4 & 99.6 & n/a & 3756.0 & 47.9 & \bf 0.63 & n/a & 0.472 & 0.368 & \textbf{0.672} \\ \hline
9 & Cricket\_Y & 0.250 & 35 & 42 & 0.1 & 0.3 & 99.7 & n/a & 3605.7 & 45.7 & \bf 0.52 & n/a & 0.480 & 0.464 & \textbf{0.675} \\ \hline
10 & Cricket\_Z & 0.250 & 35 & 44 & 0.1 & 0.4 & 99.6 & n/a & 4679.2 & 46.2 & \bf 0.67 & n/a & 0.438 & 0.376 & \textbf{0.673} \\ \hline
11 & Diatom. & 0.125 & 15 & 4 & 0.2 & 1.4 & 98.4 & 184.3 & 15.6 & 0.2 & \bf 0.02 & 0.801 & 0.886 & 0.928 & \textbf{0.896} \\ \hline
12 & ECG200 & 0.125 & 15 & 10 & 0.3 & 2.4 & 97.3 & 618.8 & 16.3 & 0.9 & \bf 0.04 & \textbf{0.870} & 0.766 & 0.786 & 0.818 \\ \hline
13 & ECGFive. & 0.500 & 15 & 5 & 0.1 & 3.2 & 96.7 & 47.6 & 3.6 & 0.1 & \bf 0.03 & 0.994 & \textbf{0.995} & 0.994 & 0.953 \\ \hline
14 & FaceAll & 0.500 & 35 & 40 & 0.0 & 0.5 & 99.5 & 16255.5 & 757.5 & 27.0 & \bf 1.25 & 0.659 & 0.631 & 0.571 & \textbf{0.714} \\ \hline
15 & FaceFour & 0.500 & 35 & 6 & 0.1 & 2.0 & 98.0 & 561.2 & 102.9 & 1.0 & \bf 0.11 & 0.489 & \textbf{0.917} & 0.881 & 0.820 \\ \hline
16 & FacesUCR & 0.500 & 35 & 31 & 0.1 & 1.1 & 98.8 & 2528.5 & 280.3 & 8.7 & \bf 0.33 & 0.662 & 0.703 & 0.654 & \textbf{0.847} \\ \hline
17 & Fish & 0.250 & 25 & 14 & 0.0 & 0.0 & 100.0 & 11153.0 & 935.6 & 6.7 & \bf 0.16 & 0.777 & \textbf{0.809} & 0.785 & 0.755 \\ \hline
18 & Gun\_Point & 0.500 & 25 & 6 & 0.1 & 0.2 & 99.7 & 266.1 & 9.5 & 0.3 & \bf 0.04 & 0.893 & \textbf{0.933} & 0.915 & 0.931 \\ \hline
19 & Haptics & 0.500 & 25 & 13 & 0.0 & 0.0 & 100.0 & n/a & 12491.0 & 31.1 & \bf 1.78 & n/a & \textbf{0.376} & 0.347 & 0.356 \\ \hline
20 & InlineSkate & 0.125 & 15 & 13 & 0.0 & 0.2 & 99.8 & n/a & 22677.2 & 42.6 & \bf 0.61 & n/a & 0.266 & 0.282 & \textbf{0.385} \\ \hline
21 & ItalyPower. & 1.000 & 25 & 6 & 0.1 & 0.9 & 99.0 & 4.9 & 0.4 & 0.1 & \bf 0.02 & \textbf{0.936} & 0.877 & 0.796 & 0.920 \\ \hline
22 & Lighting2 & 0.500 & 35 & 9 & 0.0 & 1.7 & 98.3 & 5297.6 & 1131.3 & 5.0 & \bf 1.89 & 0.426 & 0.707 & 0.698 & \textbf{0.795} \\ \hline
23 & Lighting7 & 0.500 & 35 & 16 & 0.1 & 1.9 & 98.1 & 8619.3 & 322.8 & 3.7 & \bf 0.43 & 0.548 & 0.630 & 0.485 & \textbf{0.652} \\ \hline
24 & MALLAT & 0.125 & 35 & 7 & 0.0 & 0.1 & 99.9 & 1254.9 & 1736.5 & 6.2 & \bf 0.08 & 0.656 & 0.939 & \textbf{0.926} & \textbf{0.926} \\ \hline
25 & MedicalImages & 0.500 & 35 & 34 & 0.1 & 1.1 & 98.9 & 19325.2 & 371.5 & 8.5 & \bf 0.60 & 0.587 & 0.596 & 0.494 & \textbf{0.676} \\ \hline
26 & MoteStrain & 1.000 & 15 & 5 & 0.1 & 8.1 & 91.8 & 6.9 & 3.1 & 0.1 & \bf 0.05 & \textbf{0.832} & 0.783 & 0.767 & 0.783 \\ \hline
27 & Non.FatalECG.1 & 0.250 & 25 & 41 & 0.0 & 0.0 & 100.0 & n/a & 70970.6 & 254.2 & \bf 7.03 & n/a & 0.766 & 0.622 & \textbf{0.814} \\ \hline
28 & Non.FatalECG.2 & 0.125 & 25 & 44 & 0.0 & 0.0 & 100.0 & n/a & 50898.0 & 232.8 & \bf 4.99 & n/a & 0.802 & 0.635 & \textbf{0.855} \\ \hline
29 & OliveOil & 0.125 & 15 & 5 & 0.1 & 0.7 & 99.3 & 502.3 & 107.2 & 0.8 & \bf 0.05 & \textbf{0.833} & 0.723 & 0.773 & 0.790 \\ \hline
30 & OSULeaf & 0.125 & 25 & 21 & 0.1 & 0.2 & 99.7 & 14186.5 & 1629.7 & 20.0 & \bf 0.15 & \textbf{0.686} & 0.680 & 0.555 & 0.566 \\ \hline
31 & Sony.I & 1.000 & 35 & 4 & 0.1 & 0.8 & 99.1 & 4.6 & 1.1 & 0.1 & \bf 0.02 & \textbf{0.860} & 0.686 & 0.802 & 0.850 \\ \hline
32 & Sony.II & 1.000 & 35 & 5 & 0.1 & 1.6 & 98.3 & 9.8 & 1.3 & 0.1 & \bf 0.03 & 0.846 & 0.792 & \textbf{0.945} & 0.780 \\ \hline
33 & StarLight. & 0.125 & 25 & 20 & 0.0 & 0.0 & 100.0 & n/a & 21473.5 & 78.5 & \bf 3.19 & n/a & \textbf{0.942} & 0.932 & 0.933 \\ \hline
34 & SwedishLeaf & 0.500 & 25 & 30 & 0.0 & 0.1 & 99.9 & 11953.6 & 451.7 & 12.9 & \bf 0.36 & 0.813 & 0.779 & 0.725 & \textbf{0.849} \\ \hline
35 & Symbols & 0.250 & 25 & 4 & 0.1 & 1.0 & 98.9 & 894.3 & 93.0 & 0.6 & \bf 0.04 & 0.643 & 0.933 & 0.756 & \textbf{0.865} \\ \hline
36 & synthetic. & 0.250 & 35 & 11 & 0.1 & 0.2 & 99.7 & 3667.4 & 63.9 & 3.6 & \bf 0.07 & 0.470 & 0.922 & 0.870 & \textbf{0.983} \\ \hline
37 & Trace & 0.500 & 35 & 7 & 0.0 & 0.1 & 99.8 & 4626.9 & 181.0 & 1.7 & \bf 0.13 & \textbf{1.000} & 0.994 & 0.999 & 0.965 \\ \hline
38 & Two\_Patterns & 0.500 & 35 & 38 & 0.0 & 0.1 & 99.9 & 65783.1 & 957.2 & 37.7 & \bf 1.71 & 0.539 & 0.310 & 0.753 & \textbf{0.981} \\ \hline
39 & TwoLeadECG & 1.000 & 25 & 4 & 0.1 & 0.4 & 99.6 & 14.3 & 1.3 & 0.0 & \bf 0.02 & 0.856 & \textbf{0.928} & 0.798 & 0.867 \\ \hline
40 & uWave.X & 0.250 & 25 & 44 & 0.0 & 0.3 & 99.7 & n/a & 4827.5 & 54.1 & \bf 4.94 & n/a & 0.707 & 0.580 & \textbf{0.761} \\ \hline
41 & uWave.Y & 0.250 & 25 & 41 & 0.0 & 0.2 & 99.8 & n/a & 4379.6 & 56.6 & \bf 3.69 & n/a & 0.608 & 0.466 & \textbf{0.671} \\ \hline
42 & uWave.Z & 0.125 & 25 & 37 & 0.0 & 0.2 & 99.8 & n/a & 5215.9 & 50.9 & \bf 1.83 & n/a & 0.627 & 0.565 & \textbf{0.676} \\ \hline
43 & wafer & 0.500 & 35 & 10 & 0.0 & 0.1 & 99.9 & 34653.1 & 190.5 & 5.0 & \bf 1.39 & \textbf{0.999} & 0.998 & 0.949 & 0.993 \\ \hline
44 & WordsS. & 0.250 & 25 & 35 & 0.1 & 0.4 & 99.5 & n/a & 1140.0 & 18.7 & \bf 0.31 & n/a & 0.437 & 0.389 & \textbf{0.625} \\ \hline
45 & yoga & 0.250 & 15 & 17 & 0.0 & 0.1 & 99.9 & 11389.0 & 1711.6 & 11.2 & \bf 0.34 & \textbf{0.740} & 0.705 & 0.697 & 0.625 \\ \hline \hline
\multicolumn{8}{|c||}{ \textbf{Total Wins} } & \bf 0 & \bf 0 & \bf 0 & \bf 45 & \bf 13 & \bf 9 & \bf 2 & \bf 21 \\ \hline
\multicolumn{8}{|c||}{ \textbf{Average Rank} } & \bf 0.000 & \bf 0.000 & \bf 0.000 & \bf 1.000 & \bf 2.313 & \bf 2.178 & \bf 3.089 & \bf 1.889 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:resultsTab}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Highly Qualitative Runtime Results}
\label{resultsSec}
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5105, trim=2cm 7.09cm 0.0cm 6.0cm]{speedUp}
\caption[]{ Time and accuracy comparison of our method (denoted \textbf{SD}) against state-of-the-art methods both in terms of discovery time and classification accuracy for all the 45 UCR datasets.}
\label{fig:speedUpAnalysis}
\end{figure}
The empirical results include both the discovery time and the classification accuracy of our method SD against baselines for 45 UCR datasets. Table~\ref{tab:resultsTab} contains a list of results per dataset, where the discovery time is measured in seconds. A time-out threshold of 24 hours was set for the discovery of shapelets of a single dataset. As can be seen, the Logical Shapelet (LS) exceeded the time-out threshold in a considerable number of datasets. The reader is invited to notice that 24 hours (86400 seconds) is a very large threshold, given that our method SD often finds the shapelets within a fraction of one second, as for instance in the 50words dataset. Finally, we are presenting the exact number of accepted shapelets per each dataset and the respective percentages of the accepted, rejected and refused candidates in the columns merged under "SD Performance".
It can be clearly deduced that our method SD is faster than the fastest existing baselines LS \cite{mueen2011logical} and FS \cite{rakthanmanon2013fast}. There is no dataset where any of the baselines is faster. Even, our modification of FS, i.e. the FS++, is considerably slower than SD. For instance, it took only 3.19 seconds for our method to find the shapelets of the StarLightCurves dataset, which has 1000 training instances each having 1024 points. The high-level conclusion from the discovery time results is: "Since the introduction of shapelets in 2009, time-series community believed shapelets are very useful classification patterns, but finding them is slow. This paper demonstrates that shapelets can be discovered very fast."
The discovery time measurements do not include the time needed by a practitioner to tune the parameters of the methods. While our method has two parameters ($p$ and $r$, totaling $3\times 3=9$ combinations, see Section~\ref{sec:setup}), the strongest baseline (Fast Shapelet) has more parameters, concretely four: the reduced dimensionality and cardinality of SAX, the random projection iterations and the number of SAX candidates (denoted d,c,r,k in the original paper~\cite{rakthanmanon2013fast}).
\subsection{Competitive Prediction Accuracy}
Yet, our results are atypical in another positive aspect. Most scalability papers propose speed-ups of the learning time by sacrificing a certain fraction of the prediction accuracy. In contrast, our results show that our method is both faster and more accurate than the baselines. The winning method that achieves the highest accuracy on each dataset (on each row) is distinguished in bold. Our method has more wins than the baselines (21 wins against 13 of the second best method) and also a better rank (1.889 against 2.178 of the second best method). The accuracy improvement arises from the joint interaction of accepted shapelets as predictors (distance matrix X in Algorithm~\ref{alg:discoverShapelets}), while the baselines measure the quality of each shapelet separately, without considering their interactions~\cite{ye2009time,mueen2011logical,rakthanmanon2013fast}. Incorporating the interactions among shapelets into the prediction model has been recently shown to achieve high classification accuracy \cite{grabocka2014kdd}.
\begin{table*}[htbp]
\centering
\caption{Modular Decomposition of The Performance of Our Method (SD), N/A Denotes a 24H time-out}
\begin{tabular}{|r|l||r|r|r|r||c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{\textbf{}} & \multicolumn{1}{c||}{\textbf{}} & \multicolumn{ 4}{c||}{\textbf{Discovery Time (seconds)}} & \multicolumn{ 4}{c|}{\textbf{Classification Accuracy}} \\
\cline{ 3- 10}
\multicolumn{ 1}{|c|}{\textbf{No}} & \multicolumn{ 1}{c||}{\textbf{Dataset}} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\textbf{\xmark \, PAA}} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\textbf{\cmark \, PAA}} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\textbf{\xmark \, PAA}} & \multicolumn{1}{l||}{\textbf{\cmark \, PAA}} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\textbf{\xmark \, PAA}} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\textbf{\cmark \, PAA}} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\textbf{\xmark \, PAA}} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\textbf{\cmark \, PAA}} \\ \cline{ 3- 10}
\multicolumn{ 1}{|l|}{} & \multicolumn{ 1}{l||}{} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\textbf{\xmark \, prun.}} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\textbf{\xmark \, prun.}} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\textbf{\cmark \, prun.}} & \multicolumn{1}{l||}{\textbf{\cmark \, prun.}} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\textbf{\xmark \, prun.}} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\textbf{\xmark \, prun.}} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\textbf{\cmark \, prun.}} & \multicolumn{1}{l|}{\textbf{\cmark \, prun.}} \\ \hline \hline
1 & 50words & 4028.85 & 154.74 & 5.24 & 0.36 & 0.684 & \bf 0.701 & 0.679 & 0.680 \\ \hline
2 & Adiac & 799.06 & 153.21 & 0.89 & 0.25 & \bf 0.624 & 0.555 & 0.604 & 0.583 \\ \hline
3 & Beef & 61.35 & 0.65 & 0.54 & 0.03 & 0.533 & \bf 0.600 & 0.500 & 0.507 \\ \hline
4 & CBF & 2.22 & 0.57 & 0.37 & 0.03 & \bf 0.992 & 0.964 & 0.929 & 0.975 \\ \hline
5 & Chlorine. & 1598.05 & 30.14 & 2.40 & 0.17 & 0.527 & \bf 0.596 & 0.539 & 0.553 \\ \hline
6 & CinC\_ECG. & 3718.48 & 11.74 & 12.71 & 0.34 & \bf 0.809 & 0.768 & 0.776 & 0.773 \\ \hline
7 & Coffee & 11.79 & 1.27 & 0.39 & 0.03 & \bf 0.964 & 0.893 & 0.893 & 0.961 \\ \hline
8 & Cricket\_X & 4218.58 & 141.80 & 23.63 & 0.63 & \bf 0.697 & \bf 0.697 & 0.669 & 0.672 \\ \hline
9 & Cricket\_Y & 3953.86 & 137.75 & 14.20 & 0.52 & \bf 0.715 & 0.687 & 0.677 & 0.675 \\ \hline
10 & Cricket\_Z & 5313.96 & 132.06 & 40.17 & 0.67 & 0.700 & 0.682 & \bf 0.726 & 0.673 \\ \hline
11 & Diatom. & 5.00 & 0.50 & 0.50 & 0.02 & 0.915 & \bf 0.948 & 0.827 & 0.896 \\ \hline
12 & ECG200 & 14.59 & 0.70 & 0.42 & 0.04 & 0.820 & 0.800 & \bf 0.830 & 0.818 \\ \hline
13 & ECGFiveDays & 1.41 & 0.40 & 0.36 & 0.03 & \bf 0.999 & 0.945 & 0.981 & 0.953 \\ \hline
14 & FaceAll & 1276.24 & 297.23 & 4.87 & 1.25 & 0.720 & \bf 0.731 & 0.724 & 0.714 \\ \hline
15 & FaceFour & 18.04 & 3.10 & 1.21 & 0.11 & 0.852 & 0.898 & \bf 0.943 & 0.820 \\ \hline
16 & FacesUCR & 107.35 & 24.74 & 2.70 & 0.33 & \bf 0.871 & 0.868 & 0.841 & 0.847 \\ \hline
17 & Fish & 1808.85 & 46.46 & 1.61 & 0.16 & 0.817 & \bf 0.846 & 0.800 & 0.755 \\ \hline
18 & Gun\_Point & 7.69 & 1.55 & 0.60 & 0.04 & 0.900 & 0.913 & \bf 0.953 & 0.931 \\ \hline
19 & Haptics & 17273.44 & 2634.99 & 6.59 & 1.78 & 0.354 & \bf 0.373 & 0.321 & 0.356 \\ \hline
20 & InlineSkate & 34776.14 & 99.61 & 19.82 & 0.61 & \bf 0.411 & 0.342 & 0.313 & 0.385 \\ \hline
21 & ItalyPower. & 0.77 & 0.49 & 0.62 & 0.02 & \bf 0.936 & 0.925 & 0.915 & 0.920 \\ \hline
22 & Lighting2 & 843.42 & 90.84 & 12.23 & 1.89 & \bf 0.852 & 0.836 & 0.836 & 0.795 \\ \hline
23 & Lighting7 & 120.39 & 20.15 & 4.89 & 0.43 & 0.699 & \bf 0.740 & 0.685 & 0.652 \\ \hline
24 & MALLAT & 2295.97 & 6.25 & 1.99 & 0.08 & 0.909 & 0.938 & \bf 0.941 & 0.926 \\ \hline
25 & MedicalImages & 349.15 & 57.75 & 1.76 & 0.60 & 0.625 & 0.658 & 0.668 & \bf 0.676 \\ \hline
26 & MoteStrain & 0.91 & 0.62 & 0.21 & 0.05 & 0.734 & \bf 0.815 & 0.777 & 0.783 \\ \hline
27 & Non.FatalECG.1 & \multicolumn{1}{r|}{n/a} & 35833.59 & 36.79 & 7.03 & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{n/a} & \bf 0.840 & 0.795 & 0.814 \\ \hline
28 & Non.FatalECG.2 & \multicolumn{1}{r|}{n/a} & 11086.13 & 58.18 & 4.99 & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{n/a} & 0.852 & \bf 0.858 & 0.855 \\ \hline
29 & OliveOil & 75.17 & 0.90 & 1.12 & 0.05 & \bf 0.900 & 0.800 & 0.700 & 0.790 \\ \hline
30 & OSULeaf & 2379.27 & 16.64 & 3.18 & 0.15 & 0.570 & 0.541 & \bf 0.583 & 0.566 \\ \hline
31 & Sony.I & 1.28 & 0.62 & 0.76 & 0.02 & 0.829 & \bf 0.902 & 0.792 & 0.850 \\ \hline
32 & Sony.II & 0.46 & 0.47 & 0.86 & 0.03 & 0.727 & 0.774 & 0.742 & \bf 0.780 \\ \hline
33 & StarLightCurves & \multicolumn{1}{r|}{n/a} & 4673.16 & 74.14 & 3.19 & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{n/a} & \bf 0.933 & 0.929 & \bf 0.933 \\ \hline
34 & SwedishLeaf & 830.60 & 301.63 & 1.24 & 0.36 & \bf 0.869 & 0.856 & 0.856 & 0.849 \\ \hline
35 & Symbols & 27.58 & 1.64 & 0.58 & 0.04 & 0.805 & 0.787 & 0.819 & \bf 0.865 \\ \hline
36 & synthetic. & 51.03 & 6.01 & 0.56 & 0.07 & 0.980 & \bf 0.993 & 0.980 & 0.983 \\ \hline
37 & Trace & 138.09 & 25.15 & 0.60 & 0.13 & 0.950 & \bf 0.990 & 0.960 & 0.965 \\ \hline
38 & Two\_Patterns & 4572.63 & 1216.45 & 2.78 & 1.71 & 0.985 & 0.984 & \bf 0.986 & 0.981 \\ \hline
39 & TwoLeadECG & 0.54 & 0.88 & 0.41 & 0.02 & \bf 0.932 & 0.774 & \bf 0.932 & 0.867 \\ \hline
40 & uWave.X & 27142.53 & 1565.73 & 19.46 & 4.94 & 0.757 & 0.745 & \bf 0.762 & 0.761 \\ \hline
41 & uWave.Y & 25276.28 & 1385.23 & 16.74 & 3.69 & 0.647 & 0.643 & \bf 0.671 & \bf 0.671 \\ \hline
42 & uWave.Z & 24532.05 & 513.11 & 14.09 & 1.83 & 0.662 & 0.668 & \bf 0.681 & 0.676 \\ \hline
43 & wafer & 6352.87 & 1750.96 & 3.31 & 1.39 & 0.994 & 0.994 & \bf 0.995 & 0.993 \\ \hline
44 & WordsS. & 1220.31 & 44.25 & 3.13 & 0.31 & 0.627 & \bf 0.639 & 0.607 & 0.625 \\ \hline
45 & yoga & 5098.73 & 254.54 & 3.05 & 0.34 & \bf 0.812 & 0.802 & 0.799 & 0.625 \\ \hline \hline
\multicolumn{6}{|c||}{\bf Absolute Wins} & \bf 14.0 & \bf 15.0 & \bf 12.0 & \bf 4.0 \\ \hline
\multicolumn{6}{|c||}{\bf Ranks} & $\bf 2.2 \pm 1.1$ & $\bf 2.3 \pm 1.1$ & $\bf 2.5 \pm 1.2$ & $\bf 2.7 \pm 0.9$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:originsResults}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Speed-Up Analysis}
In order to show the speed-up factor of our method with respect to the (former) state-of-the-art, we provide another presentation of the results in Figure~\ref{fig:speedUpAnalysis}. The three plots on the left side show the discovery time of SD in x-axis and the logarithm of the discovery time of each baseline as the y-axis. As can be easily observed from the illustrative order lines, SD is 4 to 5 orders of magnitude faster than the Logical Shapelet (LS) and 3 to 4 orders of magnitude faster than the Fast Shapelet (FS). The datasets where LS exceeds the 24 hour threshold are depicted in light blue. In addition, FS++ is faster than FS because it iterates over less shapelet length sizes, yet it is still 1 to 2 orders of magnitude slower than SD.
The plots on the right represent scatter plots of the classification accuracy of SD against the baselines. While generally better than LS and FS, our method SD is largely superior to FS++. Such a finding indicates that the accuracy of the Fast Shapelet (FS) is dependent on trying shapelet candidates from a fine-grained set of lengths, while our method is very accurate even though it iterates over few shapelet lengths.
\subsection{A Modular Decomposition of the Performance}
\label{sec:originResults}
We have already seen that our proposed method, SD, outperforms significantly the state-of-the-art in terms of runtime and produces even better prediction accuracy. Nevertheless, there are a couple of questions that can be addressed to our method, such as:
\begin{enumerate}
\item{What fraction of SD's runtime reduction is attributed to the novel candidate pruning and what fraction to the PAA compression?}
\item{To what extent does pruning deteriorate the prediction accuracy?}
\end{enumerate}
In order to address those analytic questions we will decompose our method in a modular fashion. Our method, SD, conducts both a PAA approximation and a pruning by the parameters $r,p$ provided in Table~\ref{tab:resultsTab}. In order to isolate the effect of compression and pruning we are creating four variants of our method, namely all the permutations "With/Without PAA compression" and "With/Without Pruning" (w.r.t. to $p,r$ from Table~\ref{tab:resultsTab}). All the decomposed results of the SD variants are shown in Table~\ref{tab:originsResults}. Note that "No pruning" means $p=0$, while "no PAA" means $r=1$. The variant with both pruning and PAA is the same as SD from Section~\ref{resultsSec}, which already was shown to be superior to the state of the art.
Looking into the results of Table~\ref{tab:originsResults}, it is important to observe that the variant with PAA compression alone is significantly faster than the variant without compression (columns 4 vs column 3). However, using pruning without compression is much faster than the exhaustive approach and also much faster than compression alone (column 5 vs. columns 3,4). When pruning and compression are combined (column 6), then the runtime reduction effect multiplies. More concretely, Figure~\ref{fig:originPrunNpPrun} analyses the runtime reduction of SD variants: that use pruning (X-axis) against variants without pruning (Y-axis) for both scenarios with PAA (plot a)) or without PAA (plot b)) compression. As can be clearly deduced, pruning alone has a significant effect on the runtime reduction by 3 to 4 orders of magnitude, compared to the cases where no pruning is employed. While PAA helps our method to be even faster, it is clear that the lion share of the speedup arises from the proposed pruning mechanism.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5105, trim=2cm 14.3cm 0.0cm 6.0cm]{originPrunNoPrun}
\caption[]{Runtime comparison (seconds) plots among variants of SD with and without pruning}
\label{fig:originPrunNpPrun}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\end{figure}
There is still a concern on how does pruning affect the classification accuracy. The prediction accuracy results are demonstrated in Table~\ref{tab:originsResults} for all the datasets, with the winning variant emphasized in bold. The total wins and the ranks of the variants indicate that the best prediction performance is attributed to the exhaustive methods (no pruning, columns 7,8). Such a finding is natural because exhaustive approaches consider all the candidate variants and can extracts more qualitative minimum distance features. Yet, are the results of the exhaustive variants better with a \textbf{statistical significance} margin? Table~\ref{tab:wilcoxonStatSign} illustrates the p-values of a Wilcoxon Signed Rank test of statistical significance, for a two-tailed hypothesis with a significance level of 5\% ($\alpha=0.05$).
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\caption{Wilcoxon Statistical Significance Test: p-values (Significance Level 5\%, Two-Tailed Hypothesis)}
\begin{tabular}{|l||c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|r||}{} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\xmark \, PAA} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\cmark \, PAA} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\xmark \, PAA} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\cmark \, PAA} \\
\multicolumn{1}{|r||}{} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\xmark \, prun.} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\xmark \, prun.} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\cmark \, prun.} & \multicolumn{1}{c|}{\cmark \, prun.} \\
\hline \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|r||}{\xmark \, PAA, \xmark \, prun.} & - & 0.904 & \bf 0.119 & 0.046 \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|r||}{\cmark \, PAA, \xmark \, prun.} & 0.904 & - & 0.153 & \bf 0.112 \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|r||}{\xmark \, PAA, \cmark \, prun.} & \bf 0.119 & 0.153 & - & 0.873 \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{|r||}{\cmark \, PAA, \cmark \, prun.} & 0.046 & \bf 0.112 & 0.873 & - \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:wilcoxonStatSign}
\end{table}
The p-values which compare variants that use pruning against variants that does not use pruning are shown in bold and correspond to $p=0.119, p=0.112$. Therefore, the prediction quality using pruning is not significantly (significance means $p < 0.05$) worse than the exhaustive approach. The final message of this section is: "Pruning of candidates provides 3 to 4 orders of runtime speedup without any statistically significant deterioration in terms of classification accuracy.".
\section{Conclusion}
Shapelets represent discriminative segments of a time-series dataset and the distances of time-series to shapelets are shown to be successful features for classification. The discovery of shapelets is currently conducted by trying out candidates from the segments (sub-sequences) of the time-series. Since the number of candidate segments is large, the time-series community has spent efforts on speeding up the discovery time of shapelets. This paper proposed a novel method that prunes the candidates based on a distance threshold to previously considered other similar candidates. In a parallel fashion, a novel supervised selection filters those shapelets that boost classification accuracy. We empirically showed that our method is 3-4 orders of magnitude faster than the fastest existing shapelet discovery methods, while providing a better prediction accuracy.
\vspace{-0.2cm}
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Introduction}
Forward particle production observables in proton-proton (p+p) and
proton-nucleus (p+A) collisions at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) offer unique
opportunities to study the dynamics of QCD at small $x$, and in particular the
non-linear regime of parton saturation \cite{Gribov:1984tu}. Indeed, in high-energy hadronic
collisions, forward particle production is sensitive only to high-momentum
partons inside one of the colliding hadrons, which therefore appears dilute. By contrast, for the other hadron or nucleus, it is mainly small-momentum partons, whose density is large, that contribute to the scattering. Such processes, in which a large-$x$ projectile is used as a probe to investigate a small-$x$ target, are sometimes called dilute-dense collisions. Since the high-$x$ part of the projectile wave function is well understood in perturbative QCD, forward particle production is indeed ideal to investigate the small-$x$ part of target wave function. This is true both in p+p and p+A collisions, although using a target nucleus does enhance the dilute-dense asymmetry of such collisions.
The separation between the linear and non-linear regimes of the target wave
function is characterized by a momentum scale $Q_s(x)$, called the saturation
scale, which increases as $x$ decreases. Dilute-dense collisions can be
described from first principles, provided $Q_s\gg\Lambda_{\mathrm{QCD}}$. This
condition is better realized with higher energies (as they open up the phase
space towards lower values of $x$), and with nuclear targets (since, roughly, $Q_s\!\sim\!A^{1/3}$). Over the years, the Color Glass Condensate (CGC) effective theory \cite{Gelis:2010nm} has emerged as the best candidate to approximate QCD in the saturation regime, both in terms of practical applicability and of phenomenological success \cite{Albacete:2014fwa}. In this paper, we focus on forward dijet production in p+A and
p+p collisions. We note that the CGC approach has been very successful in describing forward di-hadron production at RHIC \cite{Albacete:2010pg,Stasto:2011ru,Lappi:2012nh}, in particular it predicted the suppression of azimuthal correlations in d+Au collisions compared to p+p collisions \cite{Marquet:2007vb}, which was observed later experimentally~\cite{Adare:2011sc,Braidot:2010zh}.
With forward dijets at the LHC however, the full complexity of the CGC machinery
is not needed. Indeed, for the di-hadron process at RHIC energies, no particular
ordering of the momentum scales involved is assumed in CGC calculations, while,
at the LHC, the presence of particles with transverse momenta much larger than
the saturation scale clearly must imply some simplifications. On the flip side,
there will be other complications since further QCD dynamics, which is not part
of the CGC framework but which is relevant at large
transverse momenta, must also be considered. There are three important momentum
scales in the forward dijet process: a typical transverse momentum of a hard
jet, $P_t$, whose precise definition will be stated in the next section;
the transverse momentum of the small-$x$ gluons involved in the hard scattering,
$k_t$; and the saturation scale of the small-$x$ target, $Q_s$. Clearly, $P_t$
is always one of the hardest scales, and it is much bigger than $Q_s$, which is
always one of the softest scales. Then, depending on where $k_t$ sits with
respect to these two, three different regimes can be defined.
A first regime, with $Q_s\ll k_t\sim P_t$, corresponds to the domain of
applicability of the so-called \emph{high energy factorization} (HEF) framework
\cite{Catani:1990eg,Deak:2009xt}, in which the description of forward dijets
involves an unintegrated gluon distribution for the small-$x$ target, along with
off-shell hard matrix elements. That is explicitly shown in this work, starting form CGC calculations.
While such a factorization does not occur when non-linear saturation effects are accounted for, we
shall see that taking the $Q_s\ll k_t\sim P_t$ limit is tantamount to restricting the interaction with the
small-x target to a two-gluon exchange, therefore allows to indeed write all the CGC correlators
in terms of a single gluon distribution. Doing so, the matrix elements of the HEF framework are
exactly recovered.
A second regime, with $k_t\sim Q_s\ll P_t$, is where the so-called
\emph{transverse momentum dependent}~(TMD) factorization \cite{Bomhof:2006dp} is valid.
It involves on-shell matrix elements but several unintegrated gluons distributions.
In this regime, non-linear effects are present, and in the large-$N_c$ limit, equivalence with
CGC expressions was shown in \cite{Dominguez:2011wm}. In particular, in that case the
description of forward dijets involves only two independent unintegrated gluons distributions, each of which can
be determined in various other processes \cite{Dominguez:2010xd}. In the present work we shall keep $N_c$
finite, implying, as we show below, that a total of six independent unintegrated gluons distributions are needed.
Finally, the intermediate regime $Q_s\ll k_t\ll P_t$, which is naturally obtained from the two others by taking the
appropriate limits, corresponds to the collinear regime, with on-shell matrix elements and the standard integrated
gluon distribution.
Separately, the HEF and TMD approaches to dijet production have been extensively studied in the literature
\cite{Deak:2009xt,Kutak:2012rf,vanHameren:2014lna,vanHameren:2014ala,vanHameren:2013fla} and
\cite{Bomhof:2006dp,Boer:1999si,Belitsky:2002sm,Boer:2003cm,Collins:2007nk,Vogelsang:2007jk,Rogers:2010dm,Xiao:2010sp},
but little connection has been made between them so far. The first result of
this paper is to reveal that connection, in the context of dilute-dense
collisions, and to show that, in fact, they are both contained in the CGC
description. However, as already mentioned, using the CGC approach is
unnecessarily complicated and one should take advantage of the fact that $P_t\gg Q_s$ to simplify the theoretical formulation. The second result of the paper is precisely to develop a new formula for forward dijets in dilute-dense collisions that encompasses all three situations described above, meaning that it is applicable regardless of the magnitude of $k_t$. As explained below, this is obtained by extending the TMD factorization framework, more precisely by supplementing it with off-shell matrix elements.
Note that the derivation of our new unified formula is performed in two independent ways: first using the standard Feynman diagram technique, and second by exploiting the so-called helicity method that employs color-ordered amplitudes \cite{Mangano:1990by}. With this second method, the gauge invariance of the results is explicit, and the method will also prove very useful in the future, when processes with more particles in the final state are considered. As is the case in the CGC framework, our new formulation contains all the relevant limits, but it has the advantage that it is more amenable to phenomenological implementations than CGC calculations. In addition, it is
also better suited to be supplemented with further QCD dynamics relevant at high
$P_t$, such as Sudakov logarithms \cite{Mueller:2012uf,Mueller:2013wwa} or
coherence in the QCD evolution of the gluon density \cite{Ciafaloni:1987ur,Catani:1989sg,Catani:1989yc}. These tasks are left for future work.
The plan of the paper is as follows. In Section 2, we introduce kinematics and notations, and briefly present the HEF and TMD frameworks. In Section 3, we show that the HEF framework can be derived from CGC calculations, when the $Q_s\ll k_t\sim P_t$ limit is considered; namely we explain how the various CGC correlators reduce to a single gluon distribution in that limit, and show that the off-shell matrix elements of the HEF framework are indeed emerging. Section~4 is devoted to the $k_t\sim Q_s\ll P_t$ limit, the derivation of the TMD factorization formula for forward dijets given in \cite{Dominguez:2010xd} is recalled, and extended to the case of finite $N_c$, implying six independent unintegrated gluons distributions instead of two. The hard factors of the TMD framework are computed again in Section 5, but keeping the small-$x$ gluon off-shell, which leads us to our new unified formula for forward dijets in p+A collisions. In Section 6, both the TMD factorization formula and the off-shell hard factors are derived again, but using color-ordered amplitudes, instead of Feynman diagram techniques. Finally, Section 7 is devoted to conclusions and outlook.
\section{Forward dijets in p+A collisions}
We shall discuss the process of inclusive dijet production in the forward
region, in collisions of dilute and dense systems
\begin{equation}
p (p_p) + A (p_A) \to j_1 (p_1) + j_2 (p_2)+ X\,.
\end{equation}
The process is shown schematically in Fig~\ref{fig:dijets-pA}. The four-momenta
of the projectile and the target are massless and purely longitudinal.
In terms of the light cone variables, $v^\pm = (v^0\pm v^3)/\sqrt{2}$, they take
the simple form
\begin{equation}
p_p = \sqrt{\frac{s}{2}}(1,0_t,0)\,, \qquad \qquad
p_A = \sqrt{\frac{s}{2}}(0,0_t,1)\,,
\label{eq:pp-pA-defs}
\end{equation}
where $s$ is the squared center of mass energy of the p+A system.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{plots/dijets-pA.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Inclusive dijet production in p+A collision. The blob $H$ represents
hard scattering. The solid lines
coming out of $H$ represent partons, which can be either quarks or gluons.}
\label{fig:dijets-pA}
\end{figure}
The energy (or longitudinal momenta) fractions of the incoming parton (either
a quark or gluon) from the
projectile, $x_1$, and the gluon from the target, $x_2$, can be expressed in
terms of the rapidities and transverse momenta of the produced jets as
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
x_1 & = \frac{p_1^+ + p_2^+}{p_p^+} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{s}} \left(|p_{1t}|
e^{y_1}+|p_{2t}| e^{y_2}\right)\,, \\
x_2 & = \frac{p_1^- + p_2^-}{p_A^-} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{s}} \left(|p_{1t}| e^{-y_1}+|p_{2t}| e^{-y_2}\right)\,,
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where $p_{1t}$, $p_{2t}$ are transverse Euclidean two-vectors.
By looking at jets produced in the forward direction, we effectively select
those fractions to be $x_1 \sim 1$ and $x_2 \ll 1$.
Since the target A is probed at low $x_2$, the dominant contributions come from
the subprocesses in which the incoming parton on the target side is a gluon
\begin{equation}
qg \to qg\,,
\qquad \qquad
gg \to q\bar q\,,
\qquad \qquad
gg \to gg\,.
\end{equation}
In dilute-dense collisions, the large-$x$ partons of the dilute projectile are described in terms of the usual parton distribution functions of collinear factorization $f_{a/p}$, with a scale dependence given by DGLAP evolution equations. By contrast, the small-$x$ gluons of the dense target nucleus are described by a transverse-momentum-dependent distribution, which evolve towards small~$x$ according to non-linear equations.
Moreover, the momentum $k$ of the incoming gluon from the target, besides the longitudinal component $k^-=x_2\sqrt{s/2}$, has in general a non-zero transverse component, $k_T$, which leads to imbalance of transverse momentum of the produced jets
\begin{equation}
|k_{t}|^2 = |p_{1t}+p_{2t}|^2 =
|p_{1t}|^2 + |p_{2t}|^2 + 2|p_{1t}||p_{2t}| \cos\Delta\phi\,,
\label{eq:ktglue}
\end{equation}
with $k_T^2=-|k_t|^2$. Here, by $k_T$ we mean a
four-vector, as opposed to $k_t = p_{1t} + p_{2t}$, which is a two-dimensional vector
in the transverse plane. They are simply related by: $k_T =
(0,k_t,0)$.
Using the notation defined above, the gluon's four-momentum can be also parametrized as
\begin{equation}
k=x_2 p_A + k_T\,.
\label{eq:k-4-vec}
\end{equation}
The Mandelstam variables at the partonic level are defined as
\begin{subequations}
\label{eq:mandelstam}
\begin{align}
{\hat s} & = (p+k)^2 = (p_1 + p_2)^2=\frac{|P_t|^2}{z(1-z)}\,, \\
{\hat t} & = (p_2-p)^2 = (p_1 - k)^2=-\frac{|p_{2t}|^2}{1-z}\,, \\
{\hat u} & = (p_1-p)^2 = (p_2 - k)^2=-\frac{|p_{1t}|^2}{z}\,,
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
with
\begin{equation}
z=\frac{p_1^+}{p_1^+ + p_2^+} \quad\quad \text{and}
\quad\quad P_t=(1-z)p_{1t}-zp_{2t}\ .
\label{eq:zdef}
\end{equation} They sum up to ${\hat s} + {\hat t} + {\hat u} = k_T^2$.
Note that we always neglect the transverse momentum of the high-$x$ partons compared with that of the low-$x$
parton $|k_t|$. This is justified in view of the asymmetry of the problem, $x_1 \sim 1$ and $x_2 \ll 1$, which implies that gluons form
the target have a much bigger average transverse momentum (of the order of $Q_s$) compared to that of the large $x$ partons from the projectile (which of the order of $\Lambda_{QCD}$). And even when the transverse momentum imbalance of the dijet system is of the same order as the jet transverse momenta themselves, implying that both parton distributions are probed in their radiative tail, the small $x_2$ (BFKL) evolution implies a $1/k_t$ behavior on the target side, while DGLAP evolution implies a $1/k_t^2$ behavior on the projectile side.
To take into account small-$x$ effects in dijet production, an approach that has
been broadly used in phenomenological studies involves the so-called high
energy factorization (HEF) formula~\cite{Kutak:2012rf}
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\sigma^{pA\rightarrow {\rm dijets}+X}}{dy_1dy_2d^2p_{1t}d^2p_{2t}}
=
\frac{1}{16\pi^3 (x_1x_2 s)^2}
\sum_{a,c,d}
x_1 f_{a/p}(x_1,\mu^2)\,
|\overline{{\cal M}_{ag^*\to cd}}|^2
{\cal F}_{g/A}(x_2,k_t)\frac{1}{1+\delta_{cd}}\,.
\label{eq:hef-formula}
\end{equation}
This formula makes use of the unintegrated gluon distribution ${\cal F}_{g/A}$ that is involved in the
calculation of the deep inelastic structure functions. It is determined from fits to DIS data, and then used in
Eq.~(\ref{eq:hef-formula}), along with matrix elements that depend on the transverse momentum imbalance (\ref{eq:ktglue}).
Even though the high energy factorization is not strictly valid for dijet production, there exists a kinematic window, the dilute limit
$Q_s\ll|p_{1t}|,|p_{2t}|,|k_t|$, in which it can be motivated from the CGC approach. We shall demonstrate this explicitly
for all channels in the next section.
A second approach, valid in the regime where the transverse momentum imbalance between the
outgoing particles, Eq.~(\ref{eq:ktglue}), is much smaller than their individual
transverse momenta, is the so-called transverse momentum dependent (TMD) factorization.
This limit,
$|p_{1t}+p_{2t}|\ll|p_{1t}|,|p_{2t}|$, or $|k_t|\ll|P_t|$,
corresponds to the situation of nearly back-to-back dijets. Even though, in
general, there exists no TMD factorization theorem for
jet production in hadron-hadron collisions, such a factorization can be
established in the asymmetric ``dilute-dense'' situation considered here,
where only one of the colliding hadrons is described by a transverse momentum dependent gluon distribution. Again, selecting dijet systems produced in the forward direction implies $x_1 \sim 1$ and $x_2 \ll 1$, which in turn allows us to make that assumption.
The TMD factorization formula reads (so far, this has been obtained in the large-$N_c$ approximation, but this restriction will be lifted in the present work)~\cite{Dominguez:2011wm}
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\sigma^{pA\rightarrow {\rm dijets}+X}}{dy_1dy_2d^2p_{1t}d^2p_{2t}} =
\frac{\alpha _{s}^{2}}{(x_1x_2s)^{2}} \sum_{a,c,d} x_1 f_{a/p}(x_1,\mu^2) \sum_i H_{ag\to cd}^{(i)} \mathcal{F}_{ag}^{(i)}(x_2,k_t)
\frac{1}{1+\delta_{cd}}\,,
\label{eq:tmd-main}
\end{equation}
where several unintegrated gluon distributions $\mathcal{F}_{ag}^{(i)}$ with
different operator definition are involved and accompanied by different hard
factors $H_{ag\to cd}^{(i)}$. Those hard factors were calculated
in~\cite{Dominguez:2011wm} as if the
small-$x_2$ gluon was on-shell ({\it i.e. } $|k_t|=0$). The $k_t$ dependence survived only in the gluon distributions.
By restoring the $k_t$ dependence of the hard factors inside formula
(\ref{eq:tmd-main}), we can make the bridge between the HEF and TMD frameworks
and obtain a unified formulation which encompasses both the dilute and the
nearly back-to-back limit. Note that we follow the conventions used in earlier
papers that dealt with these formalisms, such as Ref.~\cite{Kutak:2012rf} and \cite{Dominguez:2011wm} respectively. Therefore, contrary to the HEF matrix elements $|\overline{{\cal M}_{ag^*\to cd}}|^2$, the hard factors $H_{ag\to cd}^{(i)}$ of the TMD factorization are defined without the $g^4$ factor. In addition, the definition of the gluon distribution also differ by a factor $\pi$. The integrated gluon distribution $x_2 f_{g/A}$ is obtained from $\int dk_t^2\ {\cal F}_{g/A}$ in the HEF formalism, and from $\int d^2k_t\ \mathcal{F}_{ag}^{(i)}$ in the TMD formalism.
Finally, let us point out that, in the frameworks described above, one emits
radiation in the transverse direction that one has no control over, as it is
part of the small-$x$ gluon distributions and therefore is treated fully
inclusively. To be more specific, at this level, transverse momentum conservation is obtained either by several particles of average transverse momentum $Q_s$, or by a third hard jet, depending on the magnitude of $|k_t|$. Due to the small-$x$ evolution, that radiation is ordered in rapidity, therefore it does not contribute to the measured forward dijets systems.
\section{High energy factorization derived from CGC: \\
the $\mathbold{|p_{1t}|,|p_{2t}|,|k_t|\gg Q_s}$ limit}
\label{sec:dilute}
We shall demonstrate that the high-energy factorization formula for
double-inclusive particle production, Eq.~(\ref{eq:hef-formula}), is identical
to a result obtained from the CGC formalism in the dilute target approximation.
This is a limit where all the momenta involved in the process are much larger
than the saturation scale: $|p_{1t}|,|p_{2t}|,|k_t|\gg Q_s$. Here, we show explicitly
the equivalence of the HEF and CGC formulas for the ${qg^*\to qg}$
channel and only provide the final results for the two other channels, as the
derivations proceed identically for all of them.
We derive the CGC cross sections for the ${qg^*\to qg}$ and $gg^* \to q{\bar q}$
channels in the dilute limit following a procedure developed in
Ref.~\cite{Iancu:2013dta} where only the $g g^*\to gg$ sub-process was considered.
The amplitude for quark-gluon production is schematically presented
in Fig.~\ref{fig:amplitudeCGC} as in Ref.~\cite{Marquet:2007vb}. In the left
diagram, the emission of the gluon from the quark happens before the interaction
with the target, and in the right diagram the emission occurs after the quark
has interacted with the target. There is a relative minus sign between the two
cases as explained in details in Ref.~\cite{Marquet:2007vb}. Multigluon
interactions of quarks and gluons with a target, in the CGC formalism,
enter as Wilson lines in the expression for the amplitude. A quark propagator is
represented as a fundamental Wilson line, while a gluon propagator as an adjoint
Wilson line. As a result, the cross section involves multipoint correlators of
Wilson lines. In particular, the amplitude from Fig.~\ref{fig:amplitudeCGC}, after squaring, has four terms: a correlator of four Wilson lines, $S^{(4)}$, corresponding to interactions happening after the emission of the gluon, both in the amplitude and the complex conjugate, then a correlator of two Wilson lines, $S^{(2)}$, representing the case when interactions with the target take place before the radiation of the gluon in both amplitude and complex conjugate, and two correlators of three Wilson lines, $S^{(3)}$, for the interference terms. In all the cases the splitting function is the same, and is given by the product of the quark wave functions: $\phi^{\lambda^*}_{\alpha\beta}(p,p^+_1,{\bf{x'}}-{\bf{b'}}) \phi^{\lambda}_{\alpha\beta}(p,p^+_1,\bf{x}-\bf{b})$. The total expression for the inclusive cross section in CGC is then given by the following formula~\cite{Marquet:2007vb}:
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\sigma(pA\to qgX)}{dy_1 dy_2 d^2p_{1t} d^2p_{2t}} = \alpha_s C_F (1-z) p_1^+ x_1 f_{q/p}(x_1,\mu^2)
\left|\mathcal{M}(p,p_1,p_2)\right|^2\,,
\label{eq:cgc-1}
\end{equation}
where the amplitude squared, $\left|\mathcal{M}(p,p_1,p_2)\right|^2$, has the
form:
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\hspace{-40pt}\left|\mathcal{M}(p,p_1,p_2)\right|^2 = \int \frac{d^2\bf{x}}{(2\pi)^2}\frac{d^2\bf{x'}}{(2\pi)^2}\frac{d^2\bf{b}}{(2\pi)^2}\frac{d^2\bf{b'}}{(2\pi)^2} e^{-ip_{1t}\cdot(\bf{x}-\bf{x'})} e^{-ip_{2t}\cdot(\bf{b}-\bf{b'})} \nonumber \\
&&\hspace{40pt}\times \sum_{\lambda\alpha\beta} \phi^{\lambda^*}_{\alpha\beta}(p,p^+_1,{\bf{x'}}-{\bf{b'}}) \phi^{\lambda}_{\alpha\beta}(p,p^+_1,\bf{x}-\bf{b}) \nonumber \\
&&\hspace{40pt}\times \left\{S^{(4)}_{qg\bar{q}g}[{\bf{b}},{\bf{x}},{\bf{b'}},{\bf{x'}} ;x_2]- S^{(3)}_{qg\bar{q}}[{\bf{b}},{\bf{x}},{\bf{b'}}+z({\bf{x'}}-{\bf{b'}});x_2] \right . \nonumber \\
&&\hspace{40pt}\left . - S^{(3)}_{qg\bar{q}}[{\bf{b}}+z({\bf{x}}-{\bf{b}}),{\bf{x'}},{\bf{b'}};x_2] + S^{(2)}_{q\bar{q}}[{\bf{b}}+z({\bf{x}}-{\bf{b}}),{\bf{b'}}+z({\bf{x'}}-{\bf{b'}});x_2]\right\}\, ,
\label{eq:cgc-2}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\phi^{\lambda}_{\alpha\beta}$ are mixed-space quark wave functions and $S^{(i)}$ are correlators of Wilson lines explained in details below.
Following the notation from Fig.~\ref{fig:dijets-pA} and Eq.~(\ref{eq:zdef}), we
use the fraction of the plus components of four-momenta, $z$, with $p_1$ being
the four-momentum of the outgoing gluon and $p_2$, the four-momentum of the
outgoing quark.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.60\textwidth]{plots/AmplitudeCGC.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Amplitude for quark-gluon production in the CGC formalism. Left: the gluon is radiated before the interaction with the target. Right: the gluon is radiated after the interaction with the target. The two terms have a relative minus sign.}
\label{fig:amplitudeCGC}
\end{figure}
The fundamental, ${U}({\bf{x}})$, and adjoint, ${V}({\bf{x}})$, Wilson lines are defined as path-ordered exponentials of the gauge field (written here in the $A^+=0$ gauge):
\begin{equation}
{U}({\bf{x}}) = \mathcal{P} \exp \left[ ig \int dx^+ A_a^-(x^+, {\bf{x}}) t^a \right]~~~ {\text{and}} ~~~
{V}({\bf{x}}) = \mathcal{P} \exp \left[ ig \int dx^+ A_a^-(x^+, {\bf{x}}) T^a
\right] \,,
\end{equation}
where $t^a$ and $T^a$ are the generators of the fundamental and adjoint representations of $SU(N)$ respectively. The traces of products of Wilson lines appearing in the cross section are defined in the following way:
\begin{equation}
S^{(4)}_{qg\bar{q}g}({\bf{b}},{\bf{x}},{\bf{b'}},{\bf{x}})=\frac{1}{C_F N_c}\left<{\text {Tr}} \left({U}({\bf{b}}){U}^\dagger({\bf{b'}})t^dt^c\right)\left[{V}({\bf{x}}){V}^\dagger({\bf{x'}})\right]^{cd}\right>_{x_2}~;
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
S^{(3)}_{qg\bar{q}}({\bf{b}},{\bf{x}},{\bf{z'}})=\frac{1}{C_F N_c}\left<{\text {Tr}} \left({U}^\dagger({\bf{z'}})t^c{U}({\bf{b}})t^d\right){V}^{cd}({\bf{x}})\right>_{x_2}~;
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
S^{(2)}_{q\bar{q}}({\bf{z}},{\bf{z'}})=\frac{1}{N_c}\left<{\text {Tr}} \left({U}({\bf{z}}){U}^\dagger({\bf{z'}})\right)\right>_{x_2}~.
\end{equation}
The CGC average is taken over the background filed evaluated at $Y=\ln(1/x_2)$. The product of wave functions in the massless limit is:
\begin{equation}
\sum_{\lambda\alpha\beta} \phi^{\lambda^*}_{\alpha\beta}(p,p^+_1,{\bf{u'}}) \phi^{\lambda}_{\alpha\beta}(p,p^+_1,{\bf{u}}) =
\frac{8\pi^2}{p^+_1} \frac{{\bf{u}} \cdot {\bf{u'}}}{|{\bf{u}}|^2 |{\bf{u'}}|^2} (1 + (1-z)^2)~.
\end{equation}
Introducing a change of variables, ${\bf{u}}={\bf{x}}-{\bf{b}}$ and ${\bf{v}}=z{\bf{x}} +(1-z){\bf{b}}$ (and similar for the primed coordinates), we get~\cite{Marquet:2007vb}:
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\hspace{-30pt}\left|\mathcal{M}(p,p_1,p_2)\right|^2 = \int \frac{d^2 {\bf{u}}}{(2\pi)^2}\frac{d^2 {\bf{u'}}}{(2\pi)^2} e^{i P_t \cdot ({\bf{u'}}-{\bf{u}})}
\sum_{\lambda\alpha\beta} \phi^{\lambda^*}_{\alpha\beta}(p,p_1^+,{\bf{u'}}) \phi^{\lambda}_{\alpha\beta}(p,p_1^+,{\bf{u}})
\nonumber \\
&&\hspace{-30pt}\times
\int\!\!\! \frac{d^2 {\bf{v}}}{(2\pi)^2}\frac{d^2 {\bf{v'}}}{(2\pi)^2} e^{i k_t
\cdot ({\bf{v'}}-{\bf{v}})}\!\!
\left[ S^{(4)}_{qg\bar{q}g}({\bf{b}},{\bf{x}},{\bf{b'}},{\bf{x'}}) -
S^{(3)}_{qg\bar{q}} ({\bf{b}},{\bf{x}},{\bf{v'}}) - S^{(3)}_{qg\bar{q}}
({\bf{v}},{\bf{x'}},{\bf{b'}}) + S^{(2)}_{q\bar{q}} ({\bf{v}},{\bf{v'}})
\right]\!\!.\,
\end{eqnarray}
The conjugate momentum to ${\bf{u'}}-{\bf{u}}$ is $P_t=(1-z)p_{1t}-zp_{2t}$, and the one corresponding to ${\bf{v'}}-{\bf{v}}$ is the total transverse momentum of the produced particles $k_t=p_{1t}+p_{2t}$. In terms of fundamental Wilson lines only:
\begin{eqnarray}
S^{(4)}_{qg\bar{q}g}({\bf{b}},{\bf{x}},{\bf{b'}},{\bf{x'}})= \frac{1}{2C_FN_c}
\left < {\text {Tr}} \left(
{U}({\bf{b}}){U}^\dagger({\bf{b'}}){U}({\bf{x'}}){U}^\dagger({\bf{x}})\right)
{\text{Tr}} \left({U}({\bf{x}}) {U}^\dagger ({\bf{x'}})\right)\right.\\ \nonumber\left. - \frac{1}{N_c} {\text{Tr}}\left(
{U}({\bf{b}}) {U}^\dagger({\bf{b'}})\right) \right>_{x_2} \,,
\label{eq:S4-fund}
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{equation}
S^{(3)}_{qg\bar{q}} ({\bf{b}},{\bf{x}},{\bf{v'}}) = \frac{1}{2C_FN_c} \left < {\text{Tr}}\left( {U}({\bf{b}}) {U}^\dagger ({\bf{x}})\right) {\text{Tr}}\left( {U}({\bf{x}}) {U}^\dagger ({\bf{v'}})\right) - \frac{1}{N_c} {\text{Tr}}\left( {U}({\bf{b}}) U^\dagger ({\bf{v'}})\right)\right>_{x_2}~.
\label{eq:S3-fund}
\end{equation}
In the dilute target limit we allow for only up to two gluon exchanges between the Wilson line propagators and the nucleus. Accordingly, we expand the Wilson lines to second order in the background field:
\begin{equation}
{U}({\bf{x}}) \approx
1 + ig \int dx^+ A^-(x^+, {\bf{x}}) - \frac{g^2}{2} \int dx^+ dy^+ \mathcal{P} \left\{A^-(x^+,{\bf{x}}) A^-(y^+,{\bf{x}}) \right\} + \mathcal{O} (A^3)~.
\end{equation}
To this order, the expectation values of the four- and three-point correlators are simply expressed in terms of the dipole operator $S^{(2)}_{q\bar{q}} ({\bf{v}},{\bf{v'}})$. The dilute target approximation gives only a leading result in $|{\bf{v}}-{\bf{v'}}|^2 Q_s^2$ for the expectation value of $S^{(2)}_{q\bar{q}} ({\bf{v}},{\bf{v'}})$, which is equivalent to taking the limit $|k_t|\gg Q_s$. Similarly, when all the momenta involved in the process are much larger than the saturation scale, the correlators entering the cross section get the following expressions:
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \hspace{-70pt} S^{(4)}_{qg\bar{q}g}({\bf{b}},{\bf{x}},{\bf{b'}},{\bf{x'}}) = 1 - g^2 N_c \Gamma _{x_2} ({\bf{x}}-{\bf{x'}}) - g^2 \frac{N_c^2 - 1}{2N_c} \Gamma _{x_2}({\bf{b}}-{\bf{b'}}) \nonumber \\
&& \hspace{30pt} - \frac{g^2 N_c}{2} \left[ \Gamma _{x_2}({\bf{x}}-{\bf{b}}) + \Gamma _{x_2}({\bf{x'}}-{\bf{b'}}) - \Gamma _{x_2}({\bf{x'}}-{\bf{b}}) - \Gamma _{x_2}({\bf{x}}-{\bf{b'}}) \right]~;
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{equation}
S^{(3)}_{qg\bar{q}} ({\bf{b}},{\bf{x}},{\bf{v'}}) = 1 - \frac{g^2 N_c}{2} \Gamma_{x_2} ({\bf{b}}-{\bf{x}}) - \frac{g^2 N_c}{2} \Gamma_{x_2} ({\bf{x}}-{\bf{v'}}) + \frac{g^2}{2 N_c} \Gamma_{x_2} ({\bf{b}}-{\bf{v'}})~;
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
S^{(2)}_{q\bar{q}} ({\bf{v}},{\bf{v'}}) = 1 - g^2 \frac{N_c^2 - 1}{2N_c} \Gamma _{x_2} ({\bf{v}} - {\bf{v'}})~.
\label{eq:dilutedipole}
\end{equation}
In the above equations:
\begin{equation}
\Gamma _{x_2} ({\bf{x}} - {\bf{y}}) = \int dx^+ \left[ \gamma_{x_2} (x^+, {\bf{0}}) - \gamma_{x_2} (x^+, {\bf{r}})\right]~,
\label{eq:Gammadef}
\end{equation}
where ${\bf{r}}={\bf{x}} - {\bf{y}}$ and $\gamma_{x_2} (x^+, {\bf{r}})$ is related to the expectation value of the two-field correlator:
\begin{equation}
\left < A^-_a (x^+,{\bf{x}}) A^-_b(y^+,{\bf{y}}) \right>_{x_2} = \delta ^{ab} \delta (x^+ - y^+) \gamma_{x_2} (x^+, {\bf{x}} - {\bf{y}})~.
\end{equation}
Using the expressions for the multi-point functions $S^{(i)}$, we get the following result for the amplitude squared:
\begin{eqnarray}
\left|\mathcal{M}(p,p_1,p_2)\right|^2 = 4 \pi^2 g^2 N_c (1 + (1-z)^2) \frac{1}{p^+_1} \int \frac{d^2 {\bf{u}}}{(2\pi)^2}\frac{d^2 {\bf{u'}}}{(2\pi)^2} e^{i P_t \cdot ({\bf{u'}}-{\bf{u}})}
\frac{{\bf{u}} \cdot {\bf{u'}}}{|{\bf{u}}|^2 |{\bf{u'}}|^2}
\nonumber \\
\times
\int \frac{d^2 {\bf{v}}}{(2\pi)^2}\frac{d^2 {\bf{v'}}}{(2\pi)^2} e^{i k_t \cdot ({\bf{v'}}-{\bf{v}})}
\left[ \Gamma_{x_2} ({\bf{x}}-{\bf{b'}}) + \Gamma_{x_2} ({\bf{x'}}-{\bf{b}}) + \Gamma_{x_2} ({\bf{x}}-{\bf{v'}}) \right . \nonumber \\ \left .
+\Gamma_{x_2} ({\bf{v}}-{\bf{x'}}) - 2 \Gamma_{x_2} ({\bf{x}}-{\bf{x'}}) - \frac {N_c^2 -1}{N_c^2} \Gamma_{x_2} ({\bf{b}}-{\bf{b'}}) \right . \nonumber \\ \left .
- \frac {N_c^2 -1}{N_c^2} \Gamma_{x_2} ({\bf{v}}-{\bf{v'}}) - \frac{1}{N_c^2} \Gamma_{x_2} ({\bf{b}}-{\bf{v'}}) - \frac{1}{N_c^2} \Gamma_{x_2} ({\bf{v}}-{\bf{b'}}) \right]~.
\end{eqnarray}
We perform the integrals in the above expression by changing the variables from ${\bf{v}}$ and ${\bf{v'}}$ to ${\bf{r}}$ and ${\bf{B}}$. The integrals over the transverse distances of the type ${\bf{r}}={\bf{v}} - {\bf{v'}}$ are equivalent to the Fourier transform of Eq.~(\ref{eq:Gammadef}) and give the unintegrated
gluon distribution:
\begin{equation}
f_{x_2} (k_t) \equiv - k_t^2 \int d^2 {\bf{r}} \, \Gamma_{x_2} ({\bf{r}}) e^{-i k_t \cdot {\bf{r}}} = k_t^2 \int dx^+ \gamma _{x_2} (x^+, k_t)~.
\end{equation}
In our approximation, the correlators do not depend on the impact parameter ${\bf{B}} =( {\bf{v}} + {\bf{v'}})/2$. The integrals over ${\bf{B}}$ factorize and give the transverse area of the target: $\int d^2{\bf{B}} = S_\perp$. Finally, the rest two integrations reduce to:
\begin{equation}
\int d^2 {\bf{u}}\, e^{-i P_t \cdot {\bf{u}}} \frac{{\bf{u}}}{|{\bf{u}}|^2} =-2\pi i \frac{{\bf{P_t}}}{|{\bf{P_t}}|^2}.
\end{equation}
In terms of the unintegrated gluon distribution, the amplitude squared then gets the form:
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \hspace{-50pt} \left|\mathcal{M}(p,p_1,p_2)\right|^2 = \frac{2}{(2\pi)^4} g^2 S_\perp N_c \frac{f_{x_2}(k_t)}{k_t^2} (1+ (1-z)^2)
\frac{1}{p^+_1} \nonumber \\
&& \hspace{20pt} \times \left[ \frac{(N_c^2-1)}{2N_c^2} \frac{1}{P_t^2} + \frac{(N_c^2-1)}{2N_c^2} \frac{1}{p_{1t}^2} + \frac{1}{p_{2t}^2}
+ \frac{1}{N_c^2}\frac{P_t \cdot p_{1t}}{P_t^2 p_{1t}^2} + \frac{P_t \cdot p_{2t}}{P_t^2 p_{2t}^2}
+\frac{p_{1t} \cdot p_{2t}}{p_{1t}^2 p_{2t}^2} \right]\, ,
\label{eq:CGCfac-qg}
\end{eqnarray}
We want to show that Eq.~(\ref{eq:CGCfac-qg}) reproduces the HEF formula~(\ref{eq:hef-formula}) with
the appropriate unintegrated parton distribution function and off-shell matrix elements. For this purpose,
we need to find a relation between the unintegrated gluon distribution used in the above equation,
$f_{x_2}(k_t)$, and ${\cal F}_{g/A}(x_2,k_t)$, which appears in the HEF formula~(\ref{eq:hef-formula}).
This is easily done by considering the deep inelastic scattering process, since ${\cal F}_{g/A}(x_2,k_t)$ is precisely
the unintegrated gluon distribution involved in the formulation of the $\gamma^*+A\to X$ total cross section, and is therefore related to the
$q\bar q$ dipole scattering amplitude in a straightforward manner (see for instance \cite{vanHameren:2014lna,Kutak:2014wga}):
\begin{equation}
{\cal F}_{g/A}(x_2,k_t)=\frac{N_c}{\alpha_s (2\pi)^3}\int d^2{\bf{v}} d^2{\bf{v'}}\
e^{-i k_t \cdot ({\bf{v}}-{\bf{v'}})}\nabla^2_{{\bf{v}}-{\bf{v'}}}\left[1-S^{(2)}_{q\bar{q}} ({\bf{v}},{\bf{v'}})\right]\ .
\label{eq:disgluon}
\end{equation}
In the weak-field limit, using formula~(\ref{eq:dilutedipole}), this gives the relation
\begin{equation}
f_{x_2}(k_t) = \frac{4\pi^2}{S_\perp (N_c^2-1)} {\cal F}_{g/A} (x_2,k_t)\,.
\end{equation}
Then, the cross section for the $qg$ production channel from
Eq.~(\ref{eq:cgc-1}) can be written in a more compact form
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\sigma(pA\to qgX)}{dy_1 dy_2 d^2p_{1t} d^2p_{2t}} =
\frac{\alpha_s^2}{2\pi}x_1f_{q/p}(x_1,\mu^2)z(1\!-\!z)\hat{P}_{gq}(z)
\left[1+\frac{(1\!-\!z)^2 p_{1t}^{\ 2}}{P_t^2}-\frac{1}{N_c^2}\frac{z^2 p_{2t}^{\ 2}}{P_t^2}\right]
\frac{{\cal F}_{g/A} (x_2,k_t)}{p_{1t}^{\ 2}\ p_{2t}^{\ 2}}~,
\label{eq:sigmaCGCfac-qg}
\end{equation}
where $\hat{P}_{gq}(z)$ is related to the quark-to-gluon splitting function and is given by:
\begin{equation}
\hat{P}_{gq}(z) = \frac{1+(1\!-\!z)^2}{z}\ .
\end{equation}
It turns out that the above expression for the quark-gluon production cross section is identical
to the result in the HEF formalism, Eq.~(\ref{eq:hef-formula}), containing the off-shell amplitudes
$\overline{\left|\mathcal{M}_{ag^* \to cd}\right|}^2$. The latter have been
calculated in Refs.~\cite{Deak:2009xt},~\cite{vanHameren:2012uj} and~\cite{vanHameren:2013}.
The equivalence of the CGC and HEF formulas in the dilute limit can be shown in
a similar way for the cross sections of the other two subprocesses, ${gg^* \to
q\bar{q}}$ and ${gg^* \to gg}$. The CGC results for the cross sections in this
limit are:
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\sigma(pA\to q\bar{q}X)}{dy_1 dy_2 d^2 p_{1t} d^2 p_{2t}} =
\frac{\alpha_s^2}{4C_F\pi}x_1f_{g/p}(x_1,\mu^2)z(1\!-\!z)\hat{P}_{qg}(z)
\left[-\frac{1}{N_c^2}+\frac{(1\!-\!z)^2 p_{1t}^{\ 2}+z^2 p_{2t}^{\ 2}}{P_t^2}\right]
\frac{{\cal F}_{g/A} (x_2,k_t)}{p_{1t}^{\ 2}\ p_{2t}^{\ 2}}
\label{eq:sigmaCGCfac-qbarq}
\end{equation}
and~\cite{Iancu:2013dta}
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\sigma(pA\to ggX)}{dy_1 dy_2 d^2 p_{1t} d^2 p_{2t}} =
\frac{\alpha_s^2N_c}{\pi C_F}x_1f_{g/p}(x_1,\mu^2)z(1\!-\!z)\hat{P}_{gg}(z)
\left[1+\frac{(1\!-\!z)^2 p_{1t}^{\ 2}+z^2 p_{2t}^{\ 2}}{P_t^2}\right]
\frac{{\cal F}_{g/A} (x_2, k_t)}{p_{1t}^{\ 2}\ p_{2t}^{\ 2}}\, .
\label{eq:sigmaCGCfac-gg}
\end{equation}
The expressions for $\hat{P}_{qg}(z)$ and $\hat{P}_{gg}(z)$ have the form:
\begin{equation}
\hat{P}_{qg}(z) = z^2+(1\!-\!z)^2 \,,
\quad \quad \quad
\hat{P}_{gg}(z) = \frac{z}{1-z} + \frac{1-z}{z} + z(1-z)\, .
\end{equation}
Again, Eqs.~(\ref{eq:sigmaCGCfac-qbarq}) and~(\ref{eq:sigmaCGCfac-gg}) are
equivalent to the HEF formulas for the corresponding cross sections~\cite{vanHameren:2014lna}.
Therefore, in principle, the HEF formalism should not be employed to include non-linear effects, and one should stick to Balitsky-Fadin-Kuraev-Lipatov (BFKL) evolution \cite{Lipatov:1976zz,Kuraev:1976ge,Balitsky:1978ic}, or Ciafaloni-Catani-Fiorani-Marchesini evolution \cite{Ciafaloni:1987ur,Catani:1989sg,Catani:1989yc}, when evaluating the gluon distribution. In this spirit, most studies are performed using a gluon density evolved with an improved BFKL equation that includes some higher-order corrections \cite{Kwiecinski:1997ee}, but no non-linear effects. However, we note that the HEF framework could be used with the Balitsky-Kovchegov (BK) equation \cite{Balitsky:1995ub,Kovchegov:1999yj} in order to investigate the so-called geometric scaling regime, where saturation effects are felt, even though $Q_s\ll k_t$. The full saturation region, $Q_s\sim k_t$, is however, in principle, out of reach of formula (\ref{eq:hef-formula}). Along these lines, an estimate of saturation effects was obtained in \cite{Kutak:2003bd,Kutak:2004ym}, using the BK equation extended to include the same higher-order corrections as included in the linear case \cite{Kwiecinski:1997ee}.
\section{TMD factorization for nearly back-to-back jets: \\ the
$\mathbold{|p_{1t}|,|p_{2t}|\gg |k_t|,Q_s}$ limit}
\label{sec:tmd-on-shell}
In this section we discuss the special case of nearly back-to-back jets,
$|p_{1t}+p_{2t}| \ll |p_{1t}|,|p_{2t}|$, where the differential cross section is
given by formula (\ref{eq:tmd-main}). Several gluon distributions
$\mathcal{F}_{ag}^{(i)}$, with different operator definition, are involved here. Indeed, as explained in \cite{Bomhof:2006dp}, a generic unintegrated gluon distribution of the form
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{F}(x_2,k_t) \stackrel{\text{naive}}{=}
2\int \frac{d\xi^+d^2{\boldsymbol\xi}}{(2\pi )^{3}p_A^{-}}e^{ix_2p_A^{-}\xi ^{+}-ik_t\cdot{\boldsymbol\xi}}
\left\langle A|\text{Tr}\left[
F^{i-}\left(\xi^+,{\boldsymbol\xi}\right)F^{i-}\left( 0\right)
\right]|A\right\rangle\,,
\end{equation}
where $F^{i-}$ are components of the gluon field strength tensor,
must be also supplemented with gauge links, in order to render such a bi-local product of field operators gauge invariant.
The gauge links are path-ordered exponentials, with the integration path being fixed by the hard part of the process under consideration. Therefore, unintegrated gluon distributions are process-dependent.
In the following, we shall encounter two gauge links $\mathcal{U}^{\left[ +\right] }$ and $\mathcal{U}^{\left[ -\right] }$, as well as the loop
$\mathcal{U}^{\left[\square \right] }=\mathcal{U}^{\left[ +\right] }\mathcal{U}^{\left[ -\right]\dagger}=\mathcal{U}^{\left[ -\right] }\mathcal{U}^{\left[ +\right]\dagger}$. These links are composed of Wilson lines, their simplest expression is obtained in the $A^+=0$ gauge:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{U}^{\left[ \pm\right] }= U(0,\pm\infty;{\bf{0}})U(\pm\infty,\xi^+;{\boldsymbol{\xi}})\quad \mbox{with}\quad
U(a,b;{\bf{x}}) = \mathcal{P} \exp \left[ ig \int_a^b dx^+ A_a^-(x^+, {\bf{x}}) t^a \right]\ ,
\end{equation}
but the expressions of the various gluon distributions given below are
gauge-invariant. From now on, $F^{i-}\left(\xi^+,{\boldsymbol\xi}\right)$ is
simply denoted as $F(\xi)$, and the hadronic matrix elements $\langle A | ... | A \rangle\to \langle ... \rangle $. Note however that they are different from the CGC averages $\left< \cdots \right>_{x_2}$ of the previous section. Indeed, the normalization of the hadronic state $\left|A\right>$ is defined as $\left<A'|A\right> = (2\pi)^3 \, 2 p_A^+ \, \delta (p_A^+ - p_A'^{+}) \, \delta^{(2)} \left (p_{At} - p'_{At}\right)$, while the CGC averages are normalized as $\left< 1 \right>_{x_2} = 1$. As explained in \cite{Dominguez:2011wm}, the two can be related by making the replacement $\left< \cdots \right>_{x_2} \to \frac{\left<A\right| \dots \left|A\right>}{ \left<A|A\right>}$.
This approach to dijet production in proton-nucleus collisions was analyzed in
Ref.~\cite{Dominguez:2011wm}. The TMD factorization formula (\ref{eq:tmd-main})
was derived there in the large-$N_c$ limit, and shown to be equivalent to CGC
calculations ({\it e.g. } formulas (\ref{eq:cgc-1}) and (\ref{eq:cgc-2}) in
the case of the $qA\to qg$ channel), after taking the limit
$|p_{1t}|,|p_{2t}|\gg |k_t|, Q_s$. In this section, we
derive the TMD factorization formula keeping $N_c$ finite. We obtain corrections to the hard
factors $H_{ag\to cd}^{(i)}$ previously derived, and we calculate new hard factors
corresponding to gluon distributions that were omitted before (as they were
vanishing in the large-$N_c$ limit). The finite $N_c$ extension prevents one to make a further simplification, called correlator factorization, essential to relate the TMD factorization and the CGC formalism, but gives completeness to the main result of this paper, i.e. the new factorization formula we propose below is valid for finite $N_c$. We also check explicitly the gauge invariance of these hard factors by computing them in a gauge different from the one used in~\cite{Dominguez:2011wm}.
An important fact to note is that, as a consequence of the
$|k_t|\ll|p_{1t}|,|p_{2t}|$ limit, the $k_t$ dependence in (\ref{eq:tmd-main})
survives only in the gluon distributions, and the hard factors are calculated as
if the small-$x_2$ gluon was on-shell. That is, looking at the hard partonic
interaction represented by the blob $H$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:dijets-pA}, $k^2 =
-|k_t|^2$ is set to zero, and ${\hat s} + {\hat t} + {\hat u} =0$.
\subsection[The $qg \to qg$ channel]{The $\mathbold{qg \to qg}$ channel}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{plots/qg2qg-diag.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Diagrams for $qg \to qg$ subprocess. The mirror diagrams of (3), (5)
and (6) give identical contributions.}
\label{fig:qg2qg-diag}
\end{figure}
The complete set of independent cut diagrams contributing to this channel is
shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:qg2qg-diag} (mirror images of diagrams (3), (5) and (6)
give identical expressions).
The cross section for a quark-gluon scattering involves only two different TMD gluon distributions as given in Ref.~\cite{Bomhof:2006dp}:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:fact_gqqg}
\frac{d\sigma^{pA\to qgX}}{d^{2}P_td^{2}k_tdy_{1}dy_{2}}=\frac{\alpha_s^2}{(x_1
x_2 s)^{2}}\ x_1f_{q/p}(x_1, \mu^2)
\sum_{i=1}^2 \mathcal{F}_{qg}^{(i)}H_{qg\to qg}^{(i)}\,,
\end{equation}
with:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{F}_{qg}^{(1)} &=&2\int \frac{d\xi^+d^2{\boldsymbol\xi}}{(2\pi )^{3}p_A^{-}}e^{ix_2p_A^{-}\xi ^{+}-ik_t\cdot{\boldsymbol\xi}}
\left\langle \text{Tr}\left[ F\left( \xi \right) \mathcal{U}^{\left[ -\right] \dagger }F\left( 0\right) \mathcal{U}^{\left[ +\right] }\right] \right\rangle
= x_2 G^{(2)}(x_2, k_t)\ ,
\label{eq:Fqg1-def}
\\
\mathcal{F}_{qg}^{(2)} &=&2\int \frac{d\xi^+d^2{\boldsymbol\xi}}{(2\pi)^{3}p_A^{-}} e^{ix_2p_A^{-}\xi ^{+}-i k_t \cdot{\boldsymbol\xi}}
\left\langle\text{Tr}\left[ F\left( \xi \right) \frac{\text{Tr}\left[ \mathcal{U}^{\left[\square \right] }\right] }{N_{c}}\mathcal{U}^{\left[ +\right] \dagger}
F\left( 0\right) \mathcal{U}^{\left[ +\right] }\right] \right\rangle\ .
\label{eq:Fqg2-def}
\end{eqnarray}
These are the same gluon distributions as in the large-$N_c$ limit~\cite{Dominguez:2011wm}, no
additional ones are present in this channel. The only difference in the expression~(\ref{eq:fact_gqqg}) when we go to
finite $N_c$ will appear in the hard factor $H_{qg \to qg}^{(1)}$ associated
with $\mathcal{F}_{qg}^{(1)}$. That gluon distribution is sometimes also denoted
$x_2G^{(2)}$, and is called the \emph{dipole distribution}, since it is the one that enters the formulation of the inclusive and semi-inclusive DIS.
In the CGC approach, $x_2G^{(2)}$ can be related to the $q \bar q$
dipole scattering amplitude, and therefore linked to the gluon distribution used
in the HEF formalism: $\mathcal{F}_{g/A} (x_2, k_t)=\pi x_2 G^{(2)}(x_2, k_t)$.
That distribution is not sufficient however to compute the forward dijet cross
section when $|k_t|\sim Q_s$ ({\it i.e. } the case considered in this section). For completeness, we note that a detailed derivation
of this relation between formula~(\ref{eq:disgluon}), involving a CGC
correlation function, and formula~(\ref{eq:Fqg1-def}), involving matrix elements defining TMDs, can be found in Appendix A of~\cite{Dominguez:2011wm}.
The exact results for the two hard factors read
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:H1-qg-on-shell-def}
H_{qg \to qg}^{(1)}&=&
\frac{1}{2} D_1 - \frac{1}{N_c^2-1} D_2 +D_4 + 2D_5 + 2 D_6\,, \\
\label{eq:H2-qg-on-shell-def}
H_{qg \to qg}^{(2)}&=&\frac{1}{2} D_1 + \frac{N_c}{2C_F} D_2 +2 D_3\,,
\end{eqnarray}
where $D_i$s are the squared and interference diagrams corresponding to the
$qg\to qg$ channel, following the numbering of Fig.~\ref{fig:qg2qg-diag}.
Each term $D_i = C_{u_i} h_i $ represents the product of the color factor,
$C_{u_i}$, and the hard coefficient, $h_i$. What kind of diagrams enter the hard
factors $H_{qg \to qg}^{(i)}$ depends on the type of the gauge links appearing
in each of them. As summarized in table IV of Ref.~\cite{Bomhof:2006dp},
the distribution $\mathcal{F}_{qg}^{(1)}$ is present in diagrams (1), (2), (4),
(5) and (6), while the distribution $\mathcal{F}_{qg}^{(2)}$ appears in diagrams
(1), (2) and (3). The $D_i$ components were computed in
Ref.~\cite{Dominguez:2011wm} (table II) in an axial gauge with the axial vector,
$n$, set to $n=p$, for both the incoming and the outgoing gluon, where $p$ is
the four-momentum of the incoming quark, as defined in Fig.~\ref{fig:dijets-pA}.
Formulated differently, the polarization vector of each external gluon was chosen such that, besides with the momentum of the gluon, their inner product with $p$ vanishes.
We recovered the same results for $D_i$s in that gauge and performed the same
calculation in a different gauge with the axial vector set to $n=p$ for the
incoming gluon and $n=p_2$ for the outgoing gluon~\footnote{The choice of axial gauge vectors for external gluons corresponds to the choice of the reference momentum for their polarization vectors, see for example \cite{Mangano:1990by}, and is arbitrary for gauge invariant quantities. Thus, the independence on those gauge vectors can be used to confirm that the result is gauge invariant.
}. The results for the hard
factors $H_{qg \to qg}^{(1)}$ and $H_{qg \to qg}^{(2)}$ at finite $N_c$ are
identical in both gauges and they read
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:H1-qg-on-shell}
H_{qg \to qg}^{(1)}&=&
- \frac{\hat{u} ( \hat{s}^2 + \hat{u}^2)}{2\hat{s}\hat{t}^2}
+\frac{1}{2N_c^2}\frac{( \hat{s}^2 + \hat{u}^2)}{\hat{s}\hat{u}}\ ,\\
\label{eq:H2-qg-on-shell}
H_{qg \to qg}^{(2)}&=&
- \frac{\hat{s} ( \hat{s}^2 + \hat{u}^2)}{2\hat{u}\hat{t}^2}\ .
\end{eqnarray}
The hard factors and the TMDs entering the factorization
formula~(\ref{eq:fact_gqqg}) are all gauge invariant. In principle, that leaves
us some freedom and the factorization formula can be rewritten with new hard
factors and the corresponding new gluon distributions formed as linear
combinations of the the old ones.
For reasons that shall be discussed in detail in Section~\ref{sec:HelTMD},
let us define the new hard factors for the $qg \to qg$ subprocess
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Kqg2qgon}
K_{qg\to qg}^{(1)} = H_{qg\to qg}^{(1)} +
\frac{1}{N_c^2} H_{qg\to qg}^{(2)} ~~~~~~~~
{\text{and}} ~~~~~~~
K_{qg\to qg}^{(2)} = \frac{N_c^2-1}{N_c^2} H_{qg\to qg}^{(2)}\,,
\end{equation}
and the corresponding new gluon TMDs
\begin{eqnarray}
\Phi_{qg\rightarrow qg}^{\left(1\right)} &=& \mathcal{F}_{qg}^{\left(1\right)}\,, \\
\Phi_{qg\rightarrow qg}^{\left(2\right)} &=& \frac{1}{N_{c}^{2}-1}\left(- \mathcal{F}_{qg}^{\left(1\right)}+
N_c^2\mathcal{F}_{qg}^{\left(2\right)}\right) \,,
\end{eqnarray}
such that the factorization formula~(\ref{eq:fact_gqqg}) now takes the form
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\sigma^{pA\to qg X}}{d^{2}P_td^{2} k_t dy_{1}dy_{2}}=
\frac{\alpha_s^2}{(x_1 x_2 s)^2}\ x_1 f_{q/p}(x_1, \mu^2)
\left[ \Phi_{qg \to qg}^{(1)}K_{qg\to qg}^{(1)} +
\Phi_{qg\to qg}^{(2)}K_{qg\to qg}^{(2)} \right]~.
\label{eq:new-fac-qg2qg}
\end{equation}
The explicit expressions for $K_{qg\to qg}^{(1)}$ and $K_{qg\to qg}^{(2)} $ are
given in Table~\ref{tab:Kfactors-on-shell}.
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\hline \\[-0.5em]
& $K^{(1)}_{ag \to cd}$ & $K^{(2)}_{ag \to cd}$ \\[0.5em]
\hline \\
$qg \to qg$ & \hspace{10pt}
$\displaystyle - \frac{{\hat s}^2+{\hat u}^2}{2 {\hat t}^2 {\hat s} {\hat u}} \left[ {\hat u}^2 +
\frac{{\hat s}^2-{\hat t}^2}{N_c^2}\right]$
&
$\displaystyle -\frac{C_F}{N_c} \frac{{\hat s} ({\hat s}^2+{\hat u}^2)}{ {\hat t}^2{\hat u}}$
\\[2em]
$gg \to q{\bar q}$ & \hspace{10pt}
$\displaystyle \frac{1}{2 N_c}
\frac{( \hat{t}^2 + \hat{u}^2)^2}{\hat{s}^2\hat{t}\hat{u}}$ & \hspace{10pt}
$\displaystyle -\frac{1}{2C_FN_c^2} \frac{\hat{t}^2 + \hat{u}^2}{\hat{s}^2}$
\\[2em]
$gg \to gg$ & \hspace{10pt}
$\displaystyle \frac{2 N_c}{C_F} \frac{(\hat{s}^2-\hat{t}\hat{u})^2(\hat{t}^2 +
\hat{u}^2)}{\hat{t}^2\hat{u}^2\hat{s}^2}$
&
$\displaystyle \frac{2 N_c}{C_F}
\frac{(\hat{s}^2-\hat{t}\hat{u})^2}{\hat{t}\hat{u}\hat{s}^2}$
\\[2em]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{
The ``new'' hard factors following from simplified effective TMD factorization
of Eqs.~(\ref{eq:new-fac-qg2qg}), (\ref{eq:new-fac-gg2qqbar}) and
(\ref{eq:gg2gg-on-shell2}) in the case with all partons being on shell.
}
\label{tab:Kfactors-on-shell}
\end{table}
\subsection[The $gg \to q{\bar q}$ channel]{The $\mathbold{gg \to q{\bar q}}$ channel}
\label{sec:gg2qq-on-shell}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{plots/gg2qq-diag.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Diagrams for $gg \to q{\bar q}$ subprocess. The mirror diagrams of (3),
(5) and (6) give identical contributions.}
\label{fig:gg2qqbar-diag}
\end{figure}
The independent cut diagrams contributing to this channel are shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:gg2qqbar-diag}.
In addition to the two gluon distributions, $\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(1)}$ and
$\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(2)}$, used in Ref.~\cite{Dominguez:2011wm}, the result to
all orders in $N_c$ involves a third distribution~\cite{Bomhof:2006dp,Akcakaya:2012si},
$\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(3)}$ (also sometimes denoted $x_2 G^{(1)}$ and called the
\emph{Weizsacker-Williams gluon distribution}), and the differential cross section reads
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:fact_ggqq}
\frac{d\sigma^{pA\to q\bar{q}X}}{d^{2}P_td^{2} k_t
dy_{1}dy_{2}}=\frac{\alpha_s^2}{(x_1x_2 s)^{2}}\ x_1f_{g/p}(x_1, \mu^2)
\sum_{i=1}^3 \mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(i)}H_{gg\to q\bar{q}}^{(i)}\,,
\end{equation}
with the three gluon TMDs defined as
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:Fgg1}
\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(1)} &=&2\int \frac{d\xi^+d^2{\boldsymbol\xi}}{(2\pi )^{3}p_A^{-}} e^{ix_2p_A^{-}\xi ^{+}-i k_t \cdot{\boldsymbol\xi}}
\left\langle \text{Tr}\left[ F\left( \xi \right)\frac{\text{Tr}\left[ \mathcal{U}^{\left[\square \right] }\right] }{N_{c}} \mathcal{U}^{\left[ -\right] \dagger }
F\left( 0\right) \mathcal{U}^{\left[ +\right] }\right] \right\rangle\ ,\\
\label{eq:Fgg2}
\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(2)} &=&2\int \frac{d\xi^+d^2{\boldsymbol\xi}}{(2\pi)^{3}p_A^{-}} e^{ix_2p_A^{-}\xi ^{+}-i k_t \cdot{\boldsymbol\xi}}
\frac{1}{N_c}\left\langle\textrm{Tr}\left[ F\left( \xi \right) \mathcal{U}^{\left[\square\right]\dagger} \right]
\textrm{Tr}\left[ F\left( 0\right) \mathcal{U}^{\left[ \square\right] }\right] \right\rangle\ ,\\
\label{eq:Fgg3}
\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(3)} &=& 2\int \frac{d\xi^+d^2{\boldsymbol\xi}}{(2\pi )^{3}p_A^{-}} e^{ix_2p_A^{-}\xi ^{+}-i k_t \cdot{\boldsymbol\xi}}
\left\langle \text{Tr}\left[F\left( \xi \right) \mathcal{U}^{\left[+\right] \dagger }F\left( 0\right) \mathcal{U}^{\left[ +\right] }\right] \right\rangle
=x_2 G^{(1)}(x_2, k_t) \ .
\end{eqnarray}
The appropriate hard factors are constructed from the expressions corresponding
to the diagrams (1)-(6) depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:gg2qqbar-diag}, using the
following formulas
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:ggqq-onshell1-def}
H_{gg \to q \bar{q}}^{(1)}&=&
\frac{N_c}{2C_F} D_1 + \frac{N_c}{2C_F} D_2 +D_4 + 2 D_5 + 2D_6\,, \\
\label{eq:ggqq-onshell2-def}
H_{gg \to q \bar{q}}^{(2)}&=&-2 N_c^2 D_3 -D_4 -2 D_5 -2D_6\,, \\
H_{gg \to q \bar{q}}^{(3)}&=&
-\frac{1}{N_c^2-1} D_1 - \frac{1}{N_c^2-1} D_2 + 2 D_3\,.
\label{eq:ggqq-onshell3-def}
\end{eqnarray}
Again, the components $D_i = C_{u_i} h_i$ were computed
in~\cite{Dominguez:2011wm} (table III) and they were used there to determine the
hard factors $H_{gg \to q \bar{q}}^{(1,2)}$ in the large $N_c$ limit.
Here, we generalize the results of~\cite{Dominguez:2011wm} to
the full, finite-$N_c$ case.
The calculation can be most readily done by exploiting crossing symmetry that
relates the $qg \to qg$ and $gg \to q{\bar q}$ channels. This allows for
identification of the diagrams between Figs.~\ref{fig:qg2qg-diag} and
\ref{fig:gg2qqbar-diag} and enables one to recycle the $D_i$ expressions
calculated in the previous subsection. For example, the expression corresponding
to the diagram (1) from Fig.~\ref{fig:gg2qqbar-diag}, with the incoming and the
outgoing legs connected, is identical to the already computed expression for the
diagram (4) from Fig.~\ref{fig:qg2qg-diag} (modulo a color averaging factor and
swapping of the momenta $p_1 \leftrightarrow p$). Similarly for all the other
diagrams. That gives the following set of hard factors for the $gg\to q{\bar q}$
subprocess:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:ggqq-onshell1}
H_{gg \to q \bar{q}}^{(1)}&=&
\frac{1}{4C_F} \frac{( \hat{t}^2 + \hat{u}^2)^2}{\hat{s}^2\hat{u}\hat{t}}\ ,\\
\label{eq:ggqq-onshell2}
H_{gg \to q \bar{q}}^{(2)}&=&
\frac{1}{2C_F} \frac{\hat{t}^2 + \hat{u}^2}{\hat{s}^2}\ ,\\
H_{gg \to q \bar{q}}^{(3)}&=&
- \frac{1}{4 N_c^2 C_F} \frac{\hat{t}^2 + \hat{u}^2}{\hat{t}\hat{u}}\ .
\label{eq:ggqq-onshell3}
\end{eqnarray}
Of the three hard factors, $H_{gg \to q \bar{q}}^{(i)}$, only two are
independent. The third hard factor, $H_{gg \to q \bar{q}}^{(3)}$, can be
expressed as\footnote{The same relation holds of course already at the level of
Eqs.~(\ref{eq:ggqq-onshell1-def})-(\ref{eq:ggqq-onshell3-def}).}
\begin{equation}
H_{gg \to q \bar{q}}^{(3)} = - \frac{1}{N_c^2} \left( H_{gg \to q \bar{q}}^{(1)} + H_{gg \to q \bar{q}}^{(2)} \right) \, .
\end{equation}
Therefore, the cross section for quark-antiquark production can be rewritten with only two hard factors and two gluon distributions that are linear combinations of $\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(1)}$, $\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(2)}$ and $\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(3)}$:
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\sigma^{pA\to q\bar{q} X}}{d^{2}P_td^{2} k_t
dy_{1}dy_{2}}=\frac{\alpha_s^2}{(x_1 x_2 s)^{2}}\ x_1f_{g/p}(x_1, \mu^2)
\left[ \Phi_{gg \to q\bar{q}}^{(1)}K_{gg\to q\bar{q}}^{(1)} + \Phi_{gg\to q\bar{q}}^{(2)}K_{gg\to q\bar{q}}^{(2)} \right]~.
\label{eq:new-fac-gg2qqbar}
\end{equation}
In the above, we defined the new gluon TMDs as
\begin{eqnarray}
\Phi_{gg\rightarrow q\overline{q}}^{\left(1\right)} &=& \frac{1}{N_{c}^{2}-1}\left(N_{c}^{2}\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{\left(1\right)}-\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{\left(3\right)}\right)\,, \\
\Phi_{gg\rightarrow q\overline{q}}^{\left(2\right)} &=& -N_{c}^{2}\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{\left(2\right)}+\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{\left(3\right)}\, ,
\end{eqnarray}
and the hard factors $K_{gg\to q\bar{q}}^{(i)}$ as:
\begin{equation}
K_{gg\to q\bar{q}}^{(1)} = \frac{N_c^2-1}{N_c^2} H_{gg\to q\bar{q}}^{(1)}~~~
{\text{and}} ~~~
K_{gg\to q\bar{q}}^{(2)} = - \frac{1}{N_c^2} H_{gg\to q\bar{q}}^{(2)} \, .
\label{eq:new-fac-gg2qq}
\end{equation}
The explicit expressions for the latter are given in Table~\ref{tab:Kfactors-on-shell}.
\subsection[The $gg \to gg$ channel]{The $\mathbold{gg \to gg}$ channel}
\label{sec:gg2gg-on-shell}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{plots/gg2gg-3gdiag.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Set of diagrams for the $gg \to gg$ subprocess involving only 3-gluon
vertices. The mirror diagrams of (3), (5) and (6) give identical
contributions.}
\label{fig:gg2gg-3gdiag}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{plots/gg2gg-4gdiag.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Set of diagrams for the $gg \to gg$ subprocess involving 4-gluon
vertex contributions. The mirror diagrams of (8), (9) and (10) give identical
contributions.}
\label{fig:gg2gg-4gdiag}
\end{figure}
Finally, the independent cut diagrams for the $gg \to gg$ channel are given in
Figs.~\ref{fig:gg2gg-3gdiag} and \ref{fig:gg2gg-4gdiag}, and the
corresponding differential cross section for two-gluon production reads:
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\sigma^{pA\to gg X}}{d^{2}P_td^{2} k_t
dy_{1}dy_{2}}=\frac{\alpha_s^2}{(x_1x_2 s)^{2}}\ x_1f_{g/p}(x_1, \mu^2)
\sum_{i=1}^6 \mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(i)}H_{gg\to gg}^{(i)}\,.
\label{eq:gg2gg-on-shell1}
\end{equation}
The $\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(1,2,3)}$ distributions are the same as the ones
introduced in the previous section in Eqs.~(\ref{eq:Fgg1})-(\ref{eq:Fgg3}).
The remaining three are~\cite{Bomhof:2006dp}:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(4)} &\!\!\!=\!\!\!& 2\!\int \frac{d\xi^+d^2{\boldsymbol\xi}}{(2\pi )^{3}p_A^{-}} e^{ix_2p_A^{-}\xi ^{+}-i k_t \cdot{\boldsymbol\xi}}
\left\langle \text{Tr}\left[F\left( \xi \right) \mathcal{U}^{\left[-\right] \dagger }F\left( 0\right) \mathcal{U}^{\left[ -\right] }\right] \right\rangle\,,
\label{eq:Fgg4}
\\
\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(5)} &\!\!\!=\!\!\!& 2\!\int \frac{d\xi^+d^2{\boldsymbol\xi}}{(2\pi )^{3}p_A^{-}} e^{ix_2p_A^{-}\xi ^{+}-i k_t \cdot{\boldsymbol\xi}}
\left\langle \text{Tr}\left[F\left( \xi \right) \mathcal{U}^{\left[\square \right] \dagger } \mathcal{U}^{\left[+\right] \dagger }
F\left( 0\right) \mathcal{U}^{\left[\square \right] } \mathcal{U}^{\left[ +\right] }\right] \right\rangle\,,
\label{eq:Fgg5}
\\
\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(6)} &\!\!\!=\!\!\!&2\!\int \frac{d\xi^+d^2{\boldsymbol\xi}}{(2\pi )^{3}p_A^{-}} e^{ix_2p_A^{-}\xi ^{+}-i k_t \cdot{\boldsymbol\xi}}
\left\langle \text{Tr}\left[ F\left( \xi \right)\mathcal{U}^{\left[ +\right] \dagger }F\left( 0\right) \mathcal{U}^{\left[ +\right] }\right]
\frac{\text{Tr}\left[ \mathcal{U}^{\left[\square \right] }\right] }{N_{c}} \frac{\text{Tr}\left[ \mathcal{U}^{\left[\square \right] }\right] }{N_{c}}\right\rangle.
\label{eq:Fgg6}
\end{eqnarray}
The associated hard factors are constructed as\footnote{Note that what is
called $H_{gg \to gg}^{(3)}$ in Ref.~\cite{Dominguez:2011wm} is now $H_{gg \to
gg}^{(6)}$. Out of six hard factors, only $H_{gg \to gg}^{(1)}$, $H_{gg \to
gg}^{(2)}$ and $H_{gg \to gg}^{(6)}$ survive in the large-$N_c$ limit.}:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:H1gggg-def}
H_{gg \to gg}^{(1)}&=&\frac{1}{2}D_1 + \frac{1}{2} D_2 +D_4 + 2D_5 + 2D_6\,,\\
\label{eq:H2gggg-def}
H_{gg \to gg}^{(2)}&=& 2 D_3 - D_4 -2 D_5 -2 D_6\,,\\
\label{eq:H6gggg-def}
H_{gg \to gg}^{(6)}&=& -\frac{N_c^2}{2} H^{(3)}_{gg \to gg} =
N_c^2 H_{gg \to gg}^{(4)}= N_c^2 H_{gg \to gg}^{(5)} =
\frac{1}{2}D_1 + \frac{1}{2} D_2 + 2 D_3\,.
\end{eqnarray}
The calculation of the $gg\to gg$ subprocess requires
inclusion of diagrams with four-gluon vertex.
Therefore, in general, the expressions $D_i$ in the above equations contain
contributions from both, the 3-gluon and 4-gluon vertex diagrams, the latter
shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:gg2gg-4gdiag}.
The corresponding expressions were computed in~\cite{Dominguez:2011wm},
where they were used to determine the hard factors in the large-$N_c$ limit.
Below, we generalize the result of Ref.~\cite{Dominguez:2011wm} to the
case of finite-$N_c$ , with the help of the exact definitions given in
Eqs.~(\ref{eq:H1gggg-def})-(\ref{eq:H6gggg-def}). The six hard factors read
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:H1gggg}
H_{gg \to gg}^{(1)}&=&
\frac{N_c}{C_F} \frac{(\hat{t}^2 + \hat{u}^2)(\hat{s}^2-\hat{t}\hat{u})^2}{\hat{u}^2\hat{t}^2\hat{s}^2}\ ,\\
\label{eq:H2gggg}
H_{gg \to gg}^{(2)}&=& =\frac{2N_c}{C_F} \frac{(\hat{s}^2-\hat{t}\hat{u})^2}{\hat{u}\hat{t}\hat{s}^2}\ ,\\
\label{eq:H6gggg}
H_{gg \to gg}^{(6)}&=& -\frac{N_c^2}{2} H^{(3)}_{gg \to gg} =
N_c^2 H_{gg \to gg}^{(4)}= N_c^2 H_{gg \to gg}^{(5)} =
\frac{N_c}{C_F} \frac{(\hat{s}^2-\hat{t}\hat{u})^2}{\hat{u}^2\hat{t}^2}\ .
\end{eqnarray}
To get further insight into the above results, we have performed an independent
calculation in a gauge with non-vanishing 4-gluon vertex contribution, with the
axial vectors defined as:
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{llll}
n = p & \text{for the gluon } k\,, & \qquad
n = k & \text{for the gluon } p\,, \\
n = p_2 & \text{for the gluon } p_1\,, & \qquad
n = p_1 & \text{for the gluon } p_2\,.
\end{array}
\label{eq:gauge-gg2gg}
\end{equation}
The contributions to $D_i$s in this gauge, coming from diagrams with 3-gluon
vertices only and depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:gg2gg-3gdiag}, are given in Table~\ref{tab:facgggg}.
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\hline
& $h_i^{(3)}$ & $C_i$ \\
\hline \\
(1) & $\displaystyle \frac{4 \hat{s}^6+4 \hat{t} \hat{s}^5+17 \hat{t}^2 \hat{s}^4+36 \hat{t}^3 \hat{s}^3+24 \hat{t}^4 \hat{s}^2+8 \hat{t}^5
\hat{s}+4 \hat{t}^6}{\hat{s}^4 \hat{t}^2}$ &
$\displaystyle \frac{N_c}{2C_F}$ \\[15pt]
(2) & $\displaystyle \frac{\hat{s}^6+2 \hat{t} \hat{s}^5+33 \hat{t}^2 \hat{s}^4+60 \hat{t}^3 \hat{s}^3+44 \hat{t}^4 \hat{s}^2+16 \hat{t}^5
\hat{s}+4 \hat{t}^6}{\hat{s}^4 (\hat{s}+\hat{t})^2}$ &
$\displaystyle \frac{N_c}{2C_F}$ \\[15pt]
(3) & $\displaystyle -\frac{2 \hat{s}^6-9 \hat{t} \hat{s}^5+19 \hat{t}^2 \hat{s}^4+48 \hat{t}^3 \hat{s}^3+4 \hat{t}^4 \hat{s}^2-24 \hat{t}^5
\hat{s}-8 \hat{t}^6}{2 \hat{s}^4 \hat{t} (\hat{s}+\hat{t})}$ &
$\displaystyle \frac{N_c}{4C_F}$ \\[15pt]
(4) & $\displaystyle \frac{(\hat{s}+2 \hat{t})^2}{\hat{s}^2}$ &
$\displaystyle \frac{N_c}{2C_F}$ \\[15pt]
(5) & $\displaystyle \frac{(\hat{s}+2 \hat{t}) \left(2 \hat{s}^3-3 \hat{t} \hat{s}^2-2 \hat{t}^2 \hat{s}+2 \hat{t}^3\right)}{2
\hat{s}^3 \hat{t}}$ &
$\displaystyle \frac{N_c}{4C_F}$ \\[15pt]
(6) & $\displaystyle -\frac{(\hat{s}+2 \hat{t}) \left(\hat{s}^3-7 \hat{t} \hat{s}^2-8 \hat{t}^2 \hat{s}-2 \hat{t}^3\right)}{2
\hat{s}^3 (\hat{s}+\hat{t})}$ &
$\displaystyle -\frac{N_c}{4C_F}$ \\ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Expressions for the $gg\to gg$ subprocess corresponding to diagrams
(1)-(6) of Fig.~\ref{fig:gg2gg-3gdiag}, hence containing only 3-gluon vertices,
in gauge (\ref{eq:gauge-gg2gg}) with non-vanishing 4-gluon vertex
contributions.}
\label{tab:facgggg}
\end{table}
\vspace{10pt}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{plots/graph-coa.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Color indices for the cut four-gluon squared matrix element.
}
\label{fig:4gamp-coa}
\end{figure}
In order to add the 4-gluon vertex contribution and obtain a full
result for the $D_i$ coefficients, let us consider a general
4-gluon amplitude, shown on the left hand side of Fig.~\ref{fig:4gamp-coa}.
A 3-gluon vertex brings a single $SU(N)$ structure constant factor. Each
amplitude in Fig.~\ref{fig:gg2gg-3gdiag} consists of two 3-gluon vertices and
that results in three possible color factor products
\begin{equation}
c_s \equiv f^{a_1 c a_4} f^{c a_2 a_3}\,, \quad \quad
c_t \equiv f^{a_1 a_2 c} f^{c a_3 a_4}\,, \quad \quad
c_u \equiv f^{a_1 a_3 c} f^{c a_4 a_2}\,, \quad \quad
\label{eq:3gv-color-factors}
\end{equation}
for the amplitudes with a gluon exchange in the $t$-, $s$- and $u$-channels,
respectively. Each of the above amplitudes can now be written as
\begin{equation}
{\cal M}^{3g}_i = c_i\, {\cal A}^{3g}_i\,,
\label{eq:3gv-amp}
\end{equation}
where $i$ is either $t$, $s$ or $u$, $c_{i}$ is a color factor from
Eq.~(\ref{eq:3gv-color-factors}), and ${\cal A}_{i}^{3g}$ is a corresponding
kinematic expression. The $3g$ superscript means that only 3-gluon vertices are
involved in the given amplitude.
Similarly, for the conjugate amplitudes, following the notation of
Fig.~\ref{fig:4gamp-coa}, we have
\begin{equation}
\bar c_s \equiv f^{b_1 c b_4} f^{c b_2 b_3}\,, \quad \quad
\bar c_t \equiv f^{b_1 b_2 c} f^{c b_3 b_4}\,, \quad \quad
\bar c_u \equiv f^{b_1 b_3 c} f^{c b_4 b_2}\,. \quad \quad
\label{eq:3gv-color-factors-bar}
\end{equation}
That allows us to identify the color coefficients of the 3-gluon diagrams of
Fig.~\ref{fig:gg2gg-3gdiag} and write them in a compact form
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{ccc}
(1) \quad \leftrightarrow \quad c_t \bar c_t\,, & \qquad
(2) \quad \leftrightarrow \quad c_u \bar c_u\,, & \qquad
(3) \quad \leftrightarrow \quad c_t \bar c_u\,, \\
(4) \quad \leftrightarrow \quad c_s \bar c_s\,, & \qquad
(5) \quad \leftrightarrow \quad c_s \bar c_t\,, & \qquad
(6) \quad \leftrightarrow \quad c_s \bar c_u\,. \\
\end{array}
\label{eq:cc-3g}
\end{equation}
The $\order{\alpha_s^2}$ contributions from diagrams with 4-gluon vertex are depicted
in Fig.~\ref{fig:gg2gg-4gdiag}, where the first row shows the 4-gluon vertex
amplitude squared, and the second row gives the interference terms with the
three types of ${\cal M}^{3g}$ amplitudes from Eq.~(\ref{eq:3gv-amp}).
A 4-gluon vertex amplitude contains all three color factor products of
Eq.~(\ref{eq:3gv-color-factors}) at once
\begin{equation}
{\cal M}^{4g} = c_t {\cal A}^{4g}_t + c_s {\cal A}^{4g}_s + c_u {\cal A}^{4g}_u\,.
\end{equation}
Therefore, all the contributions from Fig.~\ref{fig:gg2gg-4gdiag} can be
represented in the basis of the color factors defined in
Eq.~(\ref{eq:cc-3g}).
This allows us to distribute all the pieces of diagrams from
Fig.~\ref{fig:gg2gg-4gdiag} over the six $D_i$ expressions,
needed to calculate the hard factors
(\ref{eq:H1gggg-def})-(\ref{eq:H6gggg-def}), according to their color factors.
Hence, the full expressions are
\begin{eqnarray}
D_1 & = & C_1 \left(h_1^{(3)} + 2 {\cal A}^{4g}_t{\cal A}^{3g}_t +
{\cal A}^{4g}_t {\cal A}^{4g}_t\right)\,, \\
D_2 & = & C_2 \left(h_2^{(3)} + 2 {\cal A}^{4g}_u{\cal A}^{3g}_u +
{\cal A}^{4g}_u {\cal A}^{4g}_u\right)\,, \\
D_3 & = & C_3 \left(h_3^{(3)} + {\cal A}^{4g}_t{\cal A}^{4g}_u +
{\cal A}^{4g}_t{\cal A}^{3g}_u + {\cal A}^{4g}_u {\cal A}_t^{3g}\right)
\,,\\
D_4 & = & C_4 \left(h_4^{(3)} + 2 {\cal A}^{4g}_s{\cal A}^{3g}_s +
{\cal A}^{4g}_s{\cal A}^{4g}_s\right)\,, \\
D_5 & = & C_5 \left(h_5^{(3)} + {\cal A}^{4g}_t{\cal A}^{4g}_s +
{\cal A}^{4g}_t{\cal A}^{3g}_s + {\cal A}^{4g}_s{\cal A}^{3g}_t\right)\,, \\
D_6 & = & C_6 \left(h_6^{(3)} + {\cal A}^{4g}_s{\cal A}^{4g}_u +
{\cal A}^{4g}_u{\cal A}^{3g}_s + {\cal A}^{4g}_s{\cal A}^{3g}_u\right)\,.
\label{eq:Disgg2gg}
\end{eqnarray}
The results for $D_i$s in the gauge (\ref{eq:gauge-gg2gg}) are summarized in in
Table~\ref{tab:Di}. Plugging those expressions into the hard factor definitions
(\ref{eq:H1gggg-def})-(\ref{eq:H6gggg-def}) leads to the results identical to
Eqs.~(\ref{eq:H1gggg})-(\ref{eq:H6gggg}).
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\hline
& $D_i$ \\
\hline \\
(1) & $\displaystyle \frac{N_c \left(2 \hat{s}^4+2 \hat{s}^3 \hat{t}+3 \hat{s}^2 \hat{t}^2+8 \hat{s} \hat{t}^3+6 \hat{t}^4\right)}{C_F \hat{s}^2 \hat{t}^2 }$ \\[15pt]
(2) & $\displaystyle \frac{N_c \left(\hat{s}^4+4 \hat{s}^3 \hat{t}+15 \hat{s}^2 \hat{t}^2+16 \hat{s} \hat{t}^3+6 \hat{t}^4\right)}{C _F\hat{s}^2
(\hat{s}+\hat{t})^2}$
\\[15pt]
(3) & $\displaystyle -\frac{N_c \left(\hat{s}^4+\hat{s}^3 \hat{t}+7 \hat{s}^2 \hat{t}^2+12 \hat{s} \hat{t}^3+6 \hat{t}^4\right)}{2 C_F \hat{s}^2 \hat{t} (\hat{s}+\hat{t})}$
\\[15pt]
(4) & $\displaystyle \frac{N_c (\hat{s}+2 \hat{t})^2}{C_F \hat{s}^2 }$
\\[15pt]
(5) & $\displaystyle \frac{N_c (\hat{s}-2 \hat{t}) (\hat{s}+\hat{t}) (\hat{s}+2 \hat{t})}{2 C_F
\hat{s}^2 \hat{t} }$
\\[15pt]
(6) & $\displaystyle -\frac{N_c\ \hat{t} (\hat{s}+2 \hat{t}) (3 \hat{s}+2 \hat{t})}{2 C_F \hat{s}^2 (\hat{s}+\hat{t})}$
\\ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Full expressions for the diagrams including three-gluon and four-gluon
vertex contributions in the gauge (\ref{eq:gauge-gg2gg}).}
\label{tab:Di}
\end{table}
\vspace{10pt}
We have already seen that not all of the six hard factors that arise in the
$gg\to gg$ subprocess are independent. As shown in Eq.~(\ref{eq:H6gggg-def}),
the expressions for $H_{gg \to gg}^{(3)}$, $H_{gg \to gg}^{(4)}$, $H_{gg \to
gg}^{(5)}$ and $H_{gg \to gg}^{(6)}$ differ only by numerical factors. On top of
that, when examining further Eqs.~(\ref{eq:H1gggg-def}), (\ref{eq:H2gggg-def})
and (\ref{eq:H6gggg-def}), we see that the hard factors $H_{gg \to gg}^{(1)}$,
$H_{gg \to gg}^{(2)}$ and $H_{gg \to gg}^{(6)}$ are linearly dependent, that is
\begin{equation}
H_{gg \to gg}^{(6)} = H_{gg \to gg}^{(1)} + H_{gg \to gg}^{(2)} \, .
\label{eq:H1H2H6-relation}
\end{equation}
Hence, the cross section for two-gluon production from
Eq.~(\ref{eq:gg2gg-on-shell1}) can be
written in a much simpler, factorized form, with only two hard factors and two
gluon distributions
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\sigma^{pA\to gg X}}{d^{2}P_td^{2} k_t
dy_{1}dy_{2}}=\frac{\alpha_s^2}{(x_1x_2 s)^{2}}\ x_1f_{g/p}(x_1, \mu^2)
\left[ \Phi_{gg\to gg}^{(1)}K_{gg\to gg}^{(1)} + \Phi_{gg\to gg}^{(2)}K_{gg\to gg}^{(2)} \right]~.
\label{eq:gg2gg-on-shell2}
\end{equation}
In this channel, the new gluon TMDs, $\Phi_{gg\to gg}$, are defined as the following linear combinations of
$\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(1)}, \mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(2)},\ldots, \mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(6)}$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:Phigg11}
\Phi_{gg\to gg}^{(1)} &=& \frac{1}{2}\left(\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(1)} - \frac{2}{N_c^2} \mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(3)} + \frac{1}{N_c^2} \mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(4)} + \frac{1}{N_c^2} \mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(5)} + \mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(6)}\right) \,, \\
\label{eq:Phigg12}
\Phi_{gg\to gg}^{(2)} &=& \mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(2)} - \frac{2}{N_c^2} \mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(3)} + \frac{1}{N_c^2} \mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(4)} + \frac{1}{N_c^2} \mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(5)} + \mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(6)} \,,
\end{eqnarray}
and the new hard factors are:
\begin{equation}
K_{gg\to gg}^{(1)} = 2 H_{gg\to gg}^{(1)}\, ,~~~~~~
{\text{and}}~~~~~~K_{gg\to gg}^{(2)} = H_{gg\to gg}^{(2)}\, .
\label{eq:new-fac-gg2gg}
\end{equation}
The explicit expressions are given in Table~\ref{tab:Kfactors-on-shell}.
We note, that the above simplification occurs naturally when utilizing gauge
invariance from the start, as we will show in section \ref{sec:HelTMD}.
Finally, we point out that, in the large-$N_c$ limit, all the distributions that
were introduced in this section, $\mathcal{F}_{qg}^{(1)}$ $\mathcal{F}_{qg}^{(2)}$, $\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(1)}$, $\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(2)}$,
and $\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(6)}$, can be written in terms of $xG^{(1)}$ and $xG^{(2)}$, and equivalence of formulas
(\ref{eq:new-fac-qg2qg}), (\ref{eq:new-fac-gg2qqbar}) and (\ref{eq:gg2gg-on-shell2}) with CGC results is obtained \cite{Dominguez:2011wm}.
Let use conclude that this part of our work brings two improvements to the
current state of the art for the TMD factorization in forward dijet production.
First of all, we have obtained finite-$N_c$ corrections to the hard factors
of Ref.~\cite{Dominguez:2011wm}. More importantly, however, we have eliminated
the redundancy in the number of gluon distributions needed to write a
factorization formula for this process, which now takes the compact form
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\sigma^{pA\rightarrow {\rm dijets}+X}}{d^{2}P_{t}d^{2}k_{t}dy_{1}dy_{2}}=\frac{\alpha_{s}^{2}}{(x_1 x_2 s)^{2}}
\sum_{a,c,d} x_{1}f_{a/p}(x_{1}, \mu^2)\sum_{i=1}^{2}K_{ag\to cd}^{(i)}\Phi_{ag\rightarrow cd}^{(i)}\ \frac{1}{1+\delta_{cd}}\ ,
\label{eq:gg2gg-new-onshell}
\end{equation}
with only two gluon distributions and two hard factors required in each channel.
Note that, as we shall discuss now, the incoming, small-$x$ gluon is kept on-shell. Eqs.~(\ref{eq:gg2gg-new-onshell})
will be further generalized to the case of the off-shell gluon in Section~\ref{sec:hard-factors-off-shell}.
\subsection{The $\mathbold{|k_t|\gg Q_s}$ limit}
\label{sec:dilute-on-shell}
Finally, let us consider the limit $|k_t|\gg Q_s$. This is the dilute limit considered in Section \ref{sec:dilute}, with the extra requirement that $|k_t|\ll|P_t|$, needed for the validity of those formula. In that limit, the transverse separation between the field operators in the definition of the gluon distribution is restricted to values much smaller than the distance over which the Fourier integrand varies, and the ${\boldsymbol\xi}$ dependence of the gauge links can be neglected. As a result, they simplify, and all the $\mathcal{F}_{ag}^{(i)}$ distributions coincide, except $\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{(2)}$ which vanishes. In terms of the $ \Phi_{ag\to cd}^{(1,2)}$ functions, all six distributions
also reduce to that one gluon distribution, which can therefore be identified with $\mathcal{F}_{g/A}/\pi$.
Then, for all channels, one can easily sum the surviving hard factors. In terms of diagrams, we always obtain $D_1+D_2+2D_3+D_4+2D_5+2D_6$, meaning that we recover the collinear matrix elements.
Indeed we have (noting that $H_{gg \to gg}^{(3)}+H_{gg \to gg}^{(4)}+H_{gg \to gg}^{(5)}=0$):
\begin{eqnarray}
H_{qg \to qg}^{(1)}+H_{qg \to qg}^{(2)}=K_{qg \to qg}^{(1)}+K_{qg \to qg}^{(2)}
&=&\frac{\hat{s}^2+\hat{u}^2}{\hat{t}^2}-\frac{C_F}{N_c}\frac{\hat{s}^2+\hat{u}^2}{\hat{s}\hat{u}}=\frac1{g^4}
|\overline{{\cal M}_{qg\to qg}}|^2\,,~~~~~~~\\
H_{gg \to q\bar q}^{(1)}+H_{gg \to q\bar q}^{(3)}=K_{gg \to q\bar q}^{(1)}+K_{gg \to q\bar q}^{(2)}
&=&
\frac{1}{2N_c}\frac{\hat{t}^2+\hat{u}^2}{\hat{t}\hat{u}}-\frac{1}{2C_F}\frac{\hat{t}^2+\hat{u}^2}{\hat{s}^2}=\frac1{g^4}|\overline{{\cal
M}_{gg\to q\bar q}}|^2,~~~~~~~ \\
H_{gg \to gg}^{(1)}+H_{gg \to gg}^{(6)}=K_{gg \to gg}^{(1)}+K_{gg \to gg}^{(2)}
&=&\frac{2N_c}{C_F}\frac{(\hat{s}^2-\hat{t}\hat{u})^3}{\hat{s}^2\hat{t}^2\hat{u}^2}=\frac1{g^4}
|\overline{{\cal M}_{gg\to gg}}|^2\,.~~~~~~~
\end{eqnarray}
Therefore, we recover the HEF formula (\ref{eq:hef-formula}), except that, due
to the $|k_t|\ll|P_t|$ limit, the matrix elements are on-shell: the transverse
momentum of the incoming gluon, $k_t$, survives only in $\mathcal{F}_{g/A}$. In other words, we recover the standard high-$|P_t|$ limit:
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\sigma^{pA\rightarrow {\rm dijets}+X}}{dy_1dy_2dP^2_t dk^2_{t}}
=
\sum_{a,c,d} \frac{1}{1+\delta_{cd}}\ x_1 f_{a/p}(x_1,\mu^2)\,\frac{d\hat\sigma_{ag\to cd}}{d\hat{t}}\ {\cal F}_{g/A}(x_2,k_t)\,,
\label{eq:collinear-formula}
\end{equation}
with $d\hat\sigma_{ag\to cd}/d\hat{t}= |\overline{{\cal M}_{ag\to cd}}|^2 /
[16\pi (x_1x_2 s)^2]$, and where ${\cal F}_{g/A}(x_2,k_t)$ can be identified with $\partial/\partial k_t^2\ x_2 f_{g/A}(x_2,k_t^2)$, the derivative of the integrated gluon distribution.
In the following section, we shall restore the $k_t$ dependence of the hard
factors. This will extend our formulas such that they recover the full HEF
formula when the dilute limit is considered. As a result, we will obtain a
unified description, valid for generic forward dijet system with
$|p_{1t}|,|p_{2t}|\gg Q_s$, without any additional requirement on the magnitude of the transverse momentum imbalance $k_t$.
\section{Unified description of forward dijets in p+A collisions: \\
TMD factorization with off-shell hard factors}
\label{sec:hard-factors-off-shell}
We shall now generalize the hard factors that enter the TMD factorization
formula (\ref{eq:tmd-main}) to the case with one of the incoming gluons being off
the mass shell, as illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:4gamp-off-shell}.
As it has been already stated, the motivation to include the offshellness is to
be able to allow for configurations where the dijets are produced at any
azimuthal angle (of course before application of a jet algorithm that will
suppress very small angles and hence render the results finite).
As can be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:matrixelements}
(as an example we chose only purely gluonic matrix element but the same
structure occurs for the other channels), the on-shell matrix element misses
substantial contributions when the jets are produced at small angles near $\Delta\phi=0$
and at small rapidity differences $\Delta Y =|y_1 - y_2| \simeq 0$. In such
configurations, the matrix element develops a structure that is
divergent and it is suppressed only by a jet algorithm, which has to be applied
in order to ensure two-jet configurations \cite{vanHameren:2014lna}.
The matrix elements squared we are after, {\it i.e. } $g g^*\rightarrow gg$,
$g g^*\rightarrow q\bar q$ and $q g^*\rightarrow qg$, can
be extracted from the high energy limit (or eikonal limit) of $q\,g\rightarrow
q\,g\,g$ and $q\,g\rightarrow q\,\bar q\,q$ and $q\,q'\rightarrow q\,q'\,g$ \cite{vanHameren:2013}. In
this approach the quark $q$ is an auxiliary line to which the initial state
off-shell gluon $g^*$ couples eikonally.
The high energy factorization is a direct procedure where one uses the
standard Feynman rules for all vertices and color factors, and fixes the light-cone
gauge for the on-shell gluons, using a gauge vector given by the longitudinal
component of the off-shell, initial-state gluon's momentum. In particular, if we apply the
high energy factorization to the process we are after, we set the gauge
vector to $n=p_A$, where $p_A$ is the target four-momentum, as defined in
Fig.~\ref{fig:dijets-pA} and Eq.~(\ref{eq:pp-pA-defs}).
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.22\textwidth]{plots/4p-amplitude-off-shell.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Four-parton amplitude with the incoming, small-$x$, off-shell gluon.}
\label{fig:4gamp-off-shell}
\end{figure}
Furthermore, the prescription is to associate with the off-shell gluon a
longitudinal polarization vector, called \emph{nonsense
polarization} \cite{Gribov:1984tu}, of the form~\footnote{
The $\sqrt 2$ factor in Eq.~(\ref{eq:pol-off-shell}) follows from a convention.
It allows for use of the on-shell-like factor $\frac12$ in averaging over
polarization, while calculating matrix elements squared, even in the case of
the off-shell gluon, where the actual number of polarizations in the high energy
limit is 1.
}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:pol-off-shell}
\epsilon_\mu^0=\frac{i \sqrt 2\, x_2}{|k_t|} p_{A\, \mu}\,.
\end{equation}
As elaborated in Ref.~\cite{Catani:1990eg}, longitudinally polarized gluons
provide the dominant contribution to the cross section in the high energy limit.
In the square amplitude, this leads to the polarization tensor of the form \cite{Catani:1990eg}
\begin{equation}
\epsilon^0_\mu \epsilon^{0\,*}_\nu\,
= \frac{-2\, x_2^2}{k^2}\, p_{A\, \mu}\, p_{A\,\nu}\,,
\end{equation}
In the above, $x_2=k_\mu p^\mu/p_{\!A \nu} p^\nu$, which follows directly from the definition in Eq.~(\ref{eq:k-4-vec}).
The sum over polarizations of the on-shell gluons takes the standard form, with the gauge vector given by $p_{A}$
\begin{equation}
\sum_{\lambda=\pm} \epsilon^{\lambda}_\mu \epsilon^{\lambda *}_\nu\,
= g_{\mu \nu} - \frac{p_{\!A \mu} q_\nu + q_\mu p_{\!A \nu}}{q^\rho p_{\!A \rho}}\,,
\end{equation}
where, depending on the channel, $q=p,\, p_1$ or $p_2$, {\it c.f. }
Eq.~(\ref{eq:gauge-gg2gg}).
Let us note that the procedure outlined above defines the hard process in a
gauge invariant manner only when a special choice for polarization vectors of
the on-shell gluons is taken. In an arbitrary gauge, for internal and external
gluon lines, more sophisticated methods have to be used, see {\it e.g. }
\cite{vanHameren:2013,Lipatov:1995pn,Antonov:2004hh,Kotko:2014aba,vanHameren:2014iua}.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{plots/gggg.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{plots/gstarggg.png}
\end{center}
\caption{
Matrix elements squared for $gg \to gg$ scattering with $p_{t1}=p_{t2}=4\,
\ensuremath{\,\mathrm{GeV}}\xspace$ and $\alpha_s=0.2$. Left: the on-shell case. Right: the off-shell case.
$\Delta Y$ and $\Delta \phi$ are, respectively, the differences in rapidity
and azimuthal angle of the two outgoing gluons.
}
\label{fig:matrixelements}
\end{figure}
To present our results in a compact form, with direct relation to the on-shell
formulas from Section~\ref{sec:tmd-on-shell}, in addition to the
standard Mandelstam variables given by Eqs.~(\ref{eq:mandelstam}), which now,
however, sum up to ${\hat s} + {\hat t} + {\hat u} = k_T^2$,
we introduce
their barred versions, defined only with the longitudinal component
of the off-shell gluon
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
\bar{s} & \ = \ (x_2 p_{\! A} +p)^2 \ =
\ \ \frac{|P_t|^2}{z(1-z)}+|k_t|^2=x_1x_2s\,,\\
\bar{t} & \ = \ (x_2 p_{\! A} -p_1)^2=-z\bar{s}\,, \\
\bar{u} & \ = \ (x_2 p_{\! A} -p_2)^2=-(1-z)\bar{s}\,,
\end{align}
\label{eq:gen-mandelstam}
\end {subequations}
which are related via the equation
\begin{equation}
\bar{s} + \bar{t} + \bar{u} = 0\,.
\end{equation}
In the on-shell limit, $k_T^2 \to 0$, the variables defined above recover the
standard Mandelstam variables from Eq.~(\ref{eq:mandelstam})
\begin{equation}
\lim_{|k_t| \to 0} (\bar{s} - {\hat s}) = 0\,, \qquad \quad
\lim_{|k_t| \to 0} (\bar{t} - {\hat t}) = 0\,, \qquad \quad
\lim_{|k_t| \to 0} (\bar{u} - {\hat u}) = 0\,.
\label{eq:gen-mandelstam-limit}
\end{equation}
As a consistency check, we have verified that, for all three subprocesses, the
off-shell amplitudes that shall be used to build the hard factors in the
remaining part of this section are identical to
those first calculated in Ref.~\cite{Deak:2009xt}.
From this point onwards, we shall discuss our results only in terms of the new
$K^{(i)}$ hard factors and the new factorization formulas from
Eqs.~(\ref{eq:new-fac-qg2qg}), (\ref{eq:new-fac-gg2qqbar}) and
(\ref{eq:gg2gg-on-shell2}). The results for the old hard factors, $H^{(i)}$, in
the off-shell case are given in Appendix~\ref{app:off-shell-expr} for
completeness.
\subsection[The $qg^* \to qg$ channel]{The $\mathbold{qg^* \to qg}$ channel}
The off-shell hard factors for this channel are obtained using definitions given
in Eq.~(\ref{eq:Kqg2qgon}) and then Eqs.~(\ref{eq:H1-qg-on-shell-def}) and (\ref{eq:H2-qg-on-shell-def}). The
corresponding $D_i$ expressions are collected in Appendix
\ref{app:off-shell-expr} in Table~\ref{tab:Di-off-shell-qg2qg}.
The two hard factors read
\begin{eqnarray}
K^{(1)}_{qg^*\to qg} & = &
- \frac{\bar{s}^2 + \bar{u}^2}{2 \bar{t} {\hat t} {\hat s} {\hat u}}
\Bigg[\bar{u} {\hat u} + \frac{\bar{s} {\hat s} - \bar{t} {\hat t}}{N_c^2}\Bigg]\,,\\
K^{(2)}_{qg^*\to qg} & = &
- \frac{C_F}{ N_c} \,
\frac{\bar{s}\left(\bar{s}^2 + \bar{u}^2\right)}{ \bar{t} {\hat t} {\hat u} }\,.
\end{eqnarray}
In the limit $|k_t| \to 0$, simplification given by
Eq.~(\ref{eq:gen-mandelstam-limit}) occurs and
the above formulas manifestly recover the on-shell
results from Table~\ref{tab:Kfactors-on-shell}.
\subsection[The $gg^* \to q\bar q$ channel]
{The $\mathbold{gg^* \to q\bar q}$ channel}
The off-shell hard factors are obtained using definitions given in
Eq.~(\ref{eq:new-fac-gg2qq})
and then
Eqs.~(\ref{eq:ggqq-onshell1-def}),
(\ref{eq:ggqq-onshell2-def}) and (\ref{eq:ggqq-onshell3-def}). The
corresponding $D_i$ expressions are collected in Appendix
\ref{app:off-shell-expr} in Table~\ref{tab:Di-off-shell-gg2qq}.
The two hard factors take the following compact form
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:K1gg2qqoff}
K_{gg^*\rightarrow q{\bar q}}^{(1)}&=&
\frac{1}{2N_c} \frac{\bar{t}^2+\bar{u}^2}{ \bar{s} {\hat s} {\hat t} {\hat u}}
\left[\bar{u} {\hat u} + \bar{t} {\hat t} \right]\,, \\
\label{eq:K2gg2qqoff}
K_{gg^*\rightarrow q{\bar q}}^{(2)}&=&
\frac{1}{4 N_c^2 C_F} \frac{\bar{t}^2+\bar{u}^2}{ \bar{s} {\hat s} {\hat t} {\hat u} }
\left[\bar{u} {\hat u} + \bar{t} {\hat t} - \bar{s} {\hat s} \right]\,.
\end{eqnarray}
Again, following Eq.~(\ref{eq:gen-mandelstam-limit}), it is manifest that the
above hard factors reduce to those given in Table~\ref{tab:Kfactors-on-shell},
in the limit $|k_t|\to 0$.
\subsection[The $gg^* \to gg$ channel]{The $\mathbold{gg^* \to gg}$ channel}
\label{Sec:hardfactgggg}
In the gauge chosen for our calculation, all the squared diagrams and
interference terms that involve a 4-gluon vertex are identically zero.
The corresponding $D_i$s are given in Table~\ref{tab:Di-off-shell-gg2gg}
of Appendix \ref{app:off-shell-expr}.
Using the combinations from Eqs.~(\ref{eq:H1gggg-def})-(\ref{eq:H6gggg-def})
and then the definition from Eq.~(\ref{eq:new-fac-gg2gg})
leads to the following set of the off-shell hard factors
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:Kgg2ggoff1}
K^{(1)}_{gg^*\to gg} & = &
\frac{2 N_c}{C_F}\,
\frac{(\bar{s}^2-\bar{t} \bar{u})^2} {\bar{t}{\hat t} \bar{u}{\hat u} \bar{s}{\hat s} }\,
\left[\bar{u}{\hat u} + \bar{t}{\hat t} \right]\,, \\
\label{eq:Kgg2ggoff2}
K^{(2)}_{gg^*\to gg} & = &
-\frac{N_c}{C_F}\,
\frac{(\bar{s}^2-\bar{t} \bar{u})^2} {\bar{t}{\hat t} \bar{u}{\hat u} \bar{s}{\hat s} }\,
\left[\bar{u}{\hat u} + \bar{t}{\hat t} - \bar{s}{\hat s} \right]\,.
\end{eqnarray}
The on-shell limit is again manifest, with the above equations reducing to
those from Table~\ref{tab:Kfactors-on-shell} as $|k_t|\to 0 $.
\section{Helicity method for TMD amplitudes}
\label{sec:HelTMD}
In the preceding sections, the hard factors accompanying the gluon
densities $\mathcal{F}^{(i)}_{ag}$ were calculated from the squared diagrams presented in Figs.~\ref{fig:qg2qg-diag}-\ref{fig:gg2gg-4gdiag}.
This procedure has certain drawbacks, especially when one would like
to consider more complicated processes. For multiparticle processes,
the color decompositions and helicity method~\cite{Mangano:1990by,
Dixon:2013uaa} are now considered as the most effective ways to deal with them.
Moreover, it is not obvious how the gauge invariance comes into play for the
separate diagrams from Figs.~\ref{fig:qg2qg-diag}-\ref{fig:gg2gg-4gdiag}
contributing to the hard factors. In the color decomposition method, the
so-called \emph{color ordered amplitudes} are gauge invariant from the start and one
can use them directly to construct hard factors.
In view of the above, and to cross-check the results from Section
\ref{sec:hard-factors-off-shell}, we will give an alternative procedure to obtain the factorization
formulas with off-shell gluon. To this end, we shall need TMD gluon densities corresponding
to color decomposition of amplitudes and the color-ordered amplitudes
themselves.
\subsection{Color decompositions}
Let us recall some basic facts about the color decompositions.
We refer to \cite{Mangano:1990by,Dixon:2013uaa} for more details.
We first consider a gluon amplitude $\mathcal{M}^{a_{1}\ldots a_{N}}\left(\varepsilon_{1}^{\lambda_{1}},\ldots,\varepsilon_{N}^{\lambda_{N}}\right)$,
where $a_{1},\ldots,a_{N}$ are the external, adjoint color quantum numbers,
the $\varepsilon_{i}^{\lambda_{i}}$ is a polarization vector for
a gluon $i$ having momentum $k_{i}$ and helicity $\lambda_{i}=\pm$.
The fundamental color decomposition reads
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{M}^{a_{1}\ldots
a_{N}}\left(\varepsilon_{1}^{\lambda_{1}},\ldots,\varepsilon_{N}^{\lambda_{N}}\right)=\sum_{\sigma\in
S_{N-1}}\mathrm{Tr}\left(t^{a_{1}}t^{a_{\sigma_{2}}}\ldots
t^{a_{\sigma_{N}}}\right)\,\mathcal{M}\left(1^{\lambda_{1}},\sigma_{2}^{\lambda_{\sigma{2}}}\ldots,\sigma_{N}^{\lambda_{\sigma{N}}}\right),\label{eq:ColorDecompGlue}
\end{equation}
where the sum is over a set $S_{N-1}$ of all non-cyclic permutations
of $\left\{ 1,\dots,N\right\} $. The coefficients of the expansion
define color ordered -- or dual -- amplitudes. They possess several
useful properties. First of all, they are gauge invariant. Second,
there are certain relations between dual amplitudes%
.
Indeed,
the following adjoint color decomposition involves only $\left(N-2\right)!$
different amplitudes~\cite{DelDuca:1999rs}
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{M}^{a_{1}\ldots
a_{N}}\left(\varepsilon_{1}^{\lambda_{1}},\ldots,\varepsilon_{N}^{\lambda_{N}}\right)=\sum_{\sigma\in
S_{N-2}}\left(F^{a_{\sigma_2}}\ldots
F^{a_{\sigma_{N-1}}}\right)_{a_{1}a_{N}}\,\mathcal{M}\left(1^{\lambda_{1}},\sigma_{2}^{\lambda_{\sigma_2}}, \ldots,
\sigma_{N-1}^{\lambda_{\sigma_{N-1}}}, N^{\lambda_N}\right),
\label{eq:ColorDecompGlueAdj}
\end{equation}
where $\left(F^{a}\right)_{bc}=f_{abc}$.
Consider now an amplitude involving a quark anti-quark pair $\mathcal{M}^{D_{1}a_{2}\ldots a_{N-1}\overline{D}_{N}}$
where $D_{i}$, $\overline{D}_{j}$ are the color and the anti-color of the
quark and the anti-quark, respectively. The color decomposition reads
\begin{multline}
\mathcal{M}^{D_{1}a_{2}\ldots a_{N-1}\overline{D}_{N}}\left(\lambda_{1},\varepsilon_{2}^{\lambda_{2}},\ldots,\varepsilon_{N-1}^{\lambda_{N-1}},\lambda_{N}\right)=\\
\sum_{\sigma\in S_{N-2}}\left(t^{a_{\sigma_2}}\ldots
t^{a_{\sigma_{N-1}}}\right)_{D_{1}\overline{D}_{N}}\,\mathcal{M}\left(1^{\lambda_{1}},\sigma_{2}^{\lambda_{\sigma_2}}\ldots,\sigma_{N-1}^{\lambda_{\sigma_{N-1}}},N^{\lambda_{N}}\right).\label{eq:ColorDecompQuark}
\end{multline}
Now $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_N$ are helicities of the quark and the anti-quark. For amplitudes involving more quark anti-quark pairs the decomposition
is more complicated and we refer to \cite{Mangano:1990by} for details.
It is important to note that the above color decompositions work
also for the case when one of the gluons is off-shell.
\subsection{Gluon TMDs for color ordered amplitudes}
Let us now find the gluon TMDs corresponding to the color ordered amplitudes
squared, as defined in the previous subsection. We constraint ourselves
to the $2\rightarrow2$ processes case considered in this paper.
Let us first consider the $g\left(k_{4}\right)g^*\left(k_{1}\right)\rightarrow g\left(k_{3}\right)g\left(k_{2}\right)$
process. For the purpose of this and next subsections we have assigned
a new set of momenta to the partons. This assignment differs from the one
used before but it is more convenient when dealing with color ordered
amplitudes. The correspondence is achieved by the following relations:
$k_{1}\leftrightarrow k$, $k_{2}\leftrightarrow p_{1}$, $k_{3}\leftrightarrow p_{2}$,
$k_{4}\leftrightarrow p$. Moreover, for the off-shell momentum we
adopt a notation
\begin{equation}
k_{1}=n_{1}+k_{T}~.\label{eq:k1_def}
\end{equation}
The color decomposition of the four gluon amplitude reads
\begin{multline}
\mathcal{M}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow gg}^{a_{1}a_{2}a_{3}a_{4}}\left(n_{1},\varepsilon_{2}^{\lambda_{2}},\varepsilon_{3}^{\lambda_{3}},\varepsilon_{4}^{\lambda_{4}}\right)=f_{a_{1}a_{2}c}f_{ca_{3}a_{4}}\,\mathcal{M}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow gg}\left(1^{*},2^{\lambda_{2}},3^{\lambda_{3}},4^{\lambda_{4}}\right) \\
+f_{a_{1}a_{3}c}f_{ca_{2}a_{4}}\,\mathcal{M}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow gg}\left(1^{*},3^{\lambda_{3}},2^{\lambda_{2}},4^{\lambda_{4}}\right),\label{eq:Mg*g1}
\end{multline}
where $n_{1}$ is placed for the off-shell gluon instead of a polarization
vector (in fact it plays a similar role). As far as dual amplitudes
are concerned, we indicate the off-shell gluon by a star.
In Table~\ref{tab:TMDsgggg}. we calculate
the gluon TMDs
that correspond to the color structures exposed in (\ref{eq:Mg*g1})
(after squaring).
They agree with the gluon TMDs calculated in \cite{Bomhof:2006dp}
and listed in rows 1 and 3 of Table 8 of \cite{Bomhof:2006dp}. That table defines one more gluon TMD (the row 2) which however is redundant. Clearly, the color decomposition (\ref{eq:Mg*g1}) gives all the necessary color structures and already incorporates
the gauge invariance. In summary, the two gluon TMD listed in Table~\ref{tab:TMDsgggg} are the only relevant
TMDs and correspond to the two independent gauge
invariant amplitudes squared and their interference.
\begin{table}
\begin{doublespace}
\begin{centering}
\begin{tabular}{c|>{\centering}p{0.4\textwidth}}
\hline
color-ordered amplitude squared & gluon TMD\tabularnewline
\hline\\[-1.5em]
$\left|\mathcal{M}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow gg}\left(1^{*},2^{\lambda_{2}},3^{\lambda_{3}},4^{\lambda_{4}}\right)\right|^{2}$ &
\multirow{2}{0.4\textwidth}{$\Phi_{gg\rightarrow gg}^{\left(1\right)}=\frac{1}{2N{}_{c}^{2}}\big(N_{c}^{2}\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{\left(1\right)}-2\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{\left(3\right)}$\\\hfill
$+\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{\left(4\right)}+\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{\left(5\right)}+N_{c}^{2}\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{\left(6\right)}\big)$}\tabularnewline
$\left|\mathcal{M}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow gg}\left(1^{*},3^{\lambda_{3}},2^{\lambda_{2}},4^{\lambda_{4}}\right)\right|^{2}$ &
\\[0.5em]
\hline
\\[-1.5em]
$\mathcal{M}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow gg}\left(1^{*},2^{\lambda_{2}},3^{\lambda_{3}},4^{\lambda_{4}}\right)\mathcal{M}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow gg}^{*}\left(1^{*},3^{\lambda_{3}},2^{\lambda_{2}},4^{\lambda_{4}}\right)$ & \multirow{2}{0.4\textwidth}{$\Phi_{gg\rightarrow gg}^{\left(2\right)}=\frac{1}{N{}_{c}^{2}}\big(N_{c}^{2}\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{\left(2\right)}-2\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{\left(3\right)}$\\\hfill$+\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{\left(4\right)}+\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{\left(5\right)}+N_{c}^{2}\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{\left(6\right)}\big)$}\tabularnewline
$\mathcal{M}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow
gg}^{*}\left(1^{*},2^{\lambda_{2}},3^{\lambda_{3}},4^{\lambda_{4}}\right)\mathcal{M}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow
gg}\left(1^{*},3^{\lambda_{3}},2^{\lambda_{2}},4^{\lambda_{4}}\right)$ &
\\[0.5em]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\par\end{centering}
\end{doublespace}
\caption{Gluon TMDs accompanying the color-ordered amplitudes for $gg^{*}\rightarrow gg$
process. It has been assumed that TMDs are real.
The ${\cal F}^{(i)}_{gg}$ distributions are defined in
Eqs.~(\ref{eq:Fgg1}), (\ref{eq:Fgg2}), (\ref{eq:Fgg3}) and
in Eqs.~(\ref{eq:Fgg4}), (\ref{eq:Fgg5}), (\ref{eq:Fgg6}).
\label{tab:TMDsgggg}}
\end{table}
Now, let us turn to the $g\left(k_{4}\right)g^{*}\left(k_{1}\right)\rightarrow \overline{q}\left(k_{3}\right) q\left(k_{2}\right) $
process. The color decomposition reads
\begin{multline}
\mathcal{M}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}^{D_{2}a_{1}a_{4}\overline{D}_{3}}\left(\lambda_{2},n_{1},\varepsilon_{4}^{\lambda_{4}},\lambda_{3}\right)
=\left(t^{a_{1}}t^{a_{4}}\right)_{D_{2}\overline{D}_{3}}\mathcal{M}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}\left(2^{\lambda_{2}},1^{*},4^{\lambda_{4}},3^{\lambda_{3}}\right)\\
+\left(t^{a_{4}}t^{a_{1}}\right)_{D_{2}\overline{D}_{3}}\mathcal{M}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow
q\overline{q}}\left(2^{\lambda_{2}},4^{\lambda_{4}},1^{*},3^{\lambda_{3}}\right)\,.
\end{multline}
The gluon TMDs corresponding to the color structures appearing after
squaring this equation are gathered in Table \ref{tab:TMDsggqq}.
They correspond to rows 1 and 5 of Table 7 in \cite{Bomhof:2006dp}. Again,
we have only two independent TMDs that are needed.
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{doublespace}
\begin{centering}
\begin{tabular}{c|c}
\hline
color-ordered amplitude squared & gluon TMD\tabularnewline
\hline\\[-1.5em]
$\left|\mathcal{M}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}\left(2^{\lambda_{2}},1^{*},4^{\lambda_{4}},3^{\lambda_{3}}\right)\right|^{2}$ & \multirow{2}{*}{$\Phi_{gg\rightarrow q\overline{q}}^{\left(1\right)}=\frac{1}{N_{c}^{2}-1}\left(N_{c}^{2}\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{\left(1\right)}-\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{\left(3\right)}\right)$}
\tabularnewline
$\left|\mathcal{M}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}\left(2^{\lambda_{2}},4^{\lambda_{4}},1^{*},3^{\lambda_{3}}\right)\right|^{2}$ &
\\[0.5em]
\hline
\\[-1.5em]
$\mathcal{M}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}\left(2^{\lambda_{2}},1^{*},4^{\lambda_{4}},3^{\lambda_{3}}\right)\mathcal{M}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}^{*}\left(2^{\lambda_{2}},4^{\lambda_{4}},1^{*},3^{\lambda_{3}}\right)$ & \multirow{2}{*}{$\Phi_{gg\rightarrow q\overline{q}}^{\left(2\right)}=-N_{c}^{2}\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{\left(2\right)}+\mathcal{F}_{gg}^{\left(3\right)}$}\tabularnewline
$\mathcal{M}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}^{*}\left(2^{\lambda_{2}},1^{*},4^{\lambda_{4}},3^{\lambda_{3}}\right)\mathcal{M}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}\left(2^{\lambda_{2}},4^{\lambda_{4}},1^{*},3^{\lambda_{3}}\right)$ &
\\[0.5em]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\par\end{centering}
\end{doublespace}
\caption{Gluon TMDs accompanying the color-ordered amplitudes for $gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}$
process. It has been assumed that correlators are real.
The ${\cal F}^{(i)}_{gg}$ distributions are defined in
Eqs.~(\ref{eq:Fgg1}), (\ref{eq:Fgg2}) and ~(\ref{eq:Fgg3}).
\label{tab:TMDsggqq}}
\end{table}
For the process $q\left(k_{4}\right)g^{*}\left(k_{1}\right)\rightarrow
q\left(k_{3}\right)g\left(k_{2}\right)$,
the color decomposition reads
\begin{multline}
\mathcal{M}_{qg^{*}\rightarrow qg}^{D_{3}a_{1}a_{2}\overline{D}_{4}}\left(\lambda_{3},n_{1},\varepsilon_{2}^{\lambda_{2}},\lambda_{4}\right)=
\left(t^{a_{1}}t^{a_{2}}\right)_{D_{3}\overline{D}_{4}}\mathcal{M}_{qg^{*}\rightarrow qg}\left(3^{\lambda_{3}},1^{*},2^{\lambda_{2}},4^{\lambda_{4}}\right)+\\
\left(t^{a_{2}}t^{a_{1}}\right)_{D_{3}\overline{D}_{4}}\mathcal{M}_{qg^{*}\rightarrow qg}\left(3^{\lambda_{3}},2^{\lambda_{2}},1^{*},4^{\lambda_{4}}\right).
\end{multline}
For anti-quarks we need to exchange the indices $3\leftrightarrow4$.
The TMDs corresponding to those processes are given in Table
\ref{tab:TMDsgqqg}. In general, the TMDs for a sub-process with anti-quarks are different than for quarks, but they turn out to be the same assuming that the correlators are real. Again, we end up with only two independent TMDs.
\begin{table}
\begin{doublespace}
\begin{centering}
\begin{tabular}{c|c}
\hline
color-ordered amplitude squared & gluon TMD\tabularnewline
\hline\\[-1.5em]
$\mathcal{M}_{qg^{*}\rightarrow qg}\left(3^{\lambda_{3}},1^{*},2^{\lambda_{2}},4^{\lambda_{4}}\right)\mathcal{M}_{qg^{*}\rightarrow qg}^{*}\left(3^{\lambda_{3}},2^{\lambda_{2}},1^{*},4^{\lambda_{4}}\right)$ & \multirow{3}{*}{$\Phi_{qg\rightarrow qg}^{\left(1\right)}=\mathcal{F}_{qg}^{\left(1\right)}$}\tabularnewline
$\mathcal{M}_{qg^{*}\rightarrow qg}^{*}\left(3^{\lambda_{3}},1^{*},2^{\lambda_{2}},\lambda_{4}\right)\mathcal{M}_{qg^{*}\rightarrow qg}\left(3^{\lambda_{3}},2^{\lambda_{2}},1^{*},4^{\lambda_{4}}\right)$ & \tabularnewline
$\left|\mathcal{M}_{qg^{*}\rightarrow qg}\left(3^{\lambda_{3}},2^{\lambda_{2}},1^{*},4^{\lambda_{4}}\right)\right|^{2}$ &
\\[0.5em]
\hline
\\[-1.5em]
$\left|\mathcal{M}_{qg^{*}\rightarrow qg}\left(3^{\lambda_{3}},1^{*},2^{\lambda_{2}},4^{\lambda_{4}}\right)\right|^{2}$ &
\multirow{1}{*}{$\Phi_{qg\rightarrow qg}^{\left(2\right)}=\frac{1}{N_{c}^{2}-1}\left(-\mathcal{F}_{qg}^{\left(1\right)}+N_{c}^{2}\mathcal{F}_{qg}^{\left(2\right)}\right)$}
\\[0.5em]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\par\end{centering}
\end{doublespace}
\caption{Gluon TMDs accompanying the color-ordered amplitudes for $qg^{*}\rightarrow qg$
process. It has been assumed that correlators are real.
The ${\cal F}^{(i)}_{qg}$ distributions are defined in Eqs.~(\ref{eq:Fqg1-def}) and
Eqs.~(\ref{eq:Fqg2-def}).
\label{tab:TMDsgqqg}}
\end{table}
\subsection{Off-shell color-ordered helicity amplitudes}
In Section \ref{sec:hard-factors-off-shell}, we have calculated the off-shell
hard factors in a specific axial gauge, with $p_A$ chosen as the gauge vector,
and using the high energy projector (\ref{eq:pol-off-shell}).
As shown in Ref.~\cite{Catani:1990eg}, such a procedure yields results which are
gauge invariant within a subclass of axial gauges with the gauge vector
$n^\mu = a p_p^\mu+ b p_A^\mu$, where $a$ and $b$ are arbitrary complex numbers.
There are also methods to calculate gauge invariant
off-shell amplitudes in any gauge and choice of polarization vectors
\cite{vanHameren:2012uj,vanHameren:2013,Kotko:2014aba,vanHameren:2014iua}.
In what follows, we shall use those methods and specifically the results of \cite{vanHameren:2013,vanHameren:2014iua}.
Consider first the gluon amplitudes. For the purpose of this section
only we assume all momenta to be outgoing. For the non-vanishing helicity
configurations, in the helicity basis, we have
\begin{gather}
\mathcal{M}_{g^{*}g\rightarrow gg}\left(1^{*},2^{-},3^{+},4^{+}\right)=2g^{2}\,\rho_1\,\frac{\ANG{1^{*}2}^{4}}{\ANG{1^{*}2}\ANG{23}\ANG{34}\ANG{41^{*}}}~,\label{eq:Mg*ggg-++}\\
\mathcal{M}_{g^{*}g\rightarrow gg}\left(1^{*},2^{+},3^{-},4^{+}\right)=2g^{2}\,\rho_1\,\frac{\ANG{1^{*}3}^{4}}{\ANG{1^{*}2}\ANG{23}\ANG{34}\ANG{41^{*}}}~,\label{eq:Mg*ggg+-+}\\
\mathcal{M}_{g^{*}g\rightarrow gg}\left(1^{*},2^{+},3^{+},4^{-}\right)=2g^{2}\,\rho_1\,\frac{\ANG{1^{*}4}^{4}}{\ANG{1^{*}2}\ANG{23}\ANG{34}\ANG{41^{*}}}~,\label{eq:Mg*ggg++-}
\end{gather}
where we adopted a shorthand notation for the spinor products $\ANG{ij}=\ANG{k_{i}-|k_{j}+}$
with $|k_{i}\pm\rangle=\frac{1}{2}\left(1\pm\gamma_{5}\right)u\left(k_{i}\right)$, and where $\rho_1$ is a, for our purposes irrelevant, phase factor
(see details {\it e.g. } in \cite{vanHameren:2014iua}). We also defined $\ANG{1^{*}i}=\ANG{n_{1}i}$
with $n_{1}$ being the longitudinal component of $k_{1}$, {\it c.f. }
Eq.~(\ref{eq:k1_def}). The other remaining helicity configurations can be
obtained from Eqs.~(\ref{eq:Mg*ggg-++})-(\ref{eq:Mg*ggg++-}) using CP invariance
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{M}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow gg}\left(1^{*},2^{+},3^{-},4^{-}\right)=\mathcal{M}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow gg}^{*}\left(1^{*},2^{-},3^{+},4^{+}\right),
\end{equation}
and so on. For the other color ordered amplitude,
$\mathcal{M}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow gg}\left(1^{*},3,2,4\right)$,
we need to exchange $2\leftrightarrow3$ in the denominators.
The above helicity amplitudes can be efficiently evaluated and squared
numerically, however for the purpose of this paper we shall need analytic
expressions. To this end let us introduce $\SQR{ij}=\ANG{k_{i}+|k_{j}-}$,
which, up to an unimportant phase, is a complex conjugate of $\ANG{ij}$.
Moreover, we have the following relation
\begin{equation}
\ANG{ij}\SQR{ji}=\left(k_{i}+k_{j}\right)^{2}\equiv\tilde{s}_{ij}.\label{eq:stilddef}
\end{equation}
For the products involving $n_{1}$ we use the notation
\begin{equation}
\ANG{1^{*}i}\SQR{i1^{*}}=\left(n_{1}+k_{i}\right)^{2}\equiv\tilde{s}_{1^{*}i}.\label{eq:stild*}
\end{equation}
With this, we get for the required amplitudes squared summed and
averaged over helicities
\begin{gather}
\left|\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow gg}\left(1^{*},2,3,4\right)\right|^{2}=8g^{4}\,\frac{\ts{1^{*}2}^{4}+\ts{1^{*}3}^{4}+\ts{1^{*}4}^{4}}{\ts{1^{*}2}\ts{23}\ts{34}\ts{41^{*}}},\label{eq:Mg*ggg11}\\
\left|\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow gg}\left(1^{*},3,2,4\right)\right|^{2}=8g^{4}\,\frac{\ts{1^{*}2}^{4}+\ts{1^{*}3}^{4}+\ts{1^{*}4}^{4}}{\ts{1^{*}3}\ts{32}\ts{24}\ts{41^{*}}},\label{eq:Mg*gg22}\\
\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow gg}\left(1^{*},2,3,4\right)\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow gg}^{*}\left(1^{*},3,2,4\right)=-8g^{4}\,\frac{\ts{1^{*}2}^{4}+\ts{1^{*}3}^{4}+\ts{1^{*}4}^{4}}{\ANG{1^{*}2}\ANG{34}\SQR{1^{*}3}\SQR{24}\ts{23}\ts{41^{*}}},\label{eq:Mg*gg12}\\
\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow gg}^{*}\left(1^{*},2,3,4\right)\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow gg}\left(1^{*},3,2,4\right)=-8g^{4}\frac{\ts{1^{*}2}^{4}+\ts{1^{*}3}^{4}+\ts{1^{*}4}^{4}}{\SQR{1^{*}2}\SQR{34}\ANG{1^{*}3}\ANG{24}\ts{23}\ts{41^{*}}},\label{eq:Mg*gg21}
\end{gather}
where we have used overlines to indicate helicity summations. The
last two interference terms enter the cross section as a sum. Therefore, we
may simplify it as
\begin{multline}
\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow gg}\left(1^{*},2,3,4\right)\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow gg}^{*}\left(1^{*},3,2,4\right)+\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow gg}^{*}\left(1^{*},2,3,4\right)\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow gg}\left(1^{*},3,2,4\right)\\
=-8g^{4}\,\frac{(\ts{1^{*}2}^{4}+\ts{1^{*}3}^{4}+\ts{1^{*}4}^{4})(\ts{24}\ts{1^{*}3}-\ts{23}\ts{1^{*}4}+\ts{34}\ts{1^{*}2})}{\ts{1^{*}2}\ts{34}\ts{1^{*}3}\ts{24}\ts{23}\ts{41^{*}}},\label{eq:Mg*ggg1221}
\end{multline}
where we have used
\begin{equation}
\SQR{1^{*}2}\SQR{34}\ANG{1^{*}3}\ANG{24}\,+\,\ANG{1^{*}2}\ANG{34}\SQR{1^{*}3}\SQR{24}
\,=\,\AL{n_1\!-}p\hspace{-1.0ex}/_{3}p\hspace{-1.0ex}/_{4}p\hspace{-1.0ex}/_{2}\AR{n_1-}\,+\,\AL{n_1\!-}p\hspace{-1.0ex}/_{2}p\hspace{-1.0ex}/_{4}p\hspace{-1.0ex}/_{3}\AR{n_1-}~,
\end{equation}
and applied $p\hspace{-1.0ex}/_{i}p\hspace{-1.0ex}/_{j}=\tilde{s}_{ij}-p\hspace{-1.0ex}/_{j}p\hspace{-1.0ex}/_{i}$
a few times. The amplitudes for the on-shell limit are simply obtained
by dropping the star in $1^{*}$ so that the spinor and the scalar products
will be with $k_{1}$ instead of $n_{1}$.
Now let us turn to processes with quarks. We will give only amplitudes
for $g\left(k_{4}\right)g^{*}\left(k_{1}\right)\rightarrow \overline{q}\left(k_{3}\right) q\left(k_{2}\right)$
process, as all the other can be obtained by the crossing symmetry
(taking care of the proper color flow when crossing). We have
\begin{gather}
\mathcal{M}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}\left(3^{-},1^{*},4^{+},2^{+}\right)={2g^{2}}\,\rho_1\,\frac{\ANG{21^{*}}^{3}\ANG{31^{*}}}{\ANG{21^{*}}\ANG{1^{*}4}\ANG{43}\ANG{32}},\label{eq:Mg*gqq-++}\\
\mathcal{M}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}\left(3^{+},1^{*},4^{+},2^{-}\right)={2g^{2}}\,\rho_1\,\frac{\ANG{31^{*}}^{3}\ANG{21^{*}}}{\ANG{21^{*}}\ANG{1^{*}4}\ANG{43}\ANG{32}}.\label{eq:Mg*gqq++-}
\end{gather}
We note that the above formulas have never been published in the literature and are given here for the first time.
Similar as before, the two remaining helicity configurations can be
obtained thanks to CP symmetry. For the color ordered amplitudes with
1 and 4 interchanged, we need to make a replacement $1\leftrightarrow4$
in the denominators. The amplitudes squared and summed over helicities
read (the helicity averaging factor is included)
\begin{gather}
\left|\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}\left(3,1^{*},4,2\right)\right|^{2}=2g^{4}\,\frac{\ts{1^{*}3}\left(\ts{1^{*}2}^{2}+\ts{1^{*}3}^{2}\right)}{\ts{1^{*}4}\ts{34}\ts{23}},\label{eq:Mg*gqq11}\\
\left|\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}\left(3,4,1^{*},2\right)\right|^{2}=2g^{4}\,\frac{\ts{1^{*}2}\left(\ts{1^{*}2}^{2}+\ts{1^{*}3}^{2}\right)}{\ts{1^{*}4}\ts{24}\ts{23}},\label{eq:Mg*gqq22}\\
\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}\left(3,1^{*},4,2\right)\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}^{*}\left(3,4,1^{*},2\right)=-2g^{4}\,\frac{\ts{1^{*}2}\ts{1^{*}3}\left(\ts{1^{*}2}^{2}+\ts{1^{*}3}^{2}\right)}{\ANG{21^{*}}\ANG{43}\SQR{31^{*}}\SQR{42}\ts{23}\ts{41^{*}}},\label{eq:Mg*gqq12}\\
\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}^{*}\left(3,1^{*},4,2\right)\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}\left(3,4,1^{*},2\right)=-2g^{4}\,\frac{\ts{1^{*}2}\ts{1^{*}3}\left(\ts{1^{*}2}^{2}+\ts{1^{*}3}^{2}\right)}{\SQR{21^{*}}\SQR{43}\ANG{31^{*}}\ANG{42}\ts{23}\ts{41^{*}}}.\label{eq:Mg*ggqq21}
\end{gather}
The sum of the last two interference terms simplifies to
\begin{multline}
\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}\left(3,1^{*},4,2\right)\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}^{*}\left(3,4,1^{*},2\right)+\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}^{*}\left(3,1^{*},4,2\right)\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}\left(3,4,1^{*},2\right)\\
=-2g^{4}\,\frac{\ts{1^{*}2}\ts{1^{*}3}(\ts{1^{*}2}^{2}+\ts{1^{*}3}^{2})(\ts{24}\ts{1^{*}3}-\ts{23}\ts{1^{*}4}+\ts{34}\ts{1^{*}2})}{\ts{1^{*}2}\ts{34}\ts{1^{*}3}\ts{24}\ts{23}\ts{41^{*}}}.\label{eq:Mg*qq1221}
\end{multline}
In order to obtain amplitudes for $q\left(k_{4}\right)g^{*}\left(k_{1}\right)\rightarrow q\left(k_{3}\right)g\left(k_{2}\right)$
we can use the crossing symmetry. Specifically, we can obtain $\left|\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{qg^{*}\rightarrow qg}\left(3,1^{*},2,4\right)\right|^{2}$,
$\left|\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{qg^{*}\rightarrow qg}\left(3,2,1^{*},4\right)\right|^{2}$
and interference terms by making replacement $2\leftrightarrow4$
in Eqs.~(\ref{eq:Mg*gqq22}), (\ref{eq:Mg*gqq11}), (\ref{eq:Mg*qq1221})
respectively.
\subsection{Hard factors from color-ordered amplitudes}
Having computed the color ordered amplitudes it is now straightforward to
calculate the hard factors $K^{(i)}$. Let us note, that it is the $K^{(i)}$ hard
factors that appear naturally within the color-ordered formalism, not the $H^{(i)}$
factors. It also comes naturally that there are two hard factors and two TMDs per each channel, so the the factorization formulas can be written in a unified form:
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\sigma^{pA\rightarrow {\rm dijets}+X}}{d^{2}P_{t}d^{2}k_{t}dy_{1}dy_{2}}=\frac{\alpha_{s}^{2}}{(x_1 x_2 s)^{2}}
\sum_{a,c,d} x_{1}f_{a/p}(x_{1}, \mu^2)\sum_{i=1}^{2}K_{ag^*\to cd}^{(i)}\Phi_{ag\rightarrow cd}^{(i)}\ \frac{1}{1+\delta_{cd}}\ ,
\label{eq:gg2gg-mod}
\end{equation}
where $a,c,d$ are the contributing partons. The explicit expressions
for the generalized gluon TMDs $\Phi_{ag\rightarrow cd}^{\left(i\right)}$
are listed in Tables \ref{tab:TMDsgggg}-\ref{tab:TMDsgqqg}. The
hard factors $K^{i}$ were already given in Section \ref{sec:hard-factors-off-shell} (we collect them in Table~\ref{tab:Khardfactors} for convenience).
In the context of this section, they are obtained
by multiplying the left column of Tables \ref{tab:TMDsgggg}-\ref{tab:TMDsgqqg}
by the corresponding color factors and combining the cells that belong
to the same generalized TMD. More precisely, we have
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{2.}
\begin{table}
\begin{doublespace}
\begin{centering}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c}
\hline
\Large $i$ & \Large 1 & \Large 2 \\
\hline
$\displaystyle K_{gg^*\to gg}^{(i)}$ & $ \displaystyle
\frac{N_{c}}{C_F}\,\frac{\left(\overline{s}^{4}+\overline{t}^{4}+\overline{u}^{4}\right)\left(\overline{u}\hat{u}+\overline{t}\hat{t}\right)}{\bar{t}{\hat t}\bar{u}{\hat u}\bar{s}{\hat s}}$ & $\displaystyle -\frac{N_{c}}{2C_F}\,\frac{\left(\overline{s}^{4}+\overline{t}^{4}+\overline{u}^{4}\right)\left(\overline{u}\hat{u}+\overline{t}\hat{t}-\overline{s}\hat{s}\right)}{\bar{t}{\hat t}\bar{u}{\hat u}\bar{s}{\hat s}}$
\\
\hline
$\displaystyle K_{gg^*\to q\overline{q}}^{(i)}$ & $\displaystyle \frac{1}{2N_{c}}\,\frac{\left(\overline{t}^{2}+\overline{u}^{2}\right)\left(\overline{u}\hat{u}+\overline{t}\hat{t}\right)}{\overline{s}\hat{s}\hat{t}\hat{u}}$ & $\displaystyle \frac{1}{4N_{c}^2 C_F}\,\frac{\left(\overline{t}^{2}+\overline{u}^{2}\right)\left(\overline{u}\hat{u}+\overline{t}\hat{t}-\overline{s}\hat{s}\right)}{\overline{s}\hat{s}\hat{t}\hat{u}}$
\\
\hline
$\displaystyle K_{qg^*\to qg}^{(i)}$ & $\displaystyle -\frac{\overline{u}\left(\overline{s}^{2}+\overline{u}^{2}\right)}{2\overline{t}\hat{t}\hat{s}}\left(1+\frac{\overline{s}\hat{s}-\overline{t}\hat{t}}{N_{c}^{2}\ \overline{u}\hat{u}}\right)$ & $\displaystyle -\frac{C_F}{N_c}\,\frac{\overline{s}\left(\overline{s}^{2}+\overline{u}^{2}\right)}{\overline{t}\hat{t}\hat{u}}$
\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\par\end{centering}
\end{doublespace}
\caption{The hard factors accompanying the gluon TMDs $\Phi_{ag\rightarrow cd}^{\left(i\right)}$.\label{tab:Khardfactors}}
\end{table}
\begin{gather}
g^4\,K_{gg^*\to gg}^{(1)} = \frac{1}{(2N_c C_F)^2}\, \frac{N_c^3 C_F}{2} \left(\left|\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow gg}\left(1^{*},2,3,4\right)\right|^{2}
+ \left|\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow gg}\left(1^{*},3,2,4\right)\right|^{2} \right)\,, \\
g^4\,K_{gg^*\to gg}^{(2)} = \frac{1}{(2N_c C_F)^2}\, \frac{N_c^3 C_F}{4} \left(
\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow gg}\left(1^{*},2,3,4\right)
\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow gg}^{*}\left(1^{*},3,2,4\right)
+ \mathtt{c.c.}
\right)\,,
\end{gather}
for pure gluon channel, and
\begin{gather}
g^4\,K_{gg^*\to q\overline{q}}^{(1)} = \frac{1}{(2N_c C_F)^2}\, N_c C_F^2 \left(
\left|\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}\left(3,1^{*},4,2\right)\right|^{2}
+ \left|\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}\left(3,4,1^{*},2\right)\right|^{2}
\right)\,, \\
g^4\,K_{gg^*\to q\overline{q}}^{(2)} = \frac{1}{(2N_c C_F)^2}\, \frac{-C_F}{2} \left(
\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}\left(3,1^{*},4,2\right)\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}^{*}\left(3,4,1^{*},2\right)
+ \mathtt{c.c.} \right) \,,
\end{gather}
for $gg^*\to q\overline{q}$ channel. For the $qg^*\to qg$ sub-process we need to use the crossing symmetry as described in the preceding section. We have
\begin{eqnarray}
g^4\, K_{qg^*\to qg}^{(1)} &=& \frac{1}{2C_F N_c^2} \Big\lbrace
N_c C_F^2 \left(
-\left|\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}\left(3,1^{*},4,2\right)\right|^{2}
\right)_{2\leftrightarrow 4} \qquad\qquad \qquad\qquad \qquad \nonumber
\\ &&- \frac{C_F}{2} \left(-
\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}\left(3,1^{*},4,2\right)\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}^{*}\left(3,4,1^{*},2\right)- \mathtt{c.c.} \right)_{2\leftrightarrow 4}\Big\rbrace \,,
\label{eq:KgqqgCO1}
\\
g^4\, K_{qg^*\to qg}^{(2)} &=& \frac{1}{2C_F N_c^2}\, N_c C_F^2 \left(
-\left|\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{gg^{*}\rightarrow q\overline{q}}\left(3,4,1^{*},2\right)\right|^{2}
\right)_{2\leftrightarrow 4}\,.
\label{eq:KgqqgCO2}
\end{eqnarray}
In all the formulas above, the first color factor comes from color averaging. The minus signs in front of the amplitudes in (\ref{eq:KgqqgCO1}), (\ref{eq:KgqqgCO2}) come from the crossing of a fermion line. Table~\ref{tab:Khardfactors} is easily recovered using the following relations of $\tilde{s}_{ij}$ to the kinematic variables from Section~\ref{sec:hard-factors-off-shell}
\begin{gather}
\tilde{s}_{23}=\tilde{s}_{14}=\hat{s},\,\,\, \tilde{s}_{34}=\tilde{s}_{12}=\hat{t},\,\,\, \tilde{s}_{24}=\tilde{s}_{13} = \hat{u}\,, \\
\tilde{s}_{1^*4}=\bar{s},\,\,\, \tilde{s}_{1^*2}=\bar{t},\,\,\, \tilde{s}_{1^*3}=\bar{u}\,.
\end{gather}
\section{Conclusions and outlook}
Dijet production is one of the key processes studied at the LHC.
Requiring the two jets to be produced in the forward direction creates an asymmetric
situation, in which one of the incoming hadrons is probed at
large $x$, while the other is probed at a very small momentum
fraction.
This kinematic regime poses various challenges, one of the biggest questions being
the existence of a theoretically-consistent and, at the same time,
practically-manageable factorization formula. The standard collinear
factorization is not applicable in this case as the dependence on the transverse
momentum of the low-$x$ gluon in the target, $k_t$, cannot be neglected.
In the limit where the jets' transverse momenta $|p_{1t}|, |p_{2t}| \gg |k_t|
\sim Q_s$, with the latter being the saturation scale of the target, an effective
transverse-momentum-dependent factorization formula for forward dijet production has been derived in
Refs.~\cite{Dominguez:2010xd,Dominguez:2011wm} and it has been shown to be consistent with the CGC framework.
On the other side, the high energy factorization approach~\cite{Catani:1990eg,Deak:2009xt} has been also
successfully applied for studying forward dijet production at the LHC. In this paper, we have examined the theoretical status
of the HEF approach in the context of forward dijet production at hadron colliders and reconciled it with the TMD factorization
by creating a unified framework valid in the limit $|p_{1t}|, |p_{2t}| \gg Q_s$ with an arbitrary value of $|k_t|$, as long as it
is allowed by phase space constraints.
In particular, we have shown in Section~\ref{sec:dilute} that the HEF formula
is indeed justified in the kinematic window of $|p_{1t}|, |p_{2t}| \sim |k_t|
\gg Q_s$, where it was explicitly derived from CGC for all $2\to 2$ channels. This limit
corresponds to the dilute target approximation hence no non-linear effects are
expected.
The second major result of our work is an improvement of the effective TMD
factorization for forward dijet production, first derived in
Ref.~\cite{Dominguez:2011wm}, by taking into account in
Section~\ref{sec:tmd-on-shell} all finite-$N_c$ corrections, as well as
generalizing the factorization formula to the case with an off-shell incoming
gluon in Sections~\ref{sec:hard-factors-off-shell}~and~\ref{sec:HelTMD}.
In addition, we were able to simplify the TMD factorization formula by reducing
the number of gluon distributions to two independent TMDs for each channel.
The main results of this part of our study are summarized in
Eq.~(\ref{eq:gg2gg-mod}), which gives the new TMD factorization formula, as
well as in Table~\ref{tab:Khardfactors}, where we collect all the off-shell hard factors.
The corresponding gluon distributions are given in
Tables~\ref{tab:TMDsgggg}, \ref{tab:TMDsggqq} and~\ref{tab:TMDsgqqg}.
The above results were obtained with two independent techniques: a traditional
Feynman diagram approach and helicity methods with color ordered
amplitudes.
The improved TMD factorization formula (\ref{eq:gg2gg-mod}) encapsulates both
the result of Ref.~\cite{Dominguez:2011wm} and the HEF framework as its limiting
cases.
The results obtained in this paper open several avenues for future research that we plan to follow. First, a natural next steps will be to use Eq.~(\ref{eq:gg2gg-mod}) for phenomenological studies. That shall require some input for the six gluon TMDs $\Phi_{ag\rightarrow cd}^{(1,2)}(x,k_t)$, which may be difficult in a general case. But in the large-$N_c$ limit, they can all be written in terms of just two functions: $xG^{(1)}(x,k_t)$ and $xG^{(2)}(x,k_t)$, which in turn can be evaluated within certain models, as in \cite{Stasto:2011ru}.
Another line of possible extension of our framework is to supplement it with
high-$|P_t|$ effects such as Sudakov logarithms or coherence in the evolution of
the gluon density. Essentially, this can be done by adding a $\mu^2$ dependence
to the unintegrated gluon distributions~\cite{Collins:1984kg,Ciafaloni:1987ur,Catani:1989sg,Catani:1989yc,Kimber:1999xc,Kimber:2001sc, Collins:2014jpa}.
The equations that combine such effects with the small-$x$ evolution
\cite{Kutak:2011fu,Kutak:2012qk} show a nontrivial interplay between the
non-linearities and the $\mu^2$ dependence and this may, in particular, weaken
the saturation effects. At the linear level, the so-called single step inclusion of
the hard-scale effects (as demonstrated in \cite{vanHameren:2014ala}) helps in
the description of forward-central dijet data, therefore this direction seems to
be relevant in order to provide complete predictions. Furthermore, first
estimates of azimuthal decorrelations of the forward-forward dijets in the HEF
framework, with inclusion of hard scale effects and non-linearities, show that
they are of similar relevance for this process~\cite{Kutak:2014wga}.
Last but not least, it remains to be proved that the large logarithms generated by higher-order corrections can indeed be absorbed into evolution equations for the various parton distributions (and jet fragmentation functions) involved, and potentially for additional soft factors \cite{Ji:2004wu}.
This limitation however is not specific to our work, the same is true at the
level of the TMD and HEF regimes independently. In the former case, it is known
that TMD factorization generically does not apply for dijet production in
hadron-hadron collisions \cite{Collins:2007nk,Rogers:2010dm}. It is nevertheless
expected that, in dilute-dense collisions, initial state interactions originating from a dilute hadron do not interfere with the intrinsic transverse momentum and thus factorization may hold, although there is no formal proof of this statement yet.
In addition, even though it was possible to write formula
(\ref{eq:gg2gg-new-onshell}) in terms of just two TMDs per channel, this
simplification may not survive after small-$x$ evolution is included, as, in
general, the non-linear equations mix the original ${\cal F}^{(i)}_{ag}$
functions. For instance, $xG^{(1)}$ does not obey a closed equation and, contrary
to what happens with $xG^{(2)}$, the large-$N_c$ limit does not help
\cite{Dominguez:2011gc}. We note that any equivalent linear combination of the
gluon distributions, such as (\ref{eq:tmd-main}) and~(\ref{eq:gg2gg-new-onshell}), is equally valid, and it may turn out that some
alternative choice allows one to write the evolution equations directly in terms of
TMDs. By contrast, it is also possible that the inclusion of small-$x$ evolution
can only be achieved within the full complexity of the CGC, meaning that the
$Q_s\sim|k_t|\ll |P_t|$ limit, which allows one to avoid the quadrupole operator in
(\ref{eq:S4-fund}) and express the cross section in terms of gluon
distributions,
may not help when small-$x$ evolution is considered.
In the HEF regime, the issues are different. The $Q_s\ll |k_t|\sim |P_t|$ limit
makes things simpler from the point of view of small-$x$ evolution, since
non-linear effects can be neglected. However, the off-shellness of the hard
process is not neglected and thus the standard power counting of the twist
expansion becomes useless. One must then resort to different methods, such as
those of Ref.~\cite{Fadin:2006bj}. Any progress towards an all-order proof of
either HEF or TMD factorization for forward dijet production in dilute-dense
collisions will naturally carry over to our improved TMD factorization formula
(\ref{eq:gg2gg-mod}) that combines both regimes. In the meantime, our results represent a viable alternative to CGC calculations, equivalent to them in the kinematic regime appropriate for dijets $Q_s\ll |P_t|$ but more practical.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The work of K.K. has been supported by Narodowe Centrum Nauki with Sonata Bis grant DEC-2013/10/E/ST2/00656.
P.K. acknowledges the support of the grants DE-SC-0002145 and DE-FG02-93ER40771.
S.S. acknowledges useful discussions with Gavin Salam and Fabrizio Caola.
P.K., K.K., S.S. and A.vH. are grateful for hospitality to \'Ecole
Polytechnique, where part of this work has been carried out.
K.K. thanks for the hospitality of Penn State University, where part of this research was done.
|
\section{Introduction}
Understanding transport properties of particle systems driven by strong energy fluxes is of significant importance to a number of fields of science and technology.
Examples include non-equilibrium statistical physics \cite{Krapivsky10, Falkovich01}, astrophysical and geophysical phenomena \cite{Chapman94,Dunne03,Nozawa07}, multi-phase turbulent flows \cite{Zaichik09}, inhomogeneous catalysis \cite{Bird06}, combustion \cite{Balakrishnan10} and many others \cite{Grebenkov14,Gottiparthi14,Zukas97,Zhang01}.
An important requirement for these studies is the development of a rigorous framework which estimates system parameters (\textit{e.g.}\ energy fluxes) from remote (or retrospective) observations of particles following natural or anthropogenetic phenomena (a volcano eruption, meteorite impact, supernova event, blast, \textit{etc}).
Two revealing examples of this approach are the well-known pioneering studies of L.F.~Richardson (estimation of parameters of turbulent flows from Lagrangian measurements \cite{Richardson26}) and E.~Fermi (a remote estimation of a nuclear bomb yield from `tracer' particle observations~\cite{Archives45}).
There is a vast amount of literature devoted to the subject of particle transport (see \cite{Krapivsky10, Zaichik09, Balakrishnan10,Shukla02,Bird06} and references therein). Modern computational models (often called models of Lagrangian transport) achieve an unprecedented level of fidelity by matching numerical predictions with experimental observations \cite{Balakrishnan10,Toschi09, Zhang01}.
Unfortunately, whilst these computational models are an important predictive tool for practical applications and validation studies, they are unable to provide analytical insights into the fundamental transport mechanisms of these systems -- simply because analytical predictions cannot be deduced numerically.
Significant analytical progress in the understanding of transport phenomena in particle systems has been achieved by employing scaling and self-similarity frameworks \cite{Krapivsky10,Barenblatt97,Falkovich11}. This allows us to describe the dispersion process by means of power-law functions (scaling laws) relating to particle displacement and other parameters of the system -- the exponent of these power-laws being predicated analytically.
Using this knowledge in conjunction with Lagrangian measurements, one can infer values of important system parameters that would be challenging to recover by any other means.
The presented results are in line with this approach.
More specifically: we establish a scaling law for particle dispersion caused by a rapid (and localized) energy release (explosion), and express it as a simple power-law relation between the particle displacement and the physical parameters of the system (energy of the explosion, particle properties and their initial position, \textit{etc}).
We demonstrate that under a broad range of conditions the exponents of this scaling law can be deduced analytically by applying the ideas of self-similarity.
We support our analytical predictions with numerical simulations.
\section{Model}\label{sec:model}
The following is a simplified conceptual model that allows us to derive a scaling law for particle displacement.
We consider an infinite domain initially populated with particles whose density is much larger than the media density (we assume this media to be a gas with known properties).
We restrict ourselves to the case when the density fraction of particles is relatively small, so particle-particle interactions can be neglected and thus consider the dispersion of a single tracer particle (the opposite limit of a localized energy release in a `crowded' system of particles was analysed in Ref.~\onlinecite{Antal08}.
Similar to other studies \cite{Grafke14}, we assume that the dynamics of an inertial particle are dominated by viscous drag of the parent medium and is described by a force equation.
For the sake of simplicity we disregard all other processes that may occur in the system (\textit{e.g.}\ multi-phase transitions).
The equation of motion for a particle takes the standard form
\begin{equation}
\dot{\textbf{r}} = \textbf{v}, \quad \dot{\textbf{v}} = \frac{1}{\tau}(\textbf{V} - \textbf{v}),
\label{eq:force}
\end{equation}
where $\tau$ is the Stokes time of the particle, $\textbf{V}(t) \equiv \textbf{V}(\textbf{r}(t), t)$ is the velocity field induced by a blast at the position of the particle.
We assume that the flow field velocity $\textbf{V}(\textbf{r}, t)$ can be approximately described by the Sedov-Taylor solution for a strong explosion~\cite{Landau87}
\begin{equation}
\textbf{V}= \frac{2\textbf{r}}{5t} \Psi(\zeta),
\label{eq:vflow}
\end{equation}
where $\zeta = r/R(t)$ (and $r\!=\!0, \: t\!=\!0$ corresponds to the initial location and ignition time of the blast).
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Rt}
R = \beta\left(\frac{Et^2}{\rho}\right)^{1/5},
\end{equation}
where $R(t)$ is the position of the shock front, $E$ is the total energy released in the blast and $\rho$ is the density of the medium.
The dimensionless parameter $\beta$ is function of the polytropic exponent $\gamma$ (for $\gamma = 7/5$: $\beta \approx 1.033$ \cite{Landau87}) and the function $\Psi(\zeta)$ can be closely approximated by its limiting value $\Psi(\zeta) \approx 1/\gamma$, if $0 \le \zeta \le 1$, and $\Psi(\zeta)=0$ otherwise~\cite{Landau87}.
The velocity of the shock front is given by the derivative of expression (\ref{eq:Rt}):
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:dRdt}
\dot{R} =\frac{2 \beta }{5} \left(\frac{E}{\rho t^3}\right)^{1/5}.
\end{equation}
For a particle located at an initial position $r=r_0$ away from the blast ignition point at $t=0$, Eq.~(\ref{eq:force}) reduces to the scalar form
\begin{equation}
\ddot{r} + \frac{\dot{r}}{\tau} - \frac{q}{\tau} \frac{r}{(t + t_0)} = 0,
\label{eq:ODE}
\end{equation}
where $q = 2/(5\gamma)$ and $t_0$ is the time required for the shock wave to reach the particle, estimated from Eq.~(\ref{eq:Rt})
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:t0}
t_0 = \left(\frac{r_0}{\beta}\right)^{5/2}\left(\frac{\rho}{E}\right)^{1/2}.
\end{equation}
From Eq.~(\ref{eq:ODE}) we can readily deduce a scaling law for particle displacement when inertial effects are negligible.
By dropping the first term in this equation we arrive at
\begin{equation}
\frac{r}{r_{ref}} = \left(\frac{t}{t_{ref}}\right)^q,
\label{eq:scaleref}
\end{equation}
where $r_{ref}$ is some arbitrary reference position which defines the particle location at time $t=t_{ref}$.
The $r_{ref}$ and $t_{ref}$ scales have been introduced to satisfy two initial conditions of the original equation (\ref{eq:ODE}).
If we define $t_{ref} \equiv t_0 + \tau$ (\textit{i.e.} time when inertial effects become unimportant) then $r_{ref} = r_0 + r_\tau$, where $r_\tau$ is the particle displacement during the Stokes time $\tau$ (\textit{i.e.}\ from $t_0$ to $t_0 + \tau$).
We can estimate $r_\tau$ from Eq.~(\ref{eq:ODE}) in the short-time limit where the velocity term is insignificant:
\begin{equation}
\ddot{r} - \frac{q}{\tau}\frac{r}{(t + t_0)} = 0.
\label{eq:accel}
\end{equation}
The solution of this equation can be represented in terms of Bessel functions~\cite{Kamke77}, although the complete solution is cumbersome.
In order to avoid dealing with expressions containing special functions we can deduce a simplified estimation of $r_\tau$ based on the following kinematic consideration.
After being hit by the front shock wave the particle begins to accelerate (driven by fluid drag), so its trajectory is given by the expression
\begin{equation}
r = r_0 + \frac{a}{2} t^2,
\label{eq:raccel}
\end{equation}
where $a$ is the particle acceleration.
This expression reflects that at $r(t\!=\!0)\!=\!r_0$ and $\dot{r}(t\!=\!0)\!=\!0$ (initially the particle is at rest).
The acceleration term can be estimated by matching Eq.~(\ref{eq:raccel}) with the analytical solution of Eq.~(\ref{eq:accel}) or by directly substituting the expression (\ref{eq:raccel}) into this equation (acceleration being the $\ddot{r}$ term in Eq.~(\ref{eq:accel}) evaluated at $r\!=\!r_0$ and $t\!=\!0$), so $a \simeq q (r_0/t_0)/\tau$.
Then for $t = \tau$, Eq.~(\ref{eq:raccel}) leads to a complete description of the reference position
\begin{equation}
r_{ref} = r_0 + r_0 \frac{q}{2} \left( \frac{\tau}{t_0} \right),
\label{eq:rref}
\end{equation}
which allows us to write the scaling law (\ref{eq:scaleref}) in the following form
\begin{equation}
\frac{r}{r_0} = \left(1 + \frac{q}{2} \frac{\tau}{t_0}\right)\left(\frac{t}{t_0 + \tau} \right)^q.
\label{eq:rmassless}
\end{equation}
Eq.\ (\ref{eq:rmassless}) is the main result of the present study.
We can see that the exponent in this scaling law of particle displacement depends only on the properties of the media (since $q = 2/(5\gamma)$), and is independent of both the properties of the particles and energy of the explosion.
Moreover, since $\gamma > 1$ \cite{Landau87} the particle dispersion is always slower than the ballistic regime (\textit{i.e.}\ $q < 1$).
In general, the dispersion process can be characterized by two limiting cases, depending on the value of the ratio $\tau/t_0$ in Eq.(\ref{eq:rmassless}).
For given characteristics of the explosion (energy $E$), particle and medium properties (Stokes time $\tau$), the ratio $\tau/t_0$ can be associated with the initial position of the particle $r_0$ by introducing the scale
\begin{equation}
r_* = \beta \left( \frac{E \tau^2}{\rho} \right)^{1/5}.
\label{eq:lanbda}
\end{equation}
For the particles initially located within the sphere $r \le r_*$ (below we refer to this case as the `near field'), we arrive at a simplified form of the scaling law (\ref{eq:rmassless})
\begin{equation}
\frac{r}{r_0} = Q \left(\frac{t}{t_0} \right)^q, \qquad Q = \left(1 + \frac{q}{2} \frac{\tau}{t_0}\right)\left(\frac{t_0}{\tau}\right)^q.
\label{eq:scale1}
\end{equation}
For the opposite case ($r \ge r_*$, the `far field') $Q = 1$~\footnote{see Appendix \ref{sec:nearfar} for derivations}.
We remark that particle properties can influence the value of $Q$ only in the near field region.
At some point the particle motion described by Eqs.~(\ref{eq:scale1}) will be terminated and the particle will come to rest.
The time of this termination corresponds to a disappearance of the driving velocity $\mathbf{V}(\mathbf{r},t)$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:force}), or a deviation of the function $\mathbf{V}(\mathbf{r},t)$ from the strong explosion model (\ref{eq:vflow}) (\textit{i.e.}\ when the shock wave significantly dissipates).
A simple estimation of this termination point can be deduced from the following arguments.
It is well known that a spherical shock wave loses energy and eventually transforms into a spherical acoustic wave \cite{Landau87,Naugolnykh98}.
This transformation is governed by an interplay between the non-linear and dissipative processes.
As linear acoustic waves cannot generate a persistent flow \cite{Landau87}, it is apparent that a particle cannot be advected any further when this process begins to dominate.
Assuming that the shock wave transformation is mostly due to non-linear effects, and applying the condition $\dot{R} = c$ to Eq.\ (\ref{eq:dRdt}), we can readily deduce a stopping time
\begin{equation}
t_s = \left(\frac{2 \beta}{5c}\right)^{5/3}\left(\frac{E}{\rho}\right)^{1/3},
\label{eq:ts}
\end{equation}
where $c$ is the speed of sound in the media and all particle dynamics are confined to $t \ll t_s$.
Analogously, one can deduce an estimation for $t_s$ when the shock wave transformation is given by a dissipation process \cite{Landau87, Naugolnykh98}.
Scaling of the dissipation length is given by a diffusion law $\delta(t) \sim (\nu_* t)^{1/2}$, where $\nu_*$ is a well-known aggregated dissipation coefficient determined by viscosity and thermal conductivity (see Ref.\ \onlinecite{Landau87}, \S96).
By equating $R(t)$, Eq.\ (\ref{eq:Rt}), to $\delta(t)$ we arrive at the following expression for the stopping time determined by dissipation
\begin{equation}
t_s \simeq \left(\frac{E}{\rho}\right)^{2} \left(\frac{1}{\nu_*}\right)^5,
\label{eq:ts2}
\end{equation}
which yields a different $t_s$ value compared to Eq.\ (\ref{eq:ts}). In the present study we assume the dissipation coefficient $\nu_*$ is relatively small, and hence the stopping time is dominated by non-linear effects described by Eq.\ (\ref{eq:ts}).
Setting $t\!=\!t_s$ in Eqs.~(\ref{eq:scale1}), we can derive the following scaling law for the maximum particle displacement
\begin{equation}
\frac{r_{max}}{r_0} \propto r^p_0 E^k\tau^h,
\label{eq:scalelaw}
\end{equation}
with values $p=-5/2, k=1/2+2/(15\gamma), h=1-2/(5\gamma)$ for the near field scaling and $p = -1/\gamma,~ k = 1/(3\gamma), ~ h = 0$ for the scaling in the far field~\footnote{Derivations of these exponents can be found in Appendix \ref{sec:exponents}.}.
The scaling of particle displacement with Stokes time $r_{max} \propto \tau^h$ provides insightful information on the effect of particle properties in the system, since for a spherical particle
\begin{equation}
\tau = \frac{d_p^2\rho_p}{18\mu}.\label{eq:tau}
\end{equation}
Here, $d_p$ is the diameter of the particle and $\rho_p \gg \rho$ its density; $\mu$ is the dynamic viscosity of the media.
For instance, with all other parameters being equal, Eq.(\ref{eq:scalelaw}) predicts the particle displacement scales with the media viscosity (in the near field) as ${r_{max}} \propto \mu^{-1+2/(5\gamma)}$.
\section{Numerical Results}
In order to validate our analytical predictions for the scaling laws of Eq. (\ref{eq:scalelaw}), we numerically solve Eq.~(\ref{eq:ODE}) with parameter ranges of $r_0,\, E$ and $\tau$~\footnote{See Appendix \ref{sec:numode} for implementation details.}.
We use the stopping condition Eq.~(\ref{eq:ts}) to calculate a termination point and evaluate the relative particle displacements $r_{max}/r_0$ and then estimate the scaling exponents $p, k, h$ from the log-log plots.
In each set of simulations we change only one parameter keeping all other parameters constant.
The reported parameter values are selected to represent a large range of conditions which cross the near/far field boundary at $r_*$, with enough data points to recover the predicted scaling exponents. Additionally, these values must reside within the time constraint $t_0 \leq t \leq t_s$.
A multitude of parameter values recover the scaling laws, however we plot a single representational value to remove any possible ambiguity in the results.
As a foundation we model explosions in a diatomic gas (air), for which $\gamma = 7/5$ \cite{Landau87} and $q = 2/7$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:ODE}).
The dynamic viscosity parameter from Eq.\ (\ref{eq:tau}) is assumed to be a constant value of $\mu \simeq 1.983\!\times\!10^{-5}$ Pa/s (air at room temperature), and the particle density represents steel ball bearings $\rho_p = 7874$ kg/m$\mathrm{^3}$ for all reported results.
The results of analytical predictions and numerical simulations are summarized in Table \ref{tbl:scales}.
\begin{table}[tb]
\caption{\label{tbl:scales} Numerically recovered scaling exponents of physical system parameters against relative particle displacement, Eq.(\ref{eq:scalelaw}), for an explosion in air ($\gamma = 7/5$).}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{llll}
\multicolumn{2}{c}{Near Field ($r \leq r_*$)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Far Field ($r \geq r_*$)} \\
Theory & Recovered & Theory & Recovered \\
\hline\noalign{\smallskip}
$p = -5/2$ ($-2.5$) & $p=-2.47$ & $p=-5/7$ ($-0.71$) & $p=-0.72$ \\
$k=~25/42$ ($0.6$) & $k=~~0.58$ & $k=~~5/21$ ~($0.24$) & $k=~~0.23$ \\
$h=~~5/7$ ~~($0.71$) & $h=~~0.71$ & $ h=~~0$ ~~~~~($0$) & $h=~~0$ \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table}
Figure \ref{fig:zodex0} presents a typical output of our simulations.
It depicts the scaling response of a particle's initial position $r_0$ as it is varied between $0.01$ m and $5$ m to the numerical solution of Eq.~(\ref{eq:ODE}).
Two regimes of particle dispersion (near and far field, see Eq.\ (\ref{eq:scalelaw})) are indicated via the solid and dashed lines respectively.
Both results are in good agreement with the theoretical derivations presented in Table~\ref{tbl:scales}.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{zodex0d}
\caption{Scaling dependence of the scaled maximum displacement $r_{max}/r_0$ of the numerical solution to Eq.~(\ref{eq:ODE}) against $r_0$ ($\circ$) with $r_*$ indicated as a vertical dotted line. Control parameters for the presented data are $E = 4.52\!\times\!10^{10}$ J/kg and $\tau = 5.52\!\times\!10^{-6}$ s. Recovery of a $-5/2$ dependence (solid line) in the near field and a $-5/7$ dependence (dashed line) in the far field are clearly visible.}\label{fig:zodex0}
\end{figure}
Energy scaling can be determined in a similar manner, with all other parameters held constant, energy $E$ is adjusted from $452$ kJ/kg to $45.2$ TJ/kg, the result of which can be seen in Figure~\ref{fig:zodeE}.
Here again we recover two scales with good agreement to theory: the near field (solid line) and far field (dashed line) against the numerical results.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{zodeEt}
\caption{Scaling dependence of $E$ against the scaled maximum displacement $r_{max}/r_0$ of the numerical solution to Eq.~(\ref{eq:ODE}) ($\circ$). Control parameters for the presented data are $r_0 = 0.2$ m and $\tau = 5.52\!\times\!10^{-6}$ s. Recovery of a $25/42$ dependence (solid line) in the near field and a $5/21$ dependence (dashed line) in the far field are clearly visible.}\label{fig:zodeE}
\end{figure}
Finally, we investigate scaling with the Stokes time $\tau$ in Figure~\ref{fig:zodetau}.
As $\tau$ is a function of many parameters (see Eq.~\ref{eq:tau}), we fix all medium variables and alter only the particle diameter (also fixing particle density) over a $1\!\times\!10^{-4}\!-\!10 \;\rm{\mu m}$ range.
Scaling in the near field is recovered with good agreement, and as predicted there is no dependency on $\tau$ in the far field.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{zodetau}
\caption{Scaling dependence of $\tau$ against the scaled maximum displacement $r_{max}/r_0$ of the numerical solution to Eq.~(\ref{eq:ODE}) ($\circ$). Control parameters for the presented data are $r_0 = 0.2$ m and $E = 4.52\!\times\!10^{10}$ J/kg. Recovery of a $5/7$ dependence (solid line) in the near field is clearly visible. Displacement is independent of $\tau$ in the far field.}\label{fig:zodetau}
\end{figure}
To verify the scaling laws derived in Eq.\ (\ref{eq:scalelaw}) are general, we also compare results for noble gasses (\textit{i.e.} when $\gamma = 5/3$ and $\mu \simeq 1.956\!\times\!10^{-5}$ Pa/s for helium at room temperature).
Here, the near field exponents are predicted to be $p=-5/2,\, k=29/50,\, h=19/25$, which recover to $p=-2.5,\, k=0.57,\, h=0.75$ numerically.
In the the far field, $p = -3/5,\, k = 1/5,\, h = 0$, which also scale as expected recovering $p = -0.62,\, k = 0.19,\, h = 0$.
\section{Discussion}
The scaling laws established above can provide some predictions that can be validated experimentally.
For instance, it has been observed that there exists a range of particle sizes for which the inertia of the particles combined with the decay of the blast wave allows them to overtake the primary shock front \cite{Zhang01}.
This effect strongly depends on particle size and there exists a threshold (\textit{i.e.} a particle size limit) below which this effect does not occur \cite{Zhang01}.
The proposed framework allows us to formulate a quantitative criteria for this phenomenon.
Consider the dispersion of particles by an explosion in air ($\gamma = 7/5$). The existence of an overtake event directly follows from a comparison of the scaling laws for the position of the shock wave and particle displacement.
The position of the shock wave scales as $t^{2/5}$, Eq.~(\ref{eq:Rt}), while the particle displacement scales non-uniformly: initially ($t_0 \ll \tau$) it scales as $t^2$ with time, Eq.~(\ref{eq:raccel}), and then slows down to $\propto t^{2/7}$ at the large time limit, Eq.~(\ref{eq:scale1}).
This implies that at the large time limit the particle is always behind the shock wave and can only overtake it during the initial (inertial) stage.
Since particle displacement during the initial stage is given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:raccel}), this leads to the following condition for the particle to be in front of the shock wave:
\begin{equation}
\beta\left(\frac{E t^2}{\rho}\right)^{1/5} = r_0 \left(\frac{t}{t_0}\right)^{2/5} \le r_0 + (a/2) (t - t_0)^2 , ~~ t \ge t_0.
\label{eq:ovt1}
\end{equation}
By introducing a new variable $y = (t/t_0)^{1/5}$, this condition can be recast to a non-dimensional form
\begin{equation}
\Phi(y) = y^2 - \chi (y^5 -1)^{2} - 1 \le 0, ~~~ y \geq 1,
\label{eq:ovt2}
\end{equation}
where $\chi = (q/2)(t_0/\tau) \ll 1$ and $\Phi(1) = 0$.
The function $\Phi(y)$ has a single real root $y_1$ satisfying the condition $y > 1$ with its approximate value $y_1 \approx (1/\chi)^{1/8} \propto (\tau/t_0)^{1/8} \gg 1$. This root determines the time when the particle catches up and `penetrates through' the decelerating shock wave (since $t\!=\!t_1\!=\!y^5_1 t_0$). This time corresponds to the particle displacement $r_1\!=\!y^{2}_1 r_0 \ge r_0$, after which the particle decelerates and the shock wave overtakes it again.
Similarly, the second time the shock wave overtakes the particle follows from Eqs.~(\ref{eq:Rt}) and (\ref{eq:scale1}):
\begin{equation}
r_1 \left(\frac{t }{t_1}\right)^{2/5} \geq r_1 + r_0 Q \left(\frac{t - t_1 }{ t_0} \right)^{2/7}, ~~~ t \ge t_1,
\label{eq:ovt3}
\end{equation}
or in a non-dimensional form (substituting the $t_1\!=\!y^5_1 t_0$ and $r_1\!=\!y^{2}_1 r_0$ parameters from the first crossing and $y$ as defined above)
\begin{equation}
\Gamma(y) = y^{2} - Q (y^5 - y^5_1 )^{2/7} - y^2_1 \ge 0, ~~~ y \geq y_1,
\label{eq:ovt4}
\end{equation}
and $\Gamma(y_1) = 0$. The positive real root of $\Gamma(y)$ has an approximate value $y_2 \approx Q^{7/4} \propto (\tau/t_0)^{5/4} \gg 1$.
Both roots ($y_1, y_2$) are dependent on the characteristics of the explosion, and the parameters of medium and particle (via constants $\chi, Q$). It is evident that the consistency condition, $y_2 \ge y_1$, always holds for sufficiently heavy particles and for particles initially located in proximity to the center of an explosion.
In essence, we have identified three consecutive events where the particle and shock wave cross (one possible set of parameters which observes this phenomena is presented in Figure \ref{fig:overtake}).
At $t\!=\!t_0$ ($r\!=\!r_0$), the shock wave initially reaches a particle which is at rest.
Driven by inertia, the particle overtakes the decelerating shock wave at $t\!=\!t_1 > t_0$ ($r\!=\!r_1$).
Finally, at $t\!=\!t_2 > t_1$ ($r\! =\! r_2$) the shock wave again catches up to the decelerating particle and overtakes it.
The zeroth-order estimates of $t_1$ and $t_2$ derived from Eq.\ (\ref{eq:ovt2}) and (\ref{eq:ovt4}) respectively obtain an acceptable agreement with the numerical results of Figure \ref{fig:overtake}: $t_1 \approx 2\!\times\!10^{-8} \;\mathrm{(est)} = 9\!\times\!10^{-9}\; \mathrm{(numeric)}$ and $t_2 \approx 2.5\!\times\!10^{-7} \;\mathrm{(est)} = 9.5\!\times\!10^{-7} \;\mathrm{(numeric)}$.
An experimental validation of the `wave-particle' overtake phenomena is a challenging undertaking which requires precise (and simultaneous) measurements of the positions of shock waves and tracer particles; as such there are few publications on this subject.
To the best of our knowledge there is only a single experimental study, Ref.~\onlinecite{Zhang01}, in which the `wave-particle' overtake phenomena has been observed and reported.
The positions of the particles and shock in this study have been detected by means of two $150$ kV flash X-ray pulsers and six piezoelectric pressure transducers respectively.
Our interpretation of these phenomena, presented in this paper, stems from a simple kinematic analysis of the scaling laws for particle displacement, is in qualitative agreement with the experimental observations reported in Ref.~\onlinecite{Zhang01}.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{overtake}
\caption{Shock wave trajectory (dashed) and particle position (solid) after an explosion with a yield $E = 0.1$ J/kg. A steel particle with diameter $d_p = 25$ nm is initially at rest at position $r_0 =5$ mm then starts accelerating at time $t_0$ ($\circ$) after the shock passes over. The particle overtakes the shock at $t_1$ ($\bullet$), then at a later time $t_2$ (\mbox{\tiny $\blacksquare$}) it is re-captured and remains behind the shock wave for the rest of the explosive event.}\label{fig:overtake}
\end{figure}
Another interesting effect associated with an explosive energy release in a particle system is the formation of a residual sparseness (cavity) in an initially uniform particle distribution (\textit{e.g.}\ dust) after the particles have been displaced by the shock wave from their initial position.
We can easily estimate the scale of this cavity by invoking the analytical framework presented above.
In fact, the edge of the cavity is formed from the far field particles, for which $t_0 \gg \tau$.
By setting $t\!=\!t_s$ and $r \sim r_0 \sim r_{cav}$ in Eq.\ (\ref{eq:scale1}) we can derive an estimate
\begin{equation}
r_{cav} \simeq \kappa \left(\frac{E }{\rho c^2}\right)^{1/3},
\label{eq:cav1}
\end{equation}
where $\kappa = (4 \beta^5/25)^{1/3} \approx 0.09 $, which can also be established based on dimensional arguments.
This expression provides a characteristic scale of the density of particle distribution associated with the residual sparseness caused by an explosion (for a visual example of such a cavity, see images in Ref.\ \onlinecite{Antal08} and Figure 1 of Ref.\ \onlinecite{Harris15}).
\section{Conclusions}
In summary, we have presented scaling laws for particle displacement caused by a rapid (and localized) energy release (explosion).
These scaling laws account for particle properties (mass, diameter, density), properties of the medium a particle is advected through (viscosity, density, speed of sound) and the energy of the explosion dissipated through the shock front.
We demonstrated that by employing a conceptual model of particle displacement that includes the strong explosion model and simplified particle kinematics, the exponents of these scaling laws can be derived analytically, which are in good agreement with numerical simulations.
This framework has been constructed in a manner such that more realistic descriptions (different models of explosion, non-Stokes drag, multi-phase transformations, \textit{etc}) can be implemented to ascertain improved estimations of each scaling law outlined here.
For instance, taking inertial effects of the fluid flow into account leads to an equation of motion with a different form of drag~\cite{Landau87}
\begin{equation}
\dot{\textbf{r}} = \textbf{v}, \quad \dot{\textbf{v}} = \frac{1}{\lambda}(\textbf{V} - \textbf{v})^2,
\end{equation}
where the parameter $\lambda$ has a dimension of length and provides an aggregated characteristic of particles and media (size, density, viscosity), similar to Eq.\ (\ref{eq:tau}).
It is evident from this equation that the same scaling laws for particle displacement exist in the far field, \emph{viz}., with the exponents given in Table \ref{tbl:scales}.
This and further additions will be elaborated upon in our future work.
We anticipate that the results presented in this study will be useful in evaluating high fidelity models of particle transport and interpreting experimental observations of explosion phenomena.
|
\section{Conclusions}
The interaction between dark matter particles and nuclei might be much more complicated than direct detection experiments have typically assumed. The inclusion of new operators within the framework of an EFT might have profound consequences for current and proposed experiments. As a result, in this richer parameter space, data from multiple experiments with different targets is essential in order to determine the precise nature of the interaction. In addition, when modeling dark matter signals, experiments must consider how an interaction due to an arbitrary EFT operator can affect the energy distribution of dark matter events.
The importance of using multiple target elements to constrain dark matter interactions can already be seen when plotting limits from current experiments. As we have shown, the differences in target element properties lead to variations in the shape of the interaction strength versus mass limit curve. In addition, a combination of target elements can produce better constraints on dark matter, especially when considering multiple dark matter interactions and the possibility of interference. This complementarity of different target elements will become increasingly important in the case of a statistically significant detection.
The additional interactions introduced by the EFT formalism become especially significant when experiments use statistical techniques which rely on assumptions about the shape of the dark matter recoil spectrum to distinguish between background and a potential dark matter signal. Machine learning techniques, such as the boosted decision tree used in the SuperCDMS Soudan result \cite{R133_LT}, and likelihood analyses, such as the one performed on CDMS~II low-energy data \cite{CDMS-II_likelihood}, require accurate models of both the signal and the expected background. So far, direct detection experiments have focused primarily on building accurate models of their expected backgrounds, while assuming a simple signal model. However, mis-modeling the signal could also have significant consequences. If a WIMP signal that does not conform to the standard spin-independent assumptions is present in the data, it could produce unknown effects on the final result because it may not match either the signal or the background model. In the case of algorithms such as the optimum interval method that compare the observed events to the expected WIMP spectrum but do not attempt to subtract background, WIMP signal events may be interpreted as background, leading to limits that are too strict.
These considerations become especially important as the community moves forward with the proposed G2 experiments. SuperCDMS SNOLAB and LZ will have unprecedented sensitivity to dark matter scattering for a wide range of WIMP masses, and the combination of target elements allows one experiment to verify a potential signal seen by the other. However, the variation in signal strengths across EFT operators and experimental target elements could lead to experimental results that appear to be in conflict under the standard dark matter assumptions. In particular, interference between operators can suppress the relative event rates by several orders of magnitude for germanium, silicon, and xenon. If the true dark matter interaction includes such interference, it is possible that one experiment will observe a statistically significant signal while the other does not. The effective field theory framework can account for such apparent inconsistencies, and, in the event of a statistically significant signal, it will pave the way for future likelihood analyses to determine the nature of the dark matter interactions.
\section{Acknowledgements}
The authors gratefully acknowledge Liam Fitzpatrick, Wick Haxton, and Tim Tait for helpful conversations. This work is
supported in part by the National Science Foundation, by the United States Department of Energy, by
NSERC Canada, and by MultiDark (Spanish MINECO). Fermilab is operated by the Fermi Research Alliance,
LLC under Contract No. De- AC02-07CH11359. SLAC is operated under Contract No. DE-AC02-76SF00515 with
the United States Department of Energy.
\bibliographystyle{apsrev4-1}
\section{Introduction}
Astrophysical and cosmological evidence indicates that the majority of the matter in the universe takes the form of non-luminous particles called dark matter, though the exact nature of the dark matter particle remains unknown \cite{doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-082708-101659}. A generic weakly-interacting massive particle (WIMP) is a very attractive dark matter candidate \cite{1985NuPhB.253..375S}. Numerous experiments are engaged in efforts to detect rare collisions between WIMPs and target nuclei in terrestrial detectors. Results from DAMA \cite{Bernabei:2010uq}, CoGeNT \cite{PhysRevD.88.012002}, CRESST-II \cite{Angloher:2012fk}, and CDMS\,II Si \cite{Agnese:2013rvf} can be interpreted in terms of interactions of WIMPs with masses of 6-30~GeV/\textit{c}$^2$. A similar range of masses could also account for a possible excess in the gamma-ray flux near the galactic center in Fermi-LAT data \cite{PhysRevD.84.123005,2014arXiv1409.0042C}. Under standard assumptions for spin-independent WIMP-nucleon interactions, however, such interpretations are difficult to reconcile with the limits set by CDMSlite \cite{cdmslitePRL}, SuperCDMS \cite{R133_LT}, LUX \cite{PhysRevLett.112.091303}, and PICO \cite{2015arXiv150300008A}.
Standard WIMP scattering calculations make simplifying assumptions about the type of interaction between the nucleon and the dark matter particle: typically only isospin-conserving spin-independent couplings, or spin-dependent couplings to either the proton or neutron are considered. This results in constraints on the three corresponding WIMP-nucleon cross sections. Relaxing such assumptions can suppress the interaction for some target elements by orders of magnitude relative to others \cite{2013PhRvD..88a5021F}. In particular, assuming different spin-independent dark matter couplings to protons, $f_p$, and neutrons, $f_n$, can reconcile much of the tension between the CDMS\,II Si allowed region and the SuperCDMS Soudan and LUX exclusion limits \cite{2014JHEP...05..086H}. However, such solutions often require a high degree of fine-tuning.
In addition, the calculation of dark matter scattering rates typically assumes a Maxwellian velocity distribution \cite{Lewin199687}. As shown in \cite{2010JCAP...02..030K, 2012JCAP...08..027P}, N-body simulations are not well described by such a distribution. Consequently, alternate halo models have been proposed. One such velocity distribution is discussed in \cite{2013ApJ...764...35M,2014PhRvD..89f3513M} and takes the form
\begin{equation}
f(v) = \exp \left [ -\frac{v}{v_0} \right ] \left ( v_{esc}^2 - v^2 \right ) ^p,
\label{eqn:alt_vdist}
\end{equation}
for dark matter velocities smaller than the galactic escape velocity $v_{esc}$. For values of $v_0/v_{esc}$ and $p$ consistent with N-body simulations, this function falls off faster than the standard Maxwellian distribution. This difference can significantly affect the expected dark matter event rate, especially for low-mass WIMPs for which experiments are only sensitive to the high-velocity tail of the distribution. It has been shown that choosing certain values for the parameters of this alternate halo model can reconcile the tension between CDMS\,II Si and XENON100 \cite{2012PhRvL.109r1301A}, though it cannot also account for the tension with LUX because of that experiment's lower energy threshold.
Recently, an effective field theory (EFT) approach for WIMP scattering has been developed that considers all leading-order and next-to-leading order operators that can occur in the effective Lagrangian that describes the WIMP-nucleus interaction \cite{Fitzpatrick:2012,Anand:2013,Fitzpatrick:2013}. This formalism introduces new operators that rely on a range of nuclear properties in addition to the standard spin-independent and spin-dependent cases. It also explicitly includes isospin interference and interference between operators, creating a rich parameter space of possible dark matter interactions that are very sensitive to the specific choice of detector material.
The EFT framework parametrizes the WIMP-nucleus interaction in terms of fourteen operators, $\mathcal O_i$, which are listed in Eq.~\ref{eqn:operators} and include the standard spin-independent and spin-dependent interactions. These operators feature explicit dependence on $\vec v^{\bot}$ (the relative velocity between the incoming WIMP and the nucleon) and the momentum transfer $\vec q$, in addition to the WIMP and nucleon spins, $\vec S_{\chi}$ and $\vec S_N$. Note that $\mathcal O_2$ is not considered since it cannot arise from the non-relativistic limit of a relativistic operator at leading order. In addition, each operator can independently couple to protons or neutrons. We formulate this isospin dependence in terms of isoscalar and isovector interactions, following the conventions of \cite{Anand:2013}.
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eqn:operators}
\nonumber
\mathcal O_1 &=& 1_{\chi} 1_N \\
\nonumber
\mathcal O_3 &=& i \vec S_N \cdot \left [ \frac{ \vec q}{m_N} \times \vec v^{\bot} \right] \\
\nonumber
\mathcal O_4 &=& \vec S_{\chi} \cdot \vec S_N \\
\nonumber
\mathcal O_5 &=& i \vec S_{\chi} \cdot \left [ \frac{ \vec q}{m_N} \times \vec v^{\bot} \right] \\
\nonumber
\mathcal O_6 &=& \left [ \vec S_{\chi} \cdot \frac{ \vec q}{m_N} \right ] \left [ \vec S_N \cdot \frac{ \vec q}{m_N} \right ] \\
\nonumber
\mathcal O_7 &=& \vec S_N \cdot \vec v^{\bot} \\
\nonumber
\mathcal O_8 &=& \vec S_{\chi} \cdot \vec v^{\bot} \\
\nonumber
\mathcal O_9 &=& i \vec S_{\chi} \cdot \left [ \vec S_N \times \frac{ \vec q}{m_N} \right ] \\
\nonumber
\mathcal O_{10} &=& i \vec S_N \cdot \frac{ \vec q}{m_N} \\
\nonumber
\mathcal O_{11} &=& i \vec S_{\chi} \cdot \frac{ \vec q}{m_N} \\
\nonumber
\mathcal O_{12} &=& \vec S_{\chi} \cdot \left [ \vec S_N \times \vec v^{\bot} \right ] \\
\nonumber
\mathcal O_{13} &=& i \left [ \vec S_{\chi} \cdot \vec v^{\bot} \right ] \left [ \vec S_N \cdot \frac{ \vec q}{m_N} \right ] \\
\nonumber
\mathcal O_{14} &=& i \left [ \vec S_{\chi} \cdot \frac{ \vec q}{m_N} \right ] \left [ \vec S_N \cdot \vec v^{\bot} \right ] \\
\mathcal O_{15} &=& - \left [ \vec S_{\chi} \cdot \frac{ \vec q}{m_N} \right ] \left [\left ( \vec S_N \times \vec v^{\bot} \right ) \cdot \frac{ \vec q}{m_N} \right ]
\end{eqnarray}
These operators contribute to six types of nuclear response functions. The spin-independent response is denoted by $M$ and is typically the strongest of the six functions since it is related to the number of nucleons in the target nucleus. The main contribution to this response comes from the standard spin-independent operator $\mathcal O_1$, but it also contains higher-order contributions from operators $\mathcal O_5$, $\mathcal O_8$, and $\mathcal O_{11}$. There are two spin-dependent responses, $\Sigma'$ and $\Sigma''$, that correspond to projections of spin parallel and perpendicular to the momentum transfer. A linear combination of these two responses yields $\mathcal O_4$, which is related to the standard spin-dependent response. Many of the other operators also appear in one of these two responses. A novel type of response introduced in the EFT, $\Delta$, is related to the net angular momentum of an unpaired nucleon and contains contributions from operators $\mathcal O_5$ and $\mathcal O_8$. A second novel response is $\Phi''$, which is sensitive to the product of angular momentum and spin. This response tends to favor heavier elements, and the most dominant contribution to this response is from $\mathcal O_3$. The last response considered in the EFT, $\tilde \Phi '$, contains contributions from operators $\mathcal O_3$, $\mathcal O_{12}$, and $\mathcal O_{15}$. $\tilde \Phi '$ is discussed less frequently in the literature since it is difficult to find a model that produces this response, but we consider it here for completeness.
The EFT also includes two operator-operator interference terms: $\Sigma' \Delta$ and $M \Phi''$. $\Sigma'$ interferes with $\Delta$ because velocity-dependent responses are sensitive to properties such as angular momentum that depend on the motion of the nucleon within the nucleus. This interference term is particularly significant for germanium, which has large responses to both $\Sigma'$ and $\Delta$. The $\Sigma'\Delta$ response contains interference between $\mathcal O_4$ and $\mathcal O_5$, as well as between $\mathcal O_8$ and $\mathcal O_9$. In addition, since both $M$ and $\Phi''$ are scalar responses, interference between the two can be significant, especially for elements like xenon that have large responses to both. The $M \Phi''$ response contains interference between operators $\mathcal O_1$ and $\mathcal O_3$, operators $\mathcal O_{11}$ and $\mathcal O_{12}$, and operators $\mathcal O_{11}$ and $\mathcal O_{15}$.
Since the various responses are related to different nuclear properties, the strength of the resulting interaction can vary by many orders of magnitude. The expectation values of these properties are listed in \cite{Fitzpatrick:2012}. For instance, the spin-dependent responses $\Sigma'$ and $\Sigma''$ depend on the square of the spin of an unpaired nucleon, which ranges from $5\times 10^{-6}$ for protons in germanium (which has one isotope with an unpaired nucleon, which is a neutron) to 0.2 for protons in fluorine (which has an unpaired proton). The angular momentum of a nucleon, which governs the strength of the $\Delta$ response, ranges from $\mathcal O(1\times 10^{-3})$ to $\mathcal O(1)$, while $(L \cdot S)^2$, which governs the strength of the $\Phi''$ response, ranges from 0.1 for light nuclei to several hundred for heavier nuclei. The strongest response is $M$, which is related to the square of the number of nucleons.
The strength of an EFT interaction is parametrized by numerical coefficients, $c_i^{\tau}$, associated with each operator $\mathcal O_i$, where $\tau=0$ or $1$ denotes the isoscalar ($c_i^0 = \nicefrac{1}{2}( c_i^p + c_i^n$)) and isovector ($c_i^1 = \nicefrac{1}{2}( c_i^p - c_i^n$)) combinations, respectively. The coefficients have dimensions of 1/energy$^2$, so we multiply by the weak mass scale ($m_{weak} = 246.2$ GeV) to produce dimensionless quantities. The $c_i^{\tau}$ are related by a change of basis to generalized versions of $f_n$ and $f_p$ and can take on any value, positive or negative. The coefficients appear as $c_i^{\tau} c_j^{\tau'}$ in the interaction, indicating that operators interfere pair-wise, at most.
This paper discusses the EFT approach in the context of current and proposed direct detection experiments. We present exclusion limits on EFT operator coefficients using the optimum interval method \cite{ upper,2007arXiv0709.2701Y}. We discuss the differences in energy spectra that arise for arbitrary EFT interactions and examine how this energy dependence may affect future experiments if WIMP candidate events are observed. We also consider the variation in interaction strength across the elements commonly used as direct detection targets and discuss possible ways of exploring interference using experimental results. Finally, we discuss the implications of this effective field theory for the next-generation (G2) direct detection experiments, SuperCDMS SNOLAB and LZ.
\section{Exclusion limits on a set of EFT operators}
The strength of the interaction in the EFT framework is governed by a set of 28 numerical coefficients corresponding to the 14 operators, one for each isospin. Others have attempted to find global fits in this multi-dimensional parameter space, combining data from many direct detection experiments \cite{2014JCAP...09..045C}. Since the parameter space is large and relatively unconstrained by current experiments, we choose instead to calculate exclusion limits on the coefficients for individual EFT operators for three different target elements: germanium (SuperCDMS Soudan and CDMS\,II), silicon (CDMS\,II), and xenon (LUX). This paper presents the first EFT experimental result that includes all three target elements that will be used in the G2 experiments.
We use the optimum interval method to calculate 90\% upper confidence limits on the numerical coefficients of EFT operators. The optimum interval method incorporates information about the candidate event energies and energy-dependent detection efficiencies, which can yield stronger exclusion limits in the presence of unknown backgrounds than likelihood methods that consider only a single energy bin in the presence of backgrounds. This is particularly important here because of the spectral differences that can arise from different EFT interactions. We consider a single operator at a time and present the exclusion limit on the square of the EFT coefficient, which is proportional to the total interaction cross section. We compare the effects of two halo models on the limits. The first uses standard halo assumptions as in \cite{Lewin199687}, with a WIMP mass density $\rho_0$ = 0.3 GeV/$c^2$/cm$^3$, most probable WIMP velocity of 220\,km/s, mean circular velocity of the Earth with respect to the galactic center of 232\,km/s, galactic escape velocity of 544\,km/s, and a velocity distribution that correctly takes into account the effect of the Earth's velocity on the escape-velocity cutoff \cite{arrenberg}. The second halo model uses the functional form of Eq.~\ref{eqn:alt_vdist} with $p=2.7$ and $v_0/v_{esc} = 0.6875$, determined by fits to the Eris simulation of a Milky-Way-like galaxy \cite{Eris_DMdistribution}, and other halo parameters as above.
Figure\,\ref{fig:O3_O8_limits} shows the upper limits for two example operators, isoscalar operators ${\cal O}_3$ (left) and ${\cal O}_8$ (right), as a function of WIMP mass. Limits on all operators for a small range of masses can be found in Table \ref{limits_table}. Limits on all operators for a small range of masses can be found in Table \ref{limits_table}. Solid lines correspond to the Maxwellian halo, whereas dashed lines show the limit calculated assuming the alternate velocity distribution function discussed above. The SuperCDMS Soudan, CDMS\,II Ge (reanalysis), and CDMS\,II Si limits use the candidate events, thresholds, and detection efficiencies discussed in \cite{R133_LT}, \cite{CDMS-II_reanalysis}, and \cite{c34_Si} respectively, while the estimated LUX limit assumes zero observed events and functional form for the detection efficiency that follows a hyperbolic tangent versus energy centered at 2.5\,keV$_{\mbox{nr}}$ but with a step function cutoff that goes to zero below 3\,keV$_{\mbox{nr}}$.
\begin{table*}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c@{\hskip 12pt} c@{\hskip 15pt} c@{\hskip 15pt} c}
\hline\hline
Operator coefficient & SuperCDMS Soudan & CDMS\,II Ge & CDMS\,II Si\\ \hline
$(c^0_{1})^2 * m_{weak}^4$ & $8.98 \times 10^{-5}$ (---) & $2.00 \times 10^{-3}$ ($8.42 \times 10^{-6}$) & $3.06 \times 10^{-3}$ ($7.73 \times 10^{-4}$) \\
$(c^0_{3})^2 * m_{weak}^4$& $3.14 \times 10^{4}$ (---) & $2.24 \times 10^{5}$ ($ 2.66 \times 10^{1}$) & $8.59 \times 10^{5}$ ($1.37 \times 10^{4}$) \\
$(c^0_{4})^2 * m_{weak}^4$& $8.77 \times 10^{1}$ (---) & $2.05 \times 10^{3}$ ($1.10 \times 10^{1}$) & $3.94 \times 10^{3}$ ($1.02 \times 10^{3}$) \\
$(c^0_{5})^2 * m_{weak}^4$ & $6.34 \times 10^{5}$ (---) & $9.18 \times 10^{6}$ ($4.04 \times 10^{3}$) & $2.67 \times 10^{7}$ ($1.55 \times 10^{6}$) \\
$(c^0_{6})^2 * m_{weak}^4$ & $4.54 \times 10^{8}$ (---) & $3.30 \times 10^{9}$ ($4.50 \times 10^{5}$) & $2.44 \times 10^{10}$ ($3.70 \times 10^{8}$) \\
$(c^0_{7})^2 * m_{weak}^4$ & $8.44 \times 10^{7}$ (---) & $2.51 \times 10^{9}$ ($1.12 \times 10^{7}$) & $3.19 \times 10^{9}$ ($929 \times 10^{8}$) \\
$(c^0_{8})^2 * m_{weak}^4$ & $4.30 \times 10^{2}$ (---) & $1.16 \times 10^{4}$ ($2.67 \times 10^{1}$) & $1.70 \times 10^{4}$ ($3.49 \times 10^{3}$) \\
$(c^0_{9})^2 * m_{weak}^4$ & $1.95 \times 10^{5}$ (---) & $2.48 \times 10^{6}$ ($3.87 \times 10^{3}$) & $9.17 \times 10^{6}$ ($7.34 \times 10^{5}$) \\
$(c^0_{10})^2 * m_{weak}^4$ & $9.22 \times 10^{4}$ (---) & $1.11 \times 10^{6}$ ($9.08 \times 10^{2}$) & $4.34 \times 10^{6}$ ($2.86 \times 10^{5}$) \\
$(c^0_{11})^2 * m_{weak}^4$ & $5.13 \times 10^{-1}$ (---) & $6.15 \times 10^{0}$ ($5.46 \times 10^{-3}$) & $1.86 \times 10^{1}$ ($1.34 \times 10^{0}$) \\
$(c^0_{12})^2 * m_{weak}^4$ & $1.03 \times 10^{2}$ (---) & $1.21 \times 10^{3}$ ($8.70 \times 10^{-1}$) & $2.45 \times 10^{3}$ ($1.69 \times 10^{2}$) \\
$(c^0_{13})^2 * m_{weak}^4$ & $4.28 \times 10^{8}$ (---) & $3.06 \times 10^{9}$ ($3.56 \times 10^{5}$) & $2.50 \times 10^{13}$ ($1.36 \times 10^{12}$) \\
$(c^0_{14})^2 * m_{weak}^4$ & $5.00 \times 10^{11}$ (---) & $8.20 \times 10^{12}$ ($8.46 \times 10^{9}$) & $2.64 \times 10^{13}$ ($1.72 \times 10^{12}$) \\
$(c^0_{15})^2 * m_{weak}^4$ & $1.32 \times 10^{8}$ (---) & $5.65 \times 10^{8}$ ($1.10 \times 10^{4}$) & $4.44 \times 10^{9}$ ($1.48 \times 10^{7}$) \\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{SuperCDMS and CDMS\,II 90\% confidence level upper limits on the square of the dimensionless EFT coefficient for pure isoscalar interaction for a 10 GeV/\textit{c}$^2$~(300 GeV/\textit{c}$^2$) WIMP for all isoscalar EFT operators. The upper limits vary in accordance with the relative strength of the interaction in silicon and germanium.}
\label{limits_table}
\end{table*}
Because of the different nuclear responses for the three target elements considered, the relative strength of the limits varies from operator to operator. In particular, $\mathcal O_8$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:O3_O8_limits}, right) includes contributions from the $\Delta$ response, which is greater in germanium than in silicon or xenon. This contribution strengthens the SuperCDMS Soudan constraint relative to LUX and CDMS\,II Si. In addition, the shape of the curve for a single target element changes from operator to operator. For example, $\mathcal O_3$ depends on the square of the momentum transfer, naturally suppressing the event rate at low energies. As a result, the limits at low WIMP mass for $\mathcal O_3$ are weaker than for other operators.
The difference between the two WIMP velocity distributions becomes apparent when the only events expected above the detection thresholds are due to WIMPs in the high-velocity tails. Since both CDMS and LUX have thresholds of a few keV, this disparity appears only at the lowest WIMP masses. The difference is also more pronounced for LUX, since its target nucleus, xenon, is heavier than silicon or germanium. A dark matter particle must have a higher velocity to deposit a given recoil energy in xenon than in germanium or silicon; higher-energy recoils become comparatively rarer. For the SuperCDMS Soudan result, the difference in velocity distributions leads to a factor of two difference in the limit around 4\,GeV/\textit{c}$^2$, whereas for LUX, the difference in velocity distribution leads to a factor of two difference around 7\,GeV/\textit{c}$^2$.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=250 pt]{polar_EFT_limits_c1_isospin_6GeV_superHighRes_c34Si.pdf}
\caption{Polar limits on $\mathcal O_1$ isospin for SuperCDMS Soudan (blue) \cite{R133_LT}, LUX \cite{PhysRevLett.112.091303} (black), and CDMS II Si (red) \cite{c34_Si} at a WIMP mass of 6\,GeV/\textit{c}$^2$. }
\label{fig:O1_isospin}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Since the EFT explicitly includes isospin dependence, we can also use the optimum interval method to set polar limits on isospin. For a given WIMP mass and a given angle between the isoscalar and isovector components of an operator, we set a 90\% upper confidence limit on the isoscalar-isovector radius. Varying the polar angle produces exclusion ellipses in the isoscalar-isovector plane, as in Fig.~\ref{fig:O1_isospin}, which shows limits for operator $\mathcal O_1$ and a 6\,GeV/\textit{c}$^2$~WIMP. The major axis of each ellipse corresponds to the value of $c_1^0/c_1^1$ that yields maximum suppression of the scattering rate. Note that although the exposures for CDMS and SuperCDMS are significantly lower than for LUX, there are regions of parameter space allowed by LUX but excluded by SuperCDMS and CDMS at 90\% confidence. This example demonstrates that a combination of experiments using several target nuclei can constrain the EFT parameter space better than any single experiment.
\section{Effect of EFT energy dependence on standard limits}
Because of the additional momentum dependence of several of the EFT operators, the differential event rate for an arbitrary dark matter interaction could be very different than for the standard calculation. Consequently, it is possible that a limit-setting algorithm that expects the (approximately) exponential event rate of the standard spin-independent interaction could misinterpret a potential signal from a more general EFT interaction as background.
To demonstrate the possible bias that could arise from assuming the standard spin-independent event rate when setting limits, we perform simulated experiments assuming that the dark matter scattering is purely due to a single isoscalar EFT operator. Figure \ref{fig:O3_event_samples} shows the co-added results of 100 simulated experiments sampled from the energy spectrum of isoscalar $\mathcal O_3$ scattering in germanium for two different dark matter masses, assuming an energy-independent (or ``flat") detection efficiency. The operator coefficients were set to give each simulated experiment an expectation value of 10 events. This expectation was then convolved with a Poisson distribution to select the number of events for a given simulated experiment. %
\begin{figure*}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[height=175 pt]{pseudoexp_limits_O3_10GeV.pdf}
\includegraphics[height=175 pt]{pseudoexp_limits_O3_300GeV.pdf}
\caption{Distribution of 90\% confidence level upper limits calculated using the optimum interval method for the simulated experiments discussed in Sec.~3 and shown in Fig.~3, sampled from the event rate for isoscalar $\mathcal O_3$. Shaded blue bands show the 68\% and 95\% confidence level uncertainty on the distribution. The zero-background Poisson limit is shown in magenta. }
\label{fig:O3_limits}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
Unlike the standard spin-independent event rate, the event rate for $\mathcal O_3$ depends on the square of the momentum transfer, so the event rate is suppressed at low recoil energies. This effect is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:O3_event_samples}, where the black, cyan, and magenta curves show the standard spin-independent scattering rate for a range of WIMP masses and the blue histogram corresponds to the simulated spectrum expected from ${\cal O}_3$ interactions. For the case of a 10~GeV/\textit{c}$^2$~WIMP mass, the distribution of events is more closely matched by the spin-independent rate for a higher-mass WIMP. For the 300~GeV/\textit{c}$^2$~case, no spin-independent rate calculation matches the observed spectrum of events; if experimenters only consider the spin-independent WIMP rate, they may erroneously conclude that they have observed an unexpected background or incorrectly measured their detection efficiency as a function of energy.
We calculate the 90\% confidence level upper limit on the spin-independent cross section for each simulated experiment using the optimum interval method \cite{2007arXiv0709.2701Y, upper} and the standard Maxwellian halo model with halo parameters as above with no background subtraction. Each simulated experiment was assumed to have an exposure of 1000 kg days and a flat efficiency of 60\% between 1 and 100\,keV$_{\mbox{nr}}$. The distribution of limits is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:O3_limits}. Figure~\ref{fig:O3_limits} also shows the resulting median limit from simulated experiments sampled from the spin-independent distribution in black.
The distribution of limits on the spin-independent cross section for the simulated experiments sampled from the $\mathcal O_3$ energy spectrum deviates from the zero-background limit shown in magenta as well as from the mean limit derived from similar simulated experiments sampling from the spin-independent rate. As expected, the simulated-experiment limits are weaker than the zero-background limits due to the presence of candidate events. However, because the energy distribution of the candidate events sampled from $\mathcal O_3$ is different than the expected spin-independent rate, the limits also deviate from the expected shape for the true spin-independent experiment.
In the 10\,GeV/\textit{c}$^2$~case, we expect the limit to be weakest around a mass of 10\,GeV/\textit{c}$^2$, where the rate expected by the limit algorithm matches the observed event rate. However, because the observed events due to $\mathcal O_3$ scattering are skewed towards higher recoil energies, the limit tends to be weaker at larger WIMP masses where the tail of the spin-independent event rate extends to higher recoil energies. For the 300\,GeV/\textit{c}$^2$~case, the distribution of limits agrees with the Poisson zero-background limit at low masses; the observed events occur at recoil energies that cannot be produced by a low-mass WIMP. At higher masses, the distribution of limits is still close to the zero-background limit because the shape of the observed spectrum is very different from the expected spin-independent WIMP rate.
The difference in the limits between the spin-independent and EFT cases demonstrates the importance of correctly modeling the expected WIMP signal. Algorithms that assume the standard spin-independent rate when calculating limits will interpret events from EFT interactions with different spectral shapes as background, and thus, this assumption could lead to a bias in the exclusion limits reported by experiments, especially in the case where events are observed.
\section{Interference in the EFT parameter space}
\subsection{General interference framework}
The EFT framework also provides a more general description of interference among operators such as the ``xenophobic" isospin violation case discussed in the literature \cite{2013PhRvD..88a5021F}. It not only allows for interference between the isospin components of individual operators, but also among different operators. The generalized interference can be written as a matrix equation in the large EFT parameter space, but because operators interfere in pairs, and only certain pairs interfere, this large matrix can be decomposed into block-diagonal form. We consider the $2 \times 2$ case of isospin interference and the $4 \times 4$ case of isospin and operator-operator interference.
The generalized amplitude for the $4 \times 4$ case can be written as the product of the vector of operator coefficients $c_i^{\tau}$ with the amplitude matrix, where superscript 0 and 1 indicate isoscalar and isovector, respectively, and the subscripts indicate the operator being considered:
\begin{equation}
\left[ \begin{array}{cccc}
c^0_i & c^1_i & c^0_j & c^1_j\\
\end{array} \right ]
\left[ \begin{array}{cccc}
A^{00}_{ii} & A^{01}_{ii} & A^{00}_{ij} & A^{01}_{ij}\\
A^{10}_{ii} & A^{11}_{ii} & A^{10}_{ij} & A^{11}_{ij}\\
A^{00}_{ji} & A^{01}_{ji} & A^{00}_{jj} & A^{01}_{jj}\\
A^{10}_{ji} & A^{11}_{ji} & A^{10}_{jj} & A^{11}_{jj}
\end{array} \right]
\left [ \begin{array}{c}
c^0_i \\
c^1_i\\
c^0_j\\
c^1_j
\end{array}\right].
\label{eqn:matrix}
\end{equation}
The amplitudes $A^{\tau \tau'}_{ij}$ are the product of the WIMP and nuclear response functions for the interaction specified by $c^{\tau}_i$ and $c_j^{\tau'}$ and depend on properties such as target element, WIMP mass, WIMP spin, WIMP velocity, and nuclear recoil energy. We evaluate the $A^{\tau \tau'}_{ij}$ without integrating over the dark matter velocity distribution to avoid introducing more variables. Amplitudes are summed over the isotopes for a given element according to their natural abundances.
Finding the eigenvectors of this matrix will give the ``principal components" of the interaction space. We expect that three of the four eigenvalues should be small, since the matrix for a single isotope is an outer product and therefore should have a single nonzero eigenvalue. The vector with the largest eigenvalue corresponds to the maximal amplitude for scattering in the interference space under consideration, while the three small eigenvalues correspond to local extrema in the scattering amplitude which tend to suppress the event rate. To be maximally sensitive to the parameter space for a given interference case, we would like to choose target elements whose constructive interference eigenvectors span the space of interactions.
As an example, we first consider isospin interference for a single operator in an already well-understood case. Figure \ref{fig:O4_isospin} shows the constructive isospin interference eigenvectors for scattering via operator $\mathcal O_4$ (the standard spin-dependent operator) for several elemental targets, evaluated at a WIMP mass of 100\,GeV/\textit{c}$^2$~and nuclear recoil energy of 100 keV. The vectors are plotted in the space of the isoscalar coefficient versus the isovector coefficient. The proton-neutron space can be recovered from this basis via a 45-degree rotation. The amplitude in a given direction indicates the target's response to that operator and illustrates the sensitivity of each material to the corresponding operator. In addition, if we were to plot polar limits as in Fig.~\ref{fig:O1_isospin} for $\mathcal O_4$, we would see that the direction of the constructive interference vector corresponds to the minor axis of the ellipse.
In the two-dimensional case, the destructive interference vector is perpendicular to the constructive vector and corresponds to the major axis of the ellipse in a polar limit plot.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{constructive_interference_c4.pdf}
\caption{Constructive interference eigenvectors for 2D $\mathcal O_4$ isospin interference. Proton-dominated interactions occur along the $x=y$ diagonal, while neutron-dominated interactions occur along the $x=-y$ diagonal.}
\label{fig:O4_isospin}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Since $\mathcal O_4$ is the standard spin-dependent operator, we see that the constructive interference eigenvectors fall into two categories based on the nucleon content of the target nucleus. The elements with unpaired protons (fluorine, sodium, and iodine) have maximal scattering rates when the interaction is proton-dominated, corresponding to $c^0 = c^1$. On the other hand, the elements with unpaired neutrons (germinum, xenon, and silicon) have maximal scattering rates when the interaction is neutron-dominated, corresponding to $c^0 = -c^1$. Consequently, to span this space and therefore be maximally sensitive to all possible spin-dependent interactions, we should choose one element each from the neutron- and proton-dominated sets.
We can apply this same procedure to the more general 4D case to demonstrate the complementarity of the different target elements. As an example, Figure \ref{fig:O8_O9_constructive} shows all 2D projections of the four-dimensional eigenvectors in the interference space for $\mathcal O_{8}$ and $\mathcal O_{9}$, evaluated for a WIMP mass of 100\,GeV/\textit{c}$^2$~and nuclear recoil energy of 30 keV. The eigenvectors for scattering in silicon, germanium, xenon, iodine, and sodium indicate that they are most sensitive to various combinations of isoscalar and isovector $\mathcal O_{8}$ scattering. However, the vector for fluorine shows that it is sensitive to both $\mathcal O_{8}$ and $\mathcal O_{9}$. This variation across targets allows different experiments to probe different regions of the EFT parameter space, increasing the overall sensitivity of the direct detection method.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{constructive_eigenvectors_4D_grid_c8_c9_30keVErecoil_100GeVWIMP.pdf}
\caption{Constructive interference eigenvectors for 4D $\mathcal O_{8} / \mathcal O_{9}$ interference. }
\label{fig:O8_O9_constructive}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
To demonstrate the effect of this four-dimensional interference on the differential event rate, we evaluate the event rate using the operator coefficients from two four-dimensional interference eigenvectors from Fig.~\ref{fig:O8_O9_constructive} that point in different directions in the parameter space. Figure \ref{fig:interference_evt_rate} shows the differential event rate for several targets evaluated at the constructive interference vectors for fluorine (top) and germanium (bottom) for $\mathcal O_{8}/\mathcal O_{9}$ interference. Since the fluorine eigenvector is not parallel to the germanium eigenvector, the germanium event rate evaluated at the fluorine vector is suppressed and vice versa. In addition, since the xenon and germanium eigenvectors are nearly parallel in this case, the two event rates are comparable at the 30\,keV nuclear recoil energy at which the eigenvectors are evaluated.
\begin{figure}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.92\columnwidth]{4D_interference_rate_plot_c8_c9_F_eigvec_30keV.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.92\columnwidth]{4D_interference_rate_plot_c8_c9_Ge_eigvec_30keV.pdf}
\caption{Differential event rate evaluated at the $\mathcal O_{8}/\mathcal O_{9}$ constructive interference vector from Fig.~\ref{fig:O8_O9_constructive} for fluorine (top) and germanium (bottom).}
\label{fig:interference_evt_rate}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
This example shows the large variation in signal strength that can occur for different combinations of operators. In this case, varying the coefficients from the germanium eigenvector to the fluorine eigenvector led to an order-of-magnitude suppression of the rate in germanium, silicon, and xenon, and a change in the energy spectrum for fluorine. Similar suppression can also occur for the other interference terms present in the effective field theory.
\subsection{Comparison of target elements for G2 direct detection experiments}
Three target elements will be used in the upcoming G2 experiments: germanium, silicon, and xenon. Under the standard spin-independent scattering framework, where the rate scales as $\sim$$A^2$, experiments that use xenon as a target element have the greatest sensitivity for WIMP masses above a few~GeV/\textit{c}$^2$. However, in order to probe operators dependent on other nuclear properties, the complementarity of the three G2 target elements merits further investigation.
\begin{figure*}[btp!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{G2_isoscalar_rate_plot.pdf}
\caption{Relative event rates for LZ (black), SuperCDMS SNOLAB Ge iZIP (blue), and SuperCDMS SNOLAB Si (red), normalized to 1 observed event in SuperCDMS Ge (3\,GeV/\textit{c}$^2$) or LZ (10, 300\,GeV/\textit{c}$^2$). From left to right are shown the rates for a 3, 10, and 300\,GeV/\textit{c}$^2$~WIMP, assuming isoscalar interactions and the standard Maxwellian halo model. The 3\,GeV/\textit{c}$^2$~case also shows the rates from SuperCDMS SNOLAB Ge high-voltage (light blue), which has similar parameters to SuperCDMS Si high-voltage, but a target mass of 6 kg. The top row shows cumulative event rates, while the bottom row shows events per time per target mass. True interaction strengths may differ from this calculation since the interaction may proceed via a linear combination of operators.}
\label{fig:G2_evt_rate}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
When considering the possible observations the G2 experiments may make, the difference in experimental parameters such as detector mass and trigger threshold must also be taken into account. The proposed LZ detector will have a 5600\,kg fiducial mass of xenon, while SuperCDMS will be operating 57\,kg of germanium and silicon. Figure \ref{fig:G2_evt_rate} shows the relative event rates for the three G2 target elements assuming scattering proceeds via a single isoscalar EFT operator. This figure only shows the relative WIMP rates for the G2 experiments; background rates are not taken into consideration. Note that the true interaction, which may come from a linear combination of operators, could enhance or suppress these rates.
We normalize the event rate so that SuperCDMS Ge observes one event for a given operator in the 3\,GeV/\textit{c}$^2$~case and LZ observes one event for a given operator in the 10 and 300\,GeV/\textit{c}$^2$~cases. The LZ rate (black) assumes a 5600\,kg fiducial mass, an exposure of 1000\,days, a 100\% trigger efficiency between 1 and 30 keV$_{\mbox{nr}}$, and a flat 50\% nuclear-recoil selection efficiency. The SuperCDMS Ge rate (blue) assumes 50\,kg of germanium operating in standard iZIP mode \cite{2013iZIPdiscrimination}, an exposure of 1000 days, and a 100\% trigger efficiency between 0.5 and 100\,keV$_{\mbox{nr}}$, and a flat 60\% combined fiducial-volume and nuclear-recoil selection efficiency. The SuperCDMS Si rate (red) assumes 1\,kg of silicon and an exposure of 1000\,days. Since the silicon detectors will be operated in high-voltage mode \cite{cdmslitePRL}, the trigger threshold will be much lower, so we assume a 60\% combined trigger and fiducial-volume efficiency up to 50\,keV$_{\mbox{nr}}$, with a trigger threshold of 70\,eV. We also plot the event rate for SuperCDMS Ge high-voltage (light blue) for the 3\,GeV/\textit{c}$^2$~WIMP case. For the SuperCDMS Ge high-voltage detectors, we assume a target mass of 6\,kg, trigger threshold of 80\,eV, and all other parameters identical to SuperCDMS Si high-voltage.
\begin{figure*}[htb!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{all_eigenvector_interference_plots_Ge.pdf}
\caption{Event rate suppression relative to $\mathcal O_1$ scattering in LZ (black), SuperCDMS SNOLAB Ge iZIP (blue), and SuperCDMS SNOLAB Si (red) for interference in germanium, with interference ranging from constructive (left) to maximally destructive (right), as determined by the magnitude of the corresponding eigenvalue. The rate for SuperCDMS SNOLAB Ge high-voltage (light blue) is shown for the 3\,GeV/\textit{c}$^2$~case where LZ sees no events above threshold. The seven operator-operator interference cases are shown, as well as pure isoscalar $\mathcal O_1$, which is used as a reference point.}
\label{fig:G2_interference}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
Though silicon, germanium, and xenon have similar nuclear properties (e.g.,~all three have isotopes with unpaired neutrons), the variation in the event rate across operators and target elements is large. For the 3\,GeV/\textit{c}$^2$~case, the strength of the silicon signal relative to the germanium signal varies by three orders of magnitude, depending on the operator assumed. The signal in LZ is very close to zero for such a low-mass dark matter particle because the velocity required for a 3\,GeV/\textit{c}$^2$~WIMP to deposit energy above the assumed 1 keV threshold is greater than the galactic escape velocity. However, for WIMP masses above a few GeV/\textit{c}$^2$, LZ's exposure, which is approximately 100 times larger, leads to event rates that are enhanced by approximately the same factor. In addition, the relative rate for SuperCDMS Si HV becomes smaller at higher masses, since, by design, it is mainly sensitive to the small energy depositions produced by low-mass WIMPs.
To examine the effects of the different possible interactions for experiments with similar fiducial masses, we also plot the event rate per time per target mass (Fig.~\ref{fig:G2_evt_rate}, bottom). Here, we see that both Ge and Si SuperCDMS detectors operating in high-voltage mode are more sensitive to low-mass WIMPs because of their lower thresholds. In particular, the germanium high-voltage rate per kg day (light blue) is nearly an order of magnitude larger than the standard germanium iZIP rate (blue) for certain operators. For higher masses, the rates for xenon (black) and germanium are comparable within an order of magnitude, but the nuclear properties of silicon (red) make it less sensitive to these interactions. In addition, SuperCDMS Ge sees a modest enhancement to the overall event rate at high WIMP masses where the distribution of events extends beyond the assumed 30 keV$_{\mbox{nr}}$ upper limit for LZ. This effect is most prominent for operators such as $\mathcal O_3$ and $\mathcal O_{15}$, which have a $q^2$ dependence that suppresses the rate at low energies, though it is not enough to overcome the effects of LZ's larger target mass in the total number of events.
The variation in signal strength across target elements in this effective field theory solidifies the case for using multiple targets to detect dark matter. Previous work has shown that complementary target elements can break the degeneracy between the standard spin-dependent and spin-independent operators \cite{2007PhRvL..99o1301B,2013JCAP...07..028C}, and others have shown that this concept can also be applied to the larger EFT parameter space \cite{2014JCAP...09..045C}. Such considerations are particularly important when incorporating the effect of interference on the event rate. Because of the presence of both isospin interference and operator-operator interference, there are many combinations of interactions that may greatly suppress the event rate for one particular element. Even if a single experiment sees no signal due to interference effects, a complementary target with different nuclear properties may still observe events.
To demonstrate the effect of interference on the relative event rate, we determine regions of extremal interference in germanium using the principal component analysis method detailed above. The event rate suppression relative to $\mathcal O_1$ for the three G2 experiments for germanium constructive interference and destructive interference are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:G2_interference} for WIMPs with masses of 3, 10, or 300~GeV/\textit{c}$^2$, assuming the standard Maxwellian halo model and the same experimental parameters as in Fig.~\ref{fig:G2_evt_rate}. Again, this figure does not consider the relative background rates for the three experiments. We consider all seven possible cases of four-dimensional operator-operator interference. The sum of the squares of the EFT coefficients is equal for all cases presented; however, because of the relative strength of various operators and the presence of interference, the rate can be suppressed by many orders of magnitude. We characterize the interference using the magnitude of the eigenvalue: the largest eigenvalue corresponds to the maximally-enhanced event rate, while small eigenvalues correspond to varying levels of destructive interference.
The relative event rates in Fig.~\ref{fig:G2_interference} indicate that constructive interference can only modestly enhance the event rate. In the case of $\mathcal O_1 /\mathcal O_3$ interference, the maximal rate is only $\sim1.5$\% larger than the pure $\mathcal O_1$ rate. For operators such as $\mathcal O_4$ that depend on the spin of a nucleon in the nucleus, the enhancement relative to the respective isoscalar operator tends to be slightly larger. In particular, the constructive interference eigenvector for $\mathcal O_4 /\mathcal O_5$ and $\mathcal O_4 /\mathcal O_6$ interference corresponds to WIMP-neutron spin-dependent scattering and is approximately a factor of 2 larger than the isoscalar $\mathcal O_4$ rate.
Since germanium, silicon, and xenon have similar properties, the event rate in SuperCDMS and LZ is suppressed equally for most interference cases. However, there are a few notable exceptions. From Fig.~\ref{fig:G2_evt_rate}, we see that for a 3\,GeV/\textit{c}$^2$~WIMP interacting via a pure isoscalar operator, the event rate in SuperCDMS Si high-voltage tends to be at least an order of magnitude smaller than the rate in SuperCDMS Ge. When interference is considered, the rate in silicon may become equal to or larger than that in germanium. As an example, the $\mathcal O_1 /\mathcal O_3$ right-most destructive interference case in Fig.~\ref{fig:G2_interference} corresponds to maximal $\mathcal O_1$ isospin violation in germanium ($f_n/f_p \sim -0.8$) as discussed in \cite{2013PhRvD..88a5021F}. For this choice of coefficients, the rate in xenon and germanium is suppressed relative to pure isoscalar $\mathcal O_1$ scattering in that target by a factor of $\sim$$500$ and $\sim$$2000$, respectively, while the rate in silicon is suppressed by a factor of $\sim$$100$. A second instance of this suppression is seen for $\mathcal O_4/\mathcal O_6$ interference at 3\,GeV/\textit{c}$^2$~in the second plot from the left: the rate in both silicon and germanium is suppressed, but the suppression in germanium is much larger, leading to a greater number of events observed in silicon.
In addition, there exist several cases for higher WIMP masses where the rate in LZ is smaller than that in SuperCDMS Ge, despite LZ's 100$\times$ larger exposure. Maximal destructive interference (right-most plot) for $\mathcal O_4/\mathcal O_5$ and $\mathcal O_8/\mathcal O_9$ suppresses the event rate in xenon enough that SuperCDMS will see orders of magnitude more events than LZ, even for larger WIMP masses where LZ typically has an advantage. For additional interference cases the rate in LZ is less than an order of magnitude larger than that in SuperCDMS Ge. Although the cases presented here are arguably fine-tuned, the existence of regions of parameter space where interference suppresses the rate in one experiment by orders of magnitude relative to another further supports the need for multiple experiments which use a variety of target elements.
|
\section{Introduction}
\noindent Physicists conjectured some time ago that that to each quasihomogeneous (weighted homogeneous) polynomial $W$ with an isolated singularity at the origin, and to each admissible group of symmetries $G$ of $W$, there should exist two different physical ``theories," (called the Landau-Ginzburg $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$ and $\ensuremath \mathcal{B}$ models, respectively) consisting of graded Frobenius algebras (algebras with a nondegenerate pairing that is compatible with the multiplication). The $\ensuremath \mathcal{B}$-model theories have been constructed \cite{IV, Ka1, Ka2, Ka3, Kra09} and correspond to an ``orbifolded Milnor ring." The $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$-model theories have also been constructed \cite{FJR07} and are a special case of what is often called ``FJRW theory." We will not address these in this paper, but in many cases, these theories can be extended to whole families of Frobenius algebras, called \emph{Frobenius manifolds}.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent For a large class of these polynomials (called \emph{invertible}) Berglund-H\"ubsch \cite{BH}, Henningson \cite{Hen}, and Krawitz \cite{Kra09} described the construction of a dual (or transpose) polynomial $W^T$ and a dual group $G^T$. The Landau-Ginzburg mirror symmetry conjecture states that the $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$-model of a pair $W,G$ should be isomorphic to the $\ensuremath \mathcal{B}$-model of the dual pair $W^T,G^T$. This conjecture has been proved in many cases in papers such as \cite{Kra09} and \cite{FJJS11}, although the proof of the full conjecture remains open.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent It has been further conjectured that the Berglund-H\"ubsch-Henningson-Krawitz duality transform should extend to large classes of noninvertible polynomials and that Landau-Ginzburg mirror symmetry should also hold for these polynomials. In this paper we investigate some candidate mirror pairs of noninvertible polynomials and show that many obvious candidates for mirror duality cannot satisfy mirror symmetry.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent To approach this problem, we study the $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$ and $\ensuremath \mathcal{B}$ models as graded vector spaces and inspect how the symmetry groups act on these spaces. Insight into this problem will not only generate new results for Landau-Ginzburg mirror symmetry, but will also be interesting from a purely algebraic standpoint as a result about groups acting on graded algebras.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent One case of mirror symmetry that has been verified for all invertible polynomials is when the $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$-model is constructed from an invertible polynomial $W$ with its maximal group of symmetries and the $\ensuremath \mathcal{B}$-model is constructed from the corresponding transpose polynomial with the trivial group of symmetries. This is sometimes denoted $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W, G_{W}^{max}} \ensuremath \cong \ensuremath \mathcal{B}_{W^{T}, \{0\}}$. This intuition stemming from invertible polynomials motivated two conjectures about isomorphisms between $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$ and $\ensuremath \mathcal{B}$ models built from noninvertible polynomials. We often refer to polynomials for which the $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$ and $\ensuremath \mathcal{B}$ models exist as \emph{admissible}.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Conjecture 1}. For any admissible (not necessarily invertible) polynomial $W$ in $n$ variables, there exists a corresponding admissible polynomial $W^{T}$ in $n$ variables satisfying $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W,G_{W}^{max}} \ensuremath \cong \ensuremath \mathcal{B}_{W^{T}, \{0\}}$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent Note that this conjecture includes the collection of noninvertible polynomials, which are allowed to have more monomials than variables. In Section 3.1 we show that this conjecture is false. By relaxing the restriction on the number of variables that $W^{T}$ is allowed to have, we obtain a second conjecture.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Conjecture 2}. For any admissible $W$, there is a corresponding admissible $W^{T}$ satisfying $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W,G_{W}^{max}} \ensuremath \cong \ensuremath \mathcal{B}_{W^{T}, \{0\}}$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent In Section 3.2 we look at an example of a particular noninvertible polynomial, and expand our search space for finding a suitable $W^{T}$. We develop some formulas and show that they rule out the existence of $W^{T}$ in a few more cases that were not considered in Conjecture 1. Thereby we also establish that Conjecture 2 is unlikely to be true in general.
\section{Preliminaries}
Here we will introduce some of the concepts needed to explain the theory of this paper.
\subsection{Admissible Polynomials}
\noindent \textbf{Definition}. For a polynomial $W \in \ensuremath \mathbb{C}[x_{1},\dots,x_{n}]$, we say that $W$ is \textit{nondegenerate} if it has an isolated critical point at the origin.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Definition}. Let $W \in \ensuremath \mathbb{C}[x_{1},\dots,x_{n}]$. We say that $W$ is \textit{quasihomogeneous} if there exist positive rational numbers $q_{1},\dots,q_{n}$ such that for any $c \in \ensuremath \mathbb{C}$, $W(c^{q_{1}}x_{1},\dots,c^{q_{n}}x_{n}) = c W(x_{1},\dots,x_{n})$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent We often refer to the $q_{i}$ as the \textit{quasihomogeneous weights} of a polynomial $W$, or just simply the \textit{weights} of $W$, and we write the weights in vector form $J = (q_{1}, \dots, q_{n})$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Definition}. $W \in \ensuremath \mathbb{C}[x_{1},\dots,x_{n}]$ is \textit{admissible} if $W$ is both nondegenerate and quasihomogeneous, with the weights of $W$ being unique.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent We will use the following result about admissible polynomials later in the paper.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Proposition 2.1.6 of \cite{FJR07}}. If $W \in \ensuremath \mathbb{C}[x_{1},\dots,x_{n}]$ is admissible, and contains no monomials of the form $x_{i}x_{j}$ for $i \ne j$, then the $q_{i}$ are bounded above by $\frac{1}{2}$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent Because the construction of $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W,G}$ requires an admissible polynomial, we will only be concerned with admissible polynomials in this paper. In order for a polynomial to be admissible, it needs to have at least as many monomials as variables. Otherwise its quasihomogeneous weights cannot be uniquely determined. We now state the main subdivision of the admissible polynomials.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Definition}. Let $W$ be an admissible polynomial. We say that $W$ is \textit{invertible} if it has the same number of monomials as variables. If $W$ has more monomials than variables, then it is \textit{noninvertible}.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent Admissible polynomials with the same number of variables as monomials are called invertible since their associated exponent matrices (which we define in the next section) are square and invertible.
\subsection{Dual Polynomials}
\noindent We will now introduce the idea of the transpose operation for invertible polynomials.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Definition}. Let $W \in \ensuremath \mathbb{C}[x_{1},\dots, x_{n}]$. If we write $W = \sum_{i = 1}^{m} c_{i} \prod_{j = 1}^{n} x_{j}^{a_{ij}}$, then the associated \textit{exponent matrix} is defined to be $A = (a_{ij})$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent From this definition we notice that $n$ is the number of variables in $W$, and $m$ is the number of monomials in $W$. $A$ is an $m \times n$ matrix. Thus when $W$ is invertible, we have that $m = n$ which implies that $A$ is square. One can show, without much work, that this square matrix is invertible if the polynomial $W$ is quasihomogeneous with unique weights. When $W$ is noninvertible, $m > n$. $A$ then has more rows than columns.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent Observe that if a polynomial is invertible, then we may rescale all nonzero coefficients to 1. So there is effectively a one-to-one correspondence between exponent matrices of invertible polynomials and the polynomials themselves.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Definition}. Let $W$ be an invertible polynomial. If $A$ is the exponent matrix of $W$, then we define the \textit{transpose polynomial} to be the polynomial $W^{T}$ resulting from $A^{T}$. By the classification in \cite{KS}, $W^{T}$ is again a nondegenerate, invertible polynomial.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent We now have reached our fundamental problem. When a polynomial $W$ is noninvertible, its exponent matrix $A$ is no longer square. Taking $A^{T}$ yields a polynomial with fewer monomials than variables, which is not admissible. Therefore, we will require a different approach to define what the transpose polynomial should be for noninvertibles.
\subsection{Symmetry Groups and Their Duals}
\noindent \textbf{Definition}. Let $W$ be an admissible polynomial. We define the \textit{maximal Abelian symmetry group} of $W$ to be $G_{W}^{max} = \{(\zeta_{1}, \dots, \zeta_{n}) \in (\ensuremath \mathbb{C}^\times)^{n} \mid W(\zeta_{1}x_{1},\dots,\zeta_{n}x_{n}) = W(x_{1},\dots,x_{n}) \}$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent The proofs of Lemma 2.1.8 in \cite{FJR07} and Lemma 1 in \cite{ABS11} observe that $G_{W}^{max}$ is finite and that each coordinate of every group element is a root of unity. The group operation $\circ$ in $G_{W}^{max}$ is coordinate-wise multiplication. That is,
\begin{align*}
(e^{2\pi i \theta_{1}},\dots,e^{2\pi i \theta_{n}}) \circ (e^{2\pi i \phi_{1}},\dots,e^{2\pi i \phi_{n}}) = (e^{2\pi i (\theta_{1} + \phi_{1})},\dots,e^{2\pi i (\theta_{n} + \phi_{n})}).
\end{align*}
Equivalently, in additive notation we can write $(\theta_{1}, \dots, \theta_{n}) + (\phi_{1}, \dots, \phi_{n}) = (\theta_{1} + \phi_{1}, \dots, \theta_{n} + \phi_{n}) \mod \ensuremath \mathbb{Z}$. The map $(e^{2\pi i \theta_{1}},\dots,e^{2\pi i \theta_{n}}) \mapsto (\theta_{1}, \dots, \theta_{n}) \mod \ensuremath \mathbb{Z}$ gives a group isomorphism. Using additive notation, we will often write $G_{W}^{max} = \{ g \in (\ensuremath \mathbb{Q}/\ensuremath \mathbb{Z})^{n} \mid Ag \in \ensuremath \mathbb{Z}^{m} \}$, where $A$ is the $m \times n$ exponent matrix of $W$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Definition}. In this notation, $G_{W}^{max}$ is a subgroup of $(\ensuremath \mathbb{Q}/\ensuremath \mathbb{Z})^{n}$ with respect to coordinate-wise addition. For $g \in G_{W}^{max}$, we write $g = (g_{1}, \dots, g_{n})$ where each $g_{i}$ is a rational number in the interval [0,1). The $g_{i}$ are called the \textit{phases} of $g$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent The following definition of the transpose group is due to Krawitz and Henningson \cite{Kra09, Hen}.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Definition}. Let $W$ be an invertible polynomial, and let $A$ be its associated exponent matrix. The \textit{transpose group} of a subgroup $G \le G_{W}^{max}$ is the set $G^{T} = \{g \in G_{W^{T}}^{max} \mid g A h^{T} \in \ensuremath \mathbb{Z} \text{ for all } h \in G \}$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent Since this relies on knowing what $W^{T}$ is, this definition currently does not extend to noninvertible polynomials. The following is a list of common results for the transpose group.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Proposition 2 of \cite{ABS11}}. Let $W$ be an invertible polynomial with weights vector $J$, and let $G \le G_{W}^{max}$.
(1) $(G^{T})^{T} = G$,
(2) $\{0\}^{T} = G_{W^{T}}^{max}$ and $(G_{W}^{max})^{T} = \{0\}$,
(3) $\langle J \rangle^{T} = G_{W^{T}}^{max} \cap \text{SL}(n,\ensuremath \mathbb{C})$ where $n$ is the number of variables in $W$,
(4) if $G_{1} \le G_{2}$, then $G_{2}^{T} \le G_{1}^{T}$ and $G_{2} / G_{1} \ensuremath \cong G_{1}^{T} / G_{2}^{T}$.
\subsection{Some Notes on $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$ and $\ensuremath \mathcal{B}$ Models}
Landau-Ginzburg $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$ and $\ensuremath \mathcal{B}$ models are algebraic objects that are endowed with many levels of structure. In this paper, we will chiefly be concerned with their structure as graded vector spaces, although we will also occasionally consider their Frobenius algebra structure. For the benefit of the reader, we will give a formal definition of a Frobenius algebra.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Definition}. An \textit{algebra} is a vector space $A$ over a field of scalars $F$ (in our case it is $\ensuremath \mathbb{C}$), together with a multiplication $\cdot : A \times A \rightarrow A$ that satisfies for all $x,y,z \in A$ and $\alpha,\beta \in F$
$\bullet$ Right distributivity: $(x + y) \cdot z = x \cdot z + y \cdot z$,
$\bullet$ Left distributivity: $x \cdot (y + z) = x \cdot y + x \cdot z$,
$\bullet$ Compatability with scalars: $(\alpha x) \cdot (\beta y) = (\alpha\beta) (x \cdot y)$.
\noindent We further require the multiplication to be associative and commutative, and for $A$ to have a unity $e$ such that $e \cdot x = x$ for all $x \in A$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent We also define a pairing operation $\langle \cdot, \cdot \rangle: A \times A \rightarrow F$ that is
$\bullet$ Symmetric: $\langle x, y \rangle = \langle y, x \rangle$,
$\bullet$ Linear: $\langle \alpha x + \beta y, z \rangle = \alpha \langle x, z \rangle + \beta \langle y, z \rangle$,
$\bullet$ Nondegenerate: for every $x \in A$ there exists $y \in A$ such that $\langle x, y \rangle \ne 0$.
\noindent If the pairing further satisfies the \textit{Frobenius property}, meaning that $\langle x \cdot y, z \rangle = \langle x, y\cdot z \rangle$ for all $x,y,z \in A$, then we call $A$ a \textit{Frobenius algebra}.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent We will only develop the theory needed for the proofs in Section 3. We refer the interested reader to \cite{FJR07} for more details on the construction of the $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$-model. \cite{FJJS11}, \cite{Kra09}, and \cite{Tay13} also contain more information on constructing $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$ and $\ensuremath \mathcal{B}$ models, and related isomorphisms. We will start by discussing the $\ensuremath \mathcal{B}$-model.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Definition}. $\mathcal{Q}_{W} = \ensuremath \mathbb{C}[x_{1},\dots,x_{n}] / (\frac{\partial W}{\partial x_{1}}, \dots, \frac{\partial W}{\partial x_{n}})$ is called the \textit{Milnor ring} of $W$ (or \textit{local algebra} of $W$).
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Definition}. We define the \textit{unorbifolded} $\ensuremath \mathcal{B}$-model to be $\ensuremath \mathcal{B}_{W, \{0\}} = \mathcal{Q}_{W}$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent We will think of the unorbifolded $\ensuremath \mathcal{B}$-model as a graded vector space over $\ensuremath \mathbb{C}$. The degree of a monomial in $\mathcal{Q}_{W}$ is given by $\deg(x_{1}^{a_{1}}x_{2}^{a_{2}}\dots x_{n}^{a_{n}}) = 2\sum_{i}^{n} a_{i}q_{i}$. This defines a grading on the basis of $\mathcal{Q}_{W}$. We note the following:
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Theorem 2.6 of \cite{Tay13}}. If $W$ is admissible, then $\mathcal{Q}_{W}$ is finite dimensional.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent We will need two results about the unorbifolded $\ensuremath \mathcal{B}$-model. First, $\dim(\ensuremath \mathcal{B}_{W,\{0\} }) = \prod_{i = 1}^{n} \left( \frac{1}{q_{i}} - 1 \right)$. Second, the highest degree of its graded pieces is $2\sum_{i = 1}^{n} \left(1 - 2q_{i} \right)$. (See Section 2.1 of \cite{Kra09})
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent We will now develop some needed ideas about $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$-models.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Definition}. Let $W$ be an admissible polynomial with weights vector $J = (q_{1}, \dots, q_{n})$, and let $G \le G_{W}^{max}$. Then $G$ is \textit{admissible} if $J \in G$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent We note that since $W$ is quasihomogeneous, we have that $AJ^{T} = (1,\dots,1)^{T} \in \ensuremath \mathbb{Z}^{m}$. Thus $J \in G_{W}^{max}$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent The construction of the $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$-model requires that $G$ be an admissible group. From parts (3) and (4) of the proposition in Section 2.3, the corresponding condition for the $\ensuremath \mathcal{B}$-model is that $G^{T} \le G_{W^{T}}^{max} \cap \text{SL}(n,\ensuremath \mathbb{C})$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Definition}. Let $W \in \ensuremath \mathbb{C}[x_{1},\dots,x_{n}]$ be admissible, and let $g = (g_{1}, \dots, g_{n}) \in G_{W}^{max}$. The \textit{fixed locus} of the group element $g$ is the set fix$(g) = \{x_{i} \mid g_{i} = 0 \}$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent We now state how $G$ acts on the Milnor ring.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Definition}. Let $W$ be an admissible polynomial, and let $g \in G_{W}^{max}$. We define the map $g^{*}: \mathcal{Q}_{W} \rightarrow \mathcal{Q}_{W}$ by $g^{*}(m) = \det(g) m \circ g$. (Here we think of $g$ as being a diagonal map with multiplicative coordinates)
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Definition}. Let $W$ be an admissible polynomial, and let $G \le G_{W}^{max}$. Then the \emph{$G$-invariant subspace} of $\mathcal{Q}_{W}$ is defined to be $\mathcal{Q}_{W}^{G} = \{m \in \mathcal{Q}_{W} \mid g^{*}(m) = m \text{ for each } g \in G \}$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Definition}. Let $W$ be an admissible polynomial, and $G$ an admissible group. We define $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W,G} = \mathlarger{\bigoplus\limits_{g \in G}} \left( \mathcal{Q}_{W|_{\text{fix}(g)}} \right)^{G}$, where $( \cdot )^{G}$ denotes all the $G$-invariants. This is called the $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$-model \textit{state space}.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent We further note that the state space of the \textit{orbifolded} $\ensuremath \mathcal{B}$-model $\ensuremath \mathcal{B}_{W,G}$ is constructed similarly, but with the condition that $G \le G_{W}^{max} \cap \text{SL}(n,\ensuremath \mathbb{C})$. If we let $G = \{0\}$, then the formula yields the Milnor ring of $W$ as expected. The grading on the $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$-model, which will will define in a moment, differs from the $\ensuremath \mathcal{B}$-model grading; but as graded vector spaces, the $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$ and $\ensuremath \mathcal{B}$ models are very much related.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent We will not discuss many details of constructing the state space here. For further treatment of this topic, we refer the reader to Section 2.4 of \cite{Tay13}. A brief comment on notation: we represent basis elements of $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W,G}$ in the form $\lfloor m; g \rceil$, where $m$ is a monomial and $g$ is a group element.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Definition}. The $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$-model degree of a basis element $\lfloor m ; g \rceil$ is defined to be $\deg( \lfloor m ; g \rceil ) = \dim(\text{fix}(g)) + 2 \sum_{i=1}^{n}(g_{i} - q_{i})$, where $g = (g_{1},\dots,g_{n})$ with the $g_{i}$ chosen such that $0 \le g_{i} < 1$ and $J = (q_{1},\dots,q_{n})$ is the vector of quasihomogeneous weights of $W$. (See Section 2.1 of \cite{Kra09})
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent Finally, we state one important theorem for $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$-model isomorphisms.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Theorem in Section 7.1 of \cite{Tay13}} (Group-Weights). Let $W_{1}$ and $W_{2}$ be admissible polynomials which have the same weights. Suppose $G \le G_{W_{1}}^{max}$ and $G \le G_{W_{2}}^{max}$. Then $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W_{1},G} \ensuremath \cong \ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W_{2},G}$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent Note that one can give the $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$-model a product and pairing such that $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$ is a Frobenius algebra. The above is then an isomorphism of Frobenius algebras, not just graded vector spaces.
\subsection{Properties of Invertible Polynomials}
\noindent Our initial intuition tells us that some of the properties of invertible polynomials should extend to the noninvertible case. For example, we'd like to keep the results of the following proposition.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Proposition}. Let $W$ be an invertible polynomial. Then
(1) $W$ and $W^{T}$ have the same number of variables.
(2) $\left( G_{W}^{max} \right)^{T} = \{0\}$.
(3) $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W, G_{W}^{max}} \ensuremath \cong \ensuremath \mathcal{B}_{W^{T},\{0\}}$, as graded vector spaces.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Proof}. (1) follows from noticing that the exponent matrix of $W$ is square. Hence its transpose is also square and of the same size, so $W$ and $W^{T}$ have the same number of variables. (2) was stated previously in Section 2.3. (3) is a special case of the mirror symmetry conjecture that has been verified. Reference Theorem 4.1 in \cite{Kra09}. $\Box$
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent Part (3) of the proposition is especially important, and will be what we use to look for candidate transpose polynomials. In other words, given a noninvertible polynomial $W$, we would like to identify a candidate polynomial $W^{T}$ that satisfies $\mathlarger{\bigoplus\limits_{g \in G_{W}^{max}}} \left( \mathcal{Q}_{W|_{\text{fix}(g)}} \right)^{G_{W}^{max}} \ensuremath \cong \mathcal{Q}_{W^{T}}$. Though we would like this isomorphism to hold for all levels of algebraic structure, we will mainly investigate it on the level of graded vector spaces. For the benefit of the reader, we will restate the first conjecture.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Conjecture 1}. For any admissible polynomial $W$ in $n$ variables, there exists a corresponding admissible polynomial $W^{T}$ in $n$ variables satisfying $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W,G_{W}^{max}} \ensuremath \cong \ensuremath \mathcal{B}_{W^{T}, \{0\}}$.
\section{Results}
\subsection{Disproving Conjecture 1}
To disprove Conjecture 1, we prove a related nonexistence result. Note that this theorem is about any $W,\langle J \rangle$, whereas Conjecture 1 is about $W, G_{W}^{max}$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Theorem}. For any $n \in \ensuremath \mathbb{N}$, $n > 3$, let $W$ be an admissible but noninvertible polynomial in two variables with weight system $J = \left( \frac{1}{n},\;\frac{1}{n}\right)$, and let $G = \langle J \rangle$. Then there does not exist a corresponding $W^{T}$ in two variables satisfying $\mathcal{A}_{W,G} \ensuremath \cong \mathcal{B}_{W^{T}, \{0\} }$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent Before proving this theorem, we will demonstrate the hypothesis by exhibiting a few examples of such admissible polynomials for small values of $n$.
\begingroup
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.2}%
\begin{align*}
\begin{array}{|l|c|l|l|c|l|}
\hline
n & J & \text{Some Examples} & n & J & \text{Some Examples} \\ \hline
& & x^{4} + y^{4} + x^{3}y & & & x^{5} + y^{5} + x^{4}y \\
4 & \left( \frac{1}{4},\;\frac{1}{4}\right) & x^{4} + x^{2}y^{2} + xy^{3} & 5 & \left( \frac{1}{5},\;\frac{1}{5}\right) & x^{4}y + xy^{4} + x^{3}y^{2} + x^{2}y^{3}\\
& & x^{4} + xy^{3} & & & x^{5} + x^{2}y^{3} + xy^{4}\\ \hline
& & x^{6} + y^{6} + x^{5}y & & & x^{7} + y^{7} + x^{6}y \\
6 & \left( \frac{1}{6},\;\frac{1}{6}\right) & x^{5}y + x^{4}y^{2} + y^{6} & 7 & \left( \frac{1}{7},\;\frac{1}{7}\right) & x^{6}y + x^{5}y^{2} + y^{7}\\
& &x^{6} + x^{2}y^{4} + xy^{5} + y^{6} & & & x^{6}y + xy^{6}\\
\hline
\end{array}
\end{align*}
\endgroup
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Proof}. The idea of this proof is to choose an admissible polynomial with weight system $J = \left( \frac{1}{n},\;\frac{1}{n}\right)$, compute some formulas for its $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$-model using the group $\langle J \rangle$, and show that there is no corresponding isomorphic unorbifolded $\ensuremath \mathcal{B}$-model. Then, under the Group-Weights isomorphism for $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$-models, we will be able to generalize the result for any admissible polynomial with the same weights.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent To start, we need an admissible polynomial in two variables with weight system $J = \left( \frac{1}{n},\;\frac{1}{n}\right)$. Let $W' = x^{n} + y^{n} + x^{n-1}y$, and let $G = \langle J \rangle$. Certainly $W'$ has weight system $J$, and $G$ fixes $W'$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent For the unorbifolded $\ensuremath \mathcal{B}$-model, we know that $\dim(\ensuremath \mathcal{B}_{W^{T},\{0\} }) = \prod_{i = 1}^{n} \left( \frac{1}{q_{i}} - 1 \right)$ and that the highest degree of its graded pieces is given by $2\sum_{i = 1}^{n} \left(1 - 2q_{i} \right)$. In order to have $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W,G} \ensuremath \cong \ensuremath \mathcal{B}_{W^{T}, \{0\} }$, we need the degrees of the vector spaces and the degrees of each of the graded pieces to be equal. Therefore we now need corresponding formulas for the dimension of the $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$-model vector space and the degree of the highest degree piece of the $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$-model.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Lemma}. As a graded vector space, $\dim\left(\ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W',G} \right) = 2n - 2$, and the highest degree of any element is $\frac{2(2n-4)}{n}$. ($n \in \ensuremath \mathbb{N}$, $n \ge 3$).
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Proof of Lemma}. Recall that $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W',G} = \mathlarger{\bigoplus\limits_{g \in G}} \left( \mathcal{Q}_{W'|_{\text{fix}(g)}} \right)^{G}$. Notice that in our case $G = \langle \left( \frac{1}{n},\frac{1}{n} \right) \rangle = \{(0,0)$, $\left( \frac{1}{n}, \frac{1}{n} \right)$, $\dots$, $\left( \frac{n-1}{n}, \frac{n-1}{n} \right) \}$. Then $W'|_{\text{fix}(g)} = W'$ only for $g = (0,0)$. Otherwise $W'|_{\text{fix}(g)}$ is trivial.
\begin{description}
\item[Case 1] When $W'|_{\text{fix}(g)}$ is trivial, we get $n-1$ basis elements of the form $\lfloor 1; g \rceil$.
\item[Case 2] $W'|_{\text{fix}(g)} = W'$. Then $g = (0,0)$. The basis elements we get in this case are of the form $\lfloor x^{a}y^{b}; (0,0)\rceil$ where $a + b \equiv n - 2 \mod n$ and $a, b \in \{0, 1, \dots, n-2\}$. So we have $(a,b) = (0, n-2), (1,n-3), \dots, (n-3, 1), (n-2,0)$. Hence there are $n-1$ basis elements of this type.
\end{description}
The total dimension of $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W',G}$ is therefore $(n - 1) + (n - 1) = 2n-2$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent Now we will consider the degree of each basis element. Recall that
\begin{align*}
\deg( \lfloor m ; g \rceil ) = \dim(\text{fix}(g)) + 2 \sum_{i=1}^{n}(g_{i} - q_{i}),
\end{align*}
where $g = (g_{1},\dots,g_{n})$ and $J = (q_{1},\dots,q_{n})$ is the vector of quasihomogeneous weights.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent For $g = (0,0)$, the degree is $ 2 + \left(-\frac{2}{n}\right) + \left(-\frac{2}{n}\right) = \frac{2(n-2)}{n}$. Also notice by the above equation that $\deg \left( \lfloor 1; \left( \frac{n-1}{n}, \frac{n-1}{n} \right) \rceil \right) > \deg \left( \lfloor 1; \left( \frac{m}{n}, \frac{m}{n} \right) \rceil\right)$ for all $m \in \{1, \dots, n-2\}$. Compute $\deg \left( \lfloor 1; \left( \frac{n-1}{n}, \frac{n-1}{n} \right) \rceil \right)= \frac{2(2n-4)}{n}$, and notice that $\frac{2(2n-4)}{n} = 2\left(\frac{2(n-2)}{n} \right) > \frac{2(n-2)}{n}$ for all $n \ge 3$. Hence the degree of the highest degree part of $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W,G}$ is $\frac{2(2n-4)}{n}$. $\Box$
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent From the lemma, we now have the following system of equations for the possible weights $q_{1}, q_{2}$ for a candidate $W^{T}$:
\begin{align*}
\left(\frac{1}{q_{1}} - 1 \right) \left(\frac{1}{q_{2}} - 1 \right) &= 2n-2,\\
2\left((1 - 2q_{1}) + (1-2q_{2})\right) &= \frac{2(2n-4)}{n}.
\end{align*}
Solving for $q_{1}$ in the second equation, we have $q_{1} = \frac{2}{n} - q_{2}$. Substituting back into the first equation yields
\begin{align*}
n(2n-3)q_{2}^{2} + 2(3-2n)q_{2} + n - 2 = 0.
\end{align*}
We now have a quadratic equation in $q_{2}$. Consider the discriminant
\begin{align*}
D = -4(2n^{3} - 11n^{2} + 18n - 9).
\end{align*}
When $D < 0$, we will not have a real-valued solution for $q_{2}$. The above equation is a cubic polynomial that has roots at $n = 1, \frac{3}{2}, 3$. Since $D < 0$ for all $n > 3$, $q_{2}$ will not be real-valued for all $n > 3$. Thus there are no rational-valued solutions for the quasihomogeneous weights in this case.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent This shows that there is no $W^{T}$ in two variables satisfying $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W',G} \ensuremath \cong \ensuremath \mathcal{B}_{W^{T}, \{0\}}$. Extending by the Group-Weights theorem, for any admissible polynomial $W$ with weights $\left( \frac{1}{n},\frac{1}{n} \right)$, we have that $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W,G} \ensuremath \cong \ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W',G}$. By this isomorphism, we know that $\dim\left(\ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W,G } \right) = 2n - 2$ and the degree of its highest sector is $\frac{2(2n-4)}{n}$. Therefore, by what we have just shown, there cannot not exist any $W^{T}$ in two variables such that $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W,G} \ensuremath \cong \ensuremath \mathcal{B}_{W^{T}, \{0\}}$. This proves the theorem. $\Box$
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent We do have the following solutions for $n \in \{1,2,3\}$. $n = 1$ yields the solution $\mathbf{q} = (1,1)$, $n= 2$ yields solutions $\mathbf{q} = (1,0)$, $(0,1)$, and $n=3$ gives a solution $\mathbf{q} = \left( \frac{1}{3}, \frac{1}{3} \right)$. However, since each coordinate must be in the interval (0, 1/2], $\mathbf{q} = \left( \frac{1}{3}, \frac{1}{3} \right)$ is the only valid weight system.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent Our original conjecture (Conjecture 1) about the transpose of a noninvertible polynomial was that $W$ and $W^{T}$ have the same number of variables and $\left(G_{W}^{max} \right)^{T} = \{0\}$. We will now state a corollary to demonstrate that one of these assumptions must be false.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Corollary}. For any $n \in \ensuremath \mathbb{N}$, $n > 3$, let $W$ be a noninvertible polynomial in two variables with weight system $J = \left( \frac{1}{n},\;\frac{1}{n}\right)$ and $G_{W}^{max} = \langle J \rangle$. Then there does not exist a corresponding $W^{T}$ in two variables satisfying $\mathcal{A}_{W,G_{W}^{max}} \ensuremath \cong \mathcal{B}_{W^{T}, \{0\} }$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent The proof follows from the fact that for $W' = x^{n} + y^{n} + x^{n-1}y$ we have $\langle J \rangle = G_{W'}^{max}$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Lemma}. The polynomial $W'$ has $G_{W'}^{max} = \langle J \rangle = \langle \left( \frac{1}{n},\;\frac{1}{n}\right) \rangle$ for all $n \in \ensuremath \mathbb{N}$, $n \ge 3$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent The proof of the lemma relies on a theorem due to Lisa Bendall. We will state Bendall's theorem here, and refer the reader to the Appendix for a proof.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Theorem}. Let $W = x^{p} + y^{q}$. If a monomial satisfying the quasihomogeneous weights of $W$ is added to make the new polynomial $W' = x^{p} + y^{q} + x^{r}y^{s}$, then $G_{W'}^{max} = \langle (1/p,1/q),(1/n,0)\rangle$, where $n = \gcd(p,r)$. Alternatively, $G_{W'}^{max} = \langle (1/p,1/q),(0,1/m)\rangle $, where $m = \gcd(q,s)$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Proof of Lemma}. By Lisa Bendall's theorem (see Appendix), $G_{W'}^{max} = \langle \left( \frac{1}{n},\;\frac{1}{n}\right), \left(0, \frac{1}{\gcd(n,1)} \right) \rangle = \langle \left( \frac{1}{n},\;\frac{1}{n}\right) \rangle$, since $\gcd(n,1)$ = 1 and the generator $(0,1) \equiv (0,0) \mod 1$ contributes nothing. $\Box$
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent Since $W'$ has $G_{W'}^{max} = \langle J \rangle$, and since $W'$ satisfies the hypotheses of the previous theorem, we conclude that there does not exist a corresponding $W^{T}$ in two variables satisfying $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W',G_{W'}^{max}} \ensuremath \cong \ensuremath \mathcal{B}_{W^{T},\{0\}}$. Extending by the Group-Weights theorem shows that any noninvertible $W$ with weights $J$ and $G_{W}^{max} = \langle J \rangle$ fails to have a $W^{T}$ in two variables satisfying the mirror symmetry alignment stated in the Corollary.
\subsection{Evidence Against Conjecture 2}
\noindent We will now consider finding a suitable $W^{T}$ in a different number of variables. By relaxing the constraint on the number of variables required in Conjecture 1, it is natural to make the following conjecture.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Conjecture 2}. For any admissible $W$, there is a corresponding admissible $W^{T}$ satisfying $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W,G_{W}^{max}} \ensuremath \cong \ensuremath \mathcal{B}_{W^{T}, \{0\}}$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent The following theorem is a start to disproving this conjecture.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Theorem}. For any admissible polynomial $W$ with weight system $J = \left( \frac{1}{5}, \frac{1}{5} \right)$ and $G = \langle J \rangle$, there is no corresponding admissible $W^{T}$ in 1, 2, or 3 variables satisfying $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W,G} \ensuremath \cong \ensuremath \mathcal{B}_{W^{T}, \{0\}}$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Proof}. For $W$ as given in the hypothesis, we have previously shown that the degree of the $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}$-model is 8, and the degree of its highest sector is $12/5$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent We will rule out the existence of a $W^{T}$ in these three cases. In one variable, we can only have $W^{T} = x^{9}$ to give us an unorbifolded $\ensuremath \mathcal{B}$-model of dimension 8. Then $q_{1} = \frac{1}{9}$, but $1 - \frac{2}{9} = \frac{7}{9} \ne \frac{6}{5}$. The two variable case is done by the previous theorem.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent Now let $n \in \ensuremath \mathbb{N}$, $n \ge 3$. We have the following equations for a candidate weight system:
\begin{align}
\left( \frac{1}{q_{1}} - 1 \right) \left( \frac{1}{q_{2}} - 1 \right) \prod\limits_{i = 3}^{n} \left( \frac{1}{q_{i}} - 1 \right) &= 8, \\
2\left[(1 - 2q_{1}) + (1 - 2q_{2}) + \sum\limits_{i = 3}^{n} (1 - 2q_{i})\right] &= \frac{12}{5} .
\end{align}
Letting $A = 1 - \dfrac{8}{ \prod\limits_{i = 3}^{n} \left( \frac{1}{q_{i}} - 1 \right) }$, and $B = \dfrac{5n - 6}{10} - \sum\limits_{i = 3}^{n} q_{i}$, equations (1) and (2) simplify to
\begin{align}
Aq_{1}q_{2} - q_{1} - q_{2} + 1 &= 0,\\
-q_{1} + B &= q_{2}.
\end{align}
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent For any $q_{i} \in (0, 1/2]$, we have that $\frac{1}{q_{i}} - 1 \ge 1$. By equation (1), we require that $\prod\limits_{i = 3}^{n} \left( \frac{1}{q_{i}} - 1 \right) \le 8$. This tells us that $1 \le \prod\limits_{i = 3}^{n} \left( \frac{1}{q_{i}} - 1 \right) \le 8$. Therefore we have that $-7 \le A \le 0$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent From equation (2) we also have that $\sum\limits_{i = 3}^{n} (1 - 2q_{i}) \le \frac{6}{5}$. Rewriting the left-hand side gives us $(n-2) - 2\sum\limits_{i = 3}^{n} q_{i} \le \frac{6}{5}$. Subtracting $n-2$ from both sides yields $-\sum\limits_{i = 3}^{n} q_{i} \le \frac{16-5n}{10}$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent Substituting this into $B$ gives us
\begin{align*}
B = \dfrac{5n - 6}{10} - \sum\limits_{i = 3}^{n} q_{i} \le \dfrac{5n - 6}{10} + \dfrac{16-5n}{10} = 1.
\end{align*}
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent Though we have developed the previous formulas in general, we will now restrict our attention to the case $n = 3$. When $A \ne 0$, we can use the quadratic formula to plot the real-valued solutions of $q_{1}$. In three variables, the discriminant $D = (AB)^{2} - 4A(B-1) \ge 0$ for $q_{3} \le 1/9$. This yields the following:
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{q1_pos_02.png}
\caption{\label{fig:pos}Positive solutions for $q_{1}$ \hspace{\textwidth}in the quadratic system (3) and (4)}
\end{minipage}%
\begin{minipage}{.5\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{q1_neg.png}
\caption{\label{fig:neg}Negative solutions for $q_{1}$ \hspace{\textwidth}in the quadratic system (3) and (4)}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
\noindent None of these values of $q_{1}$ is in the interval $(0, 1/2]$, let alone $(0, 1/2] \cap \ensuremath \mathbb{Q}$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent Now when $A = 0$, we must have that $ \frac{1}{q_{i}} - 1 = 8$. Therefore by equation (1) we can only have $q_{1} = q_{2} = 1/2$. But equations (1) and (2) show that if this is the case, then we could have found a satisfactory weight system in just 1 variable without considering $q_{1}$ and $q_{2}$. Since we have already ruled out the case $n = 1$, we conclude that there are no valid weight systems for $W^{T}$ in three variables. $\Box$
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent The previous result casts doubt on the validity of Conjecture 2. Using the formulas developed in the last theorem may be useful in proving the following statement.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent \textbf{Conjecture 3}. For any admissible polynomial $W$ with weight system $J = \left( \frac{1}{5}, \frac{1}{5} \right)$ and $G = \langle J \rangle$, there is no corresponding admissible $W^{T}$ satisfying $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W,G} \ensuremath \cong \ensuremath \mathcal{B}_{W^{T}, \{0\}}$.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent Proving Conjecture 3 will demonstrate that the mirror symmetry construction $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W,G_{W}^{max}} \ensuremath \cong \ensuremath \mathcal{B}_{W^{T}, \{0\}}$ does not, in general, extend to noninvertible $W$.
\section{Conclusion}
Given a polynomial $W$ fixed by a weight system $J = \left(\frac{1}{n},\frac{1}{n}\right)$ and group $G = \langle J \rangle$, and $m \in \ensuremath \mathbb{N}$ representing the number of variables in a candidate $W^{T}$, it is impossible to construct $\ensuremath \mathcal{A}_{W,G} \ensuremath \cong \ensuremath \mathcal{B}_{W^{T},\{0\}}$ in the following cases:
\begin{align*}
\begin{array}{cc|cccc}
& & & m & & \\
& & 1 & 2 & 3 & \dots \\
\hline
& 4 & & X & & \\
n & 5 & X & X & X & \\
& 6 & & X & & \\
& \vdots & & X & &
\end{array}
\end{align*}
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent These results show that our original intuition about invertible polynomials and their transposes does not extend well to the noninvertible case. Even at the level of graded vector spaces, simply allowing an invertible polynomial to have one extra monomial seems to break this mirror symmetry construction.
\vspace{0.1 in}
\noindent Though we have not completely ruled out the possibility of noninvertible polynomials having a transpose, we have shown that this problem is difficult and will require further research to fully elucidate it.
\section{References}
\begingroup
\renewcommand{\section}[2]{}%
|
\section{Introduction}
An optical beam that is subject to a partial obstruction propagates showing certain degree of self-reconstruction in the obstruction domain. This phenomenon is usually referred to as self-healing (SH) of the beam. The SH effect has been demonstrated and studied mainly in propagation invariant beams (PIBs), as Airy\cite{chris2008}, Bessel\cite{litvin,sabino,chu,bouchal}, Caustic\cite{sabino1}, Mathieu and Weber\cite{zhang} beams.
There are other interesting beams whose transverse intensity profile is also invariant under propagation, changing only their scale. We refer to these beams as scaled propagation invariant beams (SPIBs), to distinguish them from the PIBs. Examples of SPIBs are the Hermite-Gauss (HG), Ince-Gauss (IG), and Laguerre-Gauss (LG) beams, which are solutions of the paraxial scalar wave equation in three different coordinate systems\cite{verdeyen,bandres2004}. Considering that these beams show a kind of propagation invariance, it is also interesting to investigate their self-reconstruction capabilities. In this paper we analyze, demonstrate and evaluate the SH effect in SPIBs.
In section 2 we first recall the structure of SPIBs. Then we propose a method to analyze theoretically the SH effect in a generic SPIB, introducing the signal to noise intensity ratio, a semi-analytical figure of merit of the self-healing process, explicitly dependent on the features of the beam and the obstruction applied to it. This figure of merit, which is computed in base of analytical diffraction formulas, provides an indirect theoretical measurement of the degree of self-healing that can be expected for an obstructed beam. In addition to this indirect theoretical figure of merit, there is necessity of computing the true degree of self-reconstruction of propagated beams. This quantitative assessment is performed by means of the Root Mean Square (RMS) deviation and the similarity function (S) \cite{chu}. In section 3 we demonstrate and evaluate by means of numerical simulations and experimentally the SH in HG and IG beams.
\section{Theory}
\subsection{Structure of scaled propagation invariant beams}
The complex amplitude of the SPIBs (HG, IG and LG beams) includes a common factor with the modulation of a Gaussian beam, which is characterized by the Rayleigh length $z_{0}$. Other parameters, expressed in terms of $z_{0}$, are $w_{0}=(\lambda z_{0}/\pi)^{1/2}$, the beam radius waist, $w (z)=w_{0}[1+(z/z_{0})^{2}]^{1/2}$, the beam radius as a function of $z$, and $R(z)=z[1+(z_{0}/z)^{2}]$, the curvature radius of the quadratic phase.
The Gouy phase, which is proportional to $\arctan (z/z_{0})$, will be specified for each one of the beams. Next we describe the structure of SPIBs. For brevity we only present the analytical expressions for the HG and the IG beams.
The HG beam is the solution of the paraxial Helmholtz equation expressed in rectangular coordinates. Its complex amplitude is given by\cite{verdeyen}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:hgb}
HGB(x,y,z)=E_{0}\;\tfrac{w_{0}}{w(z)}\;H_{l}\left(\tfrac{\sqrt{2}}{w(z)} x\right)H_{n}\left(\tfrac{\sqrt{2}}{w(z)} y\right)\\
\exp\left[-\dfrac{r^{2}}{w(z)}-i k z +i\phi(z)-ik\dfrac{r^{2}}{2 R(z)}\right]
\end{equation}
where $H_{j}(j=l,n)$ is the $j$-th order Hermite polynomial, $r=\sqrt{x^{2}+y^{2}}$ is the radial coordinate, and $\phi(z)=(l+n+1)\arctan (z/z_{0})$ is the Gouy phase. The complex transmittance of the HG beam, at the waist plane ($z=0$) is expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:hgb0}
HGB(x,y,z=0)=E_0\,H_{l}\left(\tfrac{\sqrt{2}}{w_{0}} x\right)H_{n}\left(\tfrac{\sqrt{2}}{w_{0}} y\right)\exp\left(-\tfrac{r^{2}}{w_{0}^{2}}\right)\,.
\end{equation}
The other SPIB to be considered, the IG beam, is the solution of the paraxial Helmholtz equation expressed in elliptical cylindrical coordinates. Such coordinates $(\xi,\eta,z)$ are defined by the relations $x=f(z)\cosh(\xi)\cos(\eta)$, $y=f(z)\sinh(\xi)\sin(\eta)$, and $z=z$, where $f(z)=f_{0}w(z)/w_{0}$ is the semifocal separation dependent on $z$ and $f_{0}$ is the semifocal separation at the waist plane. From these formulas it is established that the domains of $\xi$ and $\eta$ are $[0,\infty)$ and $[0,2\pi)$, respectively \cite{arfken}. The complex amplitudes of the even ($e$) and odd ($o$) IG beams are given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:igbe}
IGB_{p,m}^{e}(\xi,\eta,z)=c\;\tfrac{w_{0}}{w(z)}\;C_{p}^{m}(i\xi,\epsilon)C_{p}^{m}(\eta,\epsilon)\\
\exp\left[-\dfrac{r^{2}}{w(z)}-i k z +i\phi(z)-ik\dfrac{r^{2}}{2 R(z)}\right],
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:igbo}
IGB_{p,m}^{o}(\xi,\eta,z)=s\;\tfrac{w_{0}}{w(z)}\;S_{p}^{m}(i\xi,\epsilon)S_{p}^{m}(\eta,\epsilon)\\
\exp\left[-\dfrac{r^{2}}{w(z)}-i k z +i\phi(z)-ik\dfrac{r^{2}}{2 R(z)}\right],
\end{equation}
where $C_{p}^{m}$ and $S_{p}^{m}$ are the Ince polynomials \cite{arscott} of order $p$ and degree $m$. The integer indices ($m,p$) that are in the ranges $0\leq m\leq p$ and $1\leq m\leq p$ for even and odd functions, respectively, must have the same parity, i. e. $(-1)^{p-m}=1$. The ellipticity parameter of IG beams is $\epsilon=2f_{0}^{2}/w_{0}^{2}$, and the Gouy phase is $\phi(z)=(p+1)\arctan (z/z_{0})$ \cite{bandres2004}. At the waist of the IG beams, their complex amplitudes reduce to
\begin{equation}\label{eq:igbe0}
IGB_{p,m}^{e}(\xi,\eta,z=0)=c\;C_{p}^{m}(i\xi,\epsilon)C_{p}^{m}(\eta,\epsilon)
\exp\left(-\tfrac{r^{2}}{w_{0}^{2}}\right),
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:igbo0}
IGB_{p,m}^{o}(\xi,\eta,z=0)=s\;S_{p}^{m}(i\xi,\epsilon)S_{p}^{m}(\eta,\epsilon)
\exp\left(-\tfrac{r^{2}}{w_{0}^{2}}\right),
\end{equation}
In Eqs. (\ref{eq:hgb}-\ref{eq:igbo0}), $E_{0}$, $c$ and $s$ are normalization factors.
\subsection{Analysis of self-healing in scaled propagation invariant beams}\label{sec:SHanalysis}
To analyze the SH effect in SPIBs let us consider the setup depicted in Fig. \ref{fig:setup1}. It is assumed that a SPIB of complex amplitude $b(x,y)$, which arrives from the left side of the setup to the plane $z=0$, is partially obstructed at this plane.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering\includegraphics[width=12cm]{setup1.pdf}
\caption{Optical setup: a beam of complex amplitude $b(x,y)$ partially obstructed at the plane $z=0$ is transformed into $b_{o}(x,y)$. Then, $b_{o}(x,y)$ propagates to the distance $z$ becoming $b_{o}^{p}(x,y)$.}
\label{fig:setup1}
\end{figure}
The complex amplitude of the obstructed field at the plane $z=0$ can be expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bo}
b_{o}(x,y)=b(x,y)[1-o(x,y)],
\end{equation}
where $o(x,y)$ is a binary function, equal to 1 at the obstruction area, and 0 otherwise. Let us denote as $b^{p}(x,y)$ the field that would propagate to the distance $z$ if the beam $b(x,y)$ were not obstructed. This field can be expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bp}
b^{p}(x,y)=\tfr\{b(x,y)\},
\end{equation}
where $\tfr$ is the operator that represents Fresnel free propagation to a distance $z$. The field that propagates to the distance $z$ when the obstruction is present, can be expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bop}
b_{o}^{p}(x,y)=\tfr\{b_{o}(x,y)\}=b^{p}(x,y)-n(x,y),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{eq:noise}
n(x,y)=\tfr\{b(x,y)o(x,y)\}.
\end{equation}
According to Eq. \eqref{eq:bop}, the non-obstructed propagated field $b^{p}(x,y)$ appears as a part of the obstructed propagated field. The other function in Eq. \eqref{eq:bop}, $n(x,y)$, plays the role of a perturbation of the non-obstructed field. To analyze the SH effect it will be helpful to know the structure of $n(x,y)$. This can be done applying in Eq. (\ref{eq:noise}) the formula for the Fresnel transform of a product of functions \cite{arrizon2001}, to obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq:noise2}
n(x,y)=\dfrac{E(x,y,z)}{\lambda^{2}z^{2}}\{E^{*}(x,y,z)b^{p}(x,y)\}\otimes O \left(\tfrac{x}{\lambda z},\tfrac{y}{\lambda z}\right),
\end{equation}
where $O(u,v)$ is the Fourier transform of the obstruction pupil $o(x,y)$, $\otimes$ denotes the convolution operation, and $E(x,y)=\exp[(i\pi/\lambda z)(x^2+y^2)]$. According to Eq. \eqref{eq:bop}, a good approximation of the non-obstructed field $b^p(x,y)$ will be recovered in the propagated field $b_{o}^p(x,y)$ if the intensity of $n(x,y)$ is negligible in comparison to the intensity of $b^p(x,y)$. Next we establish estimated values of such intensities and propose a criterion for self-reconstruction and the propagation distance required to fulfill it. To determine the intensities we require optical powers of the involved fields [in Eq. (\ref{eq:bop})] and the areas where these fields are distributed. We first establish the transverse widths of the field $b^p(x,y)$ as
\begin{align}\label{eq:widths}
\Delta x_b&=2\alpha_xw(z)\notag\,,\\
\Delta y_b&=2\alpha_yw(z)\,,
\end{align}
where $\alpha_x$ and $\alpha_y$ are constant parameters and $w(z)$ is the radius of the beam Gaussian factor, at the propagation distance $z$. To establish the widths in Eq. \eqref{eq:widths}, and the corresponding parameters $\alpha_x$ and $\alpha_y$, we specify the beam limits (along any horizontal or vertical line) at the positions where the edge intensities reduces by a factor of $1/e^2$ (respect to the peak intensity). The horizontal field
width is the maximum of the widths obtained for the different horizontal lines. A similar criterion provides the vertical field width. It is also important to establish the transverse widths $\Delta x_o$ and $\Delta y_o$, of the function $O(x/\lambda z,y/\lambda z)$ that appears in Eq. (\ref{eq:noise2}). As particular case we assume that $o(x,y)$ is a square obstruction, of width $a$, for which we obtain
\begin{equation}
\Delta x_o = \Delta y_o = {2\lambda z}/{a}\,.
\label{eq:widthSinc}
\end{equation}
Considering general features of the convolution operation in Eq. (\ref{eq:noise2}) we estimate that the transverse widths of the perturbation field $n(x,y)$, along the horizontal and vertical axes, are respectively
\begin{align}\label{eq:extention}
\Delta x_n&=\Delta x_b+\Delta x_o \notag\,,\\
\Delta y_n&=\Delta y_b+\Delta y_o\,.
\end{align}
The areas of the domains of $b^p(x,y)$ and $n(x,y)$, in terms of the widths defined in Eqs. \eqref{eq:widths} and \eqref{eq:extention}, are given by
\begin{align}\label{eq:areas}
A_b&=\Delta x_b\Delta y_b\notag \,,\\
A_n&=\Delta x_n\Delta y_n\,.
\end{align}
On the other hand, we denote the optical powers of $b^p(x,y)$ and $n(x,y)$ as $P_b$ and $P_n$. Considering that such powers are invariant during propagation, we can compute them at the plane $z=0$. The powers $P_b$ and $P_n$ results from integrating $\left|b(x,y)\right|^2$ in the whole plane $z=0$ and in the obstruction domain respectively. Therefore, we can establish the average intensities $\overline{I}_{b}=P_b/A_b$ and $\overline{I}_{n}=P_n/A_n$, which correspond to the field $b^p(x,y)$ and the perturbation function $n(x,y)$, respectively. Now we can introduce the parameter
\begin{equation}\label{eq:cSH}
Q\equiv\frac{\overline{I}_{b}}{\overline{I}_{n}}\,,
\end{equation}
a positive quantity, which is referred to as signal to noise intensity ratio. An important result, proved below, is that the ratio $Q$ is limited by an upper bound, explicitly dependent on the parameters of the beam and the obstruction applied to it. Introducing the relative power $P_{nb}=P_n/P_b$, Eq. (\ref{eq:cSH}) can be expressed as
{\begin{equation}\label{eq:cSH1}
\frac{A_n}{A_b}=Q P_{nb}\,.
\end{equation}
Considering Eqs. \eqref{eq:widths} to \eqref{eq:areas} and performing some algebra, Eq. (\ref{eq:cSH1}) leads to the relation
\begin{equation}
\frac{\Delta x_o}{\Delta x_b}=\sqrt{Q\alpha P_{nb}+\alpha_d^2}-\alpha_p\,,
\label{eq:DxoDxb1}
\end{equation}
where $\alpha=\alpha_y/\alpha_x$, $\alpha_p=(\alpha+1)/2$ and $\alpha_d=(\alpha-1)/2$. Considering that ${\Delta x_o}/{\Delta x_b}>0$, we obtain the inequality
\begin{equation}\label{eq:minimumB}
\frac{\alpha_p^2-\alpha_d^2}{\alpha P_{nb}}<Q\,,
\end{equation}
that provides a minimum bound for $Q$. On the other hand, considering definitions for $\Delta x_o$ and $\Delta x_b$, Eq. \eqref{eq:DxoDxb1} can be transformed into
{\begin{equation}
\frac{z}{z_o}=\left[\frac{\pi^2w_o^2\left(\sqrt{Q\alpha P_{nb}+\alpha_d^2}-\alpha_p\right)^{-2}}{a^2\alpha_x^2}-1\right]^{-1/2}\,,
\label{eq:zzo}
\end{equation}
which corresponds to the propagation distance required to obtain a given signal to noise intensity ratio $Q$. Now, since the expression under the square brackets in Eq. \eqref{eq:zzo} must be positive, one obtains the inequality
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Q}
Q<\frac{1}{\alpha P_{nb}}\left[\left(\alpha_p+\frac{\pi w_o}{a\alpha_x}\right)^2-\alpha_d^2\right]\,,
\end{equation}
that gives a maximum bound for $Q$, which complements the minimum bound, given by \eqref{eq:minimumB}. It is noted that the maximum value of $Q$, in \eqref{eq:Q}, is dependent on the obstruction size $a$, the relative power $P_{nb}$, and the beam features related to the parameters $\alpha$, $\alpha_x$, $\alpha_p$ and $\alpha_d$. As a consequence of this result, given the parameters that specify the beam and the obstruction applied to it, there is a limit for the parameter $Q$, which corresponds indirectly to a limit for the degree of SH that can be attained on propagation. When the beam is not obstructed both parameters $a$ and $P_{nb}$ are null and the upper bound for $Q$ becomes $\infty$. In any other case, the upper bound value of $Q$ is finite.
\section{Numerical and experimental results}
To evaluate the validity of the quantitative formulae proposed in the previous section we study the SH of HG and IG SPIBs. For the experimental generation of the beams under test we employ amplitude computer-generated holograms (CGHs), displayed in a twisted nematic liquid crystal (TNLC) spatial light modulator (SLM)\cite{arrizon2005}. The holograms are designed to include the obstruction as a feature of the generated fields, simplifying the experimental set-up. Let us briefly describe the features of these CGHs. We assume that the CGH is used to encode the optical field $s(x,y)=a(x,y)\exp(i\phi(x,y))$ where the amplitud $a(x,y)$ is a normalized positive function and the phase $\phi(x,y)$ takes values in the range $[-\pi,\pi]$. The transmittance of the amplitude CGH that allows the generation of the field $s(x,y)$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:cgh}
h(x,y)=h_{b}(x,y)+a(x,y)\cos\left[\phi(x,y)-i2\pi(u_{0}x+v_{0}y)\right],
\end{equation}
where $(u_0,v_0)$ are the spatial frequencies of a linear phase carrier and $h_b(x,y)$ is a background function that makes positive definite the function $h(x,y)$ \cite{arrizon2005}. In order to propitiate a high signal to noise ratio in the generation of the field $s(x,y)$ we must chose a background $h_b(x,y)$ with low power and low bandwidth. In the CGHs that we implement, $h_b(x,y)$ is chosen as a soft Gaussian function.
The Fourier spectrum of the CGH in Eq. \eqref{eq:cgh} is
\begin{equation}
H(u,v)=H_b(u,v)+\dfrac{1}{2}S(u+u_{0},v+v_{0})+\dfrac{1}{2}S^{*}(-u-u_{0},-v-v_{0})
\end{equation}
where $H_b(u,v)$ is the Fourier transform of $h_b(x,y)$, $S$ is the Fourier transform of $s(x,y)$, and $S^{*}$ is its complex conjugate. We assume that $S(u,v)$ corresponds to one of the desired SPIBs (HG or IG beams). To isolate the SPIB, a band-pass filter, centered at frequency coordinates $(-u_0,-v_0)$, is placed at the Fourier domain of the CGH.
The experimental setup designed to generate the SPIBs, is depicted in Fig. \ref{fig:setup}. In this setup, an expanded and collimated He-Ne laser beam is used to illuminate the CGHs codified on a TNLC-SLM. Linear polarizers $P_{1}$ and $P_{2}$, orthogonal to each other, are required to obtain mostly amplitude modulation in the SLM. The Fourier transform of the amplitude CGHs is generated by the lens $L_{3}$. The field $S(u+u_0,v+v_0)$, consisting in one of the SPIBs (HG or IG beams) appears at the open pupil in the spatial filter (SF) plane. For convenience, a dark area corresponding to the required obstruction, is optionally encoded in the SPIB domain. The intensities of the generated fields are recorded with a CCD camera at different distances along the propagation axis.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering\includegraphics[width=14cm]{setup.pdf}
\caption{Experimental setup to demostrate self-healing of HG and IG beams. These fields, that include optionally a dark area (or obstruction area), appear at the first order in the Fourier domain of the CGH encoded in the TNLC-SLM. The CGH Fourier transform is generated by the lens $L_{3}$. The fields are recorded with a CCD camera at different distances $z$. }
\label{fig:setup}
\end{figure}
\newline
In Fig. \ref{fig:sinobs} we show the intensities generated numerically of a HG beam (a) and an odd IG beam (b) that will be employed to illustrate the SH effect in SPIBs. The parameters for the HG beam are $l=n=8$, and for the odd IG beam are $p=8$ and $m=2$. The intensities of the beams, experimentally generated with amplitude CGHs, using the optical setup in Fig. \ref{fig:setup}, are shown in Fig. 3(c,d). The focal length of the lens $L_{3}$ was $f=75 cm$, and the waists of the generated beams, at the plane of the SF, were $200 \mu$ and $137 \mu$ respectively.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{Nhgb88.pdf}
\label{fig:Nhgb88}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{Nigb822.pdf}
\label{fig:Nigb823}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{hgb88.pdf}
\label{fig:hgb88}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{igb822.pdf}
\label{fig:igb823}}
\caption{(a, b) Numerical and (c, d) experimental intensities of HG and IG beams, employed to illustrate the SH effect in SPIBs.}\label{fig:sinobs}
\end{figure}
In order to test the SH effect in partially obstructed SPIBs, the CGHs used to generate the fields in Fig. \ref{fig:sinobs}, were modified to include different dark square areas (obstruction domains), at the center of each field. The intensities of the obtained fields, at different propagation distances, are displayed in figures \ref{fig:NH88om} to \ref{fig:Ni823op}. For each figure the results corresponding to the numerical simulations and the experiments appear at the top and the bottom images respectively. For each horizontal array of images, in any of the figures, the field at z=0 (at the left extreme of the array) presents the obstructed domain in focus. The widths of the fields of view, in the different images, are proportional to the width $w(z)$ of the Gaussian factor, at the corresponding distance $z$.
In Fig. \ref{fig:NH88om} we present the results for the HG beam, with indices $l=n=8$. The waist radius and obstacle width in this case are respectively $w_{o}=200\, \mu m$ and $a=2.25\;w_{o}$. Employing the definitions in section \ref{sec:SHanalysis}, we obtained the parameters $\alpha_{x}=\alpha_{y}=3$ and $P_{nb}\approx0.1$. For these parameters we employed Eqs. \eqref{eq:minimumB} and \eqref{eq:Q} to obtain the allowed values of $Q$ in the range [9.90:18.72). For each $Q$ in this allowed range we can compute the required distance $z/z_o$, using Eq. \eqref{eq:Q}. For example, if we chose the ratio $Q = 16.5$, the computed normalized propagation distance obtained is $z/z_{o}=1.2$. It is noticed that the upper value of $Q$ in the interval is avoided, since in this case $z$ diverges to infinity. Both, the numerical and experimental results in Fig. \eqref{fig:NH88om} correspond to normalized propagation distances ($z/z_{o}$) in the range $[0:1.2]$. The propagation distance for the fields in Fig. \ref{fig:NH88om} marked as (d) and (h) correspond to the signal to noise intensity ratio $Q=16.5$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{NH88om0cm.pdf}
\label{fig:NH88om0cm}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{NH88om8cm.pdf}
\label{fig:NH88om8cm}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{NH88om16cm.pdf}
\label{fig:NH88om16cm}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{NH88om24cm.pdf}
\label{fig:NH88om24cm}}
\hspace{3cm}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{00cmom.pdf}
\label{fig:00cmom}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{08cmom.pdf}
\label{fig:08cmom}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{16cmom.pdf}
\label{fig:16cmom}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{24cmom.pdf}
\label{fig:24cmom}}
\caption{Numerical (top images) and experimental (bottom images) results for self-healing of a HG beam subject to a medium sized square obstruction, at the propagation distance $z/z_{0}$: (a,e) $0$, (b,f) $0.4$, (c,g) $0.8$, and (d,h) $1.2$.}
\label{fig:NH88om}
\end{figure}
The results obtained for the same HG beam employing an increased obstruction area of size $a=4.16\;w_{o}$, are displayed in Fig. \ref{fig:NH88og}. In this case, the parameters $\alpha_x$ and $\alpha_y$ remain unchanged and the relative powers take the increased value $P_{nb}=0.25$, obtaining the allowed values of $Q$ in the range $(4.03:6.32)$. The different recorded fields (numerical and experimental) correspond to propagation distances $z/z_{o}$ in the range $[0:1.6]$, with incremental step $0.4$. In particular the propagation distance $z/z_{o}=1.6$ corresponds to the signal to noise intensity ratio $Q=5.94$. This Q value, and the associated propagation distance, correspond to the fields displayed in the images marked as (e) and (j).
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{NH88og0cm.pdf}
\label{fig:NH88og0cm}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{NH88og8cm.pdf}
\label{fig:NH88og8cm}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{NH88og16cm.pdf}
\label{fig:NH88og16cm}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{NH88og24cm.pdf}
\label{fig:NH88og24cm}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{NH88og32cm.pdf}
\label{fig:NH88og32cm}}
\hspace{3cm}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{00cmog.pdf}
\label{fig:00cmog}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{08cmog.pdf}
\label{fig:08cmog}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{16cmog.pdf}
\label{fig:18cmog}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{24cmog.pdf}
\label{fig:24cmog}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{32cmog.pdf}
\label{fig:32cmog}}
\caption{Numerical (top images) and experimental (bottom images) results for self-healing of a HG beam subject to a relative large square obstruction, at the propagation distance $z/z_{0}$: (a,f) $0$, (b,g) $0.4$, (c,h) $0.8$, (d,i) $1.2$, and (e,j) $1.6$.}
\label{fig:NH88og}
\end{figure}
In the case of the IG beam, the SH demonstration is performed with an obstruction of width $a=2.7 \;w_{o}$ (where $w_{o}=137 \; \mu m$). Others parameters of the IG beam are the constants $\alpha_{x}=2$, $\alpha_{y}=3$, and $P_{nb}=0.358$, for which we obtained the allowed values of $Q$ in the range $(2.79:7.02)$. The results (numerical end experimental) displayed in Fig. \ref{fig:Ni823op} correspond to propagation distances $z/z_{o}$ in the range $[0:1.28]$ with approximated steps of $0.43$. The propagation distance $z/z_{o}=1.28$, in this range, correspond to the intensity ratio $Q=5.34$ (smaller than the limit value $Q=6.16$). In the numerical and experimental results, displayed in figures \ref{fig:NH88om} to \ref{fig:Ni823op}, it is noticed a relatively good self-reconstruction of the field inside the obstruction domain. In contrast, the field outside the obstruction area has been clearly affected by the perturbation term $n(x,y)$. This qualitative observation is verified by the quantitative assessment of the propagated fields, in the next subsection.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{igb823op0cm.pdf}
\label{fig:igb823op0cm}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{igb823op4cm.pdf}
\label{fig:igb823op4cm}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{igb823op8cm.pdf}
\label{fig:igb823op8cm}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{igb823op12cm.pdf}
\label{fig:igb823op12cm}}
\hspace{4cm}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{00cmop.pdf}
\label{fig:igb823op0cm}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{04cmop.pdf}
\label{fig:igb823op4cm}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{08cmop.pdf}
\label{fig:igb823op8cm}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=2.2cm]{12cmop.pdf}
\label{fig:igb823op12cm}}
\caption{Numerical (top images) and experimental (bottom images) results for self-healing of a IG beam subject to a small sized square obstruction, at the propagation distance $z/z_{0}$: (a,e) $0$, (b,f) $0.43$, (c,g) $0.85$, and (d,h) $1.28$.}
\label{fig:Ni823op}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Quantitative evaluation of self-healing}
In section \ref{sec:SHanalysis} we introduced the parameter $Q$ that represents a rough form of signal to noise ratio in the self-reconstruction of the desired field $b^p$, during propagation of the obstructed field $b_o^p$. As a complement of this semi-analytical assessment of the self-healing process, here we evaluate this process employing two figures of merit: the Root Mean Square (RMS) deviation and the Similarity (S) function\cite{chu}.
The RMS deviation of the intensity of the obstructed field, $I^{p}_{o}=|b^{p}_{o}|^2$, respect to intensity of the non-obstructed field, $I^{p}=|b^{p}|^2$, is given by:
\begin{equation}
RMS=\frac{\int \limits _{w}\left(I^{p}-\beta I^{p}_{o}\right)^{2}\;dA}{\int \limits _{w} (I^{p})^{2}\;dA}
\end{equation}
where $dA$ is the differential area, $w$ is the domain where the RMS is evaluated, and $\beta$ is a constant that allows the best fitting of the intensities $I_o^p$ and $I^p$, obtained from the relation, $\partial RSM / \partial \beta=0$. On the other hand, the similarity is defined as:
\begin{equation}
S=\frac{(|b^{p}_{o}|,|b^{p}|)}{||b^{p}_{o}||\;\;||b^{p}||},
\end{equation}
where $(|b^{p}_{o}|,|b^{p}|)=\int _{w}(b^{p}_{o})\;(b^{p})^{*}dA$ is the inner product of two fields, meanwhile $||b^{p}_{o}||=[\int _{w}(b^{p}_{o})\;\;(b^{p}_{o})^{*}]^{1/2}dA$ and $||b^{p}||=[\int _{w}(b^{p})\;\;(b^{p})^{*}]^{1/2}dA$ are the norm of the fields, and asterisk ($^*$) denotes complex conjugation. For each propagation distance $(z)$, the RMS and S are computed in a square domain $\varOmega$ of size $a(z)=a(w(z)/w_{o})$, referred to as field internal domain. The scale change in this domain is equal to that of the beam itself, during its free propagation. Additionally, we evaluated numerically the $RMS$ and $S$ for a domain external to $\varOmega$.
Values for the RMS deviation and the similarity S in the domain $\varOmega$, for the HG beams in Fig. \ref{fig:Nhgb88}, subject to different centered square obstructions, and propagated to different distances, are displayed in Fig. \ref{fig:rmssimai}(a,b). In addition to the medium and large obstruction, which correspond to the ones employed in the numerical and experimental results (for the HG beam) just discussed, we also considered here a small obstruction, of width $a=1.68\;w_{o}$. Similar results for the IG beam in Fig. \ref{fig:Nigb823}, employing square obstructions of two different widths, are displayed in Fig. \ref{fig:rmssimai}(c,d). In this case the medium and large obstructions have widths $2.80\;w_{o}$ and $4.16\;w_{o}$, respectively (with $w_{o}=200\mu m$). As noted in the results of Fig. \ref{fig:rmssimai}, the behavior of the similarity is opposite to that of the RMS deviation. It is also noted that the RMS metric presents more sensible variations along the propagation ranges. An interesting fact is that the RMS attain its best (minimum) value at certain propagation distances. E.g. the RMS for the HG beam with the medium sized obstruction shows a minimum at $z/z_{o} \sim 2.3$. Another case of the IG beam, with the medium sized obstruction that shows a minimum RMS at $z/z_{o}\sim 2.2$. This behavior is consistent with the prediction in section \ref{sec:SHanalysis} of an upper bound value for the signal to intensity ratio $Q$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=6.4cm]{rmshgb_ai.pdf}
\label{fig:rmshgb_ai}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=6.4cm]{simihgb_ai.pdf}
\label{fig:simihgb_ai}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=6.4cm]{rmsigb_ai.pdf}
\label{fig:rmsigb_ai}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=6.4cm]{simigb_ai.pdf}
\label{fig:simigb_ai}}
\caption{Behavior of RMS deviation (a,c) and Similarity function (b,d) within the internal domain $\varOmega$, at different propagation distances of HG (a,b) and IG (c,d) beams subject to different obstruction areas.}
\label{fig:rmssimai}
\end{figure}
To complement the results in Fig. \ref{fig:rmssimai}, we also computed the RMS and S for the already considered beams and obstructions employing the domain external to $\varOmega$ (within the area of $b^p(x,y)$).
It is interesting to note that the results, displayed in Fig. \ref{fig:rmssimae}, show a clear degradation of the external propagated fields. Fortunately, this degradation also saturates at certain propagation distances.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=6.4cm]{rmshgb_ae.pdf}
\label{fig:rmshgb_ae}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=6.4cm]{simihgb_ae.pdf}
\label{fig:simihgb_ae}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=6.4cm]{rmsigb_ae.pdf}
\label{fig:rmsigb_ae}}
\subfigure[]{
\includegraphics[width=6.4cm]{simigb_ae.pdf}
\label{fig:simigb_ae}}
\caption{Behavior of RMS deviation (a,c) and Similarity function (b,d) outside the domain $\varOmega$ at different propagation distances of HG (a,b) and IG (c,d) beams subject to different obstruction areas.}
\label{fig:rmssimae}
\end{figure}
\section{Final remarks and conclusions}
We have analyzed the SH effect in SPIBs, a kind of propagation invariant beams with scale change. In particular we demonstrated numerically and experimentally the effect in the cases of HG and IG beams.
We established a semi-analytic parameter to asses the degree of SH, corresponding to the signal to noise intensity ratio ($Q$). This quantity is computed in terms of parameters that represent the features of both the beam and the obstruction applied to it. We obtained that for a given set of these parameters, there exist a restricted range of values for $Q$. Moreover, we presented a formula to compute the required propagation distance for each $Q$ value in the allowed range. This analysis establishes indirectly that the degree of SH in SPIBs can not be achieved beyond certain limit, regardless the propagation distance of the obstructed beam. Such restriction is confirmed qualitatively in the images of self-reconstructed beams, obtained numerically and experimentally, in section section 3 (figures \ref{fig:NH88om} to \ref{fig:Ni823op}).
To complement the semi-analytic assessment of SH by means of the parameter $Q$, we evaluated numerically the effect by computing the RMS deviation and the Similarity for the obstructed propagated beams, respect to the non-disturbed beams. We first computed such parameters in a domain $\varOmega$ (referred as internal domain), which corresponds to a scaled version of the applied obstruction. The RMS deviations computed in this domain, present a reduction during propagation, up to a limit that is dependent on the beam and obstruction features. The appearance of this limit roughly provides a quantitative confirmation of the limit in the SH, that was analytically established by means of the $Q$ ratio. Although the similarity $S$ is less sensible that the RMS, the SH limit can also be noted at close views of the $S$ plots (which for brevity are not shown).
We also computed the RMS and $S$ in a domain external to $\varOmega$ (within the area of the beam $b^p(x,y)$). The results (in Fig. \ref{fig:rmssimae}) are interesting, although not surprising. They show that the RMS increases and the similarity reduces at the the external domains.
The analytical discussion regarding the signal to noise intensity ratio ($Q$) is an original contribution in this paper that can be extended to analyze the SH in other propagation invariant beams (Bessel, Airy, etc). Another contribution has been the separate evaluation of the RMS and similarity in an internal and an external domain. The results in this context improves the understanding of the SH effect.
\end{document} |
\section{Introduction}
The \texttt{iopart-num} Bib\TeX{} style is intended for use in
preparing manuscripts for Institute of Physics Publishing journals,
including Journal of Physics. It provides numeric citation with
Harvard-like formatting, based upon the specification in ``How to
prepare and submit an article for publication in an IOP journal using
\LaTeXe'' by Graham Douglas (2005).
The \texttt{iopart-num} package is available on the Comprehensive
\TeX{} Archive Network (CTAN) as \texttt{/biblio/bibtex/contrib/iopart-num}.
\section{General instructions}
To use the \texttt{iopart-num} style, include the command
\verb+\bibliographystyle{iopart-num}+ in the
document preamble. The reference section is then inserted into the
document with the command \verb+
\section{Introduction}
Understanding the ground state properties of one-dimensional lattice gases or spin-models with long--range interaction is a notoriously difficult problem in many--body physics. Only few analytical solutions for classical \cite{Hubbard,Pokrovsky} and quantum \cite{Haldane,Shastry,Hikami,Levi1} models have so far been found. Moreover, quantum systems with long-range interactions are typically difficult to treat numerically even with modern numerical techniques based on the density-matrix renormalization group \cite{White1,Schwollok,Perez,Verstraete}.
Despite these difficulties physical systems with power-law interactions have received significant attention in the last decades.
In early years the the Kondo problem for the one-dimensional Ising model with inverse square interactions \cite{algebraicKondo}, and the phase diagram thereof \cite{Cardy} were analyzed with renormalization group techniques.
In more recent years the critical properties of spin models with general algebraic interactions and dimensionality were studied \cite{Luijten1996,Luijten2001,Luijten2002}.
This work connects to the studies in Refs. \cite{Hubbard,Pokrovsky} where a classical one-dimensional Ising model with an external magnetic field and convex (long-ranged) interactions was investigated, for which the ground state was constructed analytically. In Ref. \cite{Bak} it was moreover shown that here the 'spin-up' excitations, upon varying their density, form a complete devil's staircase. The role of quantum fluctuations in these spin models was explored for the case of power-law potentials of the form $1/r^\alpha$ in the context of dipolar Bose gases \cite{Burnell} ($\alpha=3$) and strongly interacting Rydberg gases \cite{Weimer} ($\alpha=6$). Recently, the onset of a devil's staircase has indeed been identified in a one-dimensional lattice gas of atoms that were laser-excited to electronically high-lying Rydberg states \cite{Bloch}.
In this paper we generalize the aforementioned classical studies to a
two-component lattice system. Specifically, we consider a situation in
which there are two different kinds of excitations to which we will
refer as $s$ (strong) and $w$ (weak). Power-law interactions among
$s$($w$)-excitations are assumed to be strong (weak) while there is
negligible interaction between excitations belonging to different
components. One motivation for conducting this study is to show that the
physics of this system is much richer than the single-component case and
in fact features a series of transitions that are absent in the
single-component situation. A second motivation is derived from the fact that multi-component lattice gases with power-law interactions move more and more into the focus of theoretical and experimental studies on cold atomic gases in which atoms are excited to Rydberg states
\cite{Ditzhuijzen08,gunter_observing_2013,Bettelli13,Maxwell14,Li14,Gorniaczyk14,Barredo14,Teixeira}.
In certain regimes aspects of the physics of this atomic system ---
specifically, strongly state-dependent interactions and highly
suppressed interactions between atoms in different states \cite{Teixeira,Olmos} --- are indeed well described by the model
discussed here.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{sec:model} we define the model. We then summarize the results obtained in \cite{Hubbard,Pokrovsky,Bak} in Section \ref{sec:single} for the single-species case. We do so because we will make an extensive use of the technology and formalism developed in those works. In Section \ref{sec:comm} we introduce the concept of \textit{compatible} and \textit{incompatible} ground states and in Section \ref{sec:disposition} we introduce an algorithm for finding the microscopic arrangement of excitations in the ground state.
Finally in Section \ref{sec:stability} we identify the locations of the compatible-incompatible transitions in the special case of filling fractions of the form $1/q$, $q \in \mathbb{N}^+$.
\section{The model}
\label{sec:model}
We focus on a one--dimensional lattice system where each site is occupied by a three--level system whose internal states belong to the set $\left\{\ket{0},\ket{s},\ket{w}\right\}$.
The three levels correspond to the (empty) state $0$ and the cases in which the site is occupied by an $s$- or $w$-excitation. Excitations of the same kind interact with an inverse power-law potential with exponent $\alpha$ and strength $V_{\mu}$ (with $\mu=s,w$ and $V_{\mu}>0$), while there is no interaction between species of different type. The Hamiltonian then reads
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ham2spec}
H=\sum_{k=1}^N \sum_{\mu=s,w}\left(-h_{\mu} n_k^{(\mu)}+V_{\mu} \sum_{l > k}\frac{n_k^{(\mu)}n_l^{(\mu)}}{(l-k)^{\alpha}} \right),
\end{equation}
where $n^{(\mu)}=\ket{\mu}\bra{\mu}$ and $h_{\mu}$ is a positive parameter. Linking this model to experiments with gases of Rydberg atoms, one would think of $\ket{0}$ as being the atomic ground state. The state $\ket{\mu}$ then corresponds to an electronically high-lying Rydberg $\nu S$-state with principal quantum number $\nu_\mu$ \cite{Rydberg} which is excited with a laser of detuning $h_\mu$. In order to have one strongly and one weakly interacting species one needs to require $\nu_s \gg \nu_w$\footnote{In fact the strength of $V_\mu$ among excitations of the same species (atoms in the same Rydberg state) scales with the eleventh power of the principal quantum number $\nu_\mu$. Moreover, as shown by a perturbative calculation \cite{Olmos} and recently also experimentally \cite{Teixeira} there are states for which the interactions among excitation of different species is strongly suppressed.}.
In the following, unless specified otherwise, we consider the asymptotic scenario $V_s/V_w \rightarrow \infty$.
Our goal is to find the configuration of the two species that minimizes the energy of Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:ham2spec}) given fixed values of the individual total excitation numbers $n_{\mu}=\sum_{k=1}^N n_k^{(\mu)}$. The condition $V_s/V_w \rightarrow \infty$ renders the search for the ground state into a two-step process: First, the ground state configuration of the $s$-excitations is to be found which subsequently remains ``frozen''. This leads to an effective --- in general inhomogeneous --- lattice on which excitations of the $w$-species are to be arranged in the second step. Depending on the imposed total excitation numbers $n_\mu$ one can distinguish dispositions of the $w$-excitations that are \textit{compatible} with the one of the $s$-excitations, and others that are \textit{incompatible}.
Transitions between these two cases can then be studied as a function of the total excitation numbers $n_\mu$ (see e.g. \cite{Compatible} for a related discussion of compatible-incompatible transitions).
\section{The ground state of the single-species problem}
\label{sec:single}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{devil_jm.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{The single species devil's staircase for a potential $V(r)=1/r^2$.}
\label{fig:devil}
\end{figure}
The single-species case can be described in terms of the Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:ham2spec}) once we set e.g. $V_w=h_w=0$. Our aim is to find the configuration that minimizes the interaction energy once a density of excitations $\rho=m/N$ is given\footnote{In this section we drop the label $s$ as we consider a single species.}. For a start let us consider three excitations arranged on a line with distances $r$ (between the first and the second one) and $r'$ (between the second and the third one) with $r<r'$. The solution of the energy minimization problem is obtained by realizing that for a general convex potential $V(r)$ the variation of the potential energy under a change of the position of the second excitation by $\delta r$ obeys
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:convex}
V(r+\delta r)+V(r'-\delta r)\leq V(r)+V(r').
\end{equation}
This expression holds for $r,\delta r<r'$. Hence moving the excitation in the middle towards the third excitation leads to a lowering of the potential energy until $r=r'$. The energetically most favourable configuration is therefore assumed when both distances are equal, i.e. the excitations are arranged in the most uniform distribution. This consideration can be extended to larger systems with excitation density $\rho$ where the ground state is a regular arrangement of excitations with inter-excitation distance $1/\rho$.
On a chain, however, where the coordinates can only be multiples of the lattice spacing the situation is much less trivial. Here the construction of the ground state configuration proceeds as follows (Note, that the lattice spacing is set to one, throughout.): We define $x_k$ as the position of the $k$-th excitation and denote the distance between the $k$-th excitation and its nearest excitation by $r^{(k)}_1=x_{k+1}-x_k$, the distance between the $k$-th and the next-to-nearest excitation by $r^{(k)}_2=x_{k+2}-x_k=r^{(k)}_1+r^{(k+1)}_1$, and generally the distance to the $l$-th-nearest excitation by $r^{(k)}_l=\sum_{j=0}^{l-1}r^{(k+j)}_1=x_{k+l}-x_k$. All spacings of neighboring excitations, $r^{(k)}_1$, will belong to the set $\mathcal{S}_1=\{ \lfloor1/\rho\rfloor, \lceil1/\rho\rceil \}$ which is referred to as the \textit{minimal set}.
Using the above abbreviations the task is now to minimize
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:minpot}
E=-mh+\sum_{l=1}^{m}\left[\sum_{k=1}^m V\left(r_l^{(k)}\right)\right].
\end{equation}
In Ref. \cite{Hubbard} it was proposed to look for a solution which minimizes each inner sum separately, knowing that if such solution exists it will also minimize $E$. There it was demonstrated that this solution exists and that it is achieved when $r_l^{(k)}$ form minimal sets, for each $l$. These sets can be defined as $\mathcal{S}_l=\{ r_l,r_l+1 \}$, where $r_l=\lfloor l/\rho\rfloor$, and $r_l+1=\lceil l/\rho\rceil$.
Another challenge is finding the microscopic arrangements of the excitations on an infinite chain with rational filling fraction $\rho=p/q$. Clearly for all the filling fractions of the form $p=1$, $q\in \mathbb{N}^+$ one just has to distribute the excitations uniformly, one every $q$ sites. For general rational numbers it is more complicated to figure out how the excitations are distributed, but we can still think that the configuration will be periodic in $q$, each period having $p$ excitations arranged in the most uniform way.
The algorithm for finding such a distribution is given in Refs. \cite{Hubbard,Pokrovsky}. To illustrate it we start with an example and then report the general solution.
\subsection{Example}
Let us consider the case $\rho=11/47$. From the previous explanation we know that the distances between neighboring excitations are $r_1^{(k)}\in \{4,5\}$. This automatically minimizes $\sum_k V(r_1^{(k)})$. If we just had to minimize this contribution we could distribute the $11$ excitations over the $47$ sites in any pattern, which would ensure that excitations are four or five sites apart. However, as we have to minimize each contribution $l$ in (\ref{eq:minpot}) separately, we need a more sophisticated way to understand the configuration. We start by writing
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:1/rho}
\frac{1}{\rho}=4+\frac{3}{11},
\end{equation}
hence finding $r_1^{(k)}\in \mathcal{S}_1=\{4,5\}$. With 47 sites we therefore find 8 intervals $r^{(k)}_1$ of 4 sites, and three of 5 sites. The only possible values for the distances between next-neighboring excitations $r^{(k)}_2$, are then given by 8, 9, 10. Note, that for some part of the following discussion it turns out that it is actually convenient to express these distances as strings of consecutive spacings, i.e. 44, 45, 55. Let us now find the permitted next-nearest-neighbor distances which form the set $\mathcal{S}_2$. This set must contain only two consecutive numbers, so either $8,9$ or $9,10$. In order to understand which ones to pick and how to distribute intervals of length 4 and 5 we define a new filling fraction using the non-integer remainder of (\ref{eq:1/rho}):
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:1/rho2}
\frac{11}{3}=4-\frac{1}{3}.
\end{equation}
This filling fraction represents the density of $5$ sites intervals which can be regarded as defects within the $4$ sites intervals. We thus have two strings of length $4$, and one of length $3$ between these defects (4+4+3=11), where the strings of length 4 and 3 correspond to $4445$ and $445$, respectively.
In order to understand how these strings are distributed we iterate the logic and obtain from the remainder of (\ref{eq:1/rho2}) the filling fraction $(1/3)^{-1}=3$. This means that if we identify the string $445$ as the defect, and $4445$ as the defect-free one we have eventually $44454445445$. This is the ground state configuration as the iterative procedure stops when the effective $1/\rho \in \mathbb{N}^+$ (here $(1/3)^{-1} \in \mathbb{N}^+$). This method creates the configuration which minimizes each contribution in (\ref{eq:minpot}) separately. In fact one can check that for $\forall l\leq m$ , $r_l\in \mathcal{S}_l$.
\subsection{General algorithm}
The generalization of this method was given in Ref. \cite{Hubbard}. It starts by considering the set of numbers
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:hubbmethod}
\frac{1}{\rho}&=n+r_0\nonumber\\
\left|\frac{1}{r_0}\right|&=n_1+r_1 \nonumber\\
\left|\frac{1}{r_1}\right|&=n_2+r_2\nonumber\\
&\vdots\nonumber\\
\left|\frac{1}{r_{k-2}}\right|&=n_{k-1}+r_{k-1}\nonumber\\
\left|\frac{1}{r_{k-1}}\right|&=n_k,
\end{eqnarray}
where $n_j \in \mathbb{Z}$ and $k$ is a finite number since $\rho\in\mathbb{Q}$, and $-1/2\leq r_j \leq 1/2$ for any $j$. Then one can define iteratively the strings of non-defective sites $X_1,X_2,...,X_k$ and defects $Y_1,Y_2,...,Y_k$ in the following way
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:hubbmethod2}
X_1=n, \hspace{1cm}&Y_1=n+\mathrm{sgn}\left(r_0\right)\nonumber\\
&\vdots\nonumber\\
X_{i+1}=\left[X_i\right]^{n_i-1}Y_i, \hspace{1cm}&Y_{i+1}=\left[X_i\right]^{n_i+\mathrm{sgn}\left(r_i\right)-1}Y_i.
\end{eqnarray}
Here the notation $\left[X\right]^{n}$ means that the spacing $X$ is repeated $n$ times. The ground state configuration is then given by $X_k$.
\subsection{Stability of the ground state}
Finally, we summarize the solution to the problem of understanding in which region of the parameter space --- and in particular for which values of the parameter $h$ --- a given configuration of density $\rho=m/N$ is stable. The solution was given by Bak in Ref. \cite{Bak} assuming a chain of length $N$ with periodic boundary conditions. The essence is to analyze the energy cost of inserting or extracting one excitation from a given configuration. If both operations increase the energy (\ref{eq:minpot}) the configuration is stable.
Adding one excitation will modify the number of $l$-th nearest neighbor distances $r_l$ and $r_l+1$. Starting from a given configuration with $m-a$ distances $r_l$ and $a$ distances $r_l+1$ the following system of equations must hold
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:system2}
\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
\sum_{k=1}^m r_l^{(k)}=(m-a)r_l+a(r_l+1)=Nl\\
\sum_{k=1}^{m+1} r_l^{(k)}=(m+1-a')r_l+a'(r_l+1)=Nl\\
\end{array}
\right. .
\end{equation}
Solving (\ref{eq:system2}) gives the number $a'$ of distances $r_l+1$ in the configuration with one added excitation, $a'=a-r_l$. It means that $r_l$ distances $r_l+1$ will be replaced by $r_l+1$ distances $r_l$. Note that in the special case $m r_l = Nl$, one instead has to replace $r_l-1$ distances $r_l$ by $r_l$ distances $r_l-1$. With the same logic one understands that extracting one excitation from the system will replace $r_l+1$ distances $r_l$ with $r_l$ distances $r_l+1$. Considering the energy (\ref{eq:minpot}) we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:sdifferences}
\hspace*{-2cm} \Delta E_+=-h_++(r_1+1)V(r_1)-r_1V(r_1+1)+(r_2+1)V(r_2)-r_2V(r_2+1)+...+\nonumber\\
\hspace*{-2cm} \phantom{\Delta E_+=} +qV(q-1)-(q-1)V(q)+...+2qV(2q-1)-(2q-1)V(2q)+...\nonumber\\
\nonumber\\
\hspace*{-2cm} \Delta E_-=h_--(r_1+1)V(r_1)+r_1V(r_1+1)-(r_2+1)V(r_2)+r_2V(r_2+1)+...+\nonumber\\
\hspace*{-2cm} \phantom{\Delta E_-} -(q+1)V(q)+qV(q+1)+...-(2q+1)V(2q)+2qV(2q+1)+...\nonumber\\
\end{eqnarray}
where we are denoting with $\Delta E_\pm$ the change in energy when adding or extracting an excitation.
Setting the two quantities $\Delta E_\pm$ equal to zero gives a region of stability of the width
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:region}
h_+-h_-=\sum_{n}nq\left[V(nq-1)+V(nq+1)-2V(nq)\right].
\end{equation}
In \cite{Bak} it was proven that these intervals of stability for rational values of $\rho$ fill up the whole parameter space $h\in\mathbb{R}^{+}$, giving rise to a so called \textit{devil's staircase} as shown in Fig.\ref{fig:devil}.
\section{The two-species problem --- Compatible and incompatible ground state dispositions}
\label{sec:comm}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{comm.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Compatible (black squares) and incompatible (white squares) filling fractions for a periodic lattice of length $N=16,20,47$. The results are given for different excitation numbers $n_s$ and $n_w$ corresponding to filling fractions $\rho_s=n_s/N$ and $\rho_w=n_w/N$. The shaded area corresponds to cases $\rho_w+\rho_s>1$ which cannot occur since each lattice site only contains at most a single excitation.} \label{fig:comm}
\end{figure}
We will now turn to the case in which there are two different species --- $s$ and $w$ --- in the lattice. If we allowed for multiple occupations on each site we would clearly have that the energy (\ref{eq:ham2spec}) is minimized by disposing $s$ and $w$ excitations independently, using the algorithms (\ref{eq:hubbmethod}) and (\ref{eq:hubbmethod2}). However, as we allow just for one excitation per site we have the additional restriction $\rho_s+\rho_w\leq1$. Nevertheless, we will see, that in some cases, i.e. for some filling fractions, the two populations do not influence each other. The more interesting case, however, is encountered when both species cannot simultaneously assume their ground state configuration. We will refer to the former case as \textit{compatible} and to the latter as \textit{incompatible}.
The goal of this section is to define a method for distinguishing the compatible cases from the incompatible ones. Note that this is a purely combinatorial problem and that energy considerations are irrelevant for the notion of compatibility. To distinguish compatible from incompatible cases we consider the filling fractions $\rho_s=n_s/N$ and $\rho_w=n_w/N$, such that the distributions of the $s$- and $w$-species are periodic with the same period $N$. This causes no loss of generality as the filling fractions with two different periods, e.g. $\rho_s=n_s/N_s$ and $\rho_w=n_w/N_w$, can be always expressed in terms of a single period, $\rho_s=n_s N_w/(N_sN_w)$ and $\rho_w=n_w N_s/(N_sN_w)$. The two configurations corresponding to $\rho_s$ and $\rho_w$ are compatible if within a period each excitation of the kind $w$ is located in a hole with respect to the arrangement of the $s$-excitations ($s$-holes). The density of $s$-holes, denoted by $\tilde{\rho}_s$, is linked to the density of $s$-excitations by $\tilde{\rho}_s=1-\rho_s$, and the disposition of such holes can be evaluated by using the algorithm (\ref{eq:hubbmethod2}). As in the previous section we start with an example and then provide the general rule for distinguishing a compatible case from an incompatible one.
\subsection{Example}
Consider the filling fractions $\rho_w=3/16$ and $\rho_s=9/16$. The latter yields $\tilde{\rho}_s=7/16$. The disposition of $w$-excitations is 556, while the disposition of the $s$-holes is 3223222. If one is able to match the positions of the 3 $w$-excitations with the positions of three of the 7 $s$-holes without distorting the excitation distance pattern 556, then the $w$ and $s$ configurations are compatible. One can therefore think of the hole configuration as an effective inhomogeneous or distorted lattice with spacings $\tilde{a}=\{2,3\}$, disposed with repeated periods $...PPP...$, $P=3223222$. Using (\ref{eq:hubbmethod2}) with the effective filling fraction $\rho_w/\tilde{\rho}_s=3/7$, one finds that the configuration of the 3 $w$- excitations on the distorted lattice is $223$. Here the first 2 in the string $223$ means the first two elements in $P$ and so on, i.e. disposing the $w$-excitations on the distorted lattice gives the disposition $223 \rightarrow (32)(23)(222) = 556$. This is identical to the original disposition, so that the dispositions of the $w$- and $s$-species are compatible. With the same logic one finds that the filling fractions $\rho_w=3/16$, and $\rho_s=12/16$ are not compatible. In this case $\tilde{\rho}_s=4/16$, with a configuration of holes 4444, and there is no way we can combine multiples of 4 in a way to match the distances 5 and 6 between $w$-excitations.
\subsection{General algorithm}
The general algorithm to check the compatibility of two distributions of excitations is based on the following sets of numbers
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:commdens}
\mathcal{P}_l=\left\{r_l,r_l+1\right\}=\left\{\left\lfloor\frac{l}{\rho_w}\right\rfloor ,\left\lceil\frac{l}{\rho_w}\right\rceil \right\},\nonumber\\
\mathcal{H}_l=\left\{s_l,s_l+1\right\}=\left\{\left\lfloor\frac{l}{\tilde{\rho}_s}\right\rfloor ,\left\lceil\frac{l}{\tilde{\rho}_s}\right\rceil \right\},\nonumber\\
\mathcal{Q}_l=\left\{q_l,q_l+1\right\}=\left\{\left\lfloor\frac{l\tilde{\rho}_s}{\rho_w}\right\rfloor, \left\lceil\frac{l\tilde{\rho}_s}{\rho_w}\right\rceil \right\}.
\end{eqnarray}
These are the distances $\mathcal{P}_l$ between $l$-th-nearest $w$-excitations and the distances $\mathcal{H}_l$ between the $l$-th-nearest $s$-holes. The third set contains the distances between $l$-th-nearest $w$-excitations counted in units of lattice spacings of the distorted lattice. We focus here on the case $\rho_w/\tilde{\rho}_s<1$ (i.e. $\rho_s/\rho_w > 1$). The opposite case is described by simply inverting the roles of excitations and holes.
The distance between $l$-th nearest $w$ excitations is either $q_l$ or $q_{l+1}$ counted in distorted lattice spacings, where a distorted lattice spacing reads either $s_1$ or $s_1+1$ original lattice spacings.
If it is possible to group $q_l$ and $q_l+1$ distorted lattice spacings $s_1$ and $s_1+1$ in a way that they sum up to give the distances $r_l$ and $r_l+1$ then the two densities are compatible.
For example, the compatible case in Fig. \ref{fig:config} has $\rho_s = 1/2$ and $\rho_w=1/4$.
Notice, that in this simple example the sets Eq.(\ref{eq:commdens}) contain only one number and read $\mathcal{P}_l = \{4l\}, \mathcal{Q}_l = \{2l\}$ and for $l=1$ $\mathcal{H}_1 = \{2\}$. Clearly, the $q_l=2l$ distances $s_1=2$ yield the distance $4l=r_l$, i.e. the two densities are compatible.
On the other hand, considering e.g. the first incompatible filling fractions in Fig. \ref{fig:config} $\rho_s=5/16$, $\rho_w=1/4$ one has for $l=1$ $\mathcal{P}_1 = \{4\}, \mathcal{H}_1 = \{1,2\}, \mathcal{Q}_1 = \{2,3\}$, and in particular the distorted lattice is formed by repeated periods $P=12121212112$.
One can group 3 consecutive distances in $P$ to get $r_1=4$ (namely 112), but it is not possible to obtain 4 from grouping only 2 consecutive distances, so that already at level $l=1$ one can prove the incompatibility.
Formally, this means that two configurations are compatible if
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:condition}
\forall l\leq n_w,\hspace{1cm}\mathcal{H}_{q_l}\cap\mathcal{P}_l\neq \emptyset \wedge \mathcal{H}_{q_l+1}\cap\mathcal{P}_l\neq \emptyset.
\end{equation}
In Fig.\ref{fig:comm} we show a diagram illustrating the filling fractions that lead to compatible or incompatible dispositions of excitations for different system sizes.
As a byproduct of Eq. (\ref{eq:condition}) one learns that a sufficient condition for two filling fractions to be compatible is that they can be represented as $\rho_w=n_w/N$, and $\rho_s=1-k\rho_w$, with $1\leq k \leq \lfloor \rho_w^{-1} \rfloor$. In fact when $k=1$ the two configurations are dual (corresponding to the upper left to lower right diagonal in Fig. \ref{fig:comm}), in the sense that $\rho_w = \tilde{\rho}_s$. Increasing $k$ increases the number of holes while the $w$- and $s$-configurations remain compatible.
\section{Disposition of the excitations in the incompatible case}
\label{sec:disposition}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{config.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Microscopic configuration for different choices of the filling fractions $\rho_s$ and $\rho_w$. The excitations of the $s$-species are indicated with solid blue large circles and those of the $w$-species with solid red small circles. Empty sites are represented by empty circles. The case shown at the bottom of the figure is compatible (green shade), such that the arrangement of both the $s$- and $w$-excitations can be achieved by applying the algorithm (\ref{eq:hubbmethod2}) on the two species independently. All other examples are incompatible (red shade).} \label{fig:config}
\end{figure}
Let us now discuss the actual ground state of the Hamiltonian (\ref{eq:ham2spec}). For compatible filling fractions this is given by the distributions of the two species arranged independently using the algorithm (\ref{eq:hubbmethod2}). In case of the two filling fractions being incompatible the situation is more complicated. In order to make analytical progress we work under the assumption that $V_s/V_w\rightarrow \infty$, suchthat the arrangement of $s$-excitations can be considered as ``frozen''. Note, that such situation can be achieved in the context of a realisation of the system with atomic Rydberg gases when the two principal quantum numbers corresponding to the $s,w$ states are chosen appropriately, see \cite{Levi_2015} for more details. The problem then reduces to the arrangement of $w$-excitations interacting with a $1/r^\alpha$ potential constrained to sit in the $s$-holes. It is now convenient to define an effective inhomogeneous or distorted lattice with spacings $\tilde{a}\in \left\{\left\lfloor \tilde{\rho}_s^{-1} \right\rfloor ,\left\lceil \tilde{\rho}_s^{-1}\right\rceil \right\}$. Clearly the inhomogeneity alters the minimum energy disposition of the $w$-excitations, such that we cannot consider only nearest neighbor distances $r_1$ and $r_1+1$, but we have in general to consider distances up to $r_1+\beta$, with $\beta>1$. In the following we use the term ``distortion of the minimal set'' to denote that $l$-th nearest neighbours distances can take values in the set $\{r_l, r_l+1,...,r_l+\beta \}$ rather than $\{r_l,r_l+1\}$. The smallest distortion then refers to the case when only one more distance $r_l+2$, i.e. $\beta=2$, is included.
One can now exploit the convexity of the potential to demonstrate that the energy is minimized by the most homogeneous configuration. We start by considering the smallest distortion of the minimal set. Then the following relation holds:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:rplus2}
\sum_{i=1}^{n_w}r_l^{(i)}=(n_w-a-b)r_l+a(r_{l}+1)+b(r_{l}+2)=lN,
\end{equation}
where $a$ and $b$ are the number of occurrences of the distances $r_l+1$ and $r_l+2$ respectively.
We now want to show that the introduction of a longer distance results in an increase of the energy. To this end let us consider the set $\{r_l,r_l+1,r_l+2,r_l+3\}$ where only one additional distance $r_l+3$ is introduced in the ground state configuration, while the total number of excitations $n_w$ is kept fixed.
Then, since the sum (\ref{eq:rplus2}) must be conserved, we have \footnote{Adding the distance $r_l+3$ leads to new number of distances $r_l, r_l+1,r_l+2$ which are constrained to sum up to $Nl$ together with the single distance $r_l+3$. This can be achieved by adding and subtracting $r_l+3$ to (\ref{eq:rplus2}) and absorbing the $-(r_l+3)$ term in the remaining terms. In (\ref{eq:rplus3}) we have just absorbed the $-(r_l+3)$ term in a way that makes the convexity of the potential (\ref{eq:convex}) manifest.}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:rplus3}
\sum_{i=1}^{n_w}r_l^{(i)}=(n_w-a-b-1)r_l+a(r_{l}+1)+(b-1)(r_{l}+2)+(r_l-1)+(r_l+3).
\end{equation}
Calling $E_2$ the energy of the configuration (\ref{eq:rplus2}), and $E_3$ the one of (\ref{eq:rplus3}) the following holds
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:compare2}
E_3-E_2=V(r_l-1)+V(r_l+3)-V(r_l)-V(r_l+2) > 0.
\end{equation}
where the positivity stems from the convexity of the potential (\ref{eq:convex}). Analogously, one can prove by induction that having a larger set of distances is always energetically unfavourable, such that the minimal energy configuration is indeed the one achieved with the minimal set of distances, i.e. with $\beta=2$.
The procedure for finding the ground state configuration in the incompatible case can now be summarized as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item Define the inhomogeneous lattice using (\ref{eq:hubbmethod2}) with $\tilde{\rho}_s$.
\item Distribute the $w$-excitations in the effective lattice given by the disposition of $s$-holes, using algorithm (\ref{eq:hubbmethod2}) with $\rho_w/\tilde{\rho}_s$ as the effective filling fraction.
\end{itemize}
In Fig. \ref{fig:config} we show some examples of the ground state configurations for various filling fractions.
We now want to show that the above-described procedure automatically yields the minimal distortion, i.e. $\beta=2$, of the minimal set of distances of the $w$-excitations. Lets denote the two values assumed by the $s$-hole distances $\tilde{a}$ as $a'$,$a'+1$. It follows from (\ref{eq:hubbmethod2}), that the ground state configuration always contains strings of the form $a'^{k}(a'+1)$ and $a'^{k+1}(a'+1)$, or $(a'+1)^k a'$ and $(a'+1)^{k+1}a'$. The ground state configurations of the $s$-holes can then be divided into four mutually exclusive cases, depending on what kind of string of distances $a'$ they contain. If they contain
\begin{itemize}
\item $a'^{k+1}(a'+1)a'^{k}(a'+1)a'^{k+1}(a'+1)$,\\
the maximum distortion occurs for the configurations with $\mathcal{Q}_l=\{k+1,k+2\}$ for $l$th-nearest neighbor
In this case $s_{q_l}\in\{a'^{k+1},a'^k(a+1)\}$ and $s_{q_l+1}\in\{a'^{k+1}(a'+1),(a'+1)a'^k(a'+1)\}$, such that the maximum difference in length is $\beta=2$.
\item $a'^{k}(a'+1)a'^{k+1}(a'+1)a'^{k}(a'+1)$,\\
the maximum distortion occurs for the configurations with $\mathcal{Q}_l=\{k+1,k+2\}$. The maximum difference in length is $\beta=2$.
\item $(a'+1)^{k}a'(a'+1)^{k}a' (a'+1)^{k}a'$\\
the maximum distortion occurs for the configurations with $\mathcal{Q}_l=\{k,k+1\}$, giving again $\beta=2$ as the maximum length difference.
\item $(a'+1)^{k+1}a'(a'+1)^{k}a' (a'+1)^{k+1}a'$,\\
the maximum distortion occurs for the configurations with $\mathcal{Q}_l=\{k,k+1\}$. Also in this case the maximum difference in length is $\beta=2$.
\end{itemize}
It follows that apart for the compatible cases for which $\beta=1$, the algorithm described above yields automatically the minimal distortion, that is $\beta=2$, and consequently the resulting configuration minimizes the interaction energy.
\section{Stability region of the compatible phase and compatible to incompatible transitions}
\label{sec:stability}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{finite_jm.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Stability regions of the $w$-excitations. Numerical results for $\alpha=2$ on a chain of length $N=16$ are shown as blue dots.
The density of $s$-excitations is fixed to $\rho_s=1/2$, and we set the parameters $h_s=V_w=1$ and $V_s=100$. The superimposed red squares are the predictions of Eq. (\ref{eq:stabreg}) for the compatible to incompatible transitions in the thermodynamic limit. } \label{fig:finite}
\end{figure}
In the case of a single species the convexity of the potential is sufficient to determine the stability of a certain density through Eq. (\ref{eq:system2}). This is generally not true anymore in the two-species case and it is very challenging to determine which configuration or disposition is stable for given values of $h_w$ and $h_s$.
We can make progress by again assuming that $V_s/V_w\rightarrow\infty$. Here the results of the single-species problem apply for the $s$-excitations, while (\ref{eq:rplus2}) holds for the $w$ species, such that e.g. extracting one excitation leads to the following set of equations
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
(n_w-a-b)r_l+a(r_{l}+1)+b(r_{l}+2)=lN \label{eq:system3_1} \\
(n_w-a'-b'-1)r_l+a'(r_{l}+1)+b'(r_{l}+2)=lN\\
\end{array}
\right. .
\end{equation}
The aim is to find the variables $a',b'$ in terms of the variables $a,b$, similar to the case of a single species. However, the system of equations (\ref{eq:system3_1}) does not yield a complete solution. Instead it provides the consistency relation
\begin{equation}
a'-a=r_l-2(b'-b).
\label{eq:consistency}
\end{equation}
In order to proceed we restrict our analysis to the case $\rho_s=1/q_s$, and $\rho_w=1/q_w$. The independent configurations are clearly homogeneous with periods $q_s$ and $q_w$. The two configurations are incompatible if and only if $q_s$ and $q_w$ have no trivial common divisor. This can be shown as follows. Let us denote the positions of the excitations as $x_s = k q_s$ and $x_w = l q_w + \delta$, with $\delta\in \mathbb{Z}$. This means $\delta$ is a constant shift of the $w$-configuration with respect to the $s$ configuration. If $x_s \neq x_w$ for $\forall l,k \in \mathbb{Z}$, then the two configurations are compatible. We thus have
\begin{equation}
\delta \neq k q_s - l q_w = p(k q'_s-l q'_w)
\label{eq:delta}
\end{equation}
where in the second equality we explicitly collected $p$, the common divisor of $q_\mu$, such that $q_{\mu} = p q'_{\mu}$, $\mu=s,w$.
The term in brackets at the r.h.s. of (\ref{eq:delta}) is an integer number,
such that for non trivial $p\neq 1$ one can always find a shift $\delta$ (different from multiples of $p$) that yields non-conflicting configurations. On the other hand, if $p=1$, such shift does not exist and the configurations are incompatible.
Particularly interesting is to understand the transition from a compatible disposition (or phase) to an incompatible one. This can be studied as in Eqs. (\ref{eq:sdifferences})--(\ref{eq:region}) by perturbing the minimum energy configuration in the thermodynamic limit by subtracting or introducing one $w$-excitation. If we perturb a compatible configuration (where $q_{s,w}$ have a common divisor $p$) this will with certainty lead to an incompatible disposition, as it will introduce $q_w$ distances $q_w\pm1$:
Every $q_w\pm1$ distance shifts the excitations to the left/right by one site with respect to the ground state configuration (which contains only distances $q_w$ between nearest neighbours). This occurs $q_w$ times and since $q_w>p$, the condition (\ref{eq:delta}) cannot be satisfied.
Let us focus now in detail on the case $\nu=q_w/q_s\in \mathbb{N}^+$ for which the transition points can be found analytically. Using the procedure described in Section \ref{sec:disposition} one finds that the set of $l$-th nearest neighbour distances $\{ lq_w \}$ is modified in the following way. The insertion of one excitation introduces $l\nu$ distances $q_w-2$ and $l(q_w-2\nu)$ distances $q_w-1$. On the other hand subtracting one excitation will introduce $l\nu$ distances $q_w+2$, and $l(q_w-2\nu)$ distances $q_w+1$.
Notice that this is in agreement with the consistency condition dictated by (\ref{eq:consistency}).
Calling $h_w^{(\pm)}$ the values of $h_w$ for which these compatible to incompatible transitions occur, we find
\begin{eqnarray}
\hspace*{-2cm} h_w^{(-)}=\sum_{l=1}^{\infty}\left[\left(1+l(q_w-\nu) \right)V(lq_w)-l(q_w-2\nu)V(lq_w+1)-l\nu V(lq_w+2)\right],\nonumber\\
\nonumber \\
\hspace*{-2cm} h_w^{(+)}=\sum_{l=1}^{\infty}\left[\left(1-l(q_w-\nu) \right)V(lq_w)+l(q_w-2\nu)V(lq_w-1)+l\nu V(lq_w-2)\right].\nonumber\\
\label{eq:stabreg}
\end{eqnarray}
Considering a general form of the filling fractions it is very hard to read a repeated pattern of distances, such that we have not been able to determine regions of stability analytically.
In order to verify Eqs. (\ref{eq:stabreg}), we have determined the stability regions numerically for a finite chain of length $N=16$, where we have fixed $\rho_s=1/2$. The results are shown as blue dotted curve in Fig. \ref{fig:finite}. In this particular case the only accessible filling fractions are of the form $m/N$, $m \leq N$. However, since Eqs. (\ref{eq:stabreg}) are only valid for filling fractions of the form $1/q_w$, the only accessible values which can be used for a comparison are $\rho_w=1/8,1/4,1/2$. These regions are delimited by the red squares in Fig. \ref{fig:finite}. We can observe that the predictions in the thermodynamic limit tend to overestimate the values of the external field at which the transition happens compared to the finite chain calculations. This discrepancy is more pronounced for higher density of $w$-excitations. This is understandable as higher filling fractions introduce larger energy corrections in the finite chain.
\section{Conclusions}
We have investigated the statics of a two-component lattice gas with species-dependent $1/r^\alpha$ interactions in a one-dimensional lattice. The motivation behind this study is a link between this system and the current experiments in which cold atoms are excited to multiple high-lying Rydberg states. We found that the ground state arrangement of the species in the lattice falls into one of two possible categories which depend on the filling fractions of the two species. There is a compatible case in which the two species can be considered as independent, and incompatible one in which this is not the case. We have defined the criteria for compatibility of the two species configurations. In the limiting case in which we consider one of the two species as frozen, we showed how to determine the ground state configuration in the incompatible phase. Finally, for filling fractions of the form $1/q$, we determined the stability regions of the compatible phases in the thermodynamic limit and compared the analytical result with finite size numerical simulation.
\section{Acknowledgements}
E.L. would like to thank M. Marcuzzi for insightful discussions. The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Research Council under the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP/2007-2013) / ERC Grant Agreement No. 335266 (ESCQUMA), the EU-FET grants HAIRS 612862 and from the University of Nottingham. Further
funding was received through the H2020-FETPROACT-2014 Grant No. 640378 (RYSQ) and the EPSRC Grant no.\ EP/M014266/1.
\\
\\
\bibliographystyle{iopart-num}
\providecommand{\newblock}{}
|
\section{Introduction\label{sec:intro}}
Support vector machines (SVMs) have evolved to become one of the most widely used machine learning techniques today owing. They have also been employed for a number of applications to obtain cutting edge performance; novel uses have also been devised, where their utility has been amply demonstrated. The classical SVM \cite{L1svm} and the least squares SVM (LSSVM) \cite{suykens1999least} have spawned a multitude of formulations. Most SVM formulations require the solution of a Quadratic Programming Problem (QPP), involving an objective function maximizing the margin (with a term for the admissible error in case of soft-margin SVM) and suitable constraints. The solution to such an optimization problem is obtained in terms of a separating hyperplane, the determination of which is a direct consequence of the number of support vectors identified in the dataset. Practical machine learning problems of today involve large datasets, and efficient real-time performance of learning systems demands the use of learning algorithms which minimize the learning complexity, in terms of space, time or both.
The complexity of learning systems, such as SVMs, can be estimated by the Vapnik-Chervonenkis (VC) dimension. A smaller value of the VC dimension indicates robust generalization and lower test set error rates; hence a large VC dimension would be undesirable. As stated in pioneering work by Vapnik \cite{vapnik98}, Burges \cite{burges1998} and others, SVMs can have a large, possibly infinite VC dimension, which could also be infinite. This implies that SVMs may work well in practice, but there is no guarantee that they will generalize well. In fact, Vapnik and Chervonenkis \cite{vapnik1974theory} arrive at a bound on the stochastic approximation of the empirical risk, as given by Equations (\ref{eqn:vc_dim_1})-(\ref{eqn:vc_dim_2}), which holds with probability $(1-\eta)$.
\begin{eqnarray}
R(\lambda) \leq R_{emp}(\lambda) + \sqrt{\frac{h (ln \frac{2l}{h} + 1) - ln\frac{\eta}{4}}{l}} \label{eqn:vc_dim_1}\\
\text{Where, } \; R_{emp}(\lambda) = \frac{1}{l} \sum_{i=1}^l |f_\lambda(x_i)-y_i|, \label{eqn:vc_dim_2}
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent and $f_\lambda$ is a function having VC-dimension $h$ with the smallest empirical risk on a dataset $\lbrace x_i, i= 1,2,...,l\rbrace$ of $l$ data points with corresponding labels $\lbrace y_i, i= 1,2,...,l\rbrace$.
Recently, it has been shown that a formulation termed as the Minimal Complexity Machine (MCM) \cite{jd2014b} can be used to realize a large-margin classifier while minimizing an exact (\boldmath{$\Theta$}) bound on the VC dimension. The approach requires the solution of a linear programming problem, and generalizes well on benchmark datasets. The MCM outperforms SVMs in terms of test set accuracy, while using far fewer support vectors; in many instances, the MCM predicts better while using less than 10\% the number of support vectors used by SVMs \cite[Table III]{jd2014b}. Variants of the MCM have been proposed for regression \cite{mcm_regress}, fuzzy classification \cite{mcm_fuzzy} and feature selection for large datasets \cite{mcm_featsel}.
Our focus in this paper is a neurodynamical system that converges to the MCM solution, thus yielding a minimal VC dimension classifier. A dynamical system that converges to a minimum VC dimension classifier allows for high speed and real-time implementation, e.g. as an analogue VLSI chip. Since this approach yields a system that has low complexity, it opens a large vista of applications in the learning and modelling domains. The MCM solutions are usually very sparse; this provides the advantage of lower computational cost in a hardware implementation. These advantages carry over to VLSI implementations and are therefore of much interest.
Applications based on dynamical systems have attracted significant attention over the last three decades, owing to the potential for real time, high speed realizations as electronic circuits \cite{rodriguez1990nonlinear} or as recurrent neural networks \cite{wang1993analysis, xia1998general}. The behaviour of such neurodynamical systems is also interesting as it has been used in modeling biological systems \cite{freeman2007indirect, marupaka2012connectivity, corchs2001neurodynamical}, solving optimization problems \cite{yan2014collective, tank1986simple, chua1984nonlinear, brockett1988dynamical}, large-scale problems \cite{hasegawa2002solving}, fuzzy symbolic dynamics \cite{dobosz2010understanding} and working memory \cite{pascanu2011neurodynamical} among others.
There have also been several works which integrate the linear/quadratic programming approach within Neurodynamical systems. For instance, Bennett and Mangasarian \cite{mangasarian1992neural} proposed a technique for training neural networks using linear programming based on the Multi-surface Method, which was applied for breast cancer diagnosis. Faybusovich \cite{faybusovich1992dynamical, faybusovich1991dynamical, faybusovich1991hamiltonian} proposed dynamical systems for solving linear programming based on barrier functions and presented their Hamiltonian analysis. Maa and Shanblatt \cite{maa1992linear} present a neural network formulation for linear and quadratic programming, extending the network originally proposed by Kennedy and Chua \cite{kennedy1988neural}. Jun Wang presented a recurrent neural network for solving Linear Programming Problems (LPP) \cite{wang1993analysis} in 1993, which was followed by a neural network for solving LPPs with bounded variables by Xia and Wang \cite{xia1995neural} in 1995. In 1996, Wu et al. presented a neural network with global convergence guarantees \cite{wu1996high, xia1996new}. Other work in this direction includes the approaches presented by Oskoei and Amiri in 2006 \cite{ghasabi2006efficient} and by Chukwunenye in 2014 \cite{chukwunenyeinterior}. An overview of dynamical system methods for mathematical programming from a control perspective can be found in Bhaya and Kaszkurewicz \cite{bhaya2006control}.
Recent work on the application of dynamical systems involves solving LPs for estimation in the context of image restoration by Xia et al.\cite{xia2012discrete} and solving the assignment problem \cite{hu2012solving}. Liu et al. \cite{liu2013one} demonstrate the use of a neural network to solve a non-smooth optimization problem with linear constraints, while P{\'e}rez-Ilzarbe \cite{perez2013new} shows its use for solving a quadratic problem with linear constraints. In contrast the MCM formulation allows us to find a minimal VC dimension classifier utilizing a neurodynamical system that finds the optimal solution of a LPP, with guaranteed convergence and provably good generalization.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section \ref{sec2} introduces the Minimal Complexity Machine (MCM) and the associated optimization problem. Section \ref{sec3} describes the MCM neurodynamical system, and an analysis of its convergence on synthetic datasets is shown in Section \ref{sec4}. Section \ref{results} discusses simulation results. Section \ref{conclusion} contains concluding remarks.
\section{Motivating the Minimal Complexity Machine} \label{sec2}
Consider such a binary classification problem with data points $x^i, i = 1, 2, ..., M$, and where samples of class +1 and -1 are associated with labels $y_i = 1$ and $y_i = -1$, respectively. We assume that the dimension of the input samples is $n$, i.e. $x^i = (x_1^i, x_2^i, ..., x_n^i)^T$. The problem of interest is finding a hyperplane of the form
\begin{equation}
u^Tx + v = 0.
\end{equation}
that has the smallest Vapnik-Chervonenkis dimension $\gamma$, and that separates the samples with least error. In \cite{ jd2014b}, it has been shown that there exist constants $\alpha, \beta > 0$, $\alpha, \beta \in \mathbb{R}$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{exactbound}
\alpha h^2 \leq \gamma \leq \beta h^2,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{gather}
h = \frac{\operatorname*{Max}_{i = 1, 2, ..., M} \|u^T x^i + v\|}{\operatorname*{Min}_{i = 1, 2, ..., M} \|u^T x^i + v\|}.
\end{gather}
In other words, $h^2$ constitutes a tight or exact ($\theta$) bound on the VC dimension $\gamma$. An exact bound implies that $h^2$ and $\gamma$ are close to each other. Thus, the machine capacity can be minimized by minimizing $h^2$, or equivalently, $h$. The MCM optimization problem attempts to find a classifier with the smallest machine capacity, that makes as few misclassification errors on the training data as possible. This leads to a fractional programming problem, which, after suitable transformations, leads to the following optimization problem \cite{ jd2014b}. This transformation is discussed in detail in \cite[App. A]{jd2014b}.
\begin{gather}
\operatorname*{Min}_{w, b, h} ~~h + C \cdot \sum_{i = 1}^M q_i \label{obj5}\\
h \geq y_i \cdot [{w^T x^i + b}] + q_i, ~i = 1, 2, ..., M \label{cons51}\\
y_i \cdot [{w^T x^i + b}] + q_i \geq 1, ~i = 1, 2, ..., M \label{cons52} \\
q_i \geq 0, ~i = 1, 2, ..., M. \label{cons53}
\end{gather}
Here, the choice of $C$ allows a tradeoff between the complexity (machine capacity) of the classifier and the classification error. The soft margin MCM is described by the formulation Equations (\ref{obj5})-(\ref{cons53}).
Once $w$ and $b$ have been determined by solving Equations (\ref{obj5})-(\ref{cons53}), the class of a test sample $x$ may be determined as before by using the sign of $f(x)$ in Equation (\ref{testresult}).
\begin{equation}\label{testresult}
f(x) = w^T x + b
\end{equation}
In (\ref{sec3}), we show how the MCM solution can be determined by a dynamical system.
On similar lines, the kernel MCM obtains a hyperplane in $\phi$ space given by
\begin{equation}
f(x) = w^T \phi(x) + b
\end{equation}
where $\phi()$ maps input vectors into a higher dimensional image space. The kernel MCM solves the following optimization problem.
\begin{gather}
\operatorname*{Min}_{w, b, h, q} \; h + C \cdot \sum_{i = 1}^M q_i \label{objk7}\\
h \geq y_i \cdot \left[\sum_{j = 1}^M \lambda_j K(x^i, x^j) + b\right] + q_i, ~i = 1, 2, ..., M\\
y_i \cdot \left[\sum_{j = 1}^M \lambda_j K(x^i, x^j) + b\right] + q_i \geq 1, ~i = 1, 2, ..., M \\ \label{consk71}
q_i \geq 0, ~i = 1, 2, ..., M.
\end{gather}
Once the variables $\lambda_j, j = 1, 2, ..., M$ and $b$ are obtained, the class that a test point $x$ belongs to can be determined by evaluating the sign of
\begin{equation}
f(x) ~=~ w^T \phi(x) + b ~=~ \sum_{j = 1}^M \lambda_j K(x, x^j) + b.
\end{equation}\label{testval}
\section{The MCM neurodynamical system} \label{sec3}
The MCM implementation follows the approach of Nguyen \cite{nguyan2000nonlinear}, which solves a simple system of differential equations involving both primal and dual variables.
Consider a linear programming problem in the standard form as given by Equations (\ref{lp01})-(\ref{lp03}).
\begin{gather}
\max_{\theta} \; q^{T} \theta \label{lp01} \\
\mbox{s.t.}~G\theta \leq p \label{lp02} \\
\mbox{and}~\theta \geq 0 \label{lp03}
\end{gather}
The dual is given by Equations (\ref{lp04}) - (\ref{lp06}).
\begin{gather}
\min_{\delta} \; p^{T} \delta \label{lp04} \\
\mbox{s.t.}~ G^T \delta \geq q \label{lp05} \\
\mbox{and}~\delta \geq 0 \label{lp06}
\end{gather}
where $\theta,q \in \mathbb{R}^{n}$, $G \in \mathbb{R}^{m \times n}$ and $\delta, p \in \mathbb{R}^{m}$.
The primal (resp.~dual) network variables are denoted $\theta$(resp.~$\delta$) and evolve in time as described by the pair of coupled linear ODEs in Equations (\ref{df01})-(\ref{df02}).
\begin{gather}
\frac{d\theta}{dt} = p - G^{T} (\delta + k \frac{d\delta}{dt}) \label{df01} \\
\frac{d\delta}{dt} = -q - G (\theta + k \frac{d\theta}{dt}) \label{df02}
\end{gather}
where $k$ is a positive constant.
Supposing for the moment that the neural network defined by the Equations (\ref{df01})-(\ref{df02}) converges to an equilibrium, it can be shown that the optimal solution for the primal and dual formulations in Equations (\ref{lp01})-(\ref{lp06}) is an equilibrium of (\ref{df01})-(\ref{df02}), as follows:
Let the $i^{th}$ element of $\theta$ be denoted as $\theta_{i}$. The Equation (\ref{df01}) can be written as
\[
\frac{d\theta_{i}}{dt} =
\begin{cases}
(p - G^{T} (\delta + k \frac{d\delta}{dt}))_{i}, & \text{if } \theta_{i} > 0 \; \forall i \\
\max \lbrace (p - G^{T} (\delta + k \frac{d\delta}{dt}))_{i}, 0 \rbrace, & \text{if } \theta_{i} = 0 \; \forall i
\end{cases}
\]
If the equilibrium solution is represented as $\theta^{*}$ and $\delta^{*}$, then $\frac{d\theta
^{*}}{dt} = 0$ and $\frac{d\delta^{*}}{dt} = 0$. Thus, for all $i$,
\begin{equation}
(p - G^{T}\delta^{*})_{i} = 0, \; \text{if} \; \theta^{*}_{i} \geq 0 \label{eqn01}
\end{equation}
and,
\begin{equation}
(p - G^{T}\delta^{*})_{i} \leq 0, \; \text{if} \; \theta^{*}_{i} = 0 \label{eqn02}
\end{equation}
Further, for all $i$,
\begin{equation}
p - G^{T}\delta^{*} \leq 0 \label{eqn03}
\end{equation}
and,
\begin{equation}
G\theta^{*} - q \leq 0
\end{equation}
Hence $\theta^{*}$ and $\delta^{*}$ are feasible solutions for the system defined by Equations (\ref{df01})-(\ref{df02}). Also, we have
\begin{equation}
p^{T} \theta^{*} - \theta^{*} G^{T} \delta^{*} = 0 \label{eqn04}
\end{equation}
and,
\begin{equation}
\theta^{*} G^{T} \delta^{*} - q^{T} \delta^{*} = 0 \label{eqn05}
\end{equation}
which implies
\begin{equation}
p^{T} \theta^{*} = q^{T} \delta^{*}
\end{equation}
Hence $\theta^{*}$ and $\delta^{*}$ are optimal solutions for the system defined by Equations (\ref{df01})-(\ref{df02}).
Also, differentiating Equations (\ref{df01})-(\ref{df02}) we can write
\begin{eqnarray}
\ddot{\theta} & = -{G}^T (\dot{\delta} + k \ddot{\delta}) \label{thetadd}\\
\ddot{\delta} & = -{G} (\dot{\theta} + k \ddot{\theta}) \label{deltadd}
\end{eqnarray}
It remains to be proved that convergence to the equilibrium occurs. Eliminating $\delta$ (resp. $\theta$) from Equations (\ref{thetadd})-(\ref{deltadd}) yields a second order differential equation in $\theta$ (resp.$\delta$), namely:
\begin{align}
(k^2 {G}^T {G} - {I}) \ddot{\theta} + 2k {G}^T {G}\dot{\theta} + {G}^T {G} {\theta} & = -{G}^T {q} \label{theta2ode}\\
(k^2 {G} {G}^T - {I}) \ddot{\delta} + 2k {G} {G}^T\dot{\delta} + {G} {G}^T {\delta} & = -{G} {p} \label{delta2ode}
\end{align}
The asymptotic stability of these second order linear ODEs is determined by the properties of the coefficient matrices. For example, using \cite[Thm.~1]{bernstein1995lyapunov}, it follows that if $k$ is chosen large enough to make the matrix $k^2 {G}^T {G} - {I}$ positive definite and if ${G}^T {G}$ is positive definite, then (Equation (\ref{theta2ode})) is asymptotically stable, implying that, from all initial conditions, its trajectories converge to the equilibrium point $\theta^*$ (see Equation (\ref{eqn01}) ff.). One may note here that the assumption of one of the matrices $G^TG$ or $GG^T$ being positive definite is a mild one, since it corresponds to assuming that there are no redundant inequality constraints. Finally if $\theta$ converges, so must $\delta$, since we are assuming that both the primal and dual problems are feasible.
Hence, for the MCM, the system of equations that finds a minimum VC dimension classifier aims at finding the equilibrium solution for the set of variables represented by the augmented vector $X=[w, b, q, h]$. As mentioned initially, we consider data points $x^i, i = 1, 2, ..., M$, associated with labels $y^i \in \lbrace +1,-1 \rbrace, i=1,2, ..., M$, and each data-point being $n$-dimensional. Let the set of data points be denoted by $\psi_{M \times n}$, of which each row corresponds to $x^i$, and the label vector be denoted by a diagonal matrix $\Upsilon$, with diagonal entries $y_i$s, i.e. $\Upsilon = diag(y_1, y_2, y_3, ..., y_M)$.
The system finds a solution for each of the $(M+n+2)$ variables, as shown in Equation (\ref{eqn:mcm_nn_1}). Further, the LPP, as shown by Equations (\ref{lp01})-(\ref{lp03}), will now be defined by $q$, $G$ and $p$ as denoted by Equations (\ref{eqn:mcm_nn_2})-(\ref{eqn:mcm_nn_4}), where the notation $[\Upsilon \cdot \psi]$ represents the multiplication of matrices $\Upsilon$ and $\psi$; and $I$ represents the identity matrix.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{gather}
X=\begin{pmatrix}
w_{(1 \times n)} & b_{(1 \times 1)} & q_{(1 \times M)} & h_{(1 \times 1)}
\end{pmatrix}^T \label{eqn:mcm_nn_1}\\
q=\begin{pmatrix}
[0]_{(1 \times n)} & [0]_{(1 \times 1)} & C\times[1]_{(1 \times M)} & 1_{(1 \times 1)}
\end{pmatrix}^T \label{eqn:mcm_nn_2}\\
G=\begin{pmatrix}
[\Upsilon \cdot \psi]_{(M \times n)} & y_{(M \times 1)} & [0]_{(M \times M)} & -[1]_{(M \times 1)} \\
-[\Upsilon \cdot \psi]_{(M \times n)} & -y_{(M \times 1)} & -[I]_{(M \times M)} & [0]_{(M \times 1)}
\end{pmatrix} \label{eqn:mcm_nn_3} \\
p=\begin{pmatrix}
[0]_{(M \times 1)} & -[1]_{(M \times 1)}
\end{pmatrix}^T \label{eqn:mcm_nn_4}
\end{gather}
\end{figure*}
The system to be solved can now be represented as shown by Equations (\ref{mcmdf01})-(\ref{mcmdf02}), where $k \geq 0$ is a free parameter that can be tuned, and $Z$ is the dual variable of $X$.
\begin{gather}
\frac{dX}{dt} = p - G^{T} (Z + k \frac{dZ}{dt}) \label{mcmdf01} \\
\frac{dZ}{dt} = -q - G (X + k \frac{dX}{dt}) \label{mcmdf02}
\end{gather}
For the kernel MCM, the formulation can be obtained similarly by using $\phi(x^i)$, where $\phi()$ is a mapping to the chosen kernel space. The matrices $X$, $q$, $G$ and $p$ are then represented as shown in Equations (\ref{eqn:kmcm_nn_2})-(\ref{eqn:kmcm_nn_4}).
\begin{figure*}
\begin{gather}
X=\begin{pmatrix}
w_{(1 \times M)} & b_{(1 \times 1)} & q_{(1 \times M)} & h_{(1 \times 1)}
\end{pmatrix}^T \label{eqn:kmcm_nn_1}\\
q=\begin{pmatrix}
[0]_{(1 \times M)} & [0]_{(1 \times 1)} & C\times[1]_{(1 \times M)} & 1_{(1 \times 1)}
\end{pmatrix}^T \label{eqn:kmcm_nn_2}\\
G=\begin{pmatrix}
[\Upsilon [\phi(x^i)^T \phi(x^i)]]_{(M \times M)} & y_{(M \times 1)} & [0]_{(M \times M)} & -[1]_{(M \times 1)} \\
-[\Upsilon [\phi(x^i)^T \phi(x^i)]]_{(M \times M)} & -y_{(M \times 1)} & -[I]_{(M \times M)} & [0]_{(M \times 1)}
\end{pmatrix} \label{eqn:kmcm_nn_3} \\
p=\begin{pmatrix}
[0]_{(M \times 1)} & -[1]_{(M \times 1)}
\end{pmatrix}^T \label{eqn:kmcm_nn_4}
\end{gather}
\end{figure*}
Also, in terms of kernel matrix $K(x^i,x^j)=K((x^i)^T, x^j)=[\phi(x^i)^T \phi(x^j)]$, the matrix $G$ can also be written as shown in Equation (\ref{eqn:kmcm_nn_5}).
\begin{figure*}
\begin{equation}
G=\begin{pmatrix}
[\Upsilon \cdot K(x^i,x^j)]_{(M \times M)} & y_{(M \times 1)} & [0]_{(M \times M)} & -[1]_{(M \times 1)} \\
-[\Upsilon \cdot K(x^i,x^j)]_{(M \times M)} & -y_{(M \times 1)} & -[I]_{(M \times M)} & [0]_{(M \times 1)}
\end{pmatrix} \label{eqn:kmcm_nn_5}
\end{equation}
\end{figure*}
These can be substituted in Equations (\ref{mcmdf01})-(\ref{mcmdf02}) and the system can be solved to obtain the equilibrium solution for the kernel case.
\section{Simulations of the MCM Neurodynamical System \label{sec4}}
In order to visualize the convergence of the system of differential equations, we provide the plots showing the evolution of the decision variables of our system, namely $w_i$'s, $b$ and $h$ over time. We consider the case for two datasets (both two dimensional), a linearly separable dataset shown in Fig. \ref{fig:dataset2} and a dataset with points (belonging to the two classes) randomly drawn from a normal distribution, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:dataset1}.
\begin{figure*}[hbtp]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{dataset1}
\caption{A Linearly Separable Dataset}
\label{fig:dataset2}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{dataset2}
\caption{Dataset with points drawn from normal distribution}
\label{fig:dataset1}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{(a) Example of a linearly separable dataset, and (b) a dataset with points drawn from a normal distribution.}
\label{fig:datasets}
\end{figure*}
The plots for the decision variables for the linearly separable dataset are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:dataset1_plots}. The horizontal axis indicates the time in milliseconds. Figs. \ref{fig:dataset1_w1} and \ref{fig:dataset1_w2} show the plots of $w_1$, $w_2$ and their derivatives $\dot{w_1}$, $\dot{w_2}$ respectively. Plots of convergence of $b$ and its derivative $\dot{b}$ are shown in Figs. \ref{fig:dataset1_b1} and \ref{fig:dataset1_b2}, whereas those for $h$ and its derivative $\dot{h}$ are shown in Figs. \ref{fig:dataset1_h1} and \ref{fig:dataset1_h2}.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{dataset1_w1}
\caption{Plot of $w_1$ and $w_2$}
\label{fig:dataset1_w1}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{dataset1_w2}
\caption{Plot of $\dot{w_1}$ and $\dot{w_2}$}
\label{fig:dataset1_w2}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{dataset1_b1}
\caption{Plot of $b$}
\label{fig:dataset1_b1}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{dataset1_b2}
\caption{Plot of $\dot{b}$}
\label{fig:dataset1_b2}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.48\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{dataset1_h1}
\caption{Plot of $h$}
\label{fig:dataset1_h1}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.48\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{dataset1_h2}
\caption{Plot of $\dot{h}$}
\label{fig:dataset1_h2}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Plots of convergence of the decision variables $w$, $b$ and $h$, and their first derivatives $\dot{w}$, $\dot{b}$ and $\dot{h}$ with time, for the linearly separable dataset shown in Fig. \ref{fig:dataset2}.}
\label{fig:dataset1_plots}
\end{figure*}
The plots for the decision variables for the dataset with points drawn from a normal distribution are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:dataset2_plots}. The horizontal axis represents time in milliseconds. Figs. \ref{fig:dataset2_w1} and \ref{fig:dataset2_w2} show the plots of $w_1$, $w_2$ and their derivatives $\dot{w_1}$, $\dot{w_2}$ respectively. Plots of convergence of $b$ and its derivative $\dot{b}$ are shown in Figs. \ref{fig:dataset2_b1} and \ref{fig:dataset2_b2}, whereas those for $h$ and its derivative $\dot{h}$ are shown in Figs. \ref{fig:dataset2_h1} and \ref{fig:dataset2_h2}.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{dataset2_w1}
\caption{Plot of $w_1$ and $w_2$}
\label{fig:dataset2_w1}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{dataset2_w2}
\caption{Plot of $\dot{w_1}$ and $\dot{w_2}$}
\label{fig:dataset2_w2}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{dataset2_b1}
\caption{Plot of $b$}
\label{fig:dataset2_b1}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{dataset2_b2}
\caption{Plot of $\dot{b}$}
\label{fig:dataset2_b2}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{dataset2_h1}
\caption{Plot of $h$}
\label{fig:dataset2_h1}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.49\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{dataset2_h2}
\caption{Plot of $\dot{h}$}
\label{fig:dataset2_h2}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Plots of convergence of the decision variables $w$, $b$ and $h$, and their first derivatives $\dot{w}$, $\dot{b}$ and $\dot{h}$ with time, for the dataset with points drawn from a normal distribution, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:dataset1}}
\label{fig:dataset2_plots}
\end{figure*}
\section{Results}\label{results}
The MCM neurodynamical system was implemented in Matlab vR2013a and the code executed on a laptop running 64-bit Windows Operating System with Intel i3 processors @2.53 Ghz and 4 Gb RAM.
Table \ref{result_linear} shows the performance of the linear MCM dynamical system on a set of benchmark datasets from the UCI machine learning repository. The table also provides comparison with the standard SVM formulation in the linear case. For results in case of the linear MCM, see \cite{ jd2014b}. Accuracies are shown in a mean $\pm$ standard deviation format, computed using a standard five fold cross validation methodology. One can see that the MCM dynamical system outperforms the standard SVM in terms of test set accuracies.
\begin{table*}[!htbp]
\centering
\caption{Test Set Accuracies for the Linear MCM Dynamical System}
\scalebox{0.8}{
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
S. No. & Dataset & Size (samples $\times$ features) & Linear MCM Dynamical System & Linear SVM \\
\hline
1 & Hayes Roth & 132 $\times$ 5 & \textbf{76.11} $\pm$ 8.72 & 73.56 $\pm$ 7.73 \\
2 & Hepatitis & 165 $\times$ 19 & \textbf{69.35} $\pm$ 8.71 & 60.64 $\pm$ 7.19 \\
3 & TA Evaluation & 151 $\times$ 5 & \textbf{69.52} $\pm$ 6.92 & 64.94 $\pm$ 6.56 \\
4 & Promoters & 106 $\times$ 58 & \textbf{68.92 $\pm$ 6.91} & 67.78 $\pm$ 10.97 \\
5 & Voting & 435 $\times$ 16 & \textbf{95.97} $\pm$ 3.75 & 94.48 $\pm$ 2.46 \\
6 & Australian & 690 $\times$ 14 & \textbf{85.79} $\pm$ 2.59 & 84.49 $\pm$ 1.18 \\
7 & Bands & 512 $\times$ 39 & \textbf{72.58} $\pm$ 3.98 & 71.69 $\pm$ 3.81 \\
8 & Fertility & 100 $\times$ 10 & 86.00 $\pm$ \textbf{6.91} & 86.00 $\pm$ 9.01 \\
9 & Spect & 267 $\times$ 22 & 91.46 $\pm$ \textbf{4.28} & 91.99 $\pm$ 4.90 \\
10 & Haberman & 306 $\times$ 3 & 72.01 $\pm$ \textbf{3.54} & 72.56 $\pm$ 3.73 \\
11 & Planning-Relax & 182 $\times$ 13 & \textbf{72.41} $\pm$ 7.81 & 71.42 $\pm$ 7.37 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}%
}
\label{result_linear}%
\end{table*}%
Table \ref{result_kernel} shows the performance of the kernel MCM dynamical system on a set of benchmark datasets from the UCI machine learning repository. The table also provides a comparison with SVM using the RBF kernel. The hyper-parameter $C$ was tuned by using grid search. A similar search was used to determine the width of the RBF kernel. As indicated previously, accuracies are shown in mean $\pm$ standard deviation format, computed using a standard five fold cross validation methodology. One can see that the MCM dynamical system yields comparable or better performance than the SVM. Further, it is observed that the kernel MCM always uses fewer support vectors; indeed, up to \textbf{74.3\%} fewer support vectors (computed on the average number of support vectors). It may be noted that the number of support vectors presented in Table \ref{result_kernel} have been shown in the mean $\pm$ standard deviation format, across the folds on which the accuracies have been computed, and hence the values are shown as floating point numbers. Observe that in rows \textbf{1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10} of Table \ref{result_kernel}, the proposed kernel MCM achieves a higher test set accuracy with a smaller number of support vectors than the standard kernel SVM. Since the number of support vectors has a significant bearing on the number of computations, the MCM can be seen to be parsimonious in terms of computational requirements. This also translates into lower power consumption figures in hardware and VLSI realizations \cite{chakrabartty2005sub, genov2003kerneltron}.
\begin{table*}[!htbp]
\centering
\caption{Test Set Accuracies and number of Support Vectors (\#SVs) for the Kernel MCM Dynamical System (KMCM-DS) compared with standard RBF Kernel SVM (KSVM)}
\scalebox{0.75}{
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c||c|c||c|c|}
\hline
S. No. & Dataset & \pbox{20cm} {Size (samples $\times$ \\ features)} & \pbox{20cm}{ KMCM-DS \\ Test Set Acc.} & KMCM-DS \#SVs & \pbox{20cm}{KSVM \\ Test Set Acc.} & KSVM \#SVs\\
\hline
\hline
1 & Spect & 267 $\times$ 22 & \textbf{91.99} $\pm$ 4.90 & \textbf{49.6 $\pm$ 0.54} & 84.21 $\pm$ 4.90 & 50.2 $\pm$ 9.88\\
2 & TA Evaluation & 151 $\times$ 5 & \textbf{80.86} $\pm$ 6.87 & \textbf{26.60} $\pm$ 32.43 & 68.88 $\pm$ 6.48 & 86.00 $\pm$ 3.22\\
3 & Fertility Diagnosis & 100 $\times$ 10 & 88.00 $\pm$ \textbf{1.03} & \textbf{9.80} $\pm$ 19.60 & 88.00 $\pm$ 9.27 & 38.20 $\pm$ 1.60 \\
4 & Hayes Roth &132 $\times$ 5 & \textbf{81.45} $\pm$ 7.98 & \textbf{33.23 $\pm$ 1.11} & 79.57 $\pm$ 6.60 & 84.20 $\pm$ 2.04\\
5 & Hepatitis &165 $\times$ 19 & 79.35 $\pm$ \textbf{4.09} & \textbf{20.00 $\pm$ 0.00} & 82.57 $\pm$ 6.32 & 72.20 $\pm$ 4.31 \\
6 & Promoters & 106 $\times$ 58 & \textbf{69.87} $\pm$ 7.85 & \textbf{84.8 $\pm$ 0.44} & 66.45 $\pm$ 6.52 & 94.0 $\pm$ 0.70 \\
7 & Bands & 512 $\times$ 39 & \textbf{77.88} $\pm$ 4.14 & \textbf{341.2 $\pm$ 0.44} & 75.69 $\pm$ 3.81 & 427.6 $\pm$ 3.78\\
8 & Planning-Relax & 182 $\times$ 13 & \textbf{78.57 $\pm$ 8.23} & \textbf{116.8 $\pm$ 0.54} & 71.42 $\pm$ 8.43 & 145.6 $\pm$ 6.45 \\
9 & Haberman & 306 $\times$ 3 & \textbf{76.45 $\pm$ 4.37} & \textbf{71.0 $\pm$ 0.414} & 72.89 $\pm$ 4.58 & 137.4 $\pm$ 3.36 \\
10 & Australian & 690 $\times$ 14 & \textbf{76.95} $\pm$ 2.63 & \textbf{152} $\pm$ 4.86 & 66.23 $\pm$ 1.84 & 244.8 $\pm$ 4.604 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}%
}
\label{result_kernel}%
\end{table*}%
\section{Conclusion}\label{conclusion}
In this paper, we describe a Neurodynamical System that converges to a classifier with minimum VC dimension. A learning machine with such properties is attractive for building circuits that can exploit the advantages of speed and parallelism that neurodynamical systems offer. It is also of interest as part of larger learning networks and adaptive control systems. Further work in this direction involves developing neurodynamical systems using MCMs for regression and other classification scenarios such as multilabel and multiclass problems.
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
The classical notion of minimax risk, which plays a central role in
decision theory, allows for the statistician to implement any possible
estimator, regardless of its computational cost. For many problems,
there are a variety of estimators, which can be ordered in terms of
their computational complexity. Given that it is usually feasible
only to implement polynomial-time methods, it has become increasingly
important to study computationally-constrained analogues of the
minimax estimator, in which the choice of estimator is restricted to a
subset of computationally efficient estimators~\cite{Wai14_ICM}. A
fundamental question is when such computationally-constrained forms of
minimax risk estimation either coincide or differ in a fundamental way
from their classical counterpart.
The goal of this paper is to explore such gaps between classical and
computationally practical minimax risks, in the context of prediction
error for high-dimensional sparse regression. Our main contribution
is to establish a fundamental gap between the classical minimax
prediction risk and the best possible risk achievable by a broad class
of $M$-estimators based on coordinate-separable regularizers, one
which includes various nonconvex regularizers that are used in
practice.
In more detail, the classical linear regression model is based on a
response vector $\yvec \in \real^\numobs$ and a design matrix $\Xmat
\in \real^{\numobs \times \usedim}$ that are linked via the relationship
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:standard-linear-model}
\yvec & = \Xmat \thetastar + w,
\end{align}
where the vector $w \in \real^\numobs$ is a random noise vector.
Our goal is to estimate the unknown regression vector $\thetastar \in
\real^\usedim$. Throughout this paper, we focus on the
standard Gaussian model, in which the entries
of the noise vector $w$ are i.i.d.~$N(0, \sigma^2)$ variates, and the
case of deterministic design, in which the matrix $\Xmat$ is viewed as
non-random. In the sparse variant of this model, the regression
vector is assumed to have a small number of non-zero coefficients. In
particular, for some positive integer $\kdim < \usedim$, the vector
$\thetastar$ is said to be $\kdim$-sparse if it has at most $\kdim$
non-zero coefficients. Thus, the model is parameterized by the triple
$(\numobs, \usedim, \kdim)$ of sample size $\numobs$, ambient
dimension $\usedim$, and sparsity $\kdim$. We use $\Ball_0(\kdim)$ to
the denote the $\ell_0$-``ball'' of all $\usedim$-dimensional vectors
with at most $\kdim$ non-zero entries.
An estimator $\thetahat$ is a measurable function of the pair $(y,
X)$, taking values in $\real^\usedim$, and its quality can be assessed
in different ways. In this paper, we focus on its \emph{fixed design
prediction error}, given by $\Exs \big[ \frac{1}{\numobs} \|X(
\thetahat - \thetastar)\|_2^2 \big]$, a quantity that measures how
well $\thetahat$ can be used to predict the vector $X \thetastar$ of
noiseless responses. The worst-case prediction error of an estimator
$\thetahat$ over the set $\Ball_0(\kdim)$ is given by
\begin{align}
\MSE(\thetahat; \Xmat) & \defn \sup_{\thetastar\in \Ball_0(\kdim)}
\frac{1}{\numobs}\E[\ltwos{\Xmat (\thetahat - \thetastar)}^2]
\end{align}
Given that $\thetastar$ is $\kdim$-sparse, the most direct approach
would be to seek a $\kdim$-sparse minimizer to the least-squares cost
$\|\yvec - \Xmat \theta\|_2^2$, thereby obtaining the $\ell_0$-based
estimator
\begin{align}
\label{EqnDefnEllZeroEstimator}
\thetazero & \in \arg \min_{\theta\in \Ball_0(\kdim)} \|\yvec - \Xmat
\theta\|_2^2.
\end{align}
The $\ell_0$-based estimator $\thetazero$ is
known~\cite{BunWegTsyb07,raskutti2011minimax} to satisfy a bound of
the form
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:l0-optimal-rate}
\MSE(\thetazero; \Xmat) \precsim \frac{\sigma^2 \, \kdim \log
\usedim}{\numobs},
\end{align}
where $\precsim$ denotes an inequality up to constant factors
(independent of the triple $(\numobs, \usedim, \kdim)$ as well as the
standard deviation $\sigma$). However, it is not tractable to compute
this estimator in a brute force manner, since there are ${\usedim
\choose \kdim}$ subsets of size $\kdim$ to consider.
The computational intractability of the $\ell_0$-based estimator has
motivated the use of various heuristic algorithms and approximations,
including the basis pursuit method~\cite{chen1998atomic}, the Dantzig
selector~\cite{candes2007dantzig}, as well as the extended family of
Lasso estimators~\cite{tibshirani1996regression,
chen1998atomic,zou2006adaptive,belloni2011square}. Essentially,
these methods are based on replacing the $\ell_0$-constraint with its
$\ell_1$-equivalent, in either a constrained or penalized form. There
is now a very large body of work on the performance of such methods,
covering different criteria including support recovery, $\ell_2$-norm
error and prediction error (e.g., see the book~\cite{BuhVan11} and
references therein).
For the case of fixed design prediction error that is the primary
focus here, such $\ell_1$-based estimators are known to achieve the
bound~\eqref{eqn:l0-optimal-rate} only if the design matrix $\Xmat$
satisfies certain conditions, such as the restricted eigenvalue (RE)
condition or compatibility
condition~\cite{bickel2009simultaneous,van2009conditions} or the
stronger restricted isometry property~\cite{candes2007dantzig}; see
the paper~\cite{van2009conditions} for an overview of these various
conditions, and their inter-relationships. Without such conditions,
the best known guarantees for $\ell_1$-based estimators are of the
form
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:l1-achievable-rate}
\MSE(\thetahat_{\ell_1}; \Xmat) \precsim \sigma \, R \,
\sqrt{\frac{\log \usedim}{\numobs}},
\end{align}
a bound that is valid without any RE conditions on the design matrix
$\Xmat$ whenever the $\kdim$-sparse regression vector $\thetastar$ has
$\ell_1$-norm bounded by $R$ (e.g., see the
papers~\cite{BunWegTsyb07,Nem00,raskutti2011minimax}.)
The substantial gap between the ``fast''
rate~\eqref{eqn:l0-optimal-rate} and the ``slow''
rate~\eqref{eqn:l1-achievable-rate} leaves open a fundamental
question: is there a computationally efficient estimator attaining the
bound~\eqref{eqn:l0-optimal-rate} for general design matrices? In the
following subsections, we provide an overview of the currently known
results on this gap, and we then provide a high-level statement of
the main result of this paper.
\subsection{Lower bounds for Lasso}
Given the gap between the fast rate~\eqref{eqn:l0-optimal-rate} and
the Lasso's slower rate~\eqref{eqn:l1-achievable-rate}, one
possibility might be that existing analyses of prediction error are
overly conservative, and $\ell_1$-based methods can actually achieve
the bound~\eqref{eqn:l0-optimal-rate}, without additional constraints
on $\Xmat$. Some past work has given negative answers to this
quesiton. Foygel and Srebro~\cite{FoySre11} constructed a 2-sparse
regression vector and a random design matrix for which the Lasso
prediction error with any choice of regularization parameter
$\regparn$ is lower bounded by $1/\sqrt{\numobs}$. In particular,
their proposed regression vector is $\thetastar
=(0,\dots,0,\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2})$. In their design matrix, the
columns are randomly generated with distinct covariances, and
moreover, such that the rightmost column is strongly correlated with
the other two columns on its left. With this particular regression
vector and design matrix, they show that Lasso's prediction error is
lower bounded by $1/\sqrt{\numobs}$ for \emph{any} choice of Lasso
regularization parameter $\lambda$. This construction is explicit for
Lasso, and thus does not apply to more general M-estimators. Moreover,
for this particular counterexample, there is a one-to-one
correspondence between the regression vector and the design matrix, so
that one can identify the non-zero coordinates of $\thetastar$ by
examining the design matrix. Consequently, for this construction, a
simple reweighted form of the Lasso can be used to achieve the fast
rate. In particular, the reweighted Lasso estimator
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:general-reweighed-lasso}
\thetahat_{\rm wl} \in \arg \min_{\theta\in \R^d} \left \{ \|\yvec -
\Xmat \theta\|_2^2 + \lambda \sum_{j=1}^d \alpha_j |\theta_j| \right
\},
\end{align}
with $\lambda$ chosen in the usual manner ($\lambda \asymp \sigma
\sqrt{\frac{\log \usedim}{\numobs}}$), weights $\alpha_{d-1} =
\alpha_d = 1$, and the remaining weights $\{\alpha_1, \ldots,
\alpha_{d-2} \}$ chosen to be sufficiently large, has this property.
Dalalyan et al.~\cite{dalalyan2014prediction} construct a stronger
counter-example, for which the prediction error of Lasso is again
lower bounded by $1/\sqrt{n}$. For this counterexample, there is no
obvious correspondence between the regression vector and the design
matrix. Nevertheless, as we show in
Appendix~\ref{sec:fast-rate-dalalyan}, the reweighted Lasso
estimator~\eqref{eqn:general-reweighed-lasso} with a proper choice of
the regularization coefficients still achieves the fast rate on this
example. Another related piece of work is by Cand{\`e}s and
Plan~\cite{candes2009near}. They construct a design matrix for which
the Lasso estimator, when applied with the usual choice of
regularization parameter $\lambda \asymp \sigma (\frac{\log
\usedim}{\numobs})^{1/2}$, has sub-optimal prediction error. Their
matrix construction is spiritually similar to ours, but the
theoretical analysis is limited to the Lasso for a particular choice
of regularization parameter. It does not rule out the possibility that
other choices of regularization parameters, or other polynomial-time
estimators can achieve the fast rate. In contrast, our hardness result
applies to general $M$-estimators based on coordinatewise separable
regularizers, and it allows for arbitrary regularization parameters.
\subsection{Complexity-theoretic lower bound for polynomial-time sparse estimators}
In our own recent work~\cite{zhang2014lower}, we have provided a
complexity-theoretic lower bound that applies to a very broad class of
polynomial-time estimators. The analysis is performed under a
standard complexity-theoretic condition---namely, that the class $\np$
is not a subset of the class $\ppoly$---and shows that there is no
polynomial-time algorithm that returns a $\kdim$-sparse vector that
achieves the fast rate. The lower bound is established as a function
of the restricted eigenvalue of the design matrix. Given sufficiently
large $(\numobs,\kdim,\usedim)$ and any $\gamma > 0$, a design matrix
$X$ with restricted eigenvalue $\gamma$ can be constructed, such that
every polynomial-time $k$-sparse estimator $\thetahat_{\rm poly}$ has
its minimax prediction risk lower bounded as
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:polytime-paper-lower-bound}
\MSE(\thetahat_{\rm poly}; \Xmat) \succsim \frac{\sigma^2 \,
\kdim^{1-\delta} \log \usedim}{\gamma \numobs},
\end{align}
where $\delta > 0$ is an arbitrarily small positive scalar. Note that
the fraction $\kdim^{-\delta}/\gamma$, which characterizes the gap between the fast rate and the rate~\eqref{eqn:polytime-paper-lower-bound}, could be arbitrarily large. The lower bound has the following consequence:
any estimator that achieves the fast rate must either not be polynomial-time,
or must return a regression vector that is not $k$-sparse.
The condition that the estimator is $k$-sparse is essential in the
proof of lower bound~\eqref{eqn:polytime-paper-lower-bound}. In
particular, the proof relies on a reduction between estimators with
low prediction error in the sparse linear regression model, and
methods that can solve the 3-set covering
problem~\cite{natarajan1995sparse}, a classical problem that is known
to be NP-hard. The 3-set covering problem takes as input a list of
3-sets, which are subsets of a set $\mathcal{S}$ whose cardinality is
$3k$. The goal is to choose $k$ of these subsets in order to cover the
set $\mathcal{S}$. The lower
bound~\eqref{eqn:polytime-paper-lower-bound} is established by showing
that if there is a $k$-sparse estimator achieving better prediction
error, then it provides a solution to the 3-set covering problem, as
every non-zero coordinate of the estimate corresponds to a chosen
subset. This hardness result does not eliminate the possibility of
finding a polynomial-time estimator that returns dense vectors
satisfying the fast rate. In particular, it is possible that a dense
estimator cannot be used to recover a a good solution to the 3-set
covering problem, implying that it is not possible to use the hardness
of $3$-set covering to assert the hardness of achieving low prediction
error in sparse regression.
At the same time, there is some evidence that better prediction error
can be achieved by dense estimators. For instance, suppose that we
consider a sequence of high-dimensional sparse linear regression
problems, such that the restricted eigenvalue $\gamma =
\gamma_\numobs$ of the design matrix $X \in \real^{\numobs \times
\usedim}$ decays to zero at the rate $\gamma_\numobs = 1/\numobs^2$.
For such a sequence of problems, as $\numobs$ diverges to infinity,
the lower bound~\eqref{eqn:polytime-paper-lower-bound}, which applies
to $\kdim$-sparse estimators, goes to infinity, whereas the Lasso
upper bound~\eqref{eqn:l1-achievable-rate} converges to zero.
Although this behavior is somewhat mysterious, it is not a
contradiction. Indeed, what makes Lasso's performance better than the
lower bound~\eqref{eqn:polytime-paper-lower-bound} is that it allows
for non-sparse estimates. In this example, truncating the Lasso's
estimate to be $k$-sparse will substantially hurt the prediction
error. In this way, we see that proving lower bounds for non-sparse
estimators---the problem to be addressed in this paper---is a
substantially more challenging task than proving lower bound for estimators
that must return sparse outputs.
\subsection{Main results of this paper}
With this context in place, let us now turn to a high-level statement
of the main results of this paper. More precisely, our contribution
is to provide additional evidence against the polynomial achievability
of the fast rate~\eqref{eqn:l0-optimal-rate}, in particular by showing
that the slow rate~\eqref{eqn:l1-achievable-rate} is a lower bound for
a broad class of M-estimators, namely those based on minimizing a
least-squares cost function together with a coordinate-wise
decomposable regularizer. In particular, we consider estimators that
are based on an objective function of the form $L(\theta; \lambda) =
\frac{1}{\numobs} \|y - X \theta\|_2^2 + \lambda \, \ensuremath{\reg}(\theta)$,
for a weighted regularizer $\ensuremath{\reg}: \real^\usedim \rightarrow \real$
that is coordinate-separable. See Section~\ref{SecCoord} for a
precise definition of this class of estimators. Our first main result
(Theorem~\ref{theorem:main-lower-bound}) establishes that there is
always a matrix $\Xmat\in \R^{\numobs\times \usedim}$ such that for
any coordinate-wise separable function~$\reg$ and for any choice of
weight $\lambda \geq 0$, the objective $L$ always has at least one
local optimum $\thetahat_\lambda$ such that
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:intro-main-result}
\sup_{\thetastar\in \Ball_0(\kdim)} \E \Big[ \frac{1}{\numobs}
\ltwos{\Xmat (\thetahat_\lambda - \thetastar \big)}^2 \Big]
\succsim \frac{\sigma}{\sqrt{\numobs}}.
\end{align}
Moreover, if the regularizer $\ensuremath{\reg}$ is convex, then this lower
bound applies to all global optima of the convex criterion $L$. This
lower bound is applicable to many popular estimators, including the
ridge regression estimator~\cite{hoerl1970ridge}, the basis pursuit
method~\cite{chen1998atomic}, the Lasso
estimator~\cite{tibshirani1996regression}, the weighted Lasso
estimator~\cite{zou2006adaptive}, the square-root Lasso
estimator~\cite{belloni2011square}, and least squares based on
nonconvex regularizers such as the SCAD penalty~\cite{fan2001variable}
or the MCP penalty~\cite{zhang2010nearly}.
In the nonconvex setting, it is impossible (in general) to guarantee
anything beyond local optimality for any solution found by a
polynomial-time algorithm~\cite{ge2015strong}. Nevertheless, to play
the devil's advocate, one might argue that the assumption that an
adversary is allowed to pick a bad local optimum could be overly
pessimistic for statistical problems. In order to address this
concern, we prove a second result
(Theorem~\ref{theorem:gradient-descent-lower-bound}) that demonstrates
that bad local solutions are difficult to avoid. Focusing on a class
of local descent methods, we show that given a random isotropic
initialization centered at the origin, the resulting stationary points
have poor mean-squared error---that is, they can only achieve the slow
rate. In this way, this paper shows that the gap between the fast and
slow rates in high-dimensional sparse regression cannot be closed via
standard application of a very broad class of methods. In conjunction
with our earlier complexity-theoretic paper~\cite{zhang2014lower}, it
adds further weight to the conjecture that there is a fundamental gap
between the performance of polynomial-time and exponential-time
methods for sparse prediction.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. We begin in
Section~\ref{SecBackground} with further background, including a
precise definition of the family of $M$-estimators considered in this
paper, some illustrative examples, and discussion of the prediction
error bound achieved by the Lasso. Section~\ref{sec:main-result} is
devoted to the statements of our main results, along with discussion
of their consequences. In Section~\ref{SecProofs}, we provide the
proofs of our main results, with some technical lemmas deferred to the
appendices. We conclude with a discussion in
Section~\ref{SecDiscussion}.
\section{Background and problem set-up}
\label{SecBackground}
As previously described, an instance of the sparse linear regression
problem is based on observing a pair $(\Xmat, \yvec)\in
\R^{\numobs\times \usedim} \times \R^\numobs$ of instances that are
linked via the linear model~\eqref{eqn:standard-linear-model}, where
the unknown regressor $\thetastar$ is assumed to be $\kdim$-sparse,
and so belongs to the $\ell_0$-ball $\Ball_0(\kdim)$. Our goal is to
find a good predictor, meaning a vector $\thetahat$ such that the
mean-squared prediction error $\frac{1}{\numobs} \ltwos{\Xmat(
\thetahat -\thetastar)}^2$ is small.
\subsection{Least squares with coordinate-separable regularizers}
\label{SecCoord}
The analysis of this paper applies to estimators that are based on
minimizing a cost function of the form
\begin{align}
\label{EqnLoss}
L(\theta; \lambda) & = \frac{1}{\numobs} \|y - X \theta\|_2^2 +
\lambda \, \ensuremath{\reg}(\theta),
\end{align}
where $\ensuremath{\reg}:\real^\usedim \rightarrow \real$ is a
\emph{regularizer}, and $\lambda \geq 0$ is a regularization weight.
We consider the following family $\family$ of coordinate-separable
regularizers:
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item The function $\ensuremath{\reg}: \real^\usedim \rightarrow \real$ is
coordinate-wise decomposable, meaning that $\ensuremath{\reg}(\theta) =
\sum_{j=1}^\usedim \reg_j(\theta_j)$ for some univariate functions
$\rho_j:\real \rightarrow \real$.
\item Each univariate function satisfies $\rho_j(0)=0$ and is
symmetric around zero (i.e., $\rho_j(t) = \rho_j(-t)$ for all $t\in
\R$).
\item On the nonnegative real line $[0,+\infty)$, each function
$\rho_j$ is nondecreasing.
\end{enumerate}
\noindent Let us consider some examples to illustrate this definition.\\
\paragraph{Bridge regression:} The family of bridge regression estimates~\cite{frank1993statistical}
take the form
\begin{align*}
\thetahat_{\tiny{\mbox{bidge}}} \in \arg \min_{ \theta \in
\real^\usedim} \Big \{ \frac{1}{\numobs} \|\yvec - \Xmat
\theta\|_2^2 + \lambda \sum_{i=1}^\usedim |\theta|^\gamma \Big \}.
\end{align*}
Note that this is a special case of the objective
function~\eqref{EqnLoss} with $\rho_j(\cdot) = |\cdot|^\gamma$ for
each coordinate. When $\gamma \in \{1,2\}$, it corresponds to the
Lasso estimator and the ridge regression estimator respectively. The
analysis of this paper provides lower bounds for both estimators,
uniformly over the choice of $\lambda$.
\paragraph{Weighted Lasso:} The weighted Lasso estimator~\cite{zou2006adaptive}
uses a weighted $\ell_1$-norm to regularize the empirical risk, and
leads to the estimator
\begin{align*}
\thetahat_{\tiny{\mbox{wl}}} \in \arg \min_{ \theta \in \real^\usedim}
\Big \{ \frac{1}{\numobs} \|\yvec - \Xmat \theta\|_2^2 + \lambda
\sum_{i=1}^\usedim \alpha_i|\theta_i| \Big \}.
\end{align*}
Here $\alpha_1, \dots, \alpha_\usedim$ are weights that can be
adaptively chosen with respect to the design matrix $\Xmat$. The
weighted Lasso can perform better than the ordinary Lasso,
corresponding to the special case in which all $\alpha_j$ are all
equal. For instance, on the counter-example proposed by Foygel and
Srebro~\cite{FoySre11}, for which the ordinary Lasso estimator
achieves only the slow $1/\sqrt{\numobs}$ rate, the weighted Lasso
estimator achieves the $1/\numobs$ convergence rate. Nonetheless, the
analysis of this paper shows that there are design matrices for which
the weighted Lasso, even when the weights are chosen adaptively with
respect to the design, has prediction error at least a constant
multiple of $1/\sqrt{\numobs}$.
\paragraph{Square-root Lasso:} The square-root Lasso
estimator~\cite{belloni2011square} is defined by minimizing the
criterion
\begin{align*}
\thetahat_{\tiny{\mbox{sqrt}}} \in \arg \min_{ \theta \in
\real^\usedim} \Big \{ \frac{1}{\sqrt{\numobs}} \|\yvec - \Xmat
\theta\|_2 + \lambda \lone{\theta} \Big \}.
\end{align*}
This criterion is slightly different from our general objective
function~\eqref{EqnLoss}, since it involves the square root of the
least-squares error. Relative to the Lasso, its primary advantage is
that the optimal setting of the regularization parameter does not
require the knowledge of the standard deviation of the noise. For the
purposes of the current analysis, it suffices to note that by
Lagrangian duality, every square-root Lasso estimate
$\thetahat_{\tiny{\mbox{sqrt}}}$ is a minimizer of the least-squares
criterion $\|\yvec - \Xmat \theta\|_2$, subject to $\|\theta\|_1 \leq R$,
for some radius $R \geq 0$ depending on $\lambda$. Consequently, as
the weight $\lambda$ is varied over the interval $[0,\infty)$, the
square root Lasso yields the same solution path as the Lasso. Since
our lower bounds apply to the Lasso for any choice of $\lambda \geq
0$, they also apply to all square-root Lasso solutions.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.65\textwidth]{penalty-func}
\caption{Plots with regularization weight $\lambda = 1$, and
parameters $a = 3.7$ for SCAD, and $b = 2.7$ for MCP.}
\label{fig:penalty-func}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{SCAD penalty or MCP regularizer:}
Due to the intrinsic bias induced by $\ell_1$-regularization, various
forms of nonconvex regularization are widely used. Two of the most
popular are the SCAD penalty, due to Fan and
Li~\cite{fan2001variable}, and the MCP penalty, due to
Zhang et al.~\cite{zhang2010nearly}. The family of SCAD penalties takes the
form
\begin{align*}
\phi_\lambda(t) \defeq \frac{1}{\lambda} \begin{cases} \lambda |t| &
\mbox{for $|t|\leq \lambda$},\\ -(t^2-2 a \lambda |t| +
\lambda^2)/(2a-2) & \mbox{for $\lambda < |t| \leq
a\lambda$},\\ (a+1)\lambda^2/2 & \mbox{for $|t| \geq a\lambda$},
\end{cases}
\end{align*}
where $a > 2$ is a fixed parameter. When used with the least-squares
objective, it is a special case of our general set-up with
$\reg_j(\theta_j) = \phi_\lambda(\theta_j)$ for each coordinate $j =
1, \ldots, \usedim$. Similarly, the MCP penalty takes the form
\begin{align*}
\reg_\lambda(t) \defeq \int_0^{|t|} \left( 1 - \frac{z}{\lambda
b}\right)_+ d z,
\end{align*}
where $b > 0$ is a fixed parameter. It can be verified that both the
SCAD penalty and the MCP regularizer belong to the function class
$\family$ previously defined. See Figure~\ref{fig:penalty-func} for
a graphical illustration of the SCAD penalty and the MCP regularizer.
\subsection{Prediction error for the Lasso}
We now turn to a precise statement of the best known upper bounds for
the Lasso prediction error. We assume that the design matrix satisfies
the column normalization condition. More precisely, letting $X_j \in
\real^\numobs$ denote the $j^{th}$ column of the design matrix
$\Xmat$, we say that it is $1$-column normalized if
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:column-normalization-condition}
\frac{\ltwos{X_j}}{\sqrt{n}} \leq 1 \qquad \mbox{for $j = 1,2,
\ldots,\usedim$.}
\end{align}
Our choice of the constant $1$ is to simplify notation; the more
general notion allows for an arbitrary constant $C$ in this bound.
In addition to the column normalization condition, if the design matrix further satisfies a restricted eigenvalue (RE)
condition~\cite{bickel2009simultaneous,van2009conditions}, then the
Lasso is known to achieve the fast rate~\eqref{eqn:l0-optimal-rate}
for prediction error. More precisely, restricted eigenvalues are defined
in terms of subsets $\PlainSset$ of the index set $\{1, 2, \ldots,
\usedim \}$, and a cone associated with any such subset. In
particular, letting $\PlainSbar$ denote the complement of
$\PlainSset$, we define the cone
\begin{align*}
\ConeSet(\PlainSset) & \defn \big \{ \theta \in \real^\usedim \, \mid
\, \|\theta_{\PlainSbar}\|_1 \leq 3 \|\theta_{\PlainSset}\|_1 \big \}.
\end{align*}
Here $\|\theta_{\PlainSbar}\|_1 \defn \sum_{j \in \PlainSbar}
|\theta_j|$ corresponds to the $\ell_1$-norm of the coefficients
indexed by $\PlainSbar$, with $\|\theta_{\PlainSset}\|_1$ defined
similarly. Note that any vector $\thetastar$ supported on
$\PlainSset$ belongs to the cone $\ConeSet(\PlainSset)$; in addition,
it includes vectors whose $\ell_1$-norm on the ``bad'' set
$\PlainSbar$ is small relative to their $\ell_1$-norm on $\PlainSset$.
Given triplet $(\numobs, \usedim, \kdim)$, the matrix $\Xmat \in
\real^{\numobs \times \usedim}$ is said to satisfy a $\RECON$-RE
condition (also known as a compatibility condition) if
\begin{align}
\label{EqnDefnRE}
\frac{1}{\numobs} \|X \theta\|_2^2 & \geq \RECON \|\theta\|_2^2 \qquad
\mbox{for all $\theta \in \bigcup
\limits_{|\PlainSset| = \kdim} \ConeSet(\PlainSset)$.}
\end{align}
The following
result~\cite{bickel2009simultaneous,negahban2012unified,BuhVan11}
provides a bound on the prediction error for the Lasso estimator:
\begin{proposition}[Prediction error for Lasso with RE condition]
\label{PropLassoThresh}
Consider the standard linear model for a design matrix $\Xmat$
satisfying the column normalization
condition~\eqref{eqn:column-normalization-condition} and the
$\gamma$-RE condition. Then for any vector $\thetastar\in
\mathbb{B}_0(k)$, the Lasso estimator $\thetahat_{\lambda_n}$ with
$\regparn = 4 \sigma \sqrt{\frac{\log \usedim}{\numobs}}$ satisfies
\begin{align}
\label{EqnLassoThreshBound}
\frac{1}{\numobs} \| \Xmat \thetahat_{\lambda_n} - \Xmat
\thetastar\|_2^2 & \leq \frac{64\sigma^2 \kdim \log
\usedim}{\gamma^2\numobs} \qquad \mbox{for any $\thetastar \in
\Ball_0(\kdim)$}
\end{align}
with probability at least $1 - c_1 e^{-c_2 n \lambda_n^2}$.
\end{proposition}
The Lasso rate~\eqref{EqnLassoThreshBound} will match the optimal
rate~\eqref{eqn:l0-optimal-rate} if the RE constant~$\gamma$ is
bounded away from zero. If $\gamma$ is close to zero, then the Lasso
rate could be arbitrarily worse than the optimal rate. It is known
that the RE condition is necessary for recovering the true vector
$\thetastar$~\cite[see, e.g.][]{raskutti2011minimax}, but minimizing
the prediction error should be easier than recovering the true vector.
In particular, strong correlations between the columns of $X$, which
lead to violations of the RE conditions, should have no effect on the
intrinsic difficulty of the prediction problem. Recall that the
$\ell_0$-based estimator $\thetazero$ satisfies the prediction error
upper bound~\eqref{eqn:l0-optimal-rate} without any constraint on the
design matrix. Moreover, Raskutti et al.~\cite{raskutti2011minimax}
show that many problems with strongly correlated columns are actually
easy from the prediction point of view.
In the absence of RE conditions, $\ell_1$-based methods are known to
achieve the slow $1/\sqrt{\numobs}$ rate, with the only constraint on
the design matrix being a uniform column
bound~\cite{bickel2009simultaneous}:
\begin{proposition}[Prediction error for Lasso without RE condition]
\label{PropLasso}
Consider the standard linear model for a design matrix $\Xmat$
satisfying the column normalization
condition~\eqref{eqn:column-normalization-condition}. Then for any
vector $\thetastar\in \Ball_0(\kdim)\cap \Ball_1(\radius)$, the Lasso
estimator $\thetaregparn$, with $\regparn = 4 \sigma \sqrt{\frac{2\log
\usedim}{\numobs}}$, satisfies the bound
\begin{align}
\label{EqnLassoBound}
\PREDERRSQ{\thetaregparn}{\thetastar} & \leq \UNICON\; \sigma \radius
\Big ( \sqrt{\frac{2\log \usedim}{\numobs}} + \delta \Big),
\end{align}
with probability at least $1 - c_1 \usedim \, e^{-c_2 \numobs
\delta^2}$.
\end{proposition}
\noindent Combining the bounds of
Proposition~\ref{PropLassoThresh} and Proposition~\ref{PropLasso}, we
have
\begin{align}\label{eqn:combined-upper-bound}
\MSE(\thetahat_{\ell_1}; \Xmat) \leq \UNICON'
\min\Big\{\frac{\sigma^2 k \log d}{\gamma^2 n}, \sigma \radius
\sqrt{\frac{ \log \usedim}{\numobs}}\Big\}.
\end{align}
If the RE constant $\gamma$ is sufficiently close to zero, then the
second term on the right-hand side will dominate the first term. In
that case, the $1/\sqrt{\numobs}$ achievable rate is substantially
slower than the $1/\numobs$ optimal rate for reasonable ranges of
$(\kdim, R)$. One might wonder whether the analysis leading to the
bound~\eqref{eqn:combined-upper-bound} could be sharpened so as to
obtain the fast rate. Among other consequences, our first main result
(Theorem~\ref{theorem:main-lower-bound} below) shows that no
substantial sharpening is possible.
\section{Main results}
\label{sec:main-result}
We now turn to statements of our main results, and discussion of their
consequences.
\subsection{A general lower bound}
Our analysis applies to the set of local minima of the objective
function $L$ defined in equation~\eqref{EqnLoss}. More precisely, a
vector $\thetatil$ is a local minimum of the function $\theta \mapsto
L(\theta;\lambda)$ if there is an open ball $\Ball$ centered at
$\thetatil$ such that $\thetatil \in \arg \min \limits_{\theta\in
\Ball} L(\theta;\lambda)$. We then define the set
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:define-solution-path}
\Thetahat_\lambda \defeq \Big \{ \theta \in \real^\usedim \, \mid \,
\mbox{$\theta$ is a local minimum of the function $\theta \mapsto
L(\theta;\lambda)$} \Big\},
\end{align}
an object that depends on the triplet $(\Xmat,\yvec,\rho)$ as well as
the choice of regularization weight $\lambda$. Since the function
$\reg$ might be non-convex, the set $\Thetahat_\lambda$ may contain
multiple elements.
At best, a typical descent method applied to the objective $L$ can be
guaranteed to converge to some element of $\Thetahat_\lambda$. The
following theorem provides a lower bound, applicable to any method
that always returns some local minimum of the objective
function~\eqref{EqnLoss}.
\begin{theorem}
\label{theorem:main-lower-bound}
For any pair $(\numobs, \usedim)$ such that \mbox{$\usedim \geq
\numobs \geq 4$,} any sparsity level \mbox{$\kdim \geq 2$} and any
radius \mbox{$\radius \geq 8{\sigma}/{\sqrt{\numobs}}$,} there is a
design matrix $\Xmat \in \R^{\numobs\times \usedim}$ satisfying the
column normalization
condition~\eqref{eqn:column-normalization-condition} such that for any
coordinate-separable penalty, we have
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:main-lower-bound}
\sup_{\thetastar\in \Ball_0(\kdim)\cap \Ball_1(\radius)} \E \left[
\inf_{\lambda\geq 0} \sup_{\theta\in \Thetahat_\lambda}
\PREDERRSQ{\theta}{\thetastar} \right] & \geq \UNICON \min\left\{
\sigma^2, \frac{\sigma\radius}{\sqrt{\numobs}}\right\}.
\end{align}
Moreover, for any convex coordinate-separable penalty, we have
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:main-lower-bound-for-convex-penalty}
\sup_{\thetastar\in \Ball_0(\kdim)\cap \Ball_1(\radius)} \E \left[
\inf_{\lambda\geq 0} \inf_{\theta\in \Thetahat_\lambda}
\PREDERRSQ{\theta}{\thetastar} \right] \geq \UNICON \min\left\{
\sigma^2, \frac{\sigma\radius}{\sqrt{\numobs}}\right\}.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
\end{theorem}
\noindent In both of these statements, the constant $c$ is universal,
independent of $(\numobs, \usedim, \kdim, \sigma, \radius)$ as well as
the design matrix. See Section~\ref{sec:prove-main-result} for the
proof.
In order to interpret the lower bound~\eqref{eqn:main-lower-bound},
consider any estimator $\thetahat$ that takes values in the set
$\Thetahat_\lambda$, corresponding to local minima of $L$. The result
is of a game-theoretic flavor: the statistician is allowed to
adaptively choose $\lambda$ based on the observations $(y, X)$,
whereas nature is allowed to act adversarially in choosing a local
minimum for every execution of $\thetahat_\lambda$. Under this
setting, Theorem~\ref{theorem:main-lower-bound} implies that
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:concretized-lower-bound}
\sup_{\thetastar\in \Ball_0(\kdim)\cap \Ball_1(\radius)}
\frac{1}{\numobs} \E \left[ \ltwos{\Xmat\thetahat_\lambda -
\Xmat\thetastar}^2 \right] &\geq \UNICON \min\left\{ \sigma^2,
\frac{\sigma\radius}{\sqrt{\numobs}}\right\}.
\end{align}
For any convex regularizer (such as the $\ell_1$-penalty underlying
the Lasso estimate),
equation~\eqref{eqn:main-lower-bound-for-convex-penalty} provides a
stronger lower bound, one that holds uniformly over all choices of
$\lambda \geq 0$ and all (global) minima. For the Lasso estimator,
the lower bound of Theorem~\ref{theorem:main-lower-bound} matches the
upper bound~\eqref{EqnLassoBound} up to the logarithmic term
$\sqrt{\log \usedim}$, showing that the lower bound is almost tight.\\
It is possible that lower bounds of this form hold only for extremely
ill-conditioned design matrices, which would render the consequences
of the result less broadly applicable. In particular, it is natural
to wonder whether it is also possible to prove a non-trivial lower
bound when the restricted eigenvalues are bounded above zero. Recall
that under the RE condition with a positive constant~$\gamma$, the
Lasso will achieve a mixture rate~\eqref{eqn:combined-upper-bound},
consisting of a scaled fast rate $1/(\gamma^2 n)$ and the slow rate
$1/\sqrt{n}$. The following result shows that this mixture rate cannot
be improved to match the fast rate.
\begin{corollary}
\label{coro:lower-bound}
For any sparsity level $\kdim \geq 1$, any integers $\usedim = \numobs
\geq 4k$, any radius \mbox{$\radius \geq 8{\sigma}/{\sqrt{\numobs}}$}
and any constant $\gamma \in (0,1]$, there is a design matrix $\Xmat
\in \R^{\numobs\times \usedim}$ satisfying the column normalization
condition~\eqref{eqn:column-normalization-condition} and the
$\gamma$-RE condition, such that for any coordinate-separable penalty,
we have
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:coro-lower-bound}
\sup_{\thetastar\in \Ball_0(2\kdim)\cap \Ball_1(\radius)} \E \left[
\inf_{\lambda\geq 0} \sup_{\theta\in \Thetahat_\lambda}
\PREDERRSQ{\theta}{\thetastar} \right] & \geq \UNICON \min\left\{
\sigma^2, \frac{k \sigma^2}{\gamma n},
\frac{\sigma\radius}{\sqrt{\numobs}}\right\}.
\end{align}
Moreover, for any convex coordinate-separable penalty, we have
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:coro-lower-bound-for-convex-penalty}
\sup_{\thetastar\in \Ball_0(2\kdim)\cap \Ball_1(\radius)} \E \left[
\inf_{\lambda\geq 0} \inf_{\theta\in \Thetahat_\lambda}
\PREDERRSQ{\theta}{\thetastar} \right] \geq \UNICON \min\left\{
\sigma^2, \frac{k \sigma^2}{\gamma n},
\frac{\sigma\radius}{\sqrt{\numobs}}\right\}.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
\end{corollary}
Since none of the three terms on the right-hand side of
inequalities~\eqref{eqn:coro-lower-bound}
and~\eqref{eqn:coro-lower-bound-for-convex-penalty} matches the
optimal rate~\eqref{eqn:l0-optimal-rate}, the corollary implies that
the optimal rate is not achievable even if the restricted eigenvalues
are bounded above zero. Comparing this lower bound to the upper
bound~\eqref{eqn:combined-upper-bound}, there are two factors that are
not perfectly matched. First, the upper bound depends on $\log
\usedim$, but there is no such dependence in the lower bound. Second,
the upper bound has a term that is proportional to $1/\gamma^2$, but
the corresponding term in the lower bound is proportional
to~$1/\gamma$. Proving a sharper lower bound that closes this gap
remains an open problem.
We remark that Corollary~\ref{coro:lower-bound} follows by a
refinement of the proof of Theorem~\ref{theorem:main-lower-bound}. In
particular, we first show that the design matrix underlying
Theorem~\ref{theorem:main-lower-bound}---call it
$\ensuremath{X_{\mbox{\tiny{bad}}}}$---satisfies the $\gamma_n$-RE condition, where the quantity
$\gamma_n$ converges to zero as a function of sample size~$n$. In
order to prove Corollary~\ref{coro:lower-bound}, we construct a new
block-diagonal design matrix such that each block corresponds to a
version of $\ensuremath{X_{\mbox{\tiny{bad}}}}$. The size of these blocks are then chosen so that,
given a predefined quantity~$\gamma >0$, the new matrix satisfies the
$\gamma$-RE condition. We then lower bound the prediction error of
this new matrix, using Theorem~\ref{theorem:main-lower-bound} to lower
bound the prediction error of each of the blocks. We refer the reader
to Section~\ref{sec:proof-coro-lower-bound} for the full proof.
\subsection{Lower bounds for local descent methods}
For any least-squares cost with a coordinate-wise separable
regularizer, Theorem~\ref{theorem:main-lower-bound} establishes the
existence of at least one ``bad'' local minimum such that the
associated prediction error is lower bounded by $1/\sqrt{n}$. One
might argue that this result could be overly pessimistic, in that the
adversary is given too much power in choosing local minima. Indeed,
the mere existence of bad local minima need not be a practical concern
unless it can be shown that a typical optimization algorithm will
frequently converge to one of them.
Steepest descent is a standard first-order algorithm for minimizing a
convex cost function~\cite{Bertsekas_nonlin,Boyd04}. However, for
non-convex and non-differentiable loss functions, it is known that the
steepest descent method does not necessarily yield convergence to a
local minimum~\cite{dem1990introduction,wolfe1975method}. Although there
exist provably convergent first-order methods for general non-convex
optimization
(e.g.,~\cite{mifflin1982modification,kiwiel1983aggregate}), the paths
defined by their iterations are difficult to characterize, and it is
also difficult to predict the point to which the algorithm eventually
converges.
In order to address a broad class of methods in a unified manner, we
begin by observing that most first-order methods can be seen as
iteratively and approximately solving a local minimization
problem. For example, given a stepsize parameter $\eta > 0$, the
method of steepest descent iteratively approximates the minimizer of
the objective over a ball of radius $\eta$. Similarly, the
convergence of algorithms for non-convex optimization algorithms is
based on the fact that they guarantee decrease of the function value
in the local neighborhood of the current
iterate~\cite{mifflin1982modification,kiwiel1983aggregate}. We thus
study an iterative local descent algorithm taking the form:
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:local-descent-update-formula}
\theta^{t+1} \in \arg \min_{\theta \in \ensuremath{\Ball_2(\stepsize; \theta^t)}} L(\theta; \lambda),
\end{align}
where $\eta > 0$ is a given parameter, and $\Ball_2(\eta;
\theta^t) \defn \{ \theta \in \real^\usedim \, \mid \, \ltwos{\theta -
\theta^t} \leq \eta \}$ is the ball of radius $\eta$
around the current iterate. If there are multiple points achieving
the optimum, the algorithm chooses the one that is closest to
$\theta^t$, resolving any remaining ties by randomization. The
algorithm terminates when there is a minimizer belonging to the
interior of the ball $\ensuremath{\Ball_2(\stepsize; \theta^t)}$---that is, exactly when
$\theta^{t+1}$ is a local minimum of the loss function.
It should be noted that the
algorithm~\eqref{eqn:local-descent-update-formula} defines a powerful
algorithm---one that might not be easy to implement in polynomial
time---since it is guaranteed to return the global minimum of a
nonconvex program over the ball $\ensuremath{\Ball_2(\stepsize; \theta^t)}$. In a certain sense, it
is more powerful than any first-order optimization method, since it
will always decrease the function value at least as much as a descent
step with stepsize related to $\eta$. Since we are proving lower
bounds, these observations only strengthen our result. We
impose two additional conditions on the regularizers:
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item[(iv)] Each component function $\reg_j$ is continuous at the
origin.
\item[(v)] There is a constant $\curbound$ such that
$|\reg'_j(x)-\reg'_j(\ensuremath{\tilde{x}})|\leq \curbound |x - \ensuremath{\tilde{x}}|$ for any
pair $x, \ensuremath{\tilde{x}} \in (0,\infty)$.
\end{enumerate}
Assumptions (i)-(v) are more restrictive than assumptions (i)-(iii),
but they are satisfied by many popular penalties. As illustrative
examples, for the $\ell_1$-norm, we have $ H=0$. For the SCAD
penalty, we have $\curbound = 1/(a-1)$, whereas for the MCP
regularizer, we have $\curbound = 1/b$. Finally, in order to prevent the
update~\eqref{eqn:local-descent-update-formula} being so powerful that
it reaches the global minimum in one single step, we impose an
additional condition on the stepsize, namely that
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:beta-constraint}
\eta \leq \min \Big\{ B, \frac{B}{\lambda \curbound}\Big\}, \quad
\mbox{where $B \defeq \frac{\sigma}{4\sqrt{\numobs}}$.}
\end{align}
It is reasonable to assume that the stepsize bounded by a time-invariant
constant, as we can always partition a single-step update into a finite
number of smaller steps, increasing the algorithm's time complexity by a
multiplicative constant. On the other hand, the $\order(1/\sqrt{n})$
stepsize is adopted by popular first-order methods. Under these assumptions,
we have the following theorem, which applies to any regularizer $\reg$ that
satisfies Assumptions (i)-(v).
\begin{theorem}
\label{theorem:gradient-descent-lower-bound}
For any pair $(\numobs, \usedim)$ such that $\usedim\geq \numobs \geq
4$, integer $\kdim \geq 2$ and any scalars $\ensuremath{\gamma} \geq 0$ and
$\radius \geq {\sigma}/{\sqrt{\numobs}}$, there is a design matrix
$\Xmat \in \R^{\numobs\times \usedim}$ satisfying the column
normalization condition~\eqref{eqn:column-normalization-condition}
such that
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item The update~\eqref{eqn:local-descent-update-formula} terminates
after a finite number of steps $\ensuremath{T}$ at a vector $\ensuremath{\widehat{\theta}} =
\theta^{\ensuremath{T}+1}$ that is a local minimum of the loss function.
\item Given a random initialization $\theta^0\sim N(0, \ensuremath{\gamma}^2
I_{d\times d})$, the local minimum satisfies the lower bound
\end{enumerate}
\begin{align*}
\sup_{\thetastar\in \Ball_0(\kdim)\cap \Ball_1(\radius)} \E \left[
\inf_{\lambda\geq 0}\frac{1}{\numobs} \ltwos{\Xmat\ensuremath{\widehat{\theta}} -
\Xmat\thetastar}^2 \right] \geq \UNICON \min\{ \radius, \sigma\}
\frac{\sigma}{\sqrt{\numobs}}.
\end{align*}
\end{theorem}
\noindent Theorem~\ref{theorem:gradient-descent-lower-bound} shows
that local descent methods based on a random initialization do not
lead to local optima that achieve the fast rate. This conclusion
provides stronger negative evidence than
Theorem~\ref{theorem:main-lower-bound}, since it shows that bad local
minima not only exist, but are difficult to avoid.
\subsection{Simulations}
\label{SecSimulations}
In the proof of Theorem~\ref{theorem:main-lower-bound} and
Theorem~\ref{theorem:gradient-descent-lower-bound}, we construct
specific design matrices to make the problem hard to solve. In this
section, we apply several popular algorithms to the solution of the sparse linear
regression problem on these ``hard'' examples, and compare their
performance with the $\ell_0$-based
estimator~\eqref{EqnDefnEllZeroEstimator}. More specifically,
focusing on the special case $\numobs = \usedim$, we perform
simulations for the design matrix $\Xmat \in \R^{\numobs \times
\numobs}$ used in the proof of
Theorem~\ref{theorem:gradient-descent-lower-bound}. It is given by
\begin{align*}
\Xmat = \Big[ \mbox{blkdiag} \underbrace{\big \{ \sqrt{\numobs} A,
\sqrt{\numobs} A, \ldots, \sqrt{\numobs} A \big
\}}_{\mbox{$\numobs/2$ copies}}\Big],
\end{align*}
where the sub-matrix $A$ takes the form
\begin{align*}
A = \begin{bmatrix} \cos(\alpha) & -\cos(\alpha)\\ \sin(\alpha) &
\sin(\alpha)
\end{bmatrix}, \quad \mbox{where} \quad \alpha = \arcsin(n^{-1/4}).
\end{align*}
Given the $2$-sparse regression vector $\thetastar = \big(0.5, 0.5, 0,
\ldots, 0 \big)$, we form the response vector \mbox{$\yvec = \Xmat
\thetastar + w$,} where $w \sim N(0, I_{\numobs \times \numobs})$.
We compare the $\ell_0$-based estimator, referred to as the
\emph{baseline estimator}, with three other methods: the Lasso
estimator~\cite{tibshirani1996regression}, the estimator based on the
SCAD penalty~\cite{fan2001variable} and the estimator based on the MCP
penalty~\cite{zhang2010nearly}. In implementing the $\ell_0$-based
estimator, we provide it with the knowledge that $k = 2$, since the
true vector $\thetastar$ is $2$-sparse. For Lasso, we adopt the
\texttt{MATLAB} implementation~\cite{matlabLasso}, which generates a
Lasso solution path evaluated at $100$ different regularization parameters,
and we choose the estimate that yields the smallest prediction error.
For the SCAD penalty, we choose $a = 3.7$ as suggested by Fan and
Li~\cite{fan2001variable}. For the MCP penalty, we choose $b = 2.7$,
so that the maximum concavity of the MCP penalty matches that of the
SCAD penalty. For the SCAD penalty and the MCP penalty (and recalling
that $\usedim = \numobs$), we studied choices of the regularization
weight of the form $\lambda = C\sqrt{\frac{\log n}{n}}$ for a
pre-factor $C$ to be determined. As shown in past work on non-convex
regularizers~\cite{loh2013regularized}, such choices of $\lambda$ lead
to low $\ell_2$-error. By manually tuning the parameter $C$ to
optimize the prediction error, we found that $C=0.1$ is a reasonable
choice. We used routines from the GIST package~\cite{gong2013gist} to
optimize these non-convex objectives.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.7\textwidth]{simulation}
\caption{Problem scale $n$ versus the prediction error
$\Exs[\frac{1}{\numobs}\ltwos{\Xmat(\thetahat - \thetastar)}^2]$.
The expectation is computed by averaging $100$ independent runs of
the algorithm. Both the sample size $\numobs$ and the prediction
error are plotted on a logarithmic scale.}
\label{fig:simulation}
\end{figure}
By varying the sample size over the range $10$ to $1000$, we obtained
the results plotted in Figure~\ref{fig:simulation}, in which the
prediction error $\Exs[\frac{1}{\numobs}\ltwos{\Xmat(\thetahat -
\thetastar)}^2]$ and sample size $\numobs$ are both plotted on a
logarithmic scale. The performance of the Lasso, SCAD-based estimate,
and MCP-based estimate are all similar. For all of the three methods,
the prediction error scales as $1/\sqrt{n}$, as confirmed by the
slopes of the corresponding lines in Figure~\ref{fig:simulation},
which are very close to~$0.5$. In fact, by examining the estimator's
output, we find that in many cases, all three estimators output
$\thetahat = 0$, leading to the prediction error
$\frac{1}{n}\ltwos{\Xmat(0 - \thetastar)}^2 = \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}$.
Since the regularization parameters have been chosen to optimize the
prediction error, this scaling is the best rate that the three
estimators are able to achieve, and it matches the theoretical
prediction of Theorem~\ref{theorem:main-lower-bound} and
Theorem~\ref{theorem:gradient-descent-lower-bound}.
In contrast, the $\ell_0$-based estimator achieves a substantially
better error rate. The slope of the corresponding line in
Figure~\ref{fig:simulation} is very close to $1$. It means that the
prediction error of the $\ell_0$-based estimator scales as $1/n$,
thereby matching the theoretically-predicted
scaling~\eqref{eqn:l0-optimal-rate}.
\section{Proofs}
\label{SecProofs}
We now turn to the proofs of our theorems and corollary. In each
case, we defer the proofs of more technical results to the appendices.
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{theorem:main-lower-bound}}
\label{sec:prove-main-result}
For a given triple $(\numobs, \sigma, \radius)$, we define the angle
$\alpha \defeq \arcsin\left(
\frac{\sqrt{\sigma}}{\numobs^{1/4}\sqrt{32 \radius}} \right)$, and the
two-by-two matrix
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:define-matrix-A}
A = \begin{bmatrix} \cos(\alpha) & -\cos(\alpha)\\ \sin(\alpha) &
\sin(\alpha)
\end{bmatrix}.
\end{align}
Using the matrix $A \in \real^{2 \times 2}$ as a building block, we
construct a design matrix $\Xmat \in \real^{\numobs \times
\usedim}$. Without loss of generality, we may assume that $\numobs$
is divisible by two. (If $\numobs$ is not divisible by two,
constructing a $(\numobs-1)$-by-$\usedim$ design matrix concatenated
by a row of zeros only changes the result by a constant.) We then
define
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:define-design-matrix-X}
\Xmat = \Big[ \mbox{blkdiag} \underbrace{\big \{ \sqrt{\numobs} A,
\sqrt{\numobs} A, \ldots, \sqrt{\numobs} A \big
\}}_{\mbox{$\numobs/2$ copies}}~~{\bf 0}\Big] \in
\real^{\numobs\times \usedim},
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where the all-zeroes matrix on the right side has dimensions
$\numobs\times (\usedim-\numobs)$. It is easy to verify that the
matrix $\Xmat$ defined in this way satisfies the column normalization
condition~\eqref{eqn:column-normalization-condition}.
Next, we prove the lower bound~\eqref{eqn:main-lower-bound}. For any
integers $i,j \in [\usedim]$ with $i < j$, let $\theta_i$ denote the
$i^{th}$ coordinate of $\theta$, and let $\theta_{i:j}$ denote the
subvector with entries $\{\theta_i, \ldots, \theta_j\}$. Since the
matrix $A$ appears in diagonal blocks of $\Xmat$, we have
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:decompose-prediction-error}
\inf_{\lambda \geq 0} \sup_{\theta\in \Thetahat_\lambda}
\PREDERRSQ{\theta}{\thetastar} & = \inf_{\lambda \geq 0}
\sup_{\theta\in \Thetahat_\lambda} \sum_{i=1}^{\numobs/2}\norms{A
\big( \theta_{(2i-1):2i} - \opt_{(2i-1):2i} \big)}_2^2
\end{align}
and it suffices to lower bound the right-hand side of the above
equation.
For the sake of simplicity, we introduce the shorthand $B \defeq \frac{4\sigma}{\sqrt{\numobs}}$,
and define the scalars
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:define-gamma-i}
\gamma_i = \min\{\reg_{2i-1}(B), \reg_{2i}(B)\} \qquad \mbox{for
each $i = 1, \ldots, \numobs/2$.}
\end{align}
Furthermore, we define
\begin{align}
\label{EqnAdefinition}
a_i \defeq \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
(\cos \alpha, \sin \alpha) & \mbox{if }\gamma_i = \reg_{2i-1}(B)\\
(-\cos \alpha, \sin \alpha) & \mbox{if }\gamma_i = \reg_{2i}(B)
\end{array}\right.
\quad \mbox{and} \quad \ensuremath{w'}_i \defeq
\frac{\inprod{a_i}{w_{(2i-1):2i}}}{\sqrt{\numobs}}.
\end{align}
Without loss of generality, we may assume that \mbox{$\gamma_1 = \max
\limits_{i\in[\numobs/2]}\{\gamma_i\}$} and \mbox{$\gamma_i =
\reg_{2i -1}(B)$} for all $i \in [\numobs/2]$. If this condition
does not hold, we can simply re-index the columns of $\Xmat$ to make
these properties hold. Note that when we swap the columns $2i-1$ and
$2i$, the value of $a_i$ doesn't change; it is always associated with
the column whose regularization term is equal to $\gamma_i$.
Finally, we define the regression vector $\thetastar = \begin{bmatrix}
\frac{\radius}{2} & \frac{\radius}{2} & 0 & \cdots & 0
\end{bmatrix} \in \real^\usedim$.
Given these definitions, the following lemma lower bounds each term on
the right-hand side of
equation~\eqref{eqn:decompose-prediction-error}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{LEMMA:DECOMPOSED-TERM-LOWER-BOUND}
For any $\lambda\geq 0$, there is a local minimum $\thetahat_\lambda$
of the objective function $L(\theta;\lambda)$ such that
$\PREDERRSQ{\ensuremath{\thetahat_\lambda}}{\thetastar} \geq \ensuremath{T}_1 + \ensuremath{T}_2$,
where
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
\ensuremath{T}_1 & \defeq \indicator\Big[\lambda\gamma_1 > 4B(\sin^2(\alpha)
\radius \frac{\ltwos{w_{1:2}}}{\sqrt{\numobs}})\Big]
\sin^2(\alpha)(\radius -2B)_+^2 \quad \mbox{and} \\
\ensuremath{T}_2 & \defeq \sum_{i=2}^{\numobs/2} \indicator\Big[B/2 \leq
\ensuremath{w'}_i \leq B\Big] \Big( \frac{B^2}{4} - \lambda \gamma_1 \Big).
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Moreover, if the regularizer $\reg$ is convex, then every minimizer
$\thetahat_\lambda$ satisfies this lower bound.
\end{lemma}
\noindent See Appendix~\ref{AppDecomposedOne} for the proof of this
claim.
Using Lemma~\ref{LEMMA:DECOMPOSED-TERM-LOWER-BOUND}, we can now
complete the proof of the theorem. It is convenient to condition on
the event $\Event \defn \{ \ltwo{w_{1:2}} \leq \frac{\sigma}{32} \}$.
Since $\ltwo{w_{1:2}}^2/\sigma^2$ follows a chi-square distribution
with two degrees of freedom, we have $\mprob[\Event] > 0$.
Conditioned on this event, we now consider two separate cases:
\paragraph{Case 1:} First, suppose that
$\lambda\gamma_1 > \sigma^2/\numobs$. In this case, we have
\begin{align*}
4 B \Big \{ \sin^2(\alpha) \radius +
\frac{\ltwos{w_{1:2}}}{\sqrt{\numobs}} \Big \} & \leq
\frac{16\sigma}{\sqrt{\numobs}} \left(
\frac{\sigma}{32\sqrt{\numobs}} + \frac{\sigma}{32\sqrt{\numobs}}
\right) = \frac{\sigma^2}{\numobs} < \lambda\gamma_1,
\end{align*}
and consequently
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
\label{EqnCaseOneBound}
\ensuremath{T}_1 + \ensuremath{T}_2 \geq \ensuremath{T}_1 = \sin^2(\alpha)(\radius -2B)_+^2 =
\frac{\sigma}{32\sqrt{\numobs}\radius} \left(\radius -
\frac{4\sigma}{\sqrt{\numobs}}\right)^2 \geq \frac{\sigma
\radius}{128\sqrt{\numobs}},
\end{align}
where the last inequality holds since we have assumed that $\radius
\geq 8 \sigma / \sqrt{\numobs}$.
\paragraph{Case 2:}
Otherwise, we may assume that $\lambda\gamma_1 \leq \sigma^2/\numobs$.
In this case, we have
\begin{align}
\label{EqnCaseTwoBound}
\ensuremath{T}_1 + \ensuremath{T}_2 & \geq \ensuremath{T}_2 = \sum_{i=2}^{\numobs/2}
\indicator\left(B/2 \leq \ensuremath{w'}_i \leq B\right)
\frac{3\sigma^2}{\numobs}.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
\vspace*{.1in}
Combining the two lower bounds~\eqref{EqnCaseOneBound}
and~\eqref{EqnCaseTwoBound}, we find
\begin{align*}
&\E\left[ \inf_{\lambda \geq 0} \sup_{\theta\in \Thetahat_\lambda}
\frac{1}{\numobs} \ltwos{\Xmat\theta - \Xmat\thetastar}^2 \Big|
\event \right] \\
& \qquad \geq \underbrace{\E\left[ \min\left\{ \frac{\sigma
\radius}{128 \sqrt{\numobs}}, \sum_{i=2}^{\numobs/2}
\indicator\left[B/2 \leq \ensuremath{w'}_i \leq B/2\right]
\frac{3\sigma^2}{\numobs} \right\}\right]}_{\ensuremath{T}_3},
\end{align*}
where we have used the fact that $\{\ensuremath{w'}_i\}_{i=2}^{\numobs/2}$ are
independent of the event $\Event$. Using the inequality
$\min\left\{a, \sum_{i=2}^{n/2} b_i\right\} \geq \sum_{i=2}^{n/2}
\min\{2 a/n, b_i\}$, valid for scalars $a$ and
$\{b_i\}_{i=2}^{\numobs/2}$, we see that
\begin{align*}
\ensuremath{T}_3 & \geq \sum_{i=2}^{\numobs/2} \mprob\left[ \frac{2
\sigma}{\sqrt{\numobs} } \leq \ensuremath{w'}_i \leq \frac{4
\sigma}{\sqrt{\numobs}} \right] \min\left\{ \frac{\sigma
\radius}{128 \numobs \sqrt{\numobs}}, \frac{3\sigma^2}{\numobs}
\right\},
\end{align*}
where we have used the fact that $\Exs\Big[\indicator \big[B/2 \leq
\ensuremath{w'}_i \leq B \big] \Big] = \mprob[B/2 \leq \ensuremath{w'}_i \leq B]$,
and the definition $B \defeq \frac{4 \sigma}{\sqrt{\numobs}}$.
Since $\ensuremath{w'}_i \sim N(0,\sigma^2/\numobs)$, the probability $\mprob[
{2\sigma}/{\sqrt{\numobs}} \leq \ensuremath{w'}_i \leq
{4\sigma}/{\sqrt{\numobs}} ]$ is bounded away from zero
independently of all problem parameters. Hence, there is a universal
constant $c_2 > 0$ such that $\ensuremath{T}_3 \geq c_2 \min\left\{
\frac{\sigma \radius}{\sqrt{\numobs}}, \; \sigma^2 \right\}$. Putting
together the pieces, we have shown that
\begin{align*}
\E\left[ \inf_{\lambda \geq 0} \sup_{\theta\in \Thetahat_\lambda}
\frac{1}{\numobs} \ltwos{\Xmat\theta - \Xmat\thetastar}^2 \right]
&\geq \: \mprob[\event] \, \ensuremath{T}_3 \; \geq c_2' \min \left \{ \frac{
\sigma \radius}{\sqrt{\numobs}}, \: \sigma^2 \right\},
\end{align*}
which completes the proof of the theorem.
\subsection{Proof of Corollary~\ref{coro:lower-bound}}
\label{sec:proof-coro-lower-bound}
Here we provide a detailed proof of
inequality~\eqref{eqn:coro-lower-bound}. We note that
inequality~\eqref{eqn:coro-lower-bound-for-convex-penalty} follows by
an essentially identical series of steps, so that we omit the details.
Let $m$ be an even integer and let $X_m \in \R^{m\times m}$ denote the
design matrix constructed in the proof of
Theorem~\ref{theorem:main-lower-bound}. In order to avoid confusion,
we rename the parameters $(n,d,R)$ in the
construction~\eqref{eqn:define-design-matrix-X} by $(n',d',R')$, and
set them equal to
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:m-m-radius}
(n',d',R') \defeq \Big(m, m, \min \Big \{ \frac{R \sqrt{n}}{k
\sqrt{m}}, \frac{\sigma}{16 \gamma \sqrt{m}} \Big\} \Big),
\end{align}
where the quantities $(k,m,n,R,\sigma)$ are defined in the statement
of Corollary~\ref{coro:lower-bound}. Note that $X_m$ is a square
matrix, and according to equation~\eqref{eqn:define-design-matrix-X},
all of its eigenvalues are lower bounded by
$(\frac{m^{1/2}\sigma}{16R'})^{1/2}$. By
equation~\eqref{eqn:m-m-radius}, this quantity is lower bounded by
$\sqrt{m\gamma}$.
Using the matrix $X_m$ as a building block, we now construct a larger
design matrix \mbox{$X \in \R^{n \times n}$} that we then use to prove
the corollary. Let $m$ be the greatest integer divisible by two such
that $k m \leq n$. By the assumption that $n \geq 4 k$, we have $m
\geq 4$. Consequently, we may construct the $n \times n$ dimensional
matrix
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:define-coro-design-matrix-X}
\Xmat \defeq \mbox{blkdiag} \Big \{\underbrace{ \sqrt{\numobs/m} X_m,
\ldots, \sqrt{\numobs/m} X_m}_{\mbox{$k$ copies}}, \sqrt{n} I_{n-km}
\Big\} \in \real^{\numobs\times \numobs},
\end{align}
where $I_{n-km}$ is the $(n-km)$-dimensional identity matrix. It is
easy to verify the matrix $X$ satisfies the column normalization
condition. Since all eigenvalues of $X_m$ are lower bounded by
$\sqrt{m\gamma}$, we are guaranteed that all eigenvalues of $X$ are
lower bounded by $\sqrt{n\gamma}$. Thus, the matrix $X$ satisfies the
$\gamma$-RE condition.
It remains to prove a lower bound on the prediction error, and in
order to do so, it is helpful to introduce some shorthand
notation. Given an arbitrary vector $u \in \R^n$, for each integer $i
\in \{1, \ldots, k\}$, we let $u_{(i)} \in \real^m$ denote the
sub-vector consisting of the $((i-1)m+1)$-th to the $(im)$-th elements
of vector $u$, and we let $u_{(k+1)}$ denote the sub-vector consisting
of the last $n-km$ elements. We also introduce similar notation for
the function $\rho(x) = \rho_1(x_1) + \dots +\rho_n(x_n)$;
specifically, for each $i \in \{1, \ldots, k\}$, we define the
function $\rho_{(i)}: \R^m\to \R$ via $\rho_{(i)}(\theta) \defeq
\sum_{j=1}^m \rho_{(i-1)m+j}(\theta_j)$.
Using this notation, we may rewrite the cost function as:
\begin{align*}
L(\theta;\lambda) = \frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^k\Big(\ltwos{\sqrt{n/m}X_m
\theta_{(i)} - y_{(i)}}^2 + n \lambda \rho_{(i)}(\theta_{(i)}) \Big)
+ h(\theta_{(k+1)}),
\end{align*}
where $h$ is a function that only depends on $\theta_{(k+1)}$. If we
define $\theta'_{(i)} \defeq \sqrt{n/m}\theta_{(i)}$ and
$\rho'_{(i)}(\theta) \defeq \frac{n}{m}\rho_{(i)}(\sqrt{m/n}\theta)$,
then substituting them into the above expression, the cost function
can be rewritten as
\begin{align*}
G(\theta'; \lambda) & \defeq \frac{m}{n} \sum_{i=1}^k\Big(\frac{1}{m}
\ltwos{X_m \theta'_{(i)} - y_{(i)}}^2 + \lambda
\rho'_{(i)}(\theta'_{(i)}) \Big) + h(\sqrt{m/n} \; \theta'_{(k+1)}).
\end{align*}
Note that if the vector $\thetahat$ is a local minimum of the function
$\theta \mapsto L(\theta;\lambda)$, then the rescaled vector
$\thetahat' \defeq \sqrt{n/m}\;\thetahat$ is a local minimum of the
function $\theta' \mapsto G(\theta';\lambda)$. Consequently, the
sub-vector $\thetahat'_{(i)}$ must be a local minimum of the function
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:coro-split-local-minimum}
\frac{1}{m}\ltwos{X_m \theta'_{(i)} - y_{(i)}}^2 +
\rho'_{(i)}(\theta'_{(i)}).
\end{align}
Thus, the sub-vector $\thetahat'_{(i)}$ is the solution of a
regularized sparse linear regression problem with design matrix
$X_m$.
Defining the rescaled true regression vector $(\thetastar)' \defeq
\sqrt{n/m}\;\thetastar$, we can then write the prediction error as
\begin{align}
\frac{1}{n} \ltwos{X(\thetahat - \thetastar)}^2 & =
\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^k \Big(\ltwos{X_m(\thetahat'_{(i)} -
(\thetastar)'_{(i)})}^2 \Big) + \ltwos{\thetahat_{(k+1)} -
\thetastar_{(k+1)}}^2 \nonumber \\
\label{eqn:coro-split-prediction-error}
& \geq \frac{m}{n}\sum_{i=1}^k \Big( \frac{1}{m}
\ltwos{X_m(\thetahat'_{(i)} - (\thetastar)'_{(i)})}^2 \Big).
\end{align}
Consequently, the overall prediction error is lower bounded by a
scaled sum of the prediction errors associated with the design
matrix~$X_m$. Moreover, each term $\frac{1}{m}
\ltwos{X_m(\thetahat'_{(i)} - (\thetastar)'_{(i)})}^2$ can be bounded
by Theorem~\ref{theorem:main-lower-bound}.
More precisely, let $\mathcal{Q}(X,2k,R)$ denote the left-hand side of
inequality~\eqref{eqn:coro-lower-bound}. The above analysis shows that
the sparse linear regression problem on the design matrix $X$ and the
constraint $\thetastar\in \Ball_0(2\kdim)\cap \Ball_1(\radius)$ can be
decomposed into smaller-scale problems on the design matrix $X_m$ and
constraints on the scaled vector $(\thetastar)'$. By the rescaled
definition of $(\thetastar)'$, the constraint $\thetastar\in
\Ball_0(2\kdim)\cap \Ball_1(\radius)$ holds if and only if
$(\thetastar)' \in \Ball_0(2\kdim)\cap \Ball_1(\sqrt{n/m}\radius)$.
Recalling the definition of the radius $R'$ from
equation~\eqref{eqn:m-m-radius}, we can ensure that $(\thetastar)' \in
\Ball_0(2\kdim)\cap \Ball_1(\sqrt{n/m}\radius)$ by requiring that
$(\thetastar)'_{(i)}\in \Ball_0(2)\cap \Ball_1(R')$ for each
\mbox{index $i \in \{1,\dots, k\}$.} Combining
expressions~\eqref{eqn:coro-split-local-minimum}
and~\eqref{eqn:coro-split-prediction-error}, the quantity
$\mathcal{Q}(X,2k,R)$ can be lower bounded by the sum
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:bound-q-X2kR}
\mathcal{Q}(X,2k,R) \geq \frac{m}{n}\sum_{i=1}^k
\mathcal{Q}(X_m,2,R').
\end{align}
By Theorem~\ref{theorem:main-lower-bound}, we have
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:bound-q-Xm2Rp}
\mathcal{Q}(X_m,2,R') \geq c \min \left\{ \sigma^2,
\frac{\sigma\radius'}{\sqrt{m}}\right\} = c \min \left\{\sigma^2,
\frac{\sigma^2}{16\gamma m}, \frac{\sigma \radius \sqrt{n}}{k m}
\right\},
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where the second equality follows from our choce of $R'$ from
equation~\eqref{eqn:m-m-radius}. Combining the lower
bounds~\eqref{eqn:bound-q-X2kR} and~\eqref{eqn:bound-q-Xm2Rp}
completes the proof.
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~2}
The proof of Theorem~2 is conceptually similar to the proof of
Theorem~\ref{theorem:main-lower-bound}, but differs in some key
details. We begin with the altered definitions
\begin{align*}
\alpha \defeq \arcsin\left( \frac{\sqrt{\sigma}}{\numobs^{1/4}
\sqrt{\altradius}} \right) \quad \mbox{and} \quad B \defeq
\frac{\sigma}{4\sqrt{\numobs}}, \qquad \mbox{where } \altradius
\defeq \min\{\radius,\sigma\}.
\end{align*}
Given our assumption $R\geq \sigma/\sqrt{\numobs}$, note that we are
guaranteed that the inequality \mbox{$2B = \sigma/(2\sqrt{\numobs})
\leq r/2$} holds. We then define the matrix $A\in \R^{2\times2}$
and the matrix $\Xmat\in \R^{\numobs\times \usedim}$ by
equations~\eqref{eqn:define-matrix-A}
and~\eqref{eqn:define-design-matrix-X}.
\subsubsection{Proof of part (a)}
Let $\{\theta^t\}_{t=0}^\infty$ be the sequence of iterates generated
by equation~\eqref{eqn:local-descent-update-formula}. We proceed via
proof by contradiction, assuming that the sequence does not terminate
finitely, and then deriving a contradiction. We begin with a lemma.
\begin{lemma}
\label{LemAuxiliary}
If the sequence of iterates $\{\theta^t\}_{t=0}^\infty$ is not
finitely convergent, then it is unbounded.
\end{lemma}
We defer the proof of this claim to the end of this section. Based on
Lemma~\ref{LemAuxiliary}, it suffices to show that, in fact, the
sequence $\{\theta^t\}_{t=0}^\infty$ is bounded. Partitioning the
full vector as \mbox{$\theta \defeq \big(\theta_{1:n}, \theta_{n+1:d}
\big)$,} we control the two sequences $\{\theta^t_{1:n}
\}_{t=0}^\infty$ and $\{ \theta^t_{n+1:d} \}_{t=0}^\infty$. \\
Beginning with the former sequence, notice that the objective function
can be written in the form
\begin{align*}
L(\theta;\lambda) = \frac{1}{\numobs} \ltwos{y -
X_{1:\numobs}\theta_{1:n}}^2 + \sum_{i=1}^\usedim \lambda
\rho_i(\theta_i),
\end{align*}
where $\Xmat_{1:\numobs}$ represents the first $\numobs$ columns of
matrix $\Xmat$. The conditions~\eqref{eqn:define-matrix-A}
and~\eqref{eqn:define-design-matrix-X} guarantee that the Gram matrix
$X_{1:n}^T X_{1:n}$ is positive definite, which implies that the
quadratic function \mbox{$\theta_{1:n} \mapsto \ltwos{y -
X_{1:n}\theta_{1:n}}^2$} is strongly convex. Thus, if the
sequence $\{\theta_{1:n}^t\}_{t=0}^\infty$ were unbounded, then the
associated cost sequence $\{L(\theta^t; \lambda)\}_{t=0}^\infty$ would
also be unbounded. But this is not possible since $L(\theta^t;
\lambda) \leq L(\theta^0; \lambda)$ for all iterations $t = 1, 2,
\ldots$. Consequently, we are guaranteed that the sequence
$\{\theta^t_{1:n}\}_{t=0}^\infty$ must be bounded.
It remains to control the sequence
$\{\theta_{n+1:d}^t\}_{t=0}^\infty$. We claim that for any $i \in
\{n+1, \ldots, \usedim\}$, the sequence
$\{|\theta_i^t|\}_{t=0}^\infty$ is non-increasing, which implies the
boundedness condition. Proceeding via proof by contradiction, suppose
that $|\theta^t_i| < |\theta^{t+1}_i|$ for some index $i \in \{n+1,
\ldots, \usedim \}$ and iteration number $t \geq 0$. Under this
condition, define the vector
\begin{align*}
\widetilde \theta^{t+1}_j \defeq \begin{cases} \theta^{t+1}_j
& \mbox{if $j\neq i$}\\ \theta^{t}_j & \mbox{if $j=
i$.} \end{cases}
\end{align*}
Since $\rho_j$ is a monotonically non-decreasing function of $|x|$, we
are guaranteed that $L(\widetilde \theta^{t+1};\lambda) \leq
L(\theta^{t+1};\lambda)$, which implies that $\widetilde \theta^{t+1}$
is also a constrained minimum point over the ball $\ensuremath{\Ball_2(\stepsize; \theta^t)}$. In
addition, we have
\begin{align*}
\ltwos{\widetilde \theta^{t+1} - \theta^{t}} = \ltwos{\theta^{t+1} -
\theta^{t}} - |\theta^t_i - \theta^{t+1}_i| < \eta,
\end{align*}
so that $\widetilde \theta^{t+1}_j$ is strictly closer to $\theta^t$.
This contradicts the specification of the algorithm, in that it
chooses the minimum closest to $\theta^t$.
\paragraph{Proof of Lemma~\ref{LemAuxiliary}:}
The final remaining step is to prove Lemma~\ref{LemAuxiliary}. We
first claim that $\ltwos{\theta^s - \theta^t} \geq \eta$ for all
pairs $s < t$. If not, we could find some pair $s < t$ such that
$\ltwos{\theta^s - \theta^t} < \eta$. But since $t > s$, we are
guaranteed that $L(\theta^t;\lambda) \leq L(\theta^{s+1};\lambda)$.
Since $\theta^{s+1}$ is a global minimum over the ball
$\Ball_2(\eta; \theta^s)$ and $\ltwos{\theta^s - \theta^t} <
\eta$, the point $\theta^t$ is also a global minimum, and this
contradicts the definition of the algorithm (since it always chooses
the constrained global minimum closest to the current iterate).
Using this property, we now show that $\{\theta^t\}_{t=0}^\infty$ is
unbounded. For each \mbox{iteration} \mbox{$t = 0, 1, 2 \ldots$,} we use
$\Ball^t = \Ball_2(\eta/3; \theta^t)$ to denote the Euclidean
ball of radius $\eta/3$ centered at $\theta^t$. Since
$\ltwos{\theta^s - \theta^t} \geq \eta$ for all $s \neq t$, the
balls $\{\Ball^t\}_{t=0}^\infty$ are all disjoint, and hence there is
a numerical constant $C > 0$ such that for each $T \geq 1$, we have
\begin{align*}
{\rm vol}\Big( \cup_{t=0}^T \Ball^t \Big) = \sum_{t=0}^T {\rm
vol}(\Ball^t) = C \sum_{t=0}^T\eta^d.
\end{align*}
Since this volume diverges as $T \rightarrow \infty$, we conclude that
the set $\Ball \defn \cup_{t=0}^\infty \Ball^t$ must be unbounded. By
construction, any point in $\Ball$ is within $\eta/3$ of some
element of the sequence $\{\theta^t\}_{t=0}^\infty$, so this sequence
must be unbounded, as claimed.
\subsubsection{Proof of part (b)}
We now prove a lower bound on the prediction error corresponding the
local minimum to which the algorithm converges, as claimed in part (b)
of the theorem statement. In order to do so, we begin by introducing
the shorthand notation
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:define-gamma-i}
\gamma_i = \min\{\sup_{u\in (0,B]}\reg'_{2i-1}(u), \sup_{u\in (0,B]}
\reg'_{2i}(u)\} \qquad \mbox{for each $i = 1, \ldots, \numobs/2$}.
\end{align}
Then we define the quantities $a_i$ and $\ensuremath{w'}_i$ by
equations~\eqref{EqnAdefinition}. Similar to the proof of
Theorem~\ref{theorem:main-lower-bound}, we assume (without loss of
generality, re-indexing as needed) that $\gamma_i = \sup_{u\in
(0,B]}\reg'_{2i-1}(u)$ and that $\gamma_1 = \max_{i\in[\numobs/2]}
\{\gamma_i\}$.
Consider the regression vector $\thetastar \defn \begin{bmatrix}
\frac{r}{2} & \frac{r}{2} & 0 & \cdots & 0
\end{bmatrix}$.
Since the matrix $A$ appears in diagonal blocks of $\Xmat$, the
algorithm's output $\ensuremath{\widehat{\theta}}$ has error
\begin{align}
\label{eqn:gradient-decomposable-m-estimator}
\inf_{\lambda\geq 0} \PREDERRSQ{\ensuremath{\widehat{\theta}}}{\thetastar} & =
\inf_{\lambda\geq 0} \sum_{i=1}^{\numobs/2} \norms{A
\big(\ensuremath{\widehat{\theta}}_{(2i-1):2i} - \opt_{(2i-1):2i} \big)}_2^2.
\end{align}
Given the random initialization $\thetait{0}$, we define the events
\begin{align*}
\Event_0 \defeq \Big \{ \max\{ \theta_{1}^0, \theta_{2}^0 \} \leq 0\Big\}
\quad \mbox{and} \quad \event_1 \defeq \Big\{
\lambda\gamma_1 \geq 2\sin^2(\alpha)\altradius +
\frac{2 \ltwos{w_{1:2}}}{\sqrt{\numobs}} + 3B \Big \},
\end{align*}
as well as the (random) subsets
\begin{align*}
\Sset_1 & \defeq \Big \{ i \in \big \{ 2, \ldots, \numobs/2 \big \} \,
\mid \, \lambda \gamma_1 \leq 2\ensuremath{w'}_i - 4 B \Big \}, \quad
\mbox{and} \\
\Sset_2 & \defeq \Big\{ i \in \{2, \ldots, \numobs/2 \} \, \mid \,
\mbox{$2\sin^2(\alpha)\altradius + \frac{2
\ltwos{w_{1:2}}}{\sqrt{\numobs}} + 3B \leq 2\ensuremath{w'}_i - 4 B$}
\Big\}.
\end{align*}
Here the reader should recall the definition of $\ensuremath{w'}$ from
equation~\eqref{EqnAdefinition}.
Given these definitions, the following lemma provides lower bounds on
the decomposition~\eqref{eqn:gradient-decomposable-m-estimator} for
the vector $\ensuremath{\widehat{\theta}}$ after convergence.
\begin{lemma}
\label{LEMMA:GRADIENT-DESCENT-TERMWISE-LOWER-BOUND}
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item If $\ensuremath{\Event_0 \cap \Event_1}$ holds, then $\norms{A \, \big(\ensuremath{\widehat{\theta}}_{1:2} -
\opt_{1:2}\big)}_2^2 \geq \frac{\sigma \altradius}{4\sqrt{n}}$.
\item
For any index $i \in \Sset_1$, we have
$\norms{A \, \big(\ensuremath{\widehat{\theta}}_{2i-1:2i} - \opt_{2i-1:2i} \big)}_2^2 \geq
\frac{\sigma \altradius}{8\numobs^{3/2}}$.
\item We have $\mprob[\event_0] = 1/4$, and moreover $\min
\limits_{i \in \{2, \ldots, \numobs/2 \}} \mprob[i\in \ensuremath{\Sset_2}]
\geq c$ for some numerical constant $c > 0$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\noindent See Appendix~\ref{AppDecomposedTwo} for the proof of this
claim. \\
Conditioned on event $\event_0$, for any index $i \in \Sset_2$,
either the event $\ensuremath{\Event_0 \cap \Event_1}$ holds, or we have
\begin{align*}
\lambda \gamma_1 < 2\sin^2(\alpha)\altradius + \frac{2
\ltwos{w_{1:2}}}{\sqrt{\numobs}} + 3 B \leq 2\ensuremath{w'}_i - 4 B,
\end{align*}
which means that $i\in
\Sset_1$ holds. Applying
Lemma~\ref{LEMMA:GRADIENT-DESCENT-TERMWISE-LOWER-BOUND} yields the
lower bound
\begin{align*}
\inf_{\lambda\geq 0} \sum_{i=1}^{\numobs/2} \norms{A
\ensuremath{\widehat{\theta}}_{(2i-1):2i} - A \opt_{(2i-1):2i}}_2^2 &\geq
\indicator[\Event_0] \; \min\left\{ \frac{\sigma \altradius}{4
\sqrt{n}}, \: \; \frac{\sigma \altradius}{8\numobs^{3/2}} \;
\sum_{i=2}^{[\numobs/2]} \indicator[i \in \ensuremath{\Sset_2}] \right\}\\ &=
\indicator[\Event_0]\; \frac{\sigma \altradius}{8\numobs^{3/2}} \;
\sum_{i=2}^{[\numobs/2]} \indicator[i \in \ensuremath{\Sset_2}],
\end{align*}
where the last equality holds since $\frac{\sigma
\altradius}{8\numobs^{3/2}} \; \sum_{i=2}^{[\numobs/2]} \indicator[i
\in \Sset_2] \leq \frac{\sigma \altradius}{8\numobs^{3/2}}\;(n/2-1)
< \frac{\sigma \altradius}{4 \sqrt{n}}$. Since the event $\event_0$
is independent of the event $\{i \in \ensuremath{\Sset_2}, i = 2, \ldots,
\numobs/2 \}$, we have
\begin{align*}
\Exs \Big[ \inf_{\lambda\geq 0} \sum_{i=1}^{\numobs/2} \norms{A
\ensuremath{\widehat{\theta}}_{(2i-1):2i} - A \opt_{(2i-1):2i}}_2^2 \Big] & \geq
\mprob[\event_0] \; \frac{\sigma \altradius}{8\numobs^{3/2}}
\sum_{i=2}^{[\numobs/2]} \mprob[i \in \ensuremath{\Sset_2}] \\
& \stackrel{(i)}{\geq} \frac{1}{4} \; \frac{\sigma
\altradius}{8\numobs^{3/2}} \;c(n/2-1)\\
& = c' \min \{\radius, \sigma \} \, \frac{\sigma}{\sqrt{\numobs}},
\end{align*}
where step (i) uses the lower bound $\mprob[\event_0] = 1/4$ and
$\mprob[i\in \ensuremath{\Sset_2}] \geq c$ from
Lemma~\ref{LEMMA:GRADIENT-DESCENT-TERMWISE-LOWER-BOUND}. Combined
with the decomposition~\eqref{eqn:gradient-decomposable-m-estimator},
the proof is complete.
\section{Discussion}
\label{SecDiscussion}
In this paper, we have demonstrated a fundamental gap in sparse linear
regression: the best prediction risk achieved by a class of
$M$-estimators based on coordinate-wise separable regularizers is
strictly larger than the the classical minimax prediction risk,
achieved for instance by minimization over the $\ell_0$-ball. This gap
applies to a range of methods used in practice, including the Lasso in
its ordinary and weighted forms, as well as estimators based on
nonconvex penalties such as the MCP and SCAD penalties.
Several open questions remain, and we discuss a few of them here.
When the penalty function $\rho$ is convex, the M-estimator minimizing
function~\eqref{EqnLoss} can be understood as a particular convex
relaxation of the $\ell_0$-based
estimator~\eqref{EqnDefnEllZeroEstimator}. It would be interesting to
consider other forms of convex relaxations for the $\ell_0$-based
problem. For instance, Pilanci et al.~\cite{PilWaiElg15} show how a
broad class of $\ell_0$-regularized problems can be reformulated
exactly as optimization problems involving convex functions in Boolean
variables. This exact reformulation allows for the direct application
of many standard hierarchies for Boolean polynomial programming,
including the Lasserre hierarchy~\cite{lasserre2001explicit} as well
as the Sherali-Adams hierarchy~\cite{Sherali90}. Other relaxations
are possible, including those that are based on introducing auxiliary
variables for the pairwise interactions (e.g., $\gamma_{ij} = \theta_i
\theta_j$), and so incorporating these constraints as polynomials in
the constraint set. We conjecture that for any fixed natural number
$t$, if the the $t$-th level Lasserre (or Sherali-Adams) relaxation is
applied to such a reformulation, it still does not yield an estimator
that achieves the fast rate~\eqref{eqn:l0-optimal-rate}. Since a
$t^{th}$-level relaxation involves $\order(\usedim^t)$ variables, this
would imply that these hierarchies do not contain polynomial-time
algorithms that achieve the classical minimax risk. Proving or
disproving this conjecture remains an open problem.
Finally, when the penalty function $\rho$ is concave, concurrent work
by Ge et al.~\cite{ge2015strong} shows that finding the global minimum
of the loss function~\eqref{EqnLoss} is strongly NP-hard. This result
implies that no polynomial-time algorithm computes the global minimum
unless ${\bf NP}={\bf P}$. The result given here is complementary in
nature: it shows that bad local minima exist, and that local descent
methods converge to these bad local minima. It would be interesting to
extend this algorithmic lower bound to a broader class of first-order
methods. For instance, we suspect that any algorithm that relies on an
oracle giving first-order information will inevitably converge to a
bad local minimum for a broad class of random initializations.
\subsection*{Acknowledgements}
This work was partially supported by grants NSF grant DMS-1107000, NSF
grant CIF-31712-23800, Air Force Office of Scientific Research Grant
AFOSR-FA9550-14-1-0016, and Office of Naval Research MURI
N00014-11-1-0688.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:introduction}
In large networks, many similar elements can be identified to a single, larger
entity by the process of clustering. Increasing granularity in massive networks
through clustering eases operations on the network. There is a large literature
on the problem of identifying clusters in a graph
(\cite{csz:spectralkway:94,shi2000normalized,njw:spectralcluster:02,kvv:clusterings:04,lc:powercluster:10,lc:textcluster:10}),
and the problem has found many applications. However, in a variation of the
graph clustering problem we may only be interested in a single cluster near one
element in the graph. For this, local clustering algorithms are of greater use.
As an example, the problem of finding a local cluster arises in protein
networks. A protein-protein interaction (PPI) network has undirected edges that
represent an interaction between two proteins. Given two PPI networks, the goal
of the pairwise alignment problem is to identify an optimal mapping between the
networks that best represents a conserved biological function.
In~\cite{liao:protein:09}, a local clustering algorithm is applied from a
specified protein to identify a group similar to that protein. Such local
alignments are useful for analysis of a particular component of a biological
system (rather than at a systems level which will call for a global alignment).
Local clustering is also a common tool for identifying communities in a network.
A community is loosely defined as a subset of vertices in a graph which are more
strongly connected internally than to vertices outside the subset. Properties
of community structure in large, real world networks have been studied
in~\cite{lldm:localnetwork:08}, for example, where local clustering algorithms
are employed for identifying communities of varying quality.
The goal of a local clustering algorithm is to identify a cluster in a graph
near a specified vertex. Using only local structure avoids unnecessary
computation over the entire graph. An important consequence of this are running
times which are often in terms of the size of the small side of the partition,
rather than of the entire graph. The best performing local clustering
algorithms use probability diffusion processes over the graph to determine
clusters (see Section~\ref{sec:previouswork}). In this paper we present a new
algorithm which identifies a cut near a specified vertex with simple
computations over a heat kernel pagerank vector.
The theory behind using heat kernel pagerank for computing local clusters has
been considered in previous work. Here we give an efficient approximation
algorithm for computing heat kernel pagerank. Note that we use a ``relaxed''
notion of approximation which allows us to derive a sublinear probabilistic
approximation algorithm for heat kernel pagerank, while computing an exact or
sharp approximation would require computation complexity of order similar to
matrix multiplication. We use this sublinear approximation algorithm for
efficient local clustering.
\subsection{Previous work}\label{sec:previouswork}
\paragraph{Heat kernel and approximation of matrix exponentials.} Heat kernel
pagerank was first introduced in~\cite{chung:hkpr:07} as a variant of
personalized PageRank~\cite{haveliwala2002topic}. While PageRank can be
viewed as a geometric sum of random walks, the heat kernel pagerank is an
exponential sum of random walks. An alternative interpretation of the heat
kernel pagerank is related to the heat kernel of a graph as the fundamental
solution to the heat equation. As such, it has connections with diffusion and
mixing properties of graphs and has been incorporated into a number of graph
algorithmic primitives.
Orecchia et al. use a variant of heat kernel random walks in their randomized
algorithm for computing a cut in a graph with prescribed balance
constraints~\cite{osv:balsep:11}. A key subroutine in the algorithm is a
procedure for computing $e^{-A}v$ for a positive semidefinite matrix $A$ and a
unit vector $v$ in time $\tilde{O}(m)$ for graphs on $n$ vertices and $m$ edges.
They show how this can be done with a small number of computations of the form
$A^{-1}v$ and applying the Spielman-Teng linear
solver~\cite{st:graphpartitioning:stoc04}. Their main result is a randomized
algorithm that outputs a balanced cut in time $O(m\operatorname{polylog} n)$. In a follow up
paper, Sachdeva and Vishnoi~\cite{sachdeva2013matrix} reduce inversion of
positive semidefinite matrices to matrix exponentiation, thus proving that
matrix exponentiation and matrix inversion are equivalent to polylog factors.
In particular, the nearly-linear running time of the balanced separator
algorithm depends upon the nearly-linear time Spielman-Teng solver.
Another method for approximating matrix exponentials is given by Kloster and
Gleich in~\cite{kloster:columnexp:waw13}. They use a Gauss-Southwell iteration
to approximate the Taylor series expansion of the column vector $e^{P}e_c$ for
transition probability matrix $P$ and $e_c$ a standard basis vector. The
algorithm runs in sublinear time assuming the maximum degree of the network is
$O(\log\log n)$.
\paragraph{Local clustering.} Local clustering algorithms were introduced
in~\cite{st:graphpartitioning:stoc04}, where Spielman and Teng present a
nearly-linear time algorithm for finding local partitions with certain balance
constraints. Let $\Phi(S)$ denote the cut ratio of a subset $S$ that we will
later define as the Cheeger ratio. Then, given a graph and a subset of vertices
$S$ such that $\Phi(S) < \phi$ and $\textmd{vol}(S)\leq \textmd{vol}(G)/2$, their algorithm
finds a set of vertices $T$ such that $\textmd{vol}(T) \geq \textmd{vol}(S)/2$ and $\Phi(T) \leq
O(\phi^{1/3}\log^{O(1)}n)$ in time $O(m(\log n/\phi)^{O(1)})$. This seminal
work incorporates the ideas of Lov\'asz and
Simonovitz~\cite{ls:mixingisoperimetric:90,ls:randomwalks:93} on isoperimetric
properties of random walks, and their algorithm works by simulating truncated
random walks on the graph. Spielman and Teng later improve their approximation
guarantee to $O(\phi^{1/2}\log^{3/2}n)$ in a revised version of the
paper~\cite{st:localcluster:08}.
The algorithm of~\cite{st:graphpartitioning:stoc04,st:localcluster:08} improves
the spectral methods of~\cite{donath1972algorithms} and a similar expression
in~\cite{aloniso85} which use an eigenvector of the graph Laplacian to partition
the vertices of a graph. However, the local approach of Spielman and Teng
allows us to identify focused clusters without investigating the entire graph.
For this reason, the running time of this and similar local algorithms are
proportional to the size of the small side of the cut, rather than the entire
graph.
Andersen et al.~\cite{acl:prgraphpartition:focs06} give an improved local
clustering algorithm using approximate PageRank vectors. For a vertex subset
$S$ with Cheeger ratio $\phi$ and volume $k$, they show that a PageRank vector
can be used to find a set with Cheeger ratio $O(\phi^{1/2}\log^{1/2}k)$. Their
local clustering algorithm runs in time $O(\phi^{-1}m\log^4 m)$. The analysis
of the above process was strengthened in~\cite{ac:sharpdrops:07} and emphasized
that vertices with higher PageRank values will be on the same side of the cut as
the starting vertex.
Andersen and Peres~\cite{ap:evolving:09} later simulate a volume-biased evolving
set process to find sparse cuts. Although their approximation guarantee is the
same as that of~\cite{acl:prgraphpartition:focs06}, their process yields a
better ratio between the computational complexity of the algorithm on a given
run and the volume of the output set. They call this value the
\emph{work/volume ratio}, and their evolving set algorithm achieves an expected
ratio of $O(\phi^{-1/2}\log^{3/2}n)$. This result is improved by Gharan and
Trevisan in~\cite{gt:optimalcluster:12} with an algorithm that finds a set of
conductance at most $O(\epsilon^{-1/2}\phi^{1/2})$ and achieves a work/volume
ratio of $O(\varsigma^{\epsilon}\phi^{-1/2}\log^2n)$ for target volume
$\varsigma$ and target conductance $\phi$. The complexity of their algorithm is
achieved by running copies of an evolving set process in parallel.
\subsection{Our contributions}
In this paper, we give a probabilistic approximation algorithm for computing a
vector that yields a ranking of vertices close to the heat kernel pagerank
vector. The approximation algorithm, \texttt{ApproxHKPRseed}, works by simulating random
walks and computing contributions of these walks for each vertex in the graph.
Assuming access to a constant-time query which returns the destination of a heat
kernel random walk starting from a specified vertex, \texttt{ApproxHKPRseed}~runs in time
$O\big(\frac{\log(\epsilon^{-1})\log n}{\epsilon^3\log\log(\epsilon^{-1})}\big)$. In the context of this paper, we strictly address heat kernel
pagerank with a single vertex as a seed -- an analogy to Personalized PageRank
with total preference given to a single vertex. Note that heat kernel pagerank
with a general preference vector (see Section~\ref{sec:preliminaries}) is a
combination of heat kernel pagerank with a single seed vertex. We refer the
reader to~\cite{cs:imlinear:14} for this more general case.
Using \texttt{ApproxHKPRseed}~as a subroutine, we then present a local clustering algorithm
that uses a ranking according to an approximate heat kernel pagerank. Let $G$
be a graph and $S$ a proper vertex subset with volume $\varsigma \leq \textmd{vol}(G)/4$
and Cheeger ratio $\Phi(S) \leq \phi$. Then, with probability at least
$1-\epsilon$, our algorithm outputs either a cutset $T$ with $\textmd{vol}(T) \geq
\textmd{vol}(S)/2$ and $\varsigma$-local Cheeger ratio at most $O(\sqrt{\phi})$ or a
certificate that no such set exists. The algorithm has work/volume ratio of
$O(\varsigma^{-1}\epsilon^{-3}\log
n\log(\epsilon^{-1})\log\log(\epsilon^{-1}))$. This result is formalized in
Theorem~\ref{thm:localpart}. A summary of previous results and our
contributions are given in Table~\ref{table:resultssummary}.
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c}\hline
Algorithm & Conductance of output set & Work/volume ratio\\\hline
\cite{st:localcluster:08} & $O(\phi^{1/2}\log^{3/2}n)$ & $O(\phi^{-2}\operatorname{polylog} n)$\\
\cite{acl:prgraphpartition:focs06} & $O(\phi^{1/2}\log^{1/2}n)$ & $O(\phi^{-1}\operatorname{polylog} n)$\\
\cite{ap:evolving:09} & $O(\phi^{1/2}\log^{1/2} n)$ & $O(\phi^{-1/2}\operatorname{polylog} n)$\\
\cite{gt:optimalcluster:12} & $O(\epsilon^{-1/2}\phi^{1/2})$ & $O(\varsigma^{\epsilon}\phi^{-1/2}\operatorname{polylog} n)$\\
This work & $O(\phi^{1/2})$ & $O(\varsigma^{-1}\epsilon^{-3}\log n\log(\epsilon^{-1})\log\log(\epsilon^{-1}))$\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Summary of local clustering algorithms}
\label{table:resultssummary}
\end{table}
As a summary of the contributions of this work,
\begin{enumerate}[label={(\arabic*)}]
\item We present an algorithm for computing a heat kernel pagerank vector from a
single seed vertex with $(1+\epsilon)$ approximation guarantee with high
probability in time $O\big(\frac{\log(\epsilon^{-1})\log n}{\epsilon^3\log\log(\epsilon^{-1})}\big)$.\label{point:hkpralg}
\item We present a local clustering algorithm which uses a ranking according
to heat kernel pagerank. In our clustering algorithm we use the probabilistic
approximation algorithm in \ref{point:hkpralg} as a subroutine, which gives a
sublinear-time local clustering algorithm.\label{point:clusteralg}
\item Using the approximation guarantees of \ref{point:hkpralg} and the analysis
for \ref{point:clusteralg}, we present a local clustering algorithm which with
high probability returns a set with Cheeger ratio at most $O(\sqrt{\phi})$,
given a target ratio $\phi$, with work/volume ratio
$O(\varsigma^{-1}\epsilon^{-3}\log n\log(\epsilon^{-1})\log\log(\epsilon^{-1}))$
where $\varsigma$ is proportional to the volume of the output set.
\item We validate the performance analysis by implementing our algorithms using
several real and synthetic graphs as examples. The clusters that were derived
in these examples using the local clustering algorithm and heat kernel pagerank
approximation have Cheeger ratios as guaranteed in Theorem~\ref{thm:localpart}.
\end{enumerate}
The theory behind finding local cuts with heat kernel pagerank vectors was first
presented in~\cite{chung:hkpr:07,chung:partitionhkpr:im09}. Using some of this
analysis as a starting point, we provide the algorithm for computing local
clusters, called \texttt{ClusterHKPR}.
\subsection{Organization}
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. First, we give some
definitions and useful facts in Section~\ref{sec:preliminaries}. We give a
sublinear-time algorithm for approximating heat kernel pagerank in
Section~\ref{sec:hkprapprox}. In Section~\ref{sec:goodcuts} we give the
analysis justifying our local clustering algorithm, which we present in
Section~\ref{sec:localpartition}. Sections~\ref{sec:rankings}
and~\ref{sec:expresults} contain experimental results. In both sections,
experiments are performed on real data and on synthetic graphs generated with
random graph generators. In Section~\ref{sec:rankings} we demonstrate how the
rankings obtained using approximate heat kernel pagerank vectors are compared
with rankings obtained using exact heat kernel pagerank vectors. In
Section~\ref{sec:expresults} we compute local clusters by implementing the
\texttt{ClusterHKPR}~algorithm. We compare the volume and Cheeger ratio of these
clusters to those output by two existing sweep-based local clustering
algorithms. The first is by a sweep of an exact heat kernel
pagerank~\cite{chung:partitionhkpr:im09} to compare the effects of heat kernel
pagerank computation, and the second by a PageRank
vector~\cite{acl:prgraphpartition:focs06}. PageRank has a similar expression as
heat kernel pagerank except PageRank is a geometric sum whereas heat kernel
pagerank can be viewed as an exponential sum. We expect better convergence
rates from heat kernel (see Section~\ref{sec:heatkernelandhkpr}).
\section{Preliminaries}
\label{sec:preliminaries}
Let $G = (V,E)$ be an undirected graph on $n$ vertices and $m$ edges. We use $u
\sim v$ to denote $\{u,v\} \in E$. The \emph{degree}, $d_v$, of a vertex $v$ is
the number of vertices $u$ such that $u\sim v$. The \emph{volume} of a set of
vertices $S \subseteq V$ is the total degree of its vertices, $\textmd{vol}(S) = \sum_{v
\in S} d_v$, and the \emph{edge boundary} of $S$ is the set of edges with one
vertex in $S$ and the other outside of $S$, $\partial(S) = \{ u\sim v ~:~ u \in
S, v \notin S \}$. When discussing the full vertex set, $V$, we write
$S\subseteq G$ and $\textmd{vol}(G) = \textmd{vol}(V)$.
Let $f\in \mathbb{R}^n$ be a row vector over the vertices of $G$. Then the support of
$f$ is the set of vertices with nonzero values in $f$, $\textmd{supp}(f) = \{u \in V~:~
f(u)\neq 0\}$. For a subset of vertices $S$, we define $f(S) = \sum_{u\in S}
f(u)$.
\subsection{A local Cheeger inequality}
The quality of a cut can be measured by the ratio of the number of edges between
the two parts of the cut and the volume of the smaller side of the cut. This is
called the \emph{Cheeger ratio} of a set, defined by
\begin{equation*}
\Phi(S) = \frac{ |\partial(S)| }{ \min(\textmd{vol}(S), \textmd{vol}(V\setminus S)) }.
\end{equation*}
The \emph{Cheeger constant} of a graph is the minimal Cheeger ratio,
\begin{equation*}
\Phi(G) = \min_{S\subset G}\Phi(S).
\end{equation*}
Finally, for a given subset $S$ of a graph $G$, the \emph{local Cheeger ratio}
is defined
\begin{equation*}
\Phi^*(S) = \min\limits_{T \subseteq S}\Phi(T).
\end{equation*}
Our local clustering algorithm is derived from a local version of the usual
Cheeger inequalities which relate the Cheeger constant of a graph to an
eigenvalue associated to the graph. Namely, let the normalized Laplacian of a
graph be the matrix $\L = D^{-1/2}(D-A)D^{-1/2}$, where $D$ is the diagonal
matrix of vertex degrees and $A$ is the unweighted, symmetric adjacency matrix.
Also, let $\L_S$ be determined by a subset $S$ of size $|S|=s$ and define $\L_S
= D_S^{-1/2}(D_S-A_S)D_S^{-1/2}$ where $D_S$ and $A_S$ are the restricted
matrices of $D$ and $A$ with rows and columns indexed by vertices in $S$. Then
the eigenvalues $\lambda_S := \lambda_{S,1} \leq \lambda_{S,2} \leq \cdots \leq
\lambda_{S,s}$ of $\L_S$ are also known as the \emph{Dirichlet eigenvalues of
$S$}, and are related to $\Phi^*(S)$ by the following local Cheeger
inequality~\cite{chung:partitionhkpr:im09}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:cheegerinequality}
\frac{1}{2}(\Phi^*(S))^2 \leq \lambda_S \leq \Phi^*(S).
\end{equation}
The inequality (\ref{eq:cheegerinequality}) will be used to derive a
relationship between a ranking according to heat kernel pagerank and sets with
good Cheeger ratios. Details will be given in Section~\ref{sec:goodcuts}.
\subsection{Heat kernel and heat kernel pagerank}
\label{sec:heatkernelandhkpr}
The \emph{heat kernel pagerank} vector has entries indexed by the vertices of
the graph and involves two parameters; a non-negative real value $t$,
representing the temperature, and a preference row vector $f: V \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$,
by the following equation:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:hkpr}
\rho_{t,f} = e^{-t} \sum\limits_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{t^k}{k!}fP^k
\end{equation}
where $P$ is the transition probability matrix
\begin{equation*}
(P)_{uv} =
\begin{cases}
1/d_u & \mbox{ if } u\sim v\\
0 & \mbox{ otherwise}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
When $f$ is a probability distribution, the heat kernel pagerank can be regarded
as the expected distribution of a random walk according to the transition
probability matrix $P$. A starting distribution we will be particularly
concerned with is that with all probability initially on a single vertex $u$,
i.e. $f = \chi_u$ where $\chi_u$ is the indicator vector for vertex $u$. We
will denote the heat kernel pagerank vector over this distribution by $\rho_{t,u} :=
\rho_{t,\chi_u}$ and refer to $u$ as the \emph{seed} vertex.
The \emph{heat kernel} of a graph is defined $H_t = e^{-t\Delta}$ where $\Delta$
is the Laplace operator $\Delta = I - P$. Then an alternative definition for
heat kernel pagerank is $\rho_{t,f} = fH_t$, and we have that heat kernel pagerank
satisfies the heat differential equation
\begin{equation}\label{eq:heateq}
\frac{\partial}{\partial t}\rho_{t,f} = -\rho_{t,f}(I-P).
\end{equation}
We can compare the heat kernel pagerank to the personalized PageRank vector,
given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pagerank}
\textsf{pr}_{\alpha, f} = \alpha \sum\limits_{k=0}^{\infty}(1-\alpha)^kfP^k.
\end{equation}
In this definition, $\alpha$ is often called the \emph{jumping} or \emph{reset}
constant, meaning that at any step the random walk may jump to a vertex taken
from $f$ with probability $\alpha$. When $f = \chi_u$ for some $u$, i.e.
preference is given to a single vertex, the random walk is ``reset" to the first
vertex of the walk, $u$, with probability $\alpha$. We note that, compared to
the personalized PageRank vector, which can be viewed as a geometric sum, we can
expect better convergence rates from the heat kernel pagerank, defined as an
exponential sum.
\section{Heat Kernel Pagerank Approximation}
\label{sec:hkprapprox}
We begin our discussion of heat kernel pagerank approximation with an
observation. Each term in the infinite series defining heat kernel pagerank in
$(\ref{eq:hkpr})$ is of the form $e^{-t}\frac{t^k}{k!}fP^k$ for
$k\in[0,\infty]$. The vector $fP^k$ is the distribution after $k$ random walk
steps with starting distribution $f$. Then, if we perform $k$ steps of a random
walk given by transition probability matrix $P$ from starting distribution $f$
with probability $p_k = e^{-t}\frac{t^k}{k!}$, the heat kernel pagerank vector
can be viewed as the expected distribution of this process.
This suggests a natural way to approximate the heat kernel pagerank. That is,
we can obtain a close approximation to the expected distribution with
sufficiently many samples. Our algorithm operates as follows. We perform $r$
random walks to approximate the infinite sum, choosing $r$ large enough to bound
the error. We also use the fact that very long walks are performed with small
probability. As such, we limit the lengths of our random walks by a finite
number $K$. Both $r,K$ depend on a predetermined error bound $\epsilon$.
In our analysis we will use the following definition of an
$\epsilon$-approximate vector.
\begin{definition}
\label{def:eps-approx}
Let $G$ be a graph on $n$ vertices, and let $f:V\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ be a vector over
the vertices of $G$. Let $\rho_{t,f}$ be the heat kernel pagerank vector according
to $f$ and $t$. Then we say that $\nu \in \mathbb{R}^n$ is an
\emph{$\epsilon$-approximate vector} of $\rho_{t,f}$ if
\begin{enumerate}
\item for every vertex $v \in V$ in the support of $\nu$,
$$(1-\epsilon)\rho_{t,f}(v) -\epsilon \leq \nu(v) \leq (1+\epsilon)\rho_{t,f}(v),$$
\item for every vertex with $\nu(v) = 0$, it must be that $\rho_{t,f}(v) \leq \epsilon$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
We note that this is a rather coarse requirement for an approximation, but
satisfies our needs for local clustering. In the following algorithm, we
approximate $\rho_{t,u}$ by an $\epsilon$-approximate vector which we denote by
$\hat{\rho}_{t,u}$. The running time of the algorithm is $O\big(\frac{\log(\epsilon^{-1})\log n}{\epsilon^3\log\log(\epsilon^{-1})}\big)$. The
method and complexity of the algorithm, $\texttt{ApproxHKPRseed}$, are similar to the
ApproxRow algorithm for personalized PageRank given
in~\cite{bbct:sublinearpr:waw12}.
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\floatname{algorithm}{}
\caption*{\texttt{ApproxHKPRseed($G,t,u,\epsilon$)}}
\label{alg:hkprseed}
\algblock[Name]{Start}{End}
input: a graph $G$, $t\in \mathbb{R}^{+}$, seed vertex $u\in V$, error parameter $0 < \epsilon < 1$.\\
output: $\rho$, an $\epsilon$-approximation of $\rho_{t,u}$.\\
\begin{algorithmic}
\State initialize a $0$-vector $\rho$ of dimension $n$, where $n=|V|$
\State $r \gets \frac{16}{\epsilon^3}\log n$
\State $K \gets c\cdot\frac{\log(\epsilon^{-1})}{\log\log(\epsilon^{-1})}$ for some choice of contant $c$\\
\For {$r$ iterations}
\Start
\State simulate a $P$ random walk from vertex $u$ where $k$ steps are taken with probability $e^{-t}\frac{t^k}{k!}$ and $k \leq K$
\State let $v$ be the last vertex visited in the walk
\State $\rho[v] \gets \rho[v] + 1$
\End
\EndFor\\
\State
\Return $1/r \cdot \rho$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:hkpraccuracy}
Let $G$ be a graph and let $u$ be a vertex of $G$. Then, the algorithm
\texttt{ApproxHKPRseed($G,t,u,\epsilon$)} outputs an $\epsilon$-approximate vector $\hat{\rho}_{t,u}$ of the
heat kernel pagerank $\rho_{t,u}$ for $0 < \epsilon < 1$ with probability at least
$1-\epsilon$. The running time of \texttt{ApproxHKPRseed}~is $O\big(\frac{\log(\epsilon^{-1})\log n}{\epsilon^3\log\log(\epsilon^{-1})}\big)$.
\end{theorem}
\subsection{Analysis of the heat kernel pagerank algorithm}
\label{sec:hkpranalysis}
Our analysis relies on the usual Chernoff bounds as stated below.
\begin{lemma}[\cite{bbct:sublinearpr:waw12}]\label{lem:chernoff}
Let $X_i$ be independent Bernoulli random variables with $X = \sum\limits_{i = 1}^r X_i$. Then,
\begin{enumerate}
\item for $0 < \epsilon < 1$, $\P(X < (1-\epsilon)r\mathbb{E}(X)) < \exp(-\frac{\epsilon^2}{2}r\mathbb{E}(X))$
\item for $0 < \epsilon < 1$, $\P(X > (1+\epsilon)r\mathbb{E}(X)) < \exp(-\frac{\epsilon^2}{4}r\mathbb{E}(X))$
\item for $c \geq 1$, $\P(X > (1+c)r\mathbb{E}(X)) < \exp(-\frac{c}{2}r\mathbb{E}(X))$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[Theorem~\ref{thm:hkpraccuracy}]
Consider the random variable which takes on value $fP^k$ with probability $p_k =
e^{-t}\frac{t^k}{k!}$ for $k\in [0, \infty)$. The expectation of this random
variable is exactly $\rho_{t,f}$. Heat kernel pagerank can be understood as a series
of distributions of weighted random walks over the vertices, and the weights are
related to the number of steps taken in the walk. The series can be computed by
simulating this process, i.e., draw $k$ according to $p_k$ and compute $fP^k$
with sufficiently many random walks of length $k$.
We approximate the infinite sum by limiting the walks to at most $K$ steps. We
will take $K$ to be $K= \frac{\log(\epsilon^{-1})}{\log\log(\epsilon^{-1})}$. These interrupts risk the loss of
contribution to the expected value, but can be upper bounded by
$\frac{e^{-t}t^K}{K!} \leq \frac{\epsilon}{2}$ provided that $t > K/\log K$.
This is within the error bound for an approximate heat kernel pagerank. If $t
\leq K/ \log K$, the expected length of the random walk is
\begin{align*}
\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{e^{-t}t^k}{k!} \cdot k = t < K/\log K.
\end{align*}
Thus we can ignore walks of length more than $K$ while maintaining $\rho_{t,u}(v) -
\epsilon \leq \hat{\rho}_{t,u}(v) \leq \rho_{t,u}(v)$ for every vertex $v$.
Next we show how many samples are necessary for our approximation vectors. For
$k\leq K$, our algorithm simulates $k$ random walk steps with probability
$e^{-t}\frac{t^k}{k!}$. To be specific, for a fixed $u$, let $X^v_k$ be the
indicator random variable defined by $X^v_k = 1$ if a random walk beginning from
vertex $u$ ends at vertex $v$ in $k$ steps. Let $X^v$ be the random variable
that considers the random walk process ending at vertex $v$ in \emph{at most}
$k$ steps. That is, $X^v$ assumes the vector $X^v_k$ with probability
$e^{-t}\frac{t^k}{k!}$. Namely, we consider the combined random walk
\begin{equation*}
X^v=\sum_{k \leq K} e^{-t}\frac{t^k}{k!} X^v_k.
\end{equation*}
Now, let $\rho(k)_{t,u}$ be the contribution to the heat kernel pagerank vector
$\rho_{t,u}$ of walks of length at most $k$. The expectation of each $X^v$ is
$\rho(k)_{t,u}(v)$. Then, by Lemma~\ref{lem:chernoff},
\begin{align*}
\P(X^v < (1-\epsilon) \rho(k)_{t,u}(v)\cdot r) &< \exp(-\rho(k)_{t,u}(v)r\epsilon^2/2)\\
&= \exp(-(8/\epsilon)\rho(k)_{t,u}(v)\log n)\\
&< n^{-4}
\end{align*}
for every component with $\rho_{t,u}(v) > \epsilon$, since then $\rho(k)_{t,u}(v) >
\epsilon/2$. Similarly,
\begin{align*}
\P(X^v > (1+\epsilon) \rho(k)_{t,u}(v)\cdot r) &< \exp(-\rho(k)_{t,u}(v)r\epsilon^2/4)\\
&= \exp(-(4/\epsilon)\rho(k)_{t,u}(v)\log n)\\
&< n^{-2}.
\end{align*}
We conclude the analysis for the support of $\rho_{t,u}$ by noting that $\hat{\rho}_{t,u}
= \frac{1}{r} X^v$, and we achieve an $\epsilon$-multiplicative error bound for
every vertex $v$ with $\rho_{t,u}(v) > \epsilon$ with probability at least
$1-O(n^{-2})$.
On the other hand, if $\rho_{t,u}(v)\leq\epsilon$, by the third part of
Lemma~\ref{lem:chernoff}, $\P(\hat{\rho}_{t,u}(v) > 2\epsilon) \leq
n^{-8/\epsilon^2}$. We may conclude that, with high probability, $\hat{\rho}_{t,u}(v)
\leq 2\epsilon$.
For the running time, we use the assumptions that performing a random walk step
and drawing from a distribution with bounded support require constant time.
These are incorporated in the random walk simulation, which dominates the
computation. Therefore, for each of the $r$ rounds, at most $K$ steps of the
random walk are simulated, giving a total of $rK = O\Big(\frac{16}{\epsilon^3}\log n \cdot
\frac{\log(\epsilon^{-1})}{\log\log(\epsilon^{-1})}\Big)= \tilde {O}(1)$ queries.
\qed\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
This bound on $K$ is not tight. However, it is enough to use $cK$ for some
small constant $c$ to cluster vertices with $\epsilon$-approximate heat kernel
pagerank vectors computed with bounded random walks. Regardless, this value
$O(K)$ is independent of the size of the graph and never affects the running
time. See Section~\ref{sec:rankings} for a futher discussion.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
We note that the algorithm works for any $t$, but a good choice of $t$ will be
related to the size of the local cluster $S$ and a desirable convergence rate.
In particular, the constraints put on $t$ are necessary for our local clustering
results, presented in Section~\ref{sec:goodcuts}.
\end{remark}
The algorithm for efficient heat kernel pagerank computation has promise for a
variety of applications. It has been shown in~\cite{cs:hklinear:13} how to
apply heat kernel pagerank in solving symmetric diagonally dominant linear
systems with a boundary condition, for example.
\section{Finding Good Local Cuts}
\label{sec:goodcuts}
The premise of the local clustering algorithm is to find a good cut near a
specified vertex by performing a \emph{sweep} over a vector associated to that
vertex, which we will specify. Let $p:V\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ be a probability
distribution vector over the vertices of the graph of support size $N_p =
\textmd{supp}(p)$. Then, consider a \emph{probability-per-degree} ordering of the
vertices where $p(v_1)/d_{v_1} \geq p(v_2)/d_{v_2} \geq \cdots \geq
p(v_{N_p})/d_{v_{N_p}}$. Let $S_i$ be the set of the first $i$ vertices per the
ordering. We call each $S_i$ a \emph{segment}. Then the process of
investigating the cuts induced by the segments to find an optimal cut is called
performing a sweep over $p$.
In this section we will show how a sweep over a single heat kernel pagerank
vector finds local cuts. Specifically, we show that for a subset $S$ with
$\textmd{vol}(S) \leq \textmd{vol}(G)/4$ and $\Phi(S) \leq \phi$, and for a large number of
vertices $u\in S$, performing a sweep over the vector $\hat{\rho}_{t,u}$, where
$\hat{\rho}_{t,u}$ is an $\epsilon$-approximation of $\rho_{t,u}$, will find a set with
Cheeger ratio at most $O(\sqrt{\phi})$.
\begin{remark}
Though all the vertices in the support of the vector are sorted to build
segments, in practice the sweep will be aborted after the volume of the current
segment is larger than the target size. This is the \emph{locality} of the
algorithm, and ensures that the amount of work performed is proportional to the
volume of the output set.
\end{remark}
The $\varsigma$-local Cheeger ratio of a sweep over a vector $\nu$ is the
minimum Cheeger ratio over segments $S_i$ with volume $0 \leq \textmd{vol}(S_i)\leq
2\varsigma$. Let $\Phi_{\varsigma}(\nu)$ the $\varsigma$-local Cheeger ratio of
cuts over a sweep of $\nu$ that separates sets of volume between $0$ and
$2\varsigma$.
We will use the following bounds for heat kernel pagerank in terms of local
Cheeger ratios and sweep cuts to reason that many vertices $u$ can serve as good
seeds for performing a sweep.
\begin{lemma}
\label{thm:volumegoodset}
Let $G$ be a graph and $S$ a subset of vertices of volume $\varsigma \leq
\rm{vol}(G)/4$. Then the set of $u\in S$ satisfying
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{2}e^{-t\Phi^*(S)}
\leq \rho_{t,u}(S)
\leq \sqrt{\varsigma}e^{-t\Phi_{\varsigma}(\rho_{t,f_S})^2/4}
\end{equation*}
has volume at least $\varsigma/2$.
\end{lemma}
To proof Lemma~\ref{thm:volumegoodset}, we begin with some bounds for heat
kernel pagerank in terms of local Cheeger ratios and sweep cuts. For a subset
$S$, define $f_S$ to be the following distribution over the vertices,
\begin{equation*}
f_S(u) =
\begin{cases}
d_u/\textmd{vol}(S) & \mbox{ if }u\in S\\
0 & \mbox{ otherwise.}
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
Then the expected value of $\rho_{t,u}(S)$ over $u$ in $S$ is given by:
\begin{align}
\mathbb{E}(\rho_{t,u}(S)) &= \sum\limits_{u\in S}\frac{d_u}{\textmd{vol}(S)}\rho_{t,u}(S)\nonumber\\
&= \sum\limits_{u\in S}\frac{d_u}{\textmd{vol}(S)}(\chi_u H_t)(S)\nonumber\\
&= f_S H_t(S)\nonumber\\
&= \rho_{t,f_S}(S).\label{eq:ehkpru}
\end{align}
We will make use of the following result, given here without proof
(see~\cite{chung:partitionhkpr:im09}), which bounds the expected value of
$\rho_{t,u}(S)$ given by (\ref{eq:ehkpru}) in terms of local Cheeger ratios.
\begin{lemma}[\cite{chung:partitionhkpr:im09}]
\label{lem:lowerbound}
In a graph $G$, and for a subset $S$, the following holds:
\[
\frac{1}{2}e^{-t\Phi^*(S)} \leq \frac{1}{2}e^{-t\lambda_S} \leq \rho_{t,f_S}(S).
\]
\end{lemma}
Next, we use an upper bound on the amount of probability remaining in $S$ after
sufficient mixing. This is an extension of a theorem given
in~\cite{chung:partitionhkpr:im09}.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:eupperbound}
Let $G$ be a graph and $S$ a subset of vertices with volume $\varsigma \leq
\rm{vol}(G)/4$. Then,
\[ \rho_{t,f_S}(S) \leq \sqrt{\varsigma}e^{-t\Phi_{\varsigma}(\rho_{t,f_S})^2/4}. \]
\end{theorem}
To prove Theorem~\ref{thm:eupperbound}, we define the following for an arbitrary
function $f:V\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ and any integer $x$ with $0\leq x \leq \textmd{vol}(G)/2$,
\begin{equation*}
f(x) = \max\limits_{T\subseteq V\times V, |T|=x} \sum\limits_{(u,v)\in T} f(u,v), ~~~
f(u,v)=
\begin{cases}
f(u)/d_u, \mbox{ if $u \sim v$,}\\
0, \mbox{ otherwise}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
The above definition can be extended to all real values of $x$,
\begin{equation*}
f(x) = \max\limits_{T\subseteq V\times V, |T|=x} \sum\limits_{(u,v)\in T} \alpha_{uv}f(u,v), ~~~
\alpha_{uv} \leq 1 \mbox{ if }u\sim v, ~~\sum_{u\sim v}\alpha_{uv} = x.
\end{equation*}
\begin{claim}\label{claim:f}
Let $S_i$ be a segment according to a vector $f:V\rightarrow\mathbb{R}$ such that
$x=\rm{vol}(S_i)$ and $f(v) > 0$ for every $v\in S_i$. Then $$f(x) = \sum_{u\in
S_i}f(u) = f(S_i).$$
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
We are considering the maximum over a subset of vertex pairs $T$ of size
$\textmd{vol}(S_i)$. Since we are only adding values over vertex pairs which are edges
in $G$, this maximum is achieved when
\begin{align*}
f(x) &= \sum\limits_{u\in S_i}\sum\limits_{v\sim u}f(u)/d_u\\
&=\sum\limits_{u\in S_i} f(u) \sum\limits_{v\sim u}1/d_u\\
&= f(S_i).
\end{align*}
\qed\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Theorem~\ref{thm:eupperbound}]
Let $Z$ be the lazy random walk $Z = 1/2(I + P)$. Then,
\begin{align*}
fZ(S) &= 1/2\Big( f(S) + \sum\limits_{u\sim v \in S} f(u,v) \Big)\\
&= 1/2\Big( \sum\limits_{u \vee v \in S} f(u,v) + \sum\limits_{u \wedge v \in S} f(u,v) \Big)\\
&\leq 1/2(f(\textmd{vol}(S) + |\partial(S)|) + f(\textmd{vol}(S) - |\partial(S)|))\\
&= 1/2\Big(f(\textmd{vol}(S)(1 + \Phi(S))) + f(\textmd{vol}(S)(1 - \Phi(S)))\Big).
\end{align*}
Let $f_t = \rho_{t,f_S}$, and let $x$ satisfy $0 \leq x \leq 2\varsigma \leq
\textmd{vol}(G)/2$ and represent a volume of some set $S_i$. Then taking cue from the
above inequality, we can associate $S$ to $S_i$, $\textmd{vol}(S)$ to $\textmd{vol}(S_i) = x$
and $\Phi(S)$ to the minimum Cheeger ratio of a set $S_i$ satisfying $\textmd{vol}(S_i)
= x \leq 2\varsigma$, or $\Phi_{\varsigma}(\rho_{t,f_S})$. Then using Claim~\ref{claim:f},
\[ f_tZ(x) \leq 1/2(f_t(x(1+\Phi_{\varsigma}(\rho_{t,f_S}))) + f_t(x(1-\Phi_{\varsigma}(\rho_{t,f_S})))). \]
Now consider the following differential inequality,
\begin{align}
\frac{\partial}{\partial t}f_t(x) &= -\rho_{t,f_S}(I-W)(x)\label{heatdiff}\\
&= -2\rho_{t,f_S}(I-Z)(x)\nonumber\\
&= -2f_t(x) + 2f_tZ(x)\nonumber\\
&\leq -2f_t(x) + f_t(x(1+\Phi_{\varsigma}(\rho_{t,f_S})))\nonumber\\
&~~~~+ f_t(x(1-\Phi_{\varsigma}(\rho_{t,f_S})))\label{diffin}\\
&\leq 0.\label{concave}
\end{align}
Line (\ref{heatdiff}) follows from (\ref{eq:heateq}), and line (\ref{concave})
follows from the concavity of $f$.
Consider $g_t(x)$ to be $g_t(x) = \sqrt{x}e^{-t\Phi_{\varsigma}(\rho_{t,f_S})^2/4}$. Then,
\begin{align}
&-2g_t(x) + g_t(x(1+\Phi_{\varsigma}(\rho_{t,f_S}))) + g_t(x(1-\Phi_{\varsigma}(\rho_{t,f_S})))\nonumber\\
&= -2g_t(x) + \sqrt{1+\Phi_{\varsigma}(\rho_{t,f_S})}g_t(x) + \sqrt{1-\Phi_{\varsigma}(\rho_{t,f_S})}g_t(x)\nonumber\\
&= (-2 + \sqrt{1+\Phi_{\varsigma}(\rho_{t,f_S})} + \sqrt{1-\Phi_{\varsigma}(\rho_{t,f_S})})g_t(x)\nonumber\\
&\leq \frac{-\Phi_{\varsigma}(\rho_{t,f_S})^2}{4} g_t(x)\label{yineq}\\
&= \frac{\partial}{\partial t}g_t(x),\nonumbe
\end{align}
where we use the fact that $-2 + \sqrt{1+y} + \sqrt{1-y} \leq -y^2/4$ for
$y\in(0,1]$ in line (\ref{yineq}). Now, since $f_t(0) = g_t(0)$ and
$\frac{\partial}{\partial t}f_t(x)|_{t=0} \leq \frac{\partial}{\partial
t}g_t(x)|_{t=0}$,
\begin{align*}
&-2f_t(x) + f_t(x(1+\Phi_{\varsigma}(\rho_{t,f_S}))) + f_t(x(1-\Phi_{\varsigma}(\rho_{t,f_S})))\\
&< -2g_t(x) + g_t(x(1+\Phi_{\varsigma}(\rho_{t,f_S}))) + g_t(x(1-\Phi_{\varsigma}(\rho_{t,f_S}))),
\end{align*}
and in particular, $\frac{\partial}{\partial t}f_t(x) \leq
\frac{\partial}{\partial t}g_t(x)$. Since $f_0(x) \leq g_0(x)$, we may conclude
that
\begin{equation*}
f_t(x) \leq g_t(x) = \sqrt{x}e^{-t\Phi_{\varsigma}(\rho_{t,f_S})^2/4}.
\end{equation*}
\qed\end{proof}
Using Lemma~\ref{lem:lowerbound} and Theorem~\ref{thm:eupperbound}, we arrive at
the following useful inequalities.
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:bounds}
Let $G$ be a graph and $S$ a subset with volume $\varsigma \leq \rm{vol}(G)/4$.
Then,
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{2}e^{-t\Phi^*(S)}
\leq \rho_{t,f_S}(S)
\leq \sqrt{\varsigma}e^{-t\Phi_{\varsigma}(\rho_{t,f_S})^2/4}.
\end{equation*}
\end{corollary}
We are now prepared to prove Lemma~\ref{thm:volumegoodset}.
\begin{proof}[Lemma~\ref{thm:volumegoodset}]
Let $F$ be the set of seeds $F = \{u\in S ~:~ \rho_{t,u}(S) \leq 2\rho_{t,f_S}(S)\}$.
Then, by (\ref{eq:ehkpru}),
\begin{equation*}
F = \{u\in S ~:~ \rho_{t,u}(S) \leq 2\mathbb{E}(\rho_{t,u}(S))\}.
\end{equation*}
Now we consider the set of vertices not included in $F$,
\begin{align*}
\mathbb{E}(\rho_{t,u}(S) ~|~ u\notin F) &\geq \sum\limits_{u\notin F} \frac{d_u}{\textmd{vol}(S)} 2\mathbb{E}(\rho_{t,u}(S))\\
&\geq \frac{\textmd{vol}(S\setminus F)}{\textmd{vol}(S)} 2\sum\limits_{u\notin F} \mathbb{E}(\rho_{t,u}(S)).
\end{align*}
Which implies
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\textmd{vol}(S)}{2} > \textmd{vol}(S\setminus F) ~~~\mbox{ or, }~~~ \textmd{vol}(F) > \varsigma/2.
\end{equation*}
\qed\end{proof}
We can use Lemma~\ref{thm:volumegoodset} to reason that many vertices $u$
satisfy the above inequalities, and thus can serve as good seeds for performing
a sweep.
\subsection{A local graph clustering algorithm}
\label{sec:localpartition}
It follows from Lemma~\ref{thm:volumegoodset} that the ranking induced by a
heat kernel pagerank vector with appropriate seed vertex can be used to find a
cut with approximation guarantee $O(\sqrt{\phi})$ by choosing the appropriate
$t$. To obtain a sublinear time local clustering algorithm for massive graphs,
we use \texttt{ApproxHKPRseed}~to efficiently compute an $\epsilon$-approximate heat kernel
pagerank vector, $\hat{\rho}_{t,u}$, to rank vertices.
The ranking induced by $\hat{\rho}_{t,u}$ is not very different from that of a true
vector $\rho_{t,u}$ in the support of $\hat{\rho}_{t,u}$ (for an experimental analysis,
see Section~\ref{sec:rankings}). Namely, using the bounds of
Lemma~\ref{lem:lowerbound}, we have
\[ \hat{\rho}_{t,u}(S) \geq (1-\epsilon)\rho_{t,u}(S)
-\epsilon s, \]
where $s = |S|$. In particular,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:approxineq}
\frac{1}{2}(1-\epsilon)e^{-t\Phi^*(S)} -\epsilon s
\leq \hat{\rho}_{t,u}(S)
\leq \sqrt{\varsigma}e^{-t\Phi_{\varsigma}(\hat{\rho}_{t,u})^2/4}
\end{equation}
for a set of vertices $u$ of volume at least $\varsigma/2$.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:main}
Let $G$ be a graph and $S\subset G$ a subset with $\rm{vol}(S)$$= \varsigma
\leq$$\rm{vol}(G)/4$, $|S|=s$, and Cheeger ratio $\Phi(S) \leq \phi$. Let
$\hat{\rho}_{t,u}$ be an $\epsilon$-approximate of $\rho_{t,u}$ for some vertex $u\in S$.
Then there is a subset $S_t\subset S$ with $\rm{vol}(S_t)$$\geq\varsigma/2$ for
which a sweep over $\hat{\rho}_{t,u}$ for any vertex $u\in S_t$ with
\begin{enumerate}
\item$t=\phi^{-1}\log(\frac{2\sqrt{\varsigma}}{1-\epsilon} + 2\epsilon s)$ and
\item$\Phi_{\varsigma}(\hat{\rho}_{t,u})^2 \leq 4/t\log(2)$\label{assumption:sweepcheeg}
\end{enumerate}
finds a set with $\varsigma$-local Cheeger ratio at most $\sqrt{8\phi}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $u$ be a vertex in $S_t$ as described in the theorem statement. Using the
inequalities (\ref{eq:approxineq}), we can bound the local Cheeger ratio by a
sweep over $\hat{\rho}_{t,u}$:
\begin{equation*}
e^{-t\Phi^*(S)} \leq \frac{2}{1-\epsilon}(\sqrt{\varsigma}e^{-t\Phi_{\varsigma}(\hat{\rho}_{t,u})^2/4}+\epsilon s)
\end{equation*}
which implies
\begin{equation*}
e^{-t\Phi^*(S)} \leq e^{-t\Phi_{\varsigma}(\hat{\rho}_{t,u})^2/4} \Big(\frac{2\sqrt{\varsigma}}{1-\epsilon} + \epsilon s e^{t\Phi_{\varsigma}(\hat{\rho}_{t,u})^2/4}\Big),
\end{equation*}
and by the assumption \ref{assumption:sweepcheeg}, we have
\begin{align*}
e^{-t\Phi^*(S)} &\leq e^{-t\Phi_{\varsigma}(\hat{\rho}_{t,u})^2/4} \Big(\frac{2\sqrt{\varsigma}}{1-\epsilon} + 2\epsilon s\Big)\\
\Phi^*(S) &\geq \frac{\Phi_{\varsigma}(\hat{\rho}_{t,u})^2}{4} - \frac{\log(\frac{2\sqrt{\varsigma}}{1-\epsilon} + 2\epsilon s)}{t}.
\end{align*}
Let $x=\log(\frac{2\sqrt{\varsigma}}{1-\epsilon} + 2\epsilon s)$.
Then,
\begin{equation*}
\Phi_{\varsigma}(\rho_{t,f_S})^2 \leq 4\Phi^*(S) + 4x/t.
\end{equation*}
Since $\Phi^*(S) \leq \Phi(S) \leq \phi$ and $t = \phi^{-1}x$, it follows that
$\Phi_{\varsigma}(\hat{\rho}_{t,u}) \leq \sqrt{8\phi}$. In particular, a sweep over
$\hat{\rho}_{t,u}$ finds a cut with Cheeger ratio $O(\sqrt{\phi})$ as long as $u$ is
contained in $S_t$.
\qed\end{proof}
We are now prepared to give our algorithm for finding cuts locally with heat
kernel pagerank. The algorithm takes as input a starting vertex $u$, a desired
volume $\varsigma$ for the cut set, and a target Cheeger ratio $\phi$ for the
cut set. Then, to find a set achieving a minimum $\varsigma$-local Cheeger
ratio, we perform a sweep over an approximate heat kernel pagerank vector with
the starting vertex as a seed.
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\floatname{algorithm}{}
\caption*{\texttt{ClusterHKPR($G,u,s,\varsigma,\phi,\epsilon$)}}
\label{alg:localpart}
input: a graph $G$, a vertex $u$, target cluster size $s$, target cluster volume
$\varsigma \leq \textmd{vol}(G)/4$, target Cheeger ratio $\phi$, error parameter
$\epsilon$.\\
output: a set $T$ with $\varsigma/2 \leq \textmd{vol}(T) \leq 2\varsigma$,
$\Phi(T) \leq \sqrt{8\phi}$.\\
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\State $t \gets \phi^{-1}\log(\frac{2\sqrt{\varsigma}}{1-\epsilon} + 2\epsilon s)$
\State $\hat{\rho} \gets \texttt{ApproxHKPRseed($G,t,u,\epsilon$)}$\label{line:hkpr}
\State sort the vertices of $G$ in the support of $\hat{\rho}$ according to the ranking
$\hat{\rho}[v]/d_{v}$\label{line:sort}
\For{$j\in[1,n]$}\label{line:sweep}
\State $S_j = \bigcup_{i\leq j}v_i$
\If{$\textmd{vol}(S_j) > 2\varsigma$}\label{line:volume}
\State output \texttt{NO CUT FOUND}, break
\ElsIf{$\varsigma/2 \leq \textmd{vol}(S_j) \leq 2\varsigma$ and $\Phi(S_j) \leq \sqrt{8\phi}$}\label{line:checks}
\State output $S_j$
\Else
\State output \texttt{NO CUT FOUND}
\EndIf
\EndFor
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{theorem}{\label{thm:localpart}}
Let $G$ be a graph which contains a subset $S$ of volume at most $\rm{vol}(G)/4$
and Cheeger ratio bounded by $\phi$. Further, assume that $u$ is contained in
the set $S_t\subseteq S$ as defined in Theorem~\ref{thm:main}. Then
\texttt{ClusterHKPR($G,u,s,\varsigma,\phi,\epsilon$)} outputs a cutset $T$ with $\varsigma$-local Cheeger ratio at
most $\sqrt{8\phi}$. The running time is the same as that of~\texttt{ApproxHKPRseed}.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Since it is given that $u\in S_t$ for $t=\phi^{-1}\log(\frac{2\sqrt{\varsigma}}{1-\epsilon} + 2\epsilon s)$, and by the assumptions
on $G$ and $S$, Theorem~\ref{thm:main} states that a sweep over the approximate
heat kernel pagerank vector $\hat{\rho}$ will find a set with $\varsigma$-local
Cheeger ratio at most $\sqrt{8\phi}$. The checks performed in
line~\ref{line:checks} of the algorithm discover such a set.
The computational work reduces to the main procedures of computing the heat
kernel pagerank vector in line~\ref{line:hkpr} and performing a sweep over the
vector in line~\ref{line:sweep}. Performing a sweep involves sorting the
support of the vector (line~\ref{line:sort}) and calculating the conductance of
segments. From the guarantees of an $\epsilon$-approximate heat kernel pagerank
vector, any vertex with average probability less than $\epsilon$ will be
excluded from the support. Then the volume of a vector $\hat{\rho}$ output in
line~\ref{line:hkpr} is $O(\epsilon^{-1})$, and performing a sweep over
$\hat{\rho}$ can be done in $O(\epsilon^{-1}\log(\epsilon^{-1}))$ time. The
algorithm is therefore dominated by the time to compute a heat kernel pagerank
vector, and the total running time is $O\big(\frac{\log(\epsilon^{-1})\log n}{\epsilon^3\log\log(\epsilon^{-1})}\big)$.
\qed\end{proof}
\section{Ranking Vertices with Approximate Heat Kernel Pagerank}
\label{sec:rankings}
The backbone procedure of the local clustering algorithm is the sweep: ranking
the vertices of the graph according to their approximate heat kernel pagerank
values, and then testing the quality of the cluster obtained by adding vertices
one at a time in the order of this ranking. To this end, in this section we
compare the rankings of vertices obtained using exact heat kernel pagerank
vectors with approximate heat kernel pagerank vectors. Specifically, we
consider how accuracy changes as the upper bound of random walk lengths, $K$,
vary.
In the following experiments, we approximate heat kernel pagerank vectors by
sampling random walks of length $\min\{k, K\}$, where $k$ is chosen with
probability $p_k = e^{-t}\frac{t^k}{k!}$. We test the values computed with
different values of $K$. Since the expected value of a random walk length $k$
chosen with probability $p_k = e^{-t}\frac{t^k}{k!}$ is $t$, we set $K$ to range
from $1$ to approximately $t$ for a specified value of $t$.
In each trial, for a given graph, seed vertex, and value of $t$, we compute an
exact heat kernel pagerank vector $\rho_{t,u}$ and an approximate heat kernel
pagerank vector $\hat{\rho}_{t,u}$ using \texttt{ApproxHKPRseed}~but limiting the length of
random walks to $K$ for various $K$ as described above. We then measure how
similar the vectors are in two ways. First, we compare the vector values
computed. Second, we compare the rankings obtained with each vector. The
following are the measures used:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \emph{Comparing vector values.} We measure the error of the approximate
vector $\hat{\rho}_{t,u}$ by examining the values computed for each vertex and
comparing to an exact vector $\rho_{t,u}$. We use the following measures:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Average $L_1$ error}: The average absolute error over all vertices of the graph,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:measure-l1err}
\mbox{average $L_1$ error } := \frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n
|\rho_{t,u}(v_i)-\hat{\rho}_{t,u}(v_i)|.
\end{equation}
\item \textbf{$\epsilon$-error}: The accumulated error in excess of an
$\epsilon$-approximation (see Definition~\ref{def:eps-approx}),
\begin{align}
\mbox{$\epsilon$-error } := &\sum_{v\in V, \hat{\rho}_{t,u}(v) > 0} \max\{|\rho_{t,u}(v) - \hat{\rho}_{t,u}(v)|
- \epsilon\rho_{t,u}(v), 0\}\nonumber\\
&+ \sum_{v\in V, \hat{\rho}_{t,u}(v) = 0} \max\{\rho_{t,u}(v) - \epsilon,
0\}.\label{eq:measure-epserr} \end{align}
\end{itemize}
\item \emph{Comparing vector rankings.} To measure the similarity of vertex
rankings we use the intersection difference (see
\cite{benzi2013total,fagin2003comparing} among others). For a ranked list of
vertices $A$, let $A_i$ be the set of items with the top $i$ rankings. Then we
use the following measures:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Intersection difference}: Given two ranked lists of vertices,
$A$ and $B$, each of length $n$, the intersection difference is
\begin{equation}\label{eq:measure-isim}
\mbox{intersection difference} := dist(A,B) = \frac{1}{n} \sum\limits_{i=1}^n
\frac{|A_i \oplus B_i|}{2i},
\end{equation}
where $A_i \oplus B_i$ denotes the symmetric difference $(A_i \setminus B_i) \cup (B_i
\setminus A_i)$.
\item \textbf{Top-$k$ intersection difference}: The intersection difference
among the top $k$ elements in each ranking,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:measure-isimk}
\mbox{top-$k$ intersection difference} := dist_k(A,B) = \frac{1}{k}
\sum\limits_{i=1}^k \frac{|A_i \oplus B_i|}{2i}.
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
Intersection difference values lie in the range $[0,1]$, where a difference of
$0$ is achieved for identical rankings, and $1$ for totally disjoint lists. In
these experiments, $A$ is the list of vertices ranked according to an exact heat
kernel pagerank vector $\rho_{t,u}$, and $B$ is the list of vertices ranked
according to an $\epsilon$-approximate heat kernel pagerank vector $\hat{\rho}_{t,u}$.
\end{enumerate}
In every trial we choose $t=\phi^{-1}\log(\frac{2\sqrt{\varsigma}}{1-\epsilon} + 2\epsilon s)$ as specified in the local clustering
algorithm stated in Section~\ref{sec:localpartition}. This value depends on
several parameters, including desired Cheeger ratio, cluster size, and cluster
volume. Specifics are provided for each set of trials.
\subsection{Synthetic graphs}
\label{sec:synthranking}
\subsubsection{Random graph models}
In this series of trials we use three different models of random graph
generation provided in the NetworkX~\cite{networkx} Python package, which we
describe presently.
The first is the Watts-Strogatz small world model~\cite{wattsstrogatz},
generated with the command \texttt{connected_watts_strogatz} in NetworkX. In
this model, a ring of $n$ vertices is created and then each vertex is connected
to its $d$ nearest neightbors. Then, with probability $p$, each edge $(u,v)$ in
the original construction is replaced by the edge $(u,w)$ for a random existing
vertex $w$. The model takes parameters $n, d, p$ as input.
The second is the preferential attachment (Barab\'{a}si-Albert)
model~\cite{barabasialbert}. Graphs in this model are created by adding $n$
vertices one at a time, where each new vertex is adjoined to $d$ edges where
each edge is chosen with probability proportional to the degree of the
neighboring vertex. This is generated with the \texttt{barabasi_albert_graph}
generator in NetworkX. The model takes parameters $n, d$ as input.
The third NetworkX generator is \texttt{powerlaw_cluster_graph}, which uses the
Holme and Kim algorithm for generating graphs with powerlaw degree distribution
and approximate average clustering~\cite{holmekim}. It is essentially the
Barab\'{a}si-Albert model, but each random edge forms a triangle with another
neighbor with probability $p$. The model takes parameters $n, d, p$ as input.
Table~\ref{table:randomgraphs} lists the random graph models used and their
parameters.
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{Model} & \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{Source} & \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{Parameters}\\
\hline\hline
small world & Watts-Stragatz\cite{wattsstrogatz} & $n$, the size of the vertex set,\\
& & $d$, the number of neighbors each vertex is
assigned,\\
& & $p$, the probability of switching an edge.\\
\hline
preferential& Barab\'{a}si-Albert\cite{barabasialbert} & $n$, the size of the
vertex set,\\
attachment & & $d$, the number of
neighbors each vertex is assigned\\
\hline
powerlaw & Holme and Kim~\cite{holmekim} & $n$, the size of the vertex set,\\
cluster & & $d$, the number of neighbors each
vertex is assigned,\\
& & $p$, the probability of forming a
triangle\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Random graph models used.}
\label{table:randomgraphs}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Procedure} For every value of $K$ that we test, we generate ten
random graphs using each of the three random graph models. For each graph we
choose a random seed vertex $u$ with probability proportional to degree, and we
choose $t$ as $t=\phi^{-1}\log(\frac{2\sqrt{\varsigma}}{1-\epsilon} + 2\epsilon s)$ according to the values in
Table~\ref{table:synthrankingparams}. Then for each graph we compare an exact
heat kernel pagerank vector $\rho_{t,u}$ and the average of two
$\epsilon$-approximate heat kernel pagerank vectors $\hat{\rho}_{t,u}$. The results
we present are the average over all trials for each $K$ and each type of graph.
We use $d=5$ and $p=0.1$ in every trial, and $n=100$ for the first set of trials
(Figure~\ref{fig:random_rank_100}) and $n=500$ for the second
(Figure~\ref{fig:random_rank_500}). These parameters are outlined in
Table~\ref{table:synthrankingparams}.
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|p{2cm}|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{Model} & $|V|$ & ~~$d$~~ & ~~$p$~~ & ~~$\epsilon$~~
Target & Target & Target & $t$\\
& & & & & Cheeger ratio & cluster size & cluster volume &\\
\hline\hline
small world & $100$ & $5$ & $0.1$ & $0.1$ & $\phi = 0.05$ & $s = 100$ & $\varsigma = 500$ & $84.9$\\
& $500$ & $5$ & $0.1$ & $0.1$ & $\phi = 0.05$ & $s = 100$ &
$\varsigma = 500$ & $84.9$\\\hline
preferential & $100$ & $5$ & - & $0.1$ & $\phi = 0.05$ & $s = 100$ & $\varsigma = 500$ & $84.9$\\
attachment & $500$ & $5$ & - & $0.1$ & $\phi = 0.05$ & $s = 100$ &
$\varsigma = 500$ & $84.9$\\\hline
powerlaw & $100$ & $5$ & $0.1$ & $0.1$ & $\phi = 0.05$ & $s = 100$ & $\varsigma = 500$ & $84.9$\\
cluster & $500$ & $5$ & $0.1$ & $0.1$ & $\phi = 0.05$ & $s = 100$ &
$\varsigma = 500$ & $84.9$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Parameters used for random graph generation and to compute $t$ for vector computations.}
\label{table:synthrankingparams}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Discussion} For each graph and value of $K$, we measure the
$\epsilon$-error, the average $L_1$ error, the intersection difference and the
top-$10$ intersection difference of an approximate heat kernel pagerank vector
as compared to an exact heat kernel pagerank vector.
Figure~\ref{fig:random_rank_100} plots the above measures for graphs over
$n=100$ vertices, while Figure~\ref{fig:random_rank_500} plots these measures
for graphs over $n=500$ vertices. In both Figures~\ref{fig:random_rank_100}
and~\ref{fig:random_rank_500}, each subplot charts a different notion of error
(from top left, clockwise: $\epsilon$-error, average $L_1$ error, intersection
difference and top-$10$ intersection difference) on the y-axis against $K$ on
the x-axis.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\textbf{Trials on $100$-vertex random graphs.}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{random_rank_100}
\caption{Different measures of error for random graphs on $100$ vertices when approximating heat
kernel pagerank with varying random walk lengths.}
\label{fig:random_rank_100}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\textbf{Trials on $500$-vertex random graphs.}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{random_rank_500}
\caption{Different measures of error for random graphs on $500$ when approximating heat
kernel pagerank with varying random walk lengths.}
\label{fig:random_rank_500}
\end{figure}
In both sets of plots and for every measure of error, we see that in the
preferential attachment and powerlaw graphs the error is minimized after
limiting random walks to only length $K=10$, regardless of the size. We observe
a shallower decline in $\epsilon$-error, average $L_1$ error, and intsersection
differance for the small world graphs. In particular, we note that the
intersection difference drops significantly after $10$ random walk steps for all
random graphs on both $100$ and $500$ vertices. For $\epsilon = 0.1$, $K =
4\cdot \frac{\log(\epsilon^{-1})}{\log\log(\epsilon^{-1})} \approx 11.04$ is enough to approximate the rankings for the
purpose of local clustering.
\subsection{Real graphs}
\label{sec:realranking}
\subsubsection{Network data}
For the experiments in this section, and later in Section~\ref{sec:expresults},
we use the following graphs compiled from real data. The network data is
summarized in Table~\ref{table:realgraphs}.
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textbf{(dolphins)} A dolphin social network consisting of two
families~\cite{dolphins}. The seed vertex is chosen to be a prominent member of
one of the families.\label{pt:dolphins}
\item \textbf{(polbooks)} A network of books about US politics published around
the time of the 2004 Presidential election and sold on Amazon~\cite{polbooks}.
Edges represent frequent copurchases.\label{pt:polbooks}
\item \textbf{(power)} The topology of the US Western States Power Grid
~\cite{powergrid}.\label{pt:powergrid}
\item \textbf{(facebook)} A combined collection of Facebook ego-networks,
including the ego vertices themselves~\cite{facebook}.\label{pt:facebook}
\item \textbf{(enron)} An Enron email communication network~\cite{enron},
in which vertices represent email addresses and an edge $(i,j)$ exists if an
address $i$ sent at least one email to address $j$.\label{pt:enron}
\end{enumerate}
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|p{2cm}|l|c|c|c|}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{Network} & \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{Source} & ~~$|V|$~~ & ~~$|E|$~~ & Average degree\\
\hline\hline
dolphins & Dolphins social network~\cite{dolphins} & $62$ & $159$ & $5$\\\hline
polbooks & Copurchases of political books~\cite{polbooks} & $105$ & $441$ &
$8.8$\\\hline
power & Power grid topology~\cite{powergrid} & $4941$ & $6594$ & $2.7$\\\hline
facebook & Facebook ego-networks~\cite{facebook} & $4039$ & $88234$ &
$43.7$\\\hline
enron & Enron communication network~\cite{enron} & $36692$ & $183831$ &
$10$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Graphs compiled from real data.}
\label{table:realgraphs}
\end{table}
The network data for graphs~\ref{pt:dolphins},~\ref{pt:polbooks}, and
\ref{pt:powergrid} were taken from Mark Newman's network data
collection~\cite{newmandata}. The network data for graphs~\ref{pt:facebook} and
\ref{pt:enron} are from the SNAP Large Network Dataset
Collection~\cite{snapdata}.
\subsubsection{Procedure} In this series of experiments, the seed vertex $u$ was
chosen to be a known member of a cluster. As before, $t$ was chosen according
to $t=\phi^{-1}\log(\frac{2\sqrt{\varsigma}}{1-\epsilon} + 2\epsilon s)$ with the values in Table~\ref{table:realrankingparams}.
For each graph and for each value of $K$ we compare an exact heat kernel
pagerank vector $\rho_{t,u}$ with an $\epsilon$-approximate heat kernel pagerank
vector $\hat{\rho}_{t,u}$. Specifically, we consider the average $L_1$ distance
(\ref{eq:measure-l1err}) and the intersection difference
(\ref{eq:measure-isim}). We again choose $K$ to range from $1$ to $t$.
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
~~$\epsilon$~~ & Target & Target & Target & $t$\\
& Cheeger ratio & cluster size & cluster volume &\\
\hline
$0.1$ & $\phi = 0.05$ & $s = 100$ & $\varsigma = 1000$ & $95.6$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Parameters used to compute $t$ for vector computations.}
\label{table:realrankingparams}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Discussion}
Figure~\ref{fig:real_l1} plots the average $L_1$ error on the y-axis against
different values of $K$ on the x-axis for each of the dolphins, polbooks, and
power graphs. Figure~\ref{fig:real_rank_isim} plots the intersection difference
on the y-axis against $K$ on the x-axis.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{real_l1}
\caption{Average error in each component for $\epsilon$-approximate heat kernel
pagerank vectors when allowing varying random walk lengths.}
\label{fig:real_l1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{real_rank_isim}
\caption{Intersersection difference of the ranked lists of vertices computed by
exact and $\epsilon$-approximate heat kernel pagerank vectors when allowing
varying random walk lengths.}
\label{fig:real_rank_isim}
\end{figure}
First we discuss the average $L_1$ error. The dolphins and the polbooks graphs
exihibit properties of both the small world graphs and the preferential
attachment graphs of the previous section (Figures~\ref{fig:random_rank_100}
and~\ref{fig:random_rank_500}). Like the preferential attachment models, there
is a significant drop in average $L_1$ error after $K=5$, and like the small
world model the error continues to drop for larger values of $K$, approaching a
minimum error of $\approx 0.003$. The average $L_1$ error in the power graph,
on the other hand, is small for all values of $K$. We remark that,
representing a power grid, the graph has very small average vertex degree, so
few random walk steps are enough to approximate the stationary distribution.
As for the intersection difference, we observe a smaller variance in values for
the three graphs. Regardless of the size or structure of the graph, the
intersection difference drops sharply from $K=1$ to $K=5$. For values larger
than $K = 10 < 4\cdot \frac{\log(\epsilon^{-1})}{\log\log(\epsilon^{-1})}$, where $\epsilon = 0.1$, the intersection
difference decreases only marginally.
\paragraph{}The purpose of these experiments was to evaluate how error and differences of
ranking change in heat kernel pagerank approximation when varying $K$, the upper
bound on number of steps taken in random walks. We found that setting an upper
bound for random walk lengths to $K = 10 < 4\cdot \frac{\log(\epsilon^{-1})}{\log\log(\epsilon^{-1})}$ with $\epsilon = 0.1$
according to Theorem~\ref{thm:hkpraccuracy} yields approximations which satisfy
the prescribed error bounds. This value is independent of the size of the graph
and $t$, and depends only on $\epsilon$. Namely, we observed that choosing $K$
this way results in a significant decrease in both average $L_1$ error and
intersection difference as compared to smaller values of $K$, and only slight
decrease in average $L_1$ error and intersection difference for larger values of
$K$ as demonstrated in
Figures~\ref{fig:random_rank_100},~\ref{fig:random_rank_500},~\ref{fig:real_l1},
and~\ref{fig:real_rank_isim}. Further, we tested graphs of various size, random
graphs generated from various models (see Section~\ref{sec:synthranking}), and
graphs from real data representing social networks, copurchasing networks, and
topological grids (see Section~\ref{sec:realranking}). We found this choice of
$K$ was optimal for every graph regardless of size or structure. That is, the
cutoff for random walk lengths does not depend on the size of the graph.
It is also worth mentioning that the most striking outlier among the subject
graphs is the small world graph, or expander graphs. This is due to the fact
that the graph consists of a single cluster, which makes local cluster detection
ineffective.
\section{An Assessment of Cheeger Ratios Obtained with Local Clustering Algorithms}
\label{sec:expresults}
The goal of this section is to analyze the quality of local clusters computed
with a sweep over an approximate heat kernel pagerank vector (see
Section~\ref{sec:goodcuts} for details on sweeps). We consider two objectives
for analysis.
The first objective is to validate the statement of Theorem~\ref{thm:localpart}.
To do this, we show that the Cheeger ratios of local clusters computed with
sweeps over approximate heat kernel pagerank vectors are within the
approximation guarantees of Theorem~\ref{thm:localpart}. We use a slightly
modified version of \texttt{ClusterHKPR}~to compute these clusters. We call this
modified algorithm $\epsilon$HKPR, and it is described in the list below.
The second objective is to compare clusters computed with sweeps over different
vectors. Namely, for a given graph and seed vertex, we compare the local
clusters computed using the following sweep algorithms:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textbf{($\epsilon$HKPR)} A sweep over an $\epsilon$-approximate heat
kernel pagerank vector is performed. The segment $S$ with volume $\textmd{vol}(S) \leq
\textmd{vol}(G)/2$ of minimal Cheeger ratio is output. This is the
\texttt{ClusterHKPR}~algorithm with the following modification: we allow segments of
volume up to $\textmd{vol}(G)/2$ rather than limiting the search to segments of volume
$< 2\varsigma$, twice the target volume.\label{pt:epshkpr}
\item \textbf{(HKPR)} A sweep over an exact heat kernel pagerank vector is
performed. The segment $S$ with volume $\textmd{vol}(S) \leq \textmd{vol}(G)/2$ of minimal Cheeger
ratio is output. This algorithm was outlined, but not stated explicitely,
in~\cite{chung:partitionhkpr:im09}.
\item \textbf{(PR)} A sweep over a Personalized PageRank vector
(\ref{eq:pagerank}) is performed. The segment $S$ with volume $\textmd{vol}(S) \leq
\textmd{vol}(G)/2$ of minimal Cheeger ratio is output. This is an adaptation of the
algorithm \texttt{PageRank-Nibble}\cite{acl:prgraphpartition:focs06} with the
following modifications: (i) rather than performing a sweep over an approximate
PageRank vector, perform a sweep over an exact PageRank vector, and (ii) allow
segments only as large as $\textmd{vol}(G)/2$.
\end{enumerate}
We summarize the algorithms and parameters below in
Table~\ref{table:clusteralgs}.
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|l|l|}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{Algorithm} & Sweep vector &
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{Algorithm parameters} & \multicolumn{1}{|c|}{Sweep vector
parameters}\\
\hline\hline
$\epsilon$HKPR & $\hat{\rho}_{t,u}$ & $\phi$, target Cheeger ratio & $t = \phi^{-1}\log(\frac{2\sqrt{\varsigma}}{1-\epsilon} + 2\epsilon s)$\\
& & $s$, target cluster size & $u$, seed vertex\\
& & $\varsigma$, target cluster volume & $\epsilon$, approximation parameter\\\hline
HKPR & $\rho_{t,u}$ & $\phi$, target Cheeger ratio & $t = 2\phi^{-1}\log s$\\
& & $s$, target cluster size & $u$, seed vertex\\\hline
PR & $\textsf{pr}_{\alpha,u}$ & $\phi$, target Cheeger ratio & $\alpha = \phi^2/255\ln(100\sqrt{m})$\\
& & & $u$, seed vertex\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Algorithms used for comparing local clusters.}
\label{table:clusteralgs}
\end{table}
Each trial will resemble Procedure~\ref{alg:compareclusters}, as stated below.
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\floatname{algorithm}{Procedure}
\caption{Compare Clusters}
\label{alg:compareclusters}
\begin{algorithmic}
\State Let $G$ be a graph and $u$ a seed vertex
\State Choose parameters $\phi$, $s$, $\varsigma$, $\epsilon$
\State Let $S_A$ be a local cluster computed using the algorithm $\epsilon$HKPR
\State Let $S_B$ be a local cluster computed using the algorithm HKPR
\State Let $S_C$ be a local cluster computed using the algorithm PR
\State Compare $S_A, S_B, S_C$.
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
The following sections describe the experiments in more detail.
\subsection{Synthetic graphs}
In this section, we use graphs generated with three random graph models:
Watts-Strogatz small world, Barab\'{a}si-Albert preferential attachment, and
Holme and Kim's powerlaw cluster as described in Section~\ref{sec:synthranking}.
\subsubsection{Procedure} We perform twenty-five trials of
Procedure~\ref{alg:compareclusters} and take the averages of Cheeger ratios and
cluster volumes computed. Specifically, we fix a model and algorithm
parameters. Then, generate a random graph according to the model and
parameters. For each random graph, pick a random seed vertex with probability
proportional to degree. Then, for each seed vertex compute local clusters $S_A,
S_B, S_C$ using the algorithms $\epsilon$HKPR, HKPR, and PR, respectively. We
then use the average Cheeger ratio and cluster volume of the $S_A, S_B, S_C$ for
comparison. In Table~\ref{table:synthclusterparams} we summarize the parameters
used for each random graph model.
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|p{2.6cm}|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{Model}& ~~$|V|~~$ & ~$d$~ & ~~$p$~~ & ~~$\epsilon$~~ & Target & Target & Target\\
& & & & & Cheeger ratio & cluster size & cluster volume\\
\hline\hline
small world & $100$ & $5$ & $0.1$ & $0.1$ & $0.1$ & $20$ & $100$\\
& $500$ & $5$ & $0.1$ & $0.1$ & $0.1$ & $100$ & $500$\\
& $800$ & $5$ & $0.1$ & $0.1$ & $0.1$ & $100$ & $500$\\
& $1000$ & $5$ & $0.1$ & $0.1$ & $0.1$ & $100$ & $500$\\\hline
preferential & $100$ & $5$ & - & $0.1$ & $0.1$ & $20$ & $100$\\
attachment & $500$ & $5$ & - & $0.1$ & $0.1$ & $100$ & $500$\\
& $800$ & $5$ & - & $0.1$ & $0.1$ & $100$ & $500$\\\hline
powerlaw & $100$ & $5$ & $0.1$ & $0.1$ & $0.1$ & $20$ & $100$\\
cluster & $500$ & $5$ & $0.1$ & $0.1$ & $0.1$ & $100$ & $500$\\
& $800$ & $5$ & $0.1$ & $0.1$ & $0.1$ & $100$ & $500$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Algorithm parameters used to compare local clusters.}
\label{table:synthclusterparams}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Discussion} We address the first analytic objective listed in the
introduction of this section by discussing the clusters output by
$\epsilon$HKPR. Namely, we compare the clusters computed with $\epsilon$HKPR to
the guarantees of Theorem~\ref{thm:localpart}. The results for each graph are
given in Table~\ref{table:synthhkprclusterresults}. The first three columns
indicate the random graph model and algorithm parameters used for each instance.
The last two columns demonstrate how the (average) Cheeger ratio of clusters
computed by $\epsilon$HKPR compare to the approximation guarantee of
Theorem~\ref{thm:localpart}. Namely, Theorem~\ref{thm:localpart} states that
the cluster output will have Cheeger ratio $\leq \sqrt{8\phi}$ with high
probability. In every case the Cheeger ratio is well within the approximation
bounds.
\begin{table}
\centering
\textbf{Synthetic graphs}\\
\begin{tabular}{|p{2.6cm}|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{Model} & ~~$|V|$~~ & $\phi$, Target & Cheeger ratio output by &
~~~~~$\sqrt{8\phi}$~~~~~\\
& & Cheeger ratio & $\epsilon$HKPR & \\
\hline\hline
small world & $100$ & $0.1$ & $0.173557$ & $0.894427$\\
& $500$ & $0.1$ & $0.47316$ & $0.894427$\\
& $800$ & $0.1$ & $0.510597$ & $0.894427$\\
& $1000$ & $0.1$ & $0.519399$ & $0.894427$\\\hline
preferential & $100$ & $0.1$ & $0.523929$ & $0.894427$\\
attachment & $500$ & $0.1$ & $0.503542$ & $0.894427$\\
& $800$ & $0.1$ & $0.491046$ & $0.894427$\\\hline
powerlaw & $100$ & $0.1$ & $0.517521$ & $0.894427$\\
cluster & $500$ & $0.1$ & $0.500312$ & $0.894427$\\
& $800$ & $0.1$ & $0.494145$ & $0.894427$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Cheeger ratios of cluster output by $\epsilon$HKPR.}
\label{table:synthhkprclusterresults}
\end{table}
The second objective is to compare clusters computed with the three different
local clustering algorithms $\epsilon$HKPR, HKPR, and PR.
Table~\ref{table:cheegersynth} is a collection of cluster statistics for the
trials. For each graph instance we list the average Cheeger ratio and cluster
volume of local clusters computed using the PR, HKPR, and $\epsilon$HKPR
algorithms, respectively.
\begin{table}
\centering
\textbf{Synthetic graphs}\\
\begin{tabular}{|p{2cm}|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{Model} & $|V|$ & PR & HKPR & $\epsilon$HKPR\\
\hline\hline
small world & 100 & $0.235159$ & $0.087723$ & $0.173557$\\
& & (volume = $52.52$) & (volume = $171.28$) & (volume = $142$)\\\cline{2-5}
& 500 & $0.244261$ & $0.062263$ & $0.47316$\\
& & (volume = $190.16$) & (volume = $943.68$) & (volume = $206.64$)\\\cline{2-5}
& 800 & $0.246564$ & $0.064599$ & $0.510597$\\
& & (volume = $162.68$) & (volume = $1413.6$) & (volume = $209.6$)\\\cline{2-5}
& 1000 & $0.245612$ & $0.064716$ & $0.519399$\\
& & (volume = $584.56$) & (volume = $1907.4$) & (volume = $225.2$)\\\hline
preferential & 100 & $0.430071$ & $0.512819$ & $0.523929$\\
attachment & & (volume = $471.2$) & (volume = $467.16$) & (volume = $468.16$)\\\cline{2-5}
& 500 & $0.508305$ & $0.51018$ & $0.503542$\\
& & (volume = $2461.96$) & (volume = $2459.4$) & (volume = $2463.28$)\\\cline{2-5}
& 800 & $0.491046$ & $0.496369$ & $0.491046$\\
& & (volume = $3964.17$) & (volume = $3971.17$) & (volume =
$3951.83$)\\\hline
powerlaw & 100 & $0.426828$ & $0.505277$ & $0.517521$\\
cluster & & (volume = $463.4$) & (volume = $465.44$) & (volume = $464.88$)\\\cline{2-5}
& 500 & $0.487341$ & $0.507328$ & $0.500312$\\
& & (volume = $2447.12$) & (volume = $2460.44$) & (volume =
$2446.28$)\\\cline{2-5}
& 800 & $0.522281$ & $0.513365$ & $0.494145$\\
& & (volume = $3947$) & (volume = $3966$) & (volume = $3947$)\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Cheeger ratios of clusters output by different local clustering algorithms on
synthetic data.}
\label{table:cheegersynth}
\end{table}
We remark that for each graph there is little variation in Cheeger ratio and
volume of clusters computed by the three different algorithms. We also note
that there is no obvious trend as graphs get larger. The small world graphs
demonstrate the greatest variation in cluster quality. However, as mentioned in
Section~\ref{sec:rankings}, expander graphs, such as small world graphs, consist
of one large cluster.
It is worth noting that in some trials the output volume is significantly
greater than twice the target volume. While this may seem like a contradiction,
it is a consequence of our implementation. During a sweep one may choose to
output a cluster of minimal Cheeger ratio, or one that satisfies volume
constraints, or both. We are interested in comparing Cheeger ratios and so
allow the sweep to continue checking clusters that are well beyond twice the
target volume.
\subsection{Real graphs}
For these trials we use graphs generated from real data summarized in
Section~\ref{sec:realranking}.
\subsubsection{Procedure} We compare clusters computed by each of the three
algorithms as outlined in Procedure~\ref{alg:compareclusters}. In these trials
we fix the seed vertex to be a member of a cluster with good Cheeger ratio.
Using this seed vertex, we compare the clusters computed using the
$\epsilon$HKPR, HKPR, PR algorithms.
For each trial we use the parameters listed in Table~\ref{table:clusterparams}.
We note that in each case the target cluster volume is computed to be roughly
the target cluster size times the average vertex degree, and here we use
$\epsilon=0.1$.
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|p{2cm}|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{Network} & $|V|$ & $|E|$ & Average & ~~$\epsilon$~~ & Target & Target & Target\\
& & & degree & & Cheeger ratio & cluster size & cluster volume\\
\hline
dolphins & $62$ & $159$ & $5$ & $0.1$ & $0.08$ & $20$ & $100$ \\
polbooks & $105$ & $441$ & $8.8$ & $0.1$ & $0.05$ & $30$ & $270$ \\
power & $4941$ & $6594$ & $2.7$ & $0.1$ & $0.05$ & $200$ & $600$ \\
facebook & $4039$ & $88234$ & $43.7$ & $0.1$ & $0.05$ & $200$ & $2800$ \\
enron & $36692$ & $183831$ & $10$ & $0.1$ & $0.05$ & $100$ & $1000$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Graph and algorithm parameters used to compare local clusters.}
\label{table:clusterparams}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Discussion}
Table~\ref{table:realhkprclusterresults} lists ratios output by $\epsilon$HKPR compared with the approximation guarantees of
Theorem~\ref{thm:localpart}. In each case, the Cheeger ratios are well within
the approximation bounds of Theorem~\ref{thm:localpart}.
\begin{table}
\centering
\textbf{Real graphs}\\
\begin{tabular}{|p{2cm}|c|c|c|}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{Network} & $\phi$, Target & Cheeger ratio output by &
~~~~~$\sqrt{8\phi}$~~~~~\\
& Cheeger ratio & $\epsilon$HKPR & \\
\hline\hline
dolphins & $0.08$ & $0.083333$ & $0.8$ \\
polbooks & $0.05$ & $0.052133$ & $0.632456$\\
power & $0.05$ & $0.346667$ & $0.632456$ \\
facebook & $0.05$ & $0.056939$ & $0.632456$ \\
enron & $0.05$ & $0.036602$ & $0.632456$\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Cheeger ratios of cluster output \texttt{ClusterHKPR}.}
\label{table:realhkprclusterresults}
\end{table}
The complete numerical data obtained from the set of the trials are given in
Table~\ref{table:cheegerreal}. For each graph we list the Cheeger ratio,
cluster volume, and additionally the cluster size of local clusters computed
using each of the algorithms PR, HKPR, and $\epsilon$HKPR, respectively.
\begin{table}
\centering
\textbf{Real graphs}\\
\begin{tabular}{|p{2cm}|c|c|c|}
\hline
\multicolumn{1}{|c|}{Network} & PR & HKPR & $\epsilon$HKPR\\
\hline\hline
dolphins & $0.226415$ & $0.163636$ & $0.083333$ \\
& (volume = $106$) & (volume = $110$) & (volume = $96$)\\
& (size = $23$) & (size = $24$) & (size = $20$)\\\hline
polbooks & $0.079518$ & $0.245657$ & $0.052133$\\
& (volume = $415$) & (volume = $403$) & (volume = $422$)\\
& (size = $48$) & (size = $49$) & (size = $50$)\\\hline
power & $0.375$ & $0.002764$ & $0.346668$ \\
& (volume = $16$) & (volume = $4342$) & (volume = $300$)\\
& (size = $6$) & (size = $1564$) & (size = $85$)\\\hline
facebook & $0.418993$ & $0.001277$ & $0.056939$ \\
& (volume = $88140$) & (volume = $67326$) & (volume = $35266$)\\
& (size = $3063$) & (size = $1094$) & (size = $258$)\\\hline
enron & $0.48797$ & - & $0.036602$\\
& (volume = $183612$) & - & (volume = $3579$)\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Cheeger ratios of cluster output by different local clustering
algorithms.}
\label{table:cheegerreal}
\end{table}
For each graph, the local cluster computed using $\epsilon$HKPR has smaller
Cheeger ratio than the local cluster computed using PR. For the power graph, we
observe that the cluster of minimal Cheeger ratio was computed using the HKPR
algorithm, but it is nearly a third the size of the entire network. The
algorithms $\epsilon$HKPR and PR, on the other hand, each return smaller
clusters. We remark that for real graphs, the clusters computed using sweeps
over different vectors have more variation than for random graphs.
At this point we remark about our choice of parameters for the trials. At this
point the sensitivity of the algorithm to the choice of $\epsilon, \phi, s,$ and
$\varsigma$ has not been fully explored. In particular, it is worth studying
the effect of $\phi$ on the output cluster in future work.
To conclude, we include visualizations of clusters computed in the facebook
ego-network to illustrate the differences in local cluster detection.
Figure~\ref{fig:fb_ehkpr} colors the vertices in a local cluster computed using
the $\epsilon$HKPR algorithm, as described in Table~\ref{table:cheegerreal}.
Figure~\ref{fig:fb_pr} colors the vertices in a local cluster compted using the
PR algorithm.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fb_fa2_d_ehkpr}
\caption{Local cluster in facebook ego network computed using the $\epsilon$HKPR
algorithm.}
\label{fig:fb_ehkpr}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{fb_fa2_plus_ud_pr_3}
\caption{Local cluster in facebook ego network computed using the PR
algorithm.}
\label{fig:fb_pr}
\end{figure}
The numerical data of the last two sections validate the effectiveness and
efficiency of local cluster detection using sweeps over $\epsilon$-approximate
heat kernel pagerank. The experiments of Section~\ref{sec:rankings} demonstrate
that sampling a number of random walks of at most $K$ steps yield a ranking of
vertices within the error bounds of Theorem~\ref{thm:hkpraccuracy}. This ranking
in turn is used to compute a local cluster. What is more, this value $K$ does
not depend on parameters other than $\epsilon$. Specifically, it does not
depend on the size of the graph or the desired cluster volume, size, or Cheeger
ratio. Finally, the data of Section~\ref{sec:expresults} validate the
statements of Theorem~\ref{thm:localpart}. That is, perfoming a sweep over an
approximate heat kernel pagerank vector detects clusters of Cheeger ratio at
most $\sqrt{8\phi}$ for a desired Cheeger ratio $\phi$. The total cost of
computing this cluster is $O\big(\frac{\log(\epsilon^{-1})\log n}{\epsilon^3\log\log(\epsilon^{-1})}\big)$, sublinear in the size of the graph.
\bibliographystyle{amsplain}
|
\section{Introduction}The use of graphs, in particular of trees, binary trees and planar binary trees, in mathematical physics has a long tradition. The canonical examples are perhaps Feynman diagrams but the connection with Hopf Algebras of trees started with the works of Connes and Kreimer \cite{MR1725011,MR1748177,MR1810779} that describe the combinatorics of the procedure of extracting sub-divergences in Quantum Field Theory known as the BPHZ renormalization procedure \cite{collins1984renormalization}. Another approach to the use of graphs in QFT and in particular in QED, considering binary trees, planar or not, was followed by Brouder and Frabetti \cite{Brouder:1999gk,Brouder:1999za,MR1817703}. Later it was understood that these two approaches are very similar and in some cases equivalent and are related to quasi-symmetric and noncommutative quasi-symmetric functions, see for instance \cite{MR2194965,MR1905177,MR1909461,MR1327096}.
In this paper we show how the Hopf Algebra of planar binary trees of Loday and Ronco \cite{MR1654173} can be seen as a representation of the vector space generated by correlation functions that obey the Eynard-Orantin recursion formula. These correlation functions are graded by the Euler characteristic and we can consider for each degree the vector space over $\Rational$ generated by them and then take the direct sum of these vector spaces for all degrees.
First we consider planar binary trees of order $n$, that is with $n$ vertices and $n+1$ leaves, as a representation of genus $g=0$ correlation function $W_{k}^0(p,p_1,\dots, p_{k-1})$ of Euler characteristic $\chi=2-2g-k$ equal to $-n$. Here the Euler characteristic is the one of Riemann or topological surfaces of genus $g$ and $k$ punctures or borders to which the correlation functions $W_k^g(p,p_1,\dots, p_{k-1})$ are usually related in some concrete problems. For $g=0$ we label the root with $p$ and the $n+1$ leaves with the $p_1,\dots,p_{n+1}$ variables. Then by connecting the nearest neighbors leaves with a single edge and reducing the number of pairs of labels in the same way as increasing the genus we obtain graphs with loops that we see as a representation of higher genus correlation functions with the same Euler characteristic.
As an example take $W^2_1(p)$ which has $\chi=-3$. Its underline generating trees are planar binary trees of order 3 which are also models for $W_5^0(p,p_1,p_2,p_3,p_4)$:
\begin{figure}
\begin{tikzpicture}\label{fig:pbt5a}
\draw[thick](1,-0.5) -- (1,1) -- (0.25,1.75) -- (0.5,2) -- (0.25,1.75) -- (0,2) -- (1,1) -- (2,2) -- (1.75,1.75) -- (1.5,2);\draw[thick] (4,-0.5) -- (4,1) -- (3,2) -- (4,1) -- (5,2) -- (4.65,1.65) -- (4.35,2)-- (4.5,1.825)--(4.65,2);\draw[thick] (7,-0.5) -- (7,1) -- (6,2) -- (6.35,1.65)--(6.65,2)--(6.5,1.825)-- (6.35,2)--(6.5,1.825)--(6.35,1.65)-- (7,1) -- (8,2);
\end{tikzpicture}
\begin{tikzpicture}\label{fig:pbt5b}
\draw[thick] (10,-0.5) -- (10,1) -- (9,2) -- (9.25,1.75)--(9.5,2)--(9.25,1.75) -- (9.5,1.5) -- (10,2) -- (9.5,1.5) -- (10,1) -- (11,2);
\draw[thick] (13,-0.5) -- (13,1) -- (12,2) -- (13,1) -- (14,2)--(13.75,1.75)--(13.5,2)--(13.75,1.75) -- (13.5,1.5) -- (13,2) -- (13.5,1.5) ;
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Planar binary trees of order 3 as generators of the correlation functions $W^0_5, W^1_3$ and $W^2_1$ with $\chi=-3$.}\label{fig:pbt5}
\end{figure}
Identifying pairs of nearest neighbor leaves in the left and right branches independently we get the second term of topological recursion. Identifying pairs of leaves each taken from the left and the right branches gives the first term. Note that in this case not every planar binary tree of order 3 gives $W_1^2$. In fact the first tree of fig. \ref{fig:pbt5} does not give a genus 2 correlation function by identifying the nearest neighbor leaves in opposite branches.
\section{The topological recursion of Eynard and Orantin}
The topological recursion formula of Eynard and Orantin has its origin in Matrix Models, for general reviews see for instance \cite{DiFrancesco:1993nw,MR2346575}. In the hermitian 1-matrix form of the theory the purpose is to compute connected correlation functions $W_{k+1}$ depending on a set of variables $p, p_1,\dots,p_k$
\begin{equation}
W_{k+1}(p,p_1,\dots p_k)=\Braket{\text{Tr}\frac{1}{p-M}\text{Tr}\frac{1}{p_1-M}\dots \text{Tr}\frac{1}{p_k-M}}_c
\end{equation}
starting with $W_1(p)$ and $W_2(p,p_1)$.
These functions which are solutions of the so-called loop equations are only well defined over Riemann surfaces because in $\Complex$ they are multi-valued. They admit an expansion on the order $N$ of the random matrix $M$, with components $W_{k+1}^g(p,p_1,\dots p_k)$ related to a definite genus. We will not be concerned here with the actual computation of correlation functions in specific models.
Let $K=(p_1,\dots,p_k)$ be a vector of variables. For instance in concrete cases these can be coordinates of punctures on Riemann surfaces, labels of borders on topological surfaces or variables in Matrix Models, but we just leave them as labels of leaves of planar binary trees or of graphs obtained from planar binary trees. We assign the label $p$ to the root of a tree or of a graph with loops obtained from a tree. The topological recursion formula is
\begin{align}\label{toprec}
&W_{k+1}^g(p,K)=\sum_{\text{branch points }\alpha}\text{Res}_{p\rightarrow \alpha}K_p(q,\bar{q})\notag\\
&\left(W^{g-1}_{k+2}(q,\bar{q},K)+\sum_{L\cup M=K,h=0}^g W^h_{|L|+1}(q,L)W^{g-h}_{|M|+1}(\bar{q},M)\right)
\end{align}
where the sum is restricted to terms with Euler characteristic equal or smaller than 0. For instance if $h=0$ then $|L|\ge 1$.
For a very clear exposition about this setup from the point of view of Algebraic Geometry see for instance \cite{MR3087960} but some comments are in order. The branch points are the ones from a meromorphic function $x$ defined on a so called spectral curve $\mathcal{E}(x,y)=0$. The recursion kernel $K_p(q,\bar{q})$ is, roughly speaking, a meromorphic (1,1) tensor that depends on a regular point $p$ in the neighbourhood of a branch point and on $q$ and its conjugated point $\bar{q}$ for which $x(q)=x(\bar{q})$ and $y(q)=-y(\bar{q})$. In fact it can be computed from $W_1^0(p)$ and $W_2^0(p,p)$ which are symmetric differentials of order one and two respectively. Actually, all $W_k^g$ are meromorphic symmetric differentials but we will continue to refer to them as correlation functions. Since our approach will be purely algebraic and in order to soften the notation we will not explicitly mention the sum of the residues over the branch points when referring to this formula.
\section{The Loday-Ronco Hopf Algebra of planar binary trees}
We collect here some important facts of the Loday-Ronco Hopf algebra. Details and proofs can be found in \cite{MR2194965,MR1654173}.
Let $S_n$ be the symmetric group of order $n$ with the usual product $\rho\cdot\sigma$ given by the composition of permutations. When necessary we denote a permutation $\rho$ by its image $(\rho(1)\rho(2)\dots\rho(n))$. Recall that a shuffle $\rho(p,q)$ of type $(p,q)$ in $S_n$ is a permutation such that $\rho(1)<\rho(2)<\dots <\rho(p)$ and $\rho(p+1)<\rho(p+2)<\dots <\rho(p+q)$. For instance the shuffles of type $(1,2)$ in $S_3$ are $(123),(213)$ and $(312)$. We denote the set of $(p,q)$ shuffles by $S(p,q)$.
Take
\begin{equation}
k[S^\infty]=\oplus_{n=0}^{\infty}k[S_n]
\end{equation}
with $S_0$ identified with the empty permutation. $k[S^\infty]$ is a vector space over a field $k$ of characteristic $0$ generated by linear combinations of permutations. It is graded by the order of permutations and $k[S_0]$ which contains the empty permutation is identified with the field $k$. For two permutations $\rho\in S_p$ and $\sigma\in S_q$ there is a natural product on $S^\infty$ denoted by $\rho\times\sigma$ which is a permutation on $S_{p+q}$ given by letting $\rho$ acting on the first $p$ variables and $\sigma$ acting on the last $q$ variables.
There is a unique decomposition of any permutation $\sigma\in S_n$ in two permutations $\sigma_i\in S_i$ and $\sigma'_{n-i}\in S_{n-i}$ for each $i$ such that
\begin{equation}
\sigma =(\sigma_i\times\sigma'_{n-i})\cdot w^{-1}
\end{equation}
where $w$ is a shuffle of type $(i,n-i)$.
With the $\ast$ product
\begin{equation}
\rho\ast \sigma=\sum_{\alpha_{n,m}\in S_{(n,m)}}\alpha_{n,m}\cdot\left(\rho\times\sigma\right)
\end{equation}
and the co-product
\begin{equation}\label{eq:coproductperm}
\Delta\sigma=\sum \sigma_{i}\otimes\sigma^{'}_{n-i}
\end{equation}
$k[S^{\infty}]$ becomes a bi-algebra and since it is graded and connected it is automatically a Hopf Algebra.
A planar binary tree is a graph with no loops embedded in the plane with only trivalent vertices. In every planar binary tree there are paths that start on a special edge called the root and end on the terminal edges called leaves. The leaves can be left or right oriented. The order $|t|$ of a planar binary tree $t$ is the number of its vertices and on each planar binary tree of order $n$ there are $n+1$ leaves that usually are numbered from 0 to $n$ from left to right. It is frequent to visualize planar binary trees from the bottom to the top, with the root as its lowest vertical edge and the leaves as the highest edges, oriented SW-NE or SE-NW. We will denote the set of planar binary trees of order $n$ by $Y^n$ and by $k[Y^\infty]$ the vector space over $k$ generated by planar binary trees of all orders.
\begin{figure}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[thick] (1,-0.5) -- (1,1) -- (0,2) -- (0.35,1.65)--(0.65,2)--(0.35,1.65)-- (1,1) --(1.65,1.65)--(1.35,2)--(1.65,1.65) -- (2,2);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{A planar binary tree of order 3}\label{fig:pbt3-2}
\end{figure}
Additionally a planar binary tree with levels is a planar binary tree such that on each horizontal line there is at most one vertex.
\begin{figure}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[thick] (4,-0.5) -- (4,1) -- (2,3) -- (2.35,2.65)--(2.65,3)--(2.35,2.65)-- (4,1) --(4.75,1.75)--(3.5,3)-- (4.75,1.75)--(6,3); \draw[thick,dashed](1.5,1.75)--(6.5,1.75);\draw[thick,dashed](1.5,2.65)--(6.5,2.65);
\draw (6.8,2.65) node{1}; \draw (6.8,1.75) node{2};\draw[thick,dashed](1.5,1)--(6.5,1);\draw (6.8,1) node{3};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Planar binary tree with levels that is the image of $\mathbf{(132)}$}\label{fig:pbtlev3}
\end{figure}
It is clear that reading the vertices from left to right and from top to bottom it is possible to assign a permutation of order $n$ to a planar binary tree with levels and that this assignment is unique. For example in fig. \ref{fig:pbtlev3} the tree corresponds to the permutation $(132)$. In this way it is completely equivalent to consider the Hopf algebra $k[S^\infty]$ or the Hopf algebra of planar binary trees with levels because they are isomorphic. However Loday and Ronco show in \cite{MR1654173} that the $\ast$ product and the co-product are internal on the algebra of planar binary trees which is then isomorphic to a sub-Hopf algebra of $k[S^\infty]$ with the same product and co-product. The identity of the Hopf Algebra $k[Y^\infty]$ is the tree with a single edge and no vertices, following the convention of considering only internal vertices, which represents the empty permutation, and the trivial permutation of $S_1$ is represented by the tree with one vertex and two leaves, see fig \ref{fig:idgen}. In fact this element is the generator of the augmented algebra by the $\ast$ product. See fig. (\ref{fig:1star1star1}) for an example of an order 3 product.
\begin{figure}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (0,1) node{ $\Large{1=}$};\draw[thick] (1,-0.25) -- (1,1.75);
\draw (3.5,1) node{ $\Large{(\mathbf{1})=}$};\draw[thick] (5,-0.5) -- (5,1) -- (4,2) -- (5,1) -- (6,2) ;
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The identity and the generator in $k[Y^\infty]$}\label{fig:idgen}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[thick](1,-0.5) -- (1,1) -- (0,2) -- (1,1) -- (2,2) ; \draw (2.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $\ast$}}}; \draw[thick](4,-0.5) -- (4,1) -- (3,2) -- (4,1) -- (5,2); \draw (5.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $\ast$}}};\draw[thick](7,-0.5) -- (7,1) -- (6,2) -- (7,1) -- (8,2);\draw (8.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $=$}}};
\end{tikzpicture}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[thick] (1,-0.5) -- (1,1) -- (0,2) -- (0.2,1.8)--(0.4,2)--(0.2,1.8)-- (0.5,1.5)--(1,2)--(0.5,1.5)-- (1,1) -- (2,2);\draw (2.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $+$}}}; \draw[thick] (4,-0.5) -- (4,1) -- (3,2) -- (4,1) -- (5,2)--(4.8,1.8)--(4.6,2)--(4.8,1.8)--(4.5,1.5)--(4,2);\draw (5.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $+$}}}; \draw[thick] (7,-0.5) -- (7,1) -- (6,2) -- (7,1) -- (8,2)--(7.5,1.5)--(7.25,1.75)--(7.5,2)--(7.25,1.75)--(7,2);
\end{tikzpicture}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (-0.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $+$}}};\draw[thick] (1,-0.5) -- (1,1) -- (0,2) -- (0.35,1.65)--(0.65,2)--(0.35,1.65)-- (1,1) --(1.55,1.55)--(1.10,2)--(1.55,1.55) -- (2,2);\draw (2.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $+$}}}; \draw[thick] (4,-0.5) -- (4,1) -- (3,2) -- (3.45,1.55)--(3.9,2)--(3.45,1.55)-- (4,1) --(4.65,1.65)--(4.35,2)--(4.65,1.65) -- (5,2);\draw (5.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $+$}}}; \draw[thick] (7,-0.5) -- (7,1) -- (6,2) -- (6.5,1.5)--(6.75,1.75)--(6.5,2)--(6.75,1.75)--(7,2)-- (6.5,1.5) -- (7,1)-- (8,2);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{$\mathbf{(1)}\ast\mathbf{(1)}\ast\mathbf{(1)}=\mathbf{(123)}+\mathbf{(321)}+\mathbf{(312)}+\mathbf{(132)}+\mathbf{(231)}+\mathbf{(213)}$ computed in $k[S^\infty]$. Note that in $k[Y^\infty]$ the fourth and the fifth trees are the same.} \label{fig:1star1star1}
\end{figure}
The grafting $t_1 \vee t_2$ of two trees $t_1$ and $t_2$ is the operation of producing a new tree $t$ by inserting $t_1$ on the left and $t_2$ on the right leaves of $\mathbf{(1)}$. It is clear that any tree of order $n$ can be written as $t_1\vee t_2$ with $t_1$ of order $p$, $t_2$ of order $q$ and $n=p+q+1$. If a tree has only leaves on the right branch besides the first leaf then it can be written as $|\vee t_2$ and reciprocally if it has only leaves on the left branch besides the last leaf. Note that in particular $\mathbf{(1)}=|\vee |$.
In \cite{MR1654173} Loday and Ronco show that the $\ast$ product restricted to planar binary trees satisfies the identity
\begin{equation}\label{eq:shuffleident1}
t\ast t'=t_1\vee (t_2\ast t')+(t \ast t_1^{'})\vee t_2^{'}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:shuffleident2}
t\ast |=|\ast t=t
\end{equation}
with $t=t_1\vee t_2$ and $t'=t_1^{'}\vee t_2^{'}$.
If $t_1$ is a tree of order $p$ and a representative element of $W_{p+2}^{0}(p,L)$ and $t_2$ is a tree of order $q$ and a representative element of $W_{q+2}^{0}(p,M)$ then $t=t_1\vee t_2$ is a tree of order $n=p+q+1$ and a representative element of $$W^0_{n+2}(p,K)=K_p(q,\bar{q})W_{p+2}^{0}(q,L)W_{q+2}^{0}(\bar{q},M).$$ with $K=\{p_1,\dots,p_{n+1}\}=L\cup M$.
We will clarify this in what follows.
\section{The solution of topological recursion}
\subsection{Genus 0}
A representation map $\psi$ from the vector space of correlation functions of genus $g$ to the vector space of graphs with loops should be defined such that in particular to a correlation function $W^0_{n+2}(p,p_1,\dots,p_{n+1})$ of Euler characteristic $\chi=-n$ would correspond the trees of order $n$. In fact we will state below that the representation of $W^0_{n+2}(p,p_1,\dots,p_{n+1})$ is the sum of all trees of order $n$. It is not clear that this map gives a true representation in the strict mathematical sense. It is linear by definition and is obvious that it is surjective, as we can associate some instance of a correlation function $W^0_{n+2}(p,p_1,\dots,p_{n+1})$ to any tree of order $n$. If it is injective and a homomorphism is a more delicate issue because even if one considers $W^0_{n+2}$ as being a sum of all instances of correlation functions of Euler characteristic $-n$ each represented by a tree $t\in Y^n$ in the same way as in Particle Physics, where different Green functions contribute to the same scattering amplitude, it is not evident that the space of correlation functions has a product with an identity that would correspond to the trivial tree |. Note that this would give at least a ring structure and in the case of topological quantum field theory where correlations functions are identified with topological surfaces with punctures cobordism is a good candidate for such a product. In fact it is a consequence of the axioms of topological quantum field theory as stated by Atiyah for example in \cite{atiyah1988topological} that the cylinder $\Sigma\times I$, where $\Sigma$ is a topological surface without border and $I$ is a interval of real numbers, may be identified with the identity map between two vector spaces. In any case we will not elaborate more on this here and use the word representation in a somewhat rough sense. In particular, when referring to the inverse image of a tree or a sum of trees we will refrain of using the inverse $\psi^{-1}$ but will use instead $\psi^\ast$ as for the pullback.
\begin{defn}\label{def:W3}
Consider the planar binary tree with one vertex $(\mathbf{1})$. The 3-point correlation function $W_3^0(p,p_1,p_2)$ is represented by the sum of two planar binary trees with one vertex, obtained by the permutation of the leaf labels $p_1$ and $p_2$:
\begin{equation}
\psi\left(W_3^0(p,p_1,p_2)\right)=\sum_{\text{perm. of leaf labels $\{p_1,p_2\}$}}(\mathbf{1})
\end{equation}
\end{defn}
The trees that represent $W_3^0(p,p_1,p_2)$ are given by the permutations of the leaf labels of $|\vee |$. Then it is natural to represent the operation of grafting two trees by the insertion of the recursion kernel $K_p(q,\bar{q})$ on its roots. Therefore the symbol
$\tree $ has two meanings. When isolated it represents $W_3^0(p,p_1,p_2)$ because the two cylinders $W^0_2(q,p_1)$ and $W^0_2(\bar{q},p_2)$ are implicitly identified with its leaves.
When it is an internal vertex of a more complex tree it is the recursion kernel $K_p(q,\bar{q})$ with suitable labels of its variables.
\begin{defnbis}{def:W3}\label{def:W3b}
The propagator or cylinder (also named Bergman kernel in the literature) $W^0_2(q,\bar{q})$ is represented through $\psi$ by the empty permutation $|$ and the recursion kernel is represented through $\psi$ by $\tree$ when in an internal vertex of some tree. Then each planar binary tree of order n is a representation of an instance of some correlation function in genus 0 with each vertex identified with a recursion kernel and each left leaf identified with the cylinder $W^0_2(q_i,p_j)$ or each right leaf identified with the cylinder $W^0_2(\bar{q}_i,p_k)$. Finally the image under $\psi$ of a correlation function $W_{n+2}^0(p,p_1,\dots,p_{n+1})$ with $\chi=-n$ is the sum of all planar binary trees of order $n$ considering all permutations of their leaf labels and with the identifications mentioned above,
\begin{equation}
\psi\left(W_{n+2}^0(p,p_1,\dots,p_{n+1})\right)=\sum_{\substack{t_i\in Y^n \\ \text{perm. of leaf labels $\{p_1,\dots,p_{n+1}\}$}}} t_i.
\end{equation}
\end{defnbis}
Hence Definition \ref{def:W3} becomes the following example:
\begin{defn2}\label{ex:W3}
Consider the planar binary tree with one vertex. The 3-point correlation function $W_3^0(p,p_1,p_2)$ is represented by the sum of two planar binary trees with one vertex, obtained by the permutation of the leaf labels $p_1$ and $p_2$.
\end{defn2}
\begin{align}
\psi\left(W_3^0(p,p_1,p_2)\right)&=\psi\left(K_p(q,\bar{q})W^0_2(q,p_1)W^0_2(\bar{q},p_2)\right)+ \text{ perm. of $\{p_1,p_2\}$}\notag\\
&=\sum_{\text{ perm. of $\{p_1,p_2\}$}}|\vee |\notag\\
&=\sum_{\text{ perm. of $\{p_1,p_2\}$}}(\mathbf{1})
\end{align}
\begin{prop}
If $W_{n+2}^0(p,p_1,\dots,p_{n+1})$ is a correlation function with Euler characteristic $\chi=-n$ that is a solution of (\ref{toprec}) then we have
\begin{align}\label{eq:defcorr}
\psi \left(W_{n+2}^0(p,p_1,\dots,p_{n+1})\right)&=\sum_{\substack{p+q+1=n\\|t_1|=p, |t_2|=q}} t_1\vee t_2\notag\\
& + \text{perm. of leaf labels $\{p_1,\dots,p_{n+1}\}$}
\end{align}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
This is the topological recursion in genus $0$ written with planar binary trees. For $n=1$ this is the example \ref{ex:W3}. For $n$ arbitrary by Definition \ref{def:W3b}
\begin{equation}
\psi\left(W_{n+2}^0(p,p_1,\dots,p_{n+1})\right)=\sum_{\substack{t\in Y^n \\ \text{perm. of leaf labels $\{p_1,\dots,p_{n+1}\}$}}} t
\end{equation}
Decompose uniquely any $t$ of order $n$ into $t=t_1\vee t_2$ of orders $|t_1|=p$ and $|t_2|=q$ with $p+q+1=n$ to get
\begin{equation}\label{eq:invimage}
\psi\left(W_{n+2}^0(p,p_1,\dots,p_{n+1})\right)=\sum_{\substack{t_1\in Y^p, t_2\in Y^q, p+q+1=n \\ \text{perm. of leaf labels $\{p_1,\dots,p_{n+1}\}$}}} t_1\vee t_2.
\end{equation}
Then $t_1$ and $t_2$ are on the image by $\psi$ of $W_{p+2}$ and $W_{q+2}$ for $p$ and $q$ varying from 0 to $n-1$ and constrained by $p+q+1=n$. Since the operation of grafting two trees is represented by attaching the recursion kernel to its roots then, summing for all $t_1\in Y^p, t_2\in Y^q$ and for $p+q+1=n$, we get the topological recursion formula for $g=0$ after taking the preimage of (\ref{eq:invimage}) by $\psi$:
\begin{align}
W_{n+2}^0(p,p_1,\dots,p_{n+1})&=\notag\\
K_p(q,\bar{q})&\sum_{\substack{L\cup M=\{p_1,\dots,p_{n+1}\},\\|L|=p+1,|M|=q+1}} W^0_{|L|+1}(q,L)W^{0}_{|M|+1}(\bar{q},M).
\end{align}
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
Note that by $W^0_{n+2}(p,K)$ with $|K|=n+1$ we understand all instances of the correlation function with $g=0$ and $n+2$ labels. This is similar to the situation in High Energy Physics where for the same physical process described by a scattering amplitude there are several Feynman diagrams that contribute.
It is well known that the dimension of the vector space generated by planar binary trees of order $n$ is given by the Catalan number (see for instance \cite{MR1817703}) $$c_n=\frac{2n!}{n!(n+1)n!}.$$ It is also known that correlation functions in Matrix Models have a large $N$ or planar expansion that is given in terms of Catalan numbers. Therefore it is of no surprise that there exists a correspondence between planar binary trees and correlation functions of genus 0.
\end{rem}
\begin{thm}
The $n$-order solution $W_{n+2}^0(p_1,\dots,p_{n+1})$ of the topological recursion in genus 0 is represented by the linear combination
$$\sum t=\mathbf{(1)}\ast\mathbf{(1)}\ast\dots\ast\mathbf{(1)}$$
with $n$ factors of $\mathbf{(1)}$ followed by the sum over all permutations of its labels.
\end{thm}
In this way $W_{n+2}^0(p,p_1,\dots,p_{n+1})$ is represented by $\sum t$ followed by the identification of cylinders $W^0_2(q_i,p_j)$ with the left leaves or $W^0_2(\bar{q}_i,p_k)$ with the right leaves and finally by summing over all permutations of the labels $p_1,p_2,\dots, p_{n+1}$. In other words, the $\ast$ product $\mathbf{(1)}\ast\mathbf{(1)}\ast\dots\ast\mathbf{(1)}$ gives all possible insertions of recursion kernels of $W_{n+2}^0$.
\begin{proof}
By induction on the Euler characteristic or equivalently on the order $n$. For $n=1$ we saw that $W_3^0(p,p_1,p_2)$ is just a sum of two planar binary trees with one vertex, with the leaves in correspondence with $W^0_2(q,p_1)$ and $W^0_2(\bar{q},p_2)$ or its permutations and the root labeled by $p$.
So we start the induction at $n=2$: we want to show that $(\mathbf{1})\ast(\mathbf{1})$ represents $W_4^0(p,p_1,p_2,p_3)$. In the Loday-Ronco Hopf Algebra we have that $\mathbf{(1)}\ast\mathbf{(1)}=\mathbf{(12)}+\mathbf{(21)}$.
\begin{figure}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[thick](1,-0.5) -- (1,1) -- (0,2) -- (1,1) -- (2,2) ; \draw (2.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $\ast$}}}; \draw[thick](4,-0.5) -- (4,1) -- (3,2) -- (4,1) -- (5,2);\draw (5.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $=$}}};\draw[thick] (7,-0.5) -- (7,1) -- (6,2) -- (6.35,1.65)--(6.65,2)--(6.35,1.65)-- (7,1) -- (8,2);\draw (8.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $+$}}}; \draw[thick] (10,-0.5) -- (10,1) -- (9,2) -- (10,1) -- (11,2)--(10.65,1.65)--(10.35,2)--(10.65,1.65);\draw (6.3,1.3) node{ $q$};\draw (7.7,1.3) node{ $\bar{q}$};\draw (9.3,1.3) node{ $q$};\draw (10.7,1.3) node{ $\bar{q}$};
\draw (5.9,1.8) node{ $q_1$};\draw (6.85,1.8) node{ $\bar{q}_1$};\draw (5.8,2.2) node{ $p_1$}; \draw (7.2,2.2) node{ $p_2$};\draw (8.2,2.2) node{ $p_3$};\draw (10.2,1.8) node{ $q_1$};\draw (11.2,1.8) node{ $\bar{q}_1$};\draw (8.8,2.2) node{ $p_1$}; \draw (10.2,2.2) node{ $p_2$};\draw (11.2,2.2) node{ $p_3$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{$W_4^0(p,p_1,p_2,p_3)$}\label{fig:W40}
\end{figure}
On the other hand the topological recursion formula gives for $W_4^0$
\begin{align}
W_4^0(p,p_1,p_2,p_3)&=K_p(q,\bar{q})\left(W_3^0(q,p_1,p_2)W_2^0(\bar{q},p_3)\right.\notag\\
&\left.+W_2^0(q,p_1)W_3^0(\bar{q},p_2,p_3)+\text{perm. of }\{p_1,p_2,p_3\}\right)\notag\\
&=K_p(q,\bar{q})K_q(q_1,\bar{q}_1)W_2^0(q_1,p_1)W_2^0(\bar{q}_1,p_2)W_2^0(\bar{q},p_3)\notag\\
&+K_p(q,\bar{q})K_{\bar{q}}(q_1,\bar{q}_1)W_2^0(q_1,p_2)W_2^0(\bar{q}_1,p_3)W_2^0(q,p_1)\notag\\
&+\text{perm. of }\{p_1,p_2,p_3\}
\end{align}
which gives the two terms from the $\ast$ product of the Loday-Ronco Hopf Algebra identifying the vertices with the recursion kernel and the leaves with the cylinders (see fig. \ref{fig:W40}).
Next assume the induction hypothesis for $n-1$ and note that if $W^0_{n+1}$ is represented by the linear combination $\sum t=\mathbf{(1)}\ast\mathbf{(1)}\ast\dots\ast\mathbf{(1)}$ of trees $t\in Y^{n-1}$ then each tree can be written uniquely as $t=t_1\vee t_2$ with $|t_1|=a, |t_2|=b$ and $a+b+1=n-1$. Using (\ref{eq:shuffleident1}) and (\ref{eq:shuffleident2}) we get
\begin{align}\label{eq:proof}
\sum_{t\in Y^{n-1}} \mathbf{(1)}\ast t &= \sum_{t\in Y^{n-1}}|\vee (|\ast t) + \sum_{\substack{t_1\in Y^{a},t_2\in Y^b\\ a+b+1=n-1}}(\mathbf{(1)}\ast t_1)\vee t_2\notag\\
&=\sum_{t\in Y^{n-1}}|\vee t + \sum_{\substack{t_1\in Y^{a},t_2\in Y^b\\ a+b+1=n-1}}(\mathbf{(1)}\ast t_1)\vee t_2
\end{align}
Because each $t$ is of order $n-1$ but otherwise arbitrary, each $t_1$ is at most of order $n-2$ and then by the induction hypothesis $\mathbf{(1)}\ast t_1$ is in the image by $\psi$ of a solution that is at most $W^0_{n+1}$ and at least $W_3^0$. Summing also over all permutations of $K=\{p_1,\dots p_{n+1}\}$ we get
\begin{align}\label{eq:proff2}
\psi^\ast\left(\sum_{\substack{t\in Y^{n-1}\\\text{perm. of leaf labels}}}\mathbf{(1)}\ast t\right) &= \sum_{L\cup M=K, |L|=1} K_p(q,\bar{q}) W_2^0(q,L) W_{n+1}^0(\bar{q},M) \notag\\
+\sum_{L\cup M=K, |L|>1} K_p(q,\bar{q})& W_{l+1}^0(q,L) W_{m+1}^0(\bar{q},M)\notag\\
=\sum_{L\cup M=K} K_p(q,\bar{q}) & W_{l+1}^0(q,L) W_{m+1}^0(\bar{q},M)\notag\\
=W_{n+2}^0&(p,p_1,\dots,p_{n+1}).
\end{align}
\end{proof}
\subsection{Genus higher than 0}
The procedure of attaching an edge to two consecutive leaves and producing a graph with loops allows to represent correlations functions with genus $g>0$. This is equivalent to extract the outermost cylinders $W^0_2(x,p_j),W_2^0(y,p_{j+1}), x=q_i$ or $\bar{q}_i$, $y=\bar{q}_j$ or $q_j$ and to couple a cylinder $W^0_2(x,y)$ to two recursion kernels $K_{q_l}(q_i,\bar{q}_i)$ and $K_{q_m}(q_j,\bar{q}_j)$, for some convenient choice of indices, that are identified with two internal vertices. This procedure does not change the Euler characteristic of the associated correlation functions because the number of pairs of leaf labels is reduced exactly as the genus is increased. For instance with this procedure we can make the sequence
\begin{equation}
W_5^0(p,p_1,\dots p_4)\longrightarrow W^1_3(p,p_1,p_2)\longrightarrow W^2_1(p)
\end{equation}
and remain in the same graded vector space that contains $k[Y^3]$. How this changes the Hopf algebra structure is not yet clear. For now, we define the operation $_{i}\leftrightarrow_{i+1}$ on a planar binary tree.
\begin{defn}\label{defn:connecting}
Starting with a planar binary tree of order $n$ and $n+2$ labels (including the root label $p$) the operation $_{i}\leftrightarrow_{i+1}$ consists in erasing the labels of the leaves $i$ and $i+1$ then connecting them by an edge and finally relabeling the remaining leaves, now numbered $j$ with $j=0,\dots,n-2$, with the $p_{j+1}$ labels, producing in this way a graph with one loop.
\end{defn}
Therefore we represent a correlation function $W^g_{k}(p,p_1,\dots,p_{k-1})$ of genus $g$ by graphs with loops $t^g$ that are obtained by successive applications of the $_{i}\leftrightarrow_{i+1}$ operation. We denote by $\left(Y^n\right)^g$ the set of different graphs with $g$ loops that are obtained from trees $t\in Y^n$.
\begin{defn}
A correlation function $W^g_{k}(p,p_1,\dots,p_{k-1})$ of genus $g$ and Euler characteristic $\chi=2-2g-k$ is represented by a sum of all different graphs with loops $t^g\in \left(Y^n\right)^g$ for $n=-\chi$:
\begin{equation}
\psi\left(W^g_{k}(p,p_1,\dots,p_{k-1})\right)=\sum_{t^g\in (Y^n)^g} t^g
\end{equation}
\end{defn}
\begin{rem}
Two graphs $(t)^g,(t')^g\in (Y^n)^g$ are considered different in the obvious way. Either the underlying binary trees $t,t'\in Y^n$ are distinct as base elements of $k[Y^\infty]$ or the tree $t$ has a pair of leaves, say $(i,i+1)$ that are identified with an edge in $(t)^g$ producing a loop and are free in $(t')^g$ (and reciprocally because the two graphs have the same genus).
\end{rem}
In particular $W_1^1(p)$ is represented by a single graph with one loop denoted $(\mathbf{1})^1$ whose underlying planar binary tree is $(\mathbf{1})$. More generally we have
\begin{prop}\label{prop:secterm-W1}
The second summand of the topological recursion formula for the correlation function $W_{n}^1(p,p_1,\dots,p_{n-1})$ with $\chi=-n$ is represented by the sum
\begin{equation}\label{eq:prop2}
\sum_{\substack{(t_1)^1\in \left(Y^p\right)^1, t_2\in Y^q\\p+q+1=n}}(t_1)^1 \vee t_2 +\sum_{\substack{t_1\in Y^p, (t_2)^1\in \left(Y^q\right)^1\\p+q+1=n}} t_1\vee (t_2)^1
\end{equation}
where each underlying planar binary tree $t$ of order $n$ is decomposed as $t=t_1\vee t_2$, with $|t_1|=p$, $|t_2|=q$, $p+q+1=n$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
For $n=2$ the underlying trees of $W_2^1(p,p_1)$ are the same of $W^0_4(p,p_1,p_2,p_3)$ namely $t=(\mathbf{12})+(\mathbf{21})$. Remembering that $(\mathbf{12})=(\mathbf{1})\vee|$ and $(\mathbf{21})=|\vee(\mathbf{1})$ and applying $_{i}\leftrightarrow_{i+1}$ to $(\mathbf{1})$ for $i=0$ (\ref{eq:prop2}) is the same as
$$
(\mathbf{1})^1\vee | + |\vee (\mathbf{1})^1.
$$
which is the image by $\psi$ of the second term of $W_2^1(p,p_1)$ in the topological recursion formula.
For $n$ arbitrary consider the trees $t'=t'_1\vee t'_2, t'\in Y^{n-1}$ with $|t'_1|=a, |t'_2|=b, a+b+1=n-1$ whose sum represents solutions $W^0_{n+1}(p,p_1,\dots,p_n)$ by the induction hypothesis. By (\ref{eq:shuffleident1}) and (\ref{eq:shuffleident2}) we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:shuffleident1a}
(\mathbf{1})\ast t'= |\vee t' + ((\mathbf{1})\ast t'_1)\vee t'_2.
\end{equation}
Noting that $t^{''}=(\mathbf{1})\ast t'_1$ are at most of order $n-1$ and at least of order $1$ and identifying pairs of leaves on the same branches by applying $_{i}\leftrightarrow_{i+1}$ to each component of the grafting operation the last formula gives
\begin{equation}\label{eq:identifysepbr}
\left(_{i}\leftrightarrow_{i+1}\right)_{\text{same branches}}(\mathbf{1})\ast t'=|\vee (t')^{1} +(t'')^1\vee t'_2 + t''\vee (t'_2)^1
\end{equation}
for each pair of leaves $(i, i+1)$ on the left or right branches. To collect all different terms produced in this way is equivalent to sum over $(t')^1\in \left(Y^{n-1}\right)^1$, also over $t''\in Y^{a+1}$ and $(t'')^{1}\in \left(Y^{a+1}\right)^1$ for $0\le a\le n-2$, and finally over $t'_2\in Y^{b}$ and $(t'_2)^1\in \left(Y^{b}\right)^1$ for $0\le b\le n-2$. Then the sum of all different terms given by (\ref{eq:identifysepbr}) is\footnote{Assuming the convention that for a tree $t$ of order 0, $(t)^1=0$.}
\begin{align}\label{eq:identifysepbr2}
& \sum_{i=0}^{n-1}\sum_{t'\in Y^{n-1}}\left(_{i}\leftrightarrow_{i+1}\right)_{\text{same branches}}(\mathbf{1})\ast t'=\sum_{(t')^1\in \left(Y^{n-1}\right)^1} |\vee (t')^1\notag\\
& +\sum_{\substack{(t'')^{1}\in \left(Y^{a+1}\right)^1, t'_2\in Y^{b}\\a+b+1=n-1}}(t'')^1\vee t'_2 + \sum_{\substack{t^{''}\in Y^{a+1},(t'_2)^1\in \left(Y^{b}\right)^1\\a+b+1=n-1}}t''\vee (t'_2)^1\notag\\
&=\sum_{\substack{(t_1)^1\in \left(Y^p\right)^1, t_2\in Y^q\\p+q+1=n}}t_1^1 \vee t_2 +\sum_{\substack{t_1\in Y^p, t^1_2\in \left(Y^q\right)^1\\p+q+1=n}} t_1\vee t_2^1
\end{align}
where now $t_1$ and $t_2$ are the left and right branches of a tree $t=t_1\vee t_2$ of order $n$. Note that on the right the first sum starts at $p=1$ which is the lowest possibility for a $g=1$ graph. Then the highest value of $q$ is $n-2$. For the same reason the second sum on the right starts at $q=1$ which implies that $p\le n-2$. Translating (\ref{eq:identifysepbr2}) to the topological recursion we have
\begin{align}
& \psi^\ast\left(\sum_{i=0}^{n-1}\sum_{t'\in Y^{n-1}}\left(_{i}\leftrightarrow_{i+1}\right)_{\text{same branches}}(\mathbf{1})\ast t'\right)=K_p(q,\bar{q})\times\notag\\
&\left(\sum_{L\cup M=\{p_1,\dots,p_{n-1}\}, |L|=1}W_2^0(q,L)W_{m+1}^1(\bar{q},M)\right.\notag\\
&\left.+\sum_{L\cup M=\{p_1,\dots,p_{n-1}\}, |L|>1}W_{l+1}^1(q,L)W_{m+1}^0(\bar{q},M)
+W_{l+1}^0(q,L)W_m^1(\bar{q},M)\right)\notag\\
&=K_p(q,\bar{q})\times\notag\\
&\left(\sum_{L\cup M=\{p_1,\dots,p_{n-1}\}}W_{l+1}^0(q,L)W_{m+1}^1(\bar{q},M)
+W_l^1(q,L)W_m^0(\bar{q},M)\right)
\end{align}
which is the second term of the topological recursion formula for $W_{n}^1(p,p_1,\dots,p_{n-1})$.
\end{proof}
Now we consider the first term in topological recursion which for $W_{n}^1(p,p_1,\dots,p_{n-1})$ is
\begin{equation}\label{eq:firstW^1}
K_p(q,\bar{q})W^0_{n+1}(q,\bar{q},p_1,\dots,p_{n-1}).
\end{equation}
We start by a definition:
\begin{defn}
The ungrafting operation $\raisebox{1.7mm}{$\line(1,0){10}$}\hspace{-3mm}\vee$ is defined by removing from $t$ the tree $(\mathbf{1})$ that contains the root producing a forest with two trees $t_1$ and $t_2$. When $t$ represents an instance of a correlation function then the roots of $t_1$ and $t_2$ are labeled by $q$ and $\bar{q}$ and as before the tree $(\mathbf{1})$ represents $K_p(q,\bar{q})$.
\end{defn}
\begin{rem}
The operations $\vee$ and $\raisebox{1.7mm}{$\line(1,0){10}$}\hspace{-3mm}\vee$ are similar to the operations $B^+$ and $B^-$ of the Connes-Kreimer Hopf Algebra described, for instance, in \cite{MR1725011}.
\end{rem}
If we start with the planar binary tree $t\in Y^n$ with leaves labels $p_1,\dots, p_{n+1}$ and root label $p$ and identify two nearest neighbor leaves in opposite branches then we get a 1-loop graph $t^1\in \left(Y^n\right)^1$ with a relabeling $p_1,\dots,p_{n-1}$. Then, by applying $\raisebox{1.7mm}{$\line(1,0){10}$}\hspace{-3mm}\vee$, we get another tree $t'$ with two more edges with labels $q$ and $\bar{q}$ besides the leaves labelled by $p_1,\dots,p_{n-1}$. This tree is isomorphic as a graph to a planar binary tree in $Y^{n-1}$ that we denote also $t'$ by promoting the edge with the label $q$ to the root and the other edge to the rightmost leaf, see fig \ref{fig:ungraft} for an example with $W_3^1(p,p_1,p_2)$. In this way we get a representation of (\ref{eq:firstW^1}) by summing over all planar binary trees $t'\in Y^{n-1}$.
\begin{figure}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[thick] (1,-1) -- (1,-0.5) -- (0.5,0) -- (1,-0.5) -- (1.5,0);
\draw[thick] (0.2,1.15)--(0.7,1.65)--(0.5,1.45)--(0.3,1.65)--(0.5,1.45)--(0.2,1.15)--(-0.3,1.65)-- (0.5,0.85); \draw[thick] (1.5,0.85)--(1.95,1.3)--(2.3,1.65);
\draw (0.5,0.2) node{ $q$};\draw (1.5,0.2) node{ $\bar{q}$};
\draw (0.5,0.6) node{ $q$};\draw (1.5,0.6) node{ $\bar{q}$};
\draw (1,-1.2) node{ $p$};
\draw (-0.35,1.85) node{ $p_1$};\draw (0.3,1.85) node{ $p_2$};
\draw[thick] (2.3,1.7) arc (45:135:1.10cm);
\draw (2.8,0.5) node{\textbf{{\Large $\longrightarrow$}}};
\draw[thick] (4.5,-1) -- (4.5,-0.5) -- (4,0) -- (4.5,-0.5) -- (5,0);
\draw (4.5,-1.2) node{ $p$};
\draw (4,0.2) node{ $q$};\draw (5,0.2) node{ $\bar{q}$};
\draw[thick] (6,0.85) -- (5.2,1.65) -- (6,0.85)--(6.8,1.65)--(6.5,1.35) -- (6.2,1.65)--(6.5,1.35)-- (6,0.85)--(6,0.35);
\draw (6,0.15) node{ $q$};
\draw (5.2,1.85) node{ $p_1$};\draw (6.2,1.85) node{ $p_2$};
\draw (6.8,1.85) node{ $\bar{q}$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Ungrafting a 1-loop graph of $W_3^1(p,p_1,p_2)$. The resulting tree is $(\mathbf{21})$.}\label{fig:ungraft}
\end{figure}
It is clear that what was left to be done in (\ref{eq:identifysepbr}) was the identification of two consecutive leaves in opposite branches. In principle there are several graphs $t^1\in(Y^n)^1$ of this type. The first one corresponds to the first term in (\ref{eq:shuffleident1a}) which gives a 1-loop graph with no leaves on the left branch. All other $t^1$ come from the second term of that formula and depend on the type of the left branch $t'_1$ of the decomposition of the tree $t'\in Y^{n-1}$, $t'=t'_1\vee t'_2$. If $t'_1=|$ then $(\mathbf{1})\ast |=(\mathbf{1})$ and the identification of leaves gives a $t^1$ with a single leaf on the left branch. The next case is $(\mathbf{1})\ast(\mathbf{1})=(\mathbf{12})+(\mathbf{21})$ and this gives a sum of two one-loop graphs with 2 leaves on the left branch. The procedure continues until $t'_2=|$ which then gives a 1-loop graph with no leaves on the right branch. Thus we have proved the following proposition
\begin{prop}\label{first-term-top-rec}
The representation of the first term of the topological recursion formula for $W^1_{n}(p,p_1,\dots,p_{n-1})$ is given by the identification of leaves on opposite branches of the decomposition $t=t_1\vee t_2$ with $t\in Y^n, t_1\in Y^p, t_2\in Y^q,p+q+1=n$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:prop3}
\psi\left(K_p(q,\bar{q})W^0_{n+1}(q,\bar{q},p_1,\dots,p_{n-1})\right)=\sum_{\substack{t_1\in Y^p, t_2\in Y^q\\p+q+1=n}}t_1 \bridge t_2
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
The obvious notation $\phantom{.}\bridge\phantom{.}$ means that two consecutive leaves in opposite branches are identified.
Therefore we have exhausted all possibilities of obtaining 1-loop graphs from planar binary trees of order $n$ and the two previous propositions imply the following theorem:
\begin{thm}
The $n$ order solution $W^1_{n}(p,p_1,\dots,p_{n-1})$ of the topological recursion in genus $1$ is given by
$\mathbf{(1)}\ast\mathbf{(1)}\ast\dots\ast\mathbf{(1)}$, with $n$ factors, followed the identification of pairs of nearest neighbor leaves producing 1-loop graphs and finally by summing over all permutations of leaves labels $p_1,p_2,\dots, p_{n-1}$:
\begin{align}
\psi\left(W^1_{n}(p,p_1,\dots,p_{n-1})\right)&=\notag\\
\sum_{\text{perm. of }\{p_1,\dots,p_{n-1}\}}\sum_{i=0}^{n-1}
& _{i}\leftrightarrow_{i+1} \left(\mathbf{(1)}\ast\mathbf{(1)}\ast\dots\ast\mathbf{(1)}\right)
\end{align}
\end{thm}
Next we prove a simple lemma regarding symmetric graphs as in fig. \ref{fig:symgraph}. Note that the resulting ungrafted graphs have the left-right order of the right branch of the original graph exchanged:
\begin{lem}
If a graph that enters in the representation of the correlation function $W^{2g+1}_{k+1}(p,K)$ has nearest neighbor leaves identified in different branches and is symmetric with respect to the vertical axis that passes through the root then it has a weight factor of $2$, that is, it appears two times in the complete graph representation of $W^{2g+1}_{k+1}(p,K)$.
\begin{proof}
First note that such a graph has an even number of leaves, say $2a$, possibly 0. After being ungrafted the resulting graph represents the following term in the topological recursion formula:
\begin{align}
&K_p(q,\bar{q})W^{2g}_{2a+2}(q,\bar{q},K)\notag\\
&=K_p(q,\bar{q})K_q(q_1,\bar{q}_1)\left(W^{g}_{a+2}(q_1,\bar{q},L)W^{g}_{a+1}(\bar{q}_1,M)\right.\notag\\
&\left. +W^{g}_{a+1}(q_1,L)W^{g}_{a+2}(\bar{q}_1,\bar{q},M)+\dots\right)
\end{align}
for $|L|=|M|=a$ and $L\cup M =K$ where the dots represent other terms that are not symmetric and that are represented by other graphs. This shows that the same graph after being ungrafted originates two symmetrical graphs and as such it has a weight factor of 2 when counting the number of graphs in the complete representation.
\end{proof}
\end{lem}
\begin{figure}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[thick](1,-0.5) -- (1,1) --(0.25,1.75)--(0.5,2)--(0.25,1.75)-- (0,2) -- (1,1) -- (1.75,1.75)--(1.5,2)--(1.75,1.75)--(2,2) ; \draw (0,2.2) node{ $t^g$};
\draw (2,2.2) node{ $\overline{t}^g$}; \draw[thick] (1.44,2.1) arc (45:135:0.62cm);
\draw (3,1) node{ $\longrightarrow$};
\draw[thick,dashed] (0.2,1.5)--(1.8,1.5);\draw (0.35,1.2) node{ $q$};
\draw (1.65,1.2) node{ $\bar{q}$};
\draw (1,-0.7) node{ $p$};
\draw[thick] (5,-0.5) -- (5,1) -- (4,2) -- (4.35,1.65)--(4.65,2)--(4.35,1.65)-- (5,1) -- (6,2);\draw (6.5,1) node{ $+$}; \draw[thick] (8,-0.5) -- (8,1) -- (7,2) -- (8,1) -- (9,2)--(8.65,1.65)--(8.35,2)--(8.65,1.65);
\draw (3.9,2.2) node{ $\bar{q}$};\draw (4.7,2.2) node{$\overline{t}^g$};\draw (6.2,2.2) node{ $\overline{t}^g$};
\draw (7,2.2) node{ $t^g$};\draw (8.5,2.2) node{$t^g$};
\draw (9.2,2.2) node{ $\bar{q}$};
\draw (5,-0.7) node{ $q$}; \draw (8,-0.7) node{ $q$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{A symmetric $2g+1$-loop graph with $t^g$ a $g-$loop graph. The graph $\overline{t}^g$ is the reflection of $t^g$ on the vertical axis that passes through the root. After the ungrafting operation the first graph is obtained by exchanging $q$ and $\bar{q}$ on the original graph.}\label{fig:symgraph}
\end{figure}
\begin{defn2}
See fig. \ref{fig:W13} for the graph representation of $W_3^1(p,p_1,p_2)$ with a graph of weight 2.
\end{defn2}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[thick] (1,-0.5) -- (1,1) -- (0,2) -- (0.2,1.8)--(0.4,2)--(0.2,1.8)-- (0.5,1.5)--(1,2)--(0.5,1.5)-- (1,1) -- (2,2);\draw (2.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $+$}}}; \draw[thick] (4,-0.5) -- (4,1) -- (3,2) -- (4,1) -- (5,2)--(4.8,1.8)--(4.6,2)--(4.8,1.8)--(4.5,1.5)--(4,2);\draw (5.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $+$}}}; \draw[thick] (7,-0.5) -- (7,1) -- (6,2) -- (7,1) -- (8,2)--(7.5,1.5)--(7.25,1.75)--(7.5,2)--(7.25,1.75)--(7,2);\draw[thick] (2,2.1) arc (45:135:0.67cm);\draw[thick] (3.95,2.1) arc (30:150:0.58cm);\draw[thick] (6.95,2.1) arc (30:150:0.58cm);
\end{tikzpicture}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (-0.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $+$}}};\draw[thick] (1,-0.5) -- (1,1) -- (0,2) -- (0.35,1.65)--(0.65,2)--(0.35,1.65)-- (1,1) --(1.65,1.65)--(1.35,2)--(1.65,1.65) -- (2,2);\draw (2.5,1); \draw (3.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $+$}}}; \draw[thick] (7,-0.5) -- (7,1) -- (6,2) -- (6.5,1.5)--(6.75,1.75)--(6.5,2)--(6.75,1.75)--(7,2)-- (6.5,1.5) -- (7,1)-- (8,2);
\draw[thick] (2,2.1) arc (30:150:0.35cm);\draw[thick] (8,2.1) arc (45:135:0.67cm);
\end{tikzpicture}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[thick] (1,-0.5) -- (1,1) -- (0,2) -- (0.2,1.8)--(0.4,2)--(0.2,1.8)-- (0.5,1.5)--(1,2)--(0.5,1.5)-- (1,1) -- (2,2);\draw (2.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $+$}}}; \draw[thick] (4,-0.5) -- (4,1) -- (3,2) -- (4,1) -- (5,2)--(4.8,1.8)--(4.6,2)--(4.8,1.8)--(4.5,1.5)--(4,2);\draw (5.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $+$}}}; \draw[thick] (7,-0.5) -- (7,1) -- (6,2) -- (7,1) -- (8,2)--(7.5,1.5)--(7.25,1.75)--(7.5,2)--(7.25,1.75)--(7,2);\draw[thick] (0.4,2.1) arc (30:150:0.2cm);\draw[thick] (5,2.1) arc (45:135:0.3cm);\draw[thick] (8.05,2.1) arc (45:135:0.35cm);
\end{tikzpicture}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (-0.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $+$}}};\draw[thick] (1,-0.5) -- (1,1) -- (0,2) -- (0.35,1.65)--(0.65,2)--(0.35,1.65)-- (1,1) --(1.65,1.65)--(1.35,2)--(1.65,1.65) -- (2,2);\draw (2.5,1); \draw (3.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $+$}}}; \draw[thick] (7,-0.5) -- (7,1) -- (6,2) -- (6.5,1.5)--(6.75,1.75)--(6.5,2)--(6.75,1.75)--(7,2)-- (6.5,1.5) -- (7,1)-- (8,2);
\draw[thick] (0.6,2.1) arc (30:150:0.35cm);\draw[thick] (6.44,2.1) arc (30:150:0.29cm);
\end{tikzpicture}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[thick] (1,-0.5) -- (1,1) -- (0,2) -- (0.2,1.8)--(0.4,2)--(0.2,1.8)-- (0.5,1.5)--(1,2)--(0.5,1.5)-- (1,1) -- (2,2);\draw (2.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $+$}}}; \draw[thick] (4,-0.5) -- (4,1) -- (3,2) -- (4,1) -- (5,2)--(4.8,1.8)--(4.6,2)--(4.8,1.8)--(4.5,1.5)--(4,2);\draw (5.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $+$}}}; \draw[thick] (7,-0.5) -- (7,1) -- (6,2) -- (7,1) -- (8,2)--(7.5,1.5)--(7.25,1.75)--(7.5,2)--(7.25,1.75)--(7,2);\draw[thick] (1,2.1) arc (45:135:0.4cm);\draw[thick] (4.6,2.1) arc (45:135:0.4cm);\draw[thick] (7.5,2.1) arc (45:135:0.35cm);
\end{tikzpicture}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (-0.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $+2$}}};\draw[thick] (1,-0.5) -- (1,1) -- (0,2) -- (0.35,1.65)--(0.65,2)--(0.35,1.65)-- (1,1) --(1.65,1.65)--(1.35,2)--(1.65,1.65) -- (2,2);\draw (2.5,1); \draw (3.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $+$}}}; \draw[thick] (7,-0.5) -- (7,1) -- (6,2) -- (6.5,1.5)--(6.75,1.75)--(6.5,2)--(6.75,1.75)--(7,2)-- (6.5,1.5) -- (7,1)-- (8,2);
\draw[thick] (1.27,2.1) arc (45:135:0.42cm);\draw[thick] (7,2.1) arc (30:150:0.29cm);\draw (3.5,-1) node{\textbf{$+$ perm. of $\{p_1,p_2\}$}};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{$W_3^1(p,p_1,p_2)$. The root label $p$ and the leaf labels $\{p_1,p_2\}$ are omitted.}\label{fig:W13}
\end{figure}
A simple but important fact is that $_{i}\leftrightarrow_{i+1}$ acts as a derivation when applied independently to the left and right branches of a tree $t=t_1\vee t_2$. This is apparent in Proposition \ref{prop:secterm-W1}. However when summing over all graphs we must take care with overcounting. If we start with $t^1=(t_1)^1\vee t_2+t_1\vee (t_2)^1$ with $|t|=n, |t_1|=p,|t_2|=q, p+q+1=n$ and apply $_{i}\leftrightarrow_{i+1}$ to the two branches independently and sum over all different graphs we get
\begin{align}
&\sum_{i=0}^{n-1} \left(_{i}\leftrightarrow_{i+1}\right)_{\text{same branches}}\left(\sum_{\substack{(t_1)^1\in (Y^{p})^1,t_2\in Y^{q}\\p+q+1=n}}(t_1)^1\vee t_2\right.\notag\\
&\left.+\sum_{\substack{t_1\in Y^p, (t_2)^1\in (Y^{q})^1\\p+q+1=n}}t_1\vee (t_2)^1\right)=\notag\\
&\sum_{\substack{(t_1)^2\in (Y^{p})^2,t_2\in Y^{q}\\p+q+1=n}}2(t_1)^2\vee t_2
+\sum_{\substack{(t_1)^1\in (Y^{p})^1,(t_2)^1\in (Y^{q})^1\\p+q+1=n}}2(t_1)^1\vee (t_2)^1\notag\\
&+\sum_{\substack{t_1\in Y^p, t_2\in Y^{q},(t_2)^2\in (Y^{q})^2\\p+q+1=n}}2t_1\vee (t_2)^2
\end{align}
whenever the operation is well defined\footnote{The operation is not well defined if there is only one leaf available before and/or after a certain loop or if there are no more leaves to contract. In this case we set to 0 the result of acting with $_{i}\leftrightarrow_{i+1}$.}. The reasoning for the 2 factors is the double counting of identical graphs. For instance if $(t_1)^1$ has a loop starting at leaf $2$ and $(t_1)^2$ was obtained by producing a second loop starting at leaf 0, then this $(t_1)^2$ is identical to the 2-loop graph that was obtained by producing a second loop at leaf 2 in $(t_1)^1$ that had already a loop starting at leaf 0.
Therefore the sum of different 2-loop graphs obtained from all planar binary trees $t=t_1\vee t_2$ is
\begin{align}
&\sum_{(t)^2\in (Y^n)^2} (t)^2=\sum_{\substack{(t_1)^2\in (Y^{p})^2,t_2\in Y^{q}\\p+q+1=n}}(t_1)^2\vee t_2\notag\\
&+
\sum_{\substack{(t_1)^1\in (Y^{p})^1,(t_2)^1\in (Y^{q})^1\\p+q+1=n}}(t_1)^1\vee (t_2)^1\notag\\
&+\sum_{\substack{t_1\in Y^p, (t_2)^2\in (Y^{q})^2\\p+q+1=n}}t_1\vee (t_2)^2
\end{align}
As for the identification of two consecutive leafs in separate branches, we start again from $t^1=(t_1)^1\vee t_2+t_1\vee (t_2)^1$ to get
\begin{equation}
t^2=(t_1)^1\bridge t_2+t_1\bridge (t_2)^1
\end{equation}
The fact that it may not be always possible to contract two leaves in opposite branches is important to count the dimensions of the vector spaces $k[(Y^n)^g]$ generated by graphs with $g$ loops but we will not consider this.
It is clear that we can continue this procedure and generate graphs $t^g\in (Y^n)^g$ with an increasing number of $g$ loops and $k$ labels (including the root) up to the consistence of the relation $-n=2-2g-k$.
Hence we have the following proposition:
\begin{prop}\label{prop:graphloop}
The graphs with loops $t^g\in (Y^n)^g$ and $k$ labels, including the root, that are compatible with $-n=2-2g-k$ are obtained from planar binary trees $t=t_1\vee t_2$ by successive applications of $\left(_{i}\leftrightarrow_{i+1}\right)_{\text{same branches}}$ and $\left(_{i}\leftrightarrow_{i+1}\right)_{\text{opposite branches}}$ to all $t\in Y^n$:
\begin{align}\label{eq:gloopgraph}
\sum_{(t)^g\in (Y^n)^g} (t)^g=&\sum_{k=0}^g\sum_{\substack{(t_1)^k\in(Y^p)^k,(t_2)^{g-k}\in(Y^q)^{g-k}\\p+q+1=n}} \left( (t_1)^k\vee (t_2)^{g-k}\right)\notag\\
&+\sum_{k=0}^{g-1} \sum_{\substack{(t_1)^k\in(Y^p)^k,(t_2)^{g-k}\in(Y^q)^{g-k}\\p+q+1=n}}\left((t_1)^{g-1-k}\bridge (t_2)^{k}\right)
\end{align}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
It follows from the discussion above and a simple inductive argument. The first sum on the right is a consequence of the fact that $\left(_{i}\leftrightarrow_{i+1}\right)_{\text{s. br.}}$ acts as a derivation, after taken into account double counting and summing over all different graphs, and the second sum results from applying $\left(_{i}\leftrightarrow_{i+1}\right)_{\text{opp. br.}}$ to a $(g-1)-$loop graph $t^{g-1}$ without leafs from opposite branches identified.
To see that any graph $t^g$ on the sum on the left can be obtained in this way just take the same graph but with some pair of leafs free, say $(i,i+1)$. This is a $t^{g-1}$ graph that admits a decomposition $(t_1)^k\vee (t_2)^{g-1-k}$ or $(t_1)^k\bridge (t_2)^{g-2-k}$. In the first case, if $(i,i+1)$ belong to the left or right branches apply $\left(_{i}\leftrightarrow_{i+1}\right)_{\text{s. br.}}$ to get an element in the first sum on the right of (\ref{eq:gloopgraph}). If $(i,i+1)$ belong to opposite branches apply $\left(_{i}\leftrightarrow_{i+1}\right)_{\text{opp. br.}}$ to get an element of the second sum. The second case works in a similar way except that $(i,i+1)$ must belong to the same branches.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}
The $n$ order solution $W^g_{2-2g+n}$ of the topological recursion in genus $g>0$ and $k=2-2g+n>0$ variables is given by
$\mathbf{(1)}\ast\mathbf{(1)}\ast\dots\ast\mathbf{(1)}$, with $n$ factors, followed the identification of pairs of nearest neighbor leaves producing graphs with loops as in Proposition \ref{prop:graphloop} and finally by summing over all permutations of $p_1,p_2,\dots, p_{1-2g+n}$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
The proof now follows easily from Proposition \ref{prop:graphloop}. Remember that the sum of all planar binary trees of order $n$ is obtained by $n$ factors of $(\mathbf{1})$ with the $\ast$ product. By ungrafting the graphs given by (\ref{eq:gloopgraph}) and using the representation map $\psi$ we get
\begin{align}\label{eq:prooftoprec}
&W^g(p,p_1,\dots,p_{k-1})=\psi^\ast\left(\sum_{\substack{(t)^g\in (Y^n)^g\\\text{perm. of leaf labels }K=\{p_1,\dots,p_{k-1}\}}}(t)^g\right)=\notag\\
&\sum_{h=0}^g\sum_{\substack{L\cup M=K\\\text{perm. of }K}}
K_p(q,\bar{q})\left(W^{g-1}_{k+1}(q,\bar{q},K)+ W_{l+1}^h(q,L)W_{m+1}^{g-h}(\bar{q},M)\right)
\end{align}
which is the topological recursion formula for arbitrary genus.
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
After being ungrafted the second term in (\ref{eq:gloopgraph}) can still have leaves in opposite branches identified. In general this happens if $(t)^g=(t_1)^{g_1}\bridge (t_2)^{g_2}$ with $g_1+g_2=g-1$ and say $(t_1)^{g_1}$ has a decomposition $(t_1)^{g'_1}\bridge (t_2)^{g'_2}$ with ${g'}_1+{g'}_2=g_1-1$.
\begin{defn2}
See fig. \ref{fig:W21} for the graph representation of $W_1^2(p)$.
\end{defn2}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[thick] (1,-0.5) -- (1,1) -- (0,2) -- (0.2,1.8)--(0.4,2)--(0.2,1.8)-- (0.5,1.5)--(1,2)--(0.5,1.5)-- (1,1) -- (2,2);\draw (2.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $+$}}}; \draw[thick] (4,-0.5) -- (4,1) -- (3,2) -- (4,1) -- (5,2)--(4.8,1.8)--(4.6,2)--(4.8,1.8)--(4.5,1.5)--(4,2);\draw (5.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $+$}}}; \draw[thick] (7,-0.5) -- (7,1) -- (6,2) -- (7,1) -- (8,2)--(7.5,1.5)--(7.25,1.75)--(7.5,2)--(7.25,1.75)--(7,2);\draw[thick] (0.4,2.1) arc (30:150:0.2cm);\draw[thick] (2,2.1) arc (45:135:0.67cm);\draw[thick] (3.95,2.1) arc (30:150:0.58cm);\draw[thick] (5,2.1) arc (45:135:0.3cm);\draw[thick] (6.95,2.1) arc (30:150:0.58cm);\draw[thick] (8.05,2.1) arc (45:135:0.35cm);
\end{tikzpicture}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw (-0.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $+$}}};\draw[thick] (1,-0.5) -- (1,1) -- (0,2) -- (0.35,1.65)--(0.65,2)--(0.35,1.65)-- (1,1) --(1.65,1.65)--(1.35,2)--(1.65,1.65) -- (2,2);\draw (2.5,1); \draw (3.5,1) node{\textbf{{\Large $+$}}}; \draw[thick] (7,-0.5) -- (7,1) -- (6,2) -- (6.5,1.5)--(6.75,1.75)--(6.5,2)--(6.75,1.75)--(7,2)-- (6.5,1.5) -- (7,1)-- (8,2);
\draw[thick] (0.6,2.1) arc (30:150:0.35cm);\draw[thick] (2,2.1) arc (30:150:0.35cm);\draw[thick] (6.44,2.1) arc (30:150:0.29cm);\draw[thick] (8,2.1) arc (45:135:0.67cm);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{$W_1^2(p)$ The root label $p$ is omitted.}\label{fig:W21}
\end{figure}
\end{rem}
\section{The antipode}
In a graded connected Hopf Algebra there is a canonical antipode $S$ whose expression is given by the convolution inverse of the identity:
\begin{equation}
m\left(S\otimes \text{Id}\right)\Delta = m\left(I\otimes \text{S}\right)\Delta=\eta\cdot\epsilon
\end{equation}
with $m$ the product, $\Delta$ the co-product, $\eta$ the unit and $\epsilon$ the co-unit. Explicitly, in the Loday-Ronco Hopf Algebra, we have
\begin{equation}
S(t)=-t-S(t_1)\ast t_2
\end{equation}
where in Sweedler notation
\begin{equation}
\Delta t = \sum t_1\otimes t_2
\end{equation}
is the co-product in $k[Y^\infty]$ induced by (\ref{eq:coproductperm}).
For instance, $S(\mathbf{1})=-\mathbf{1}$ because $\mathbf{1}$ is primitive and $S(\mathbf{12})=(\mathbf{21})$ and also $S(\mathbf{21})=(\mathbf{12})$. This suggests that a map $\psi^\ast S$ induced by the antipode on the vector space of correlations functions should give
$$(\psi^\ast S)(W^0_4)=W^0_4.$$
More generally, from $S((\mathbf{1}))=-(\mathbf{1})$ we see that
$$S((\mathbf{1})\ast(\mathbf{1})\ast\dots\ast(\mathbf{1}))=(-1)^n(\mathbf{1})\ast(\mathbf{1})\ast\dots\ast(\mathbf{1})$$
with $n$ factors in the $\ast$ product and then $$(\psi^\ast S)(W_{n+2}^0)=(-1)^nW_{n+2}^0.$$
Since $n$ is identified with the Euler characteristic we see that the induced map respects the grading of $k[Y^\infty]$ for $g=0$.
For the moment it is not clear how to extend this simple computation to the case of graphs with loops. The tree | being the identity in $k[Y^\infty]$ and representing $W_2^0$ has trivially $S(|)=|$, but it is not clear if the change of topology from a tree to a graph with loops shouldn't change dramatically the Hopf Algebra structure or if even the full algebra of these class of graphs with loops of arbitrary order is yet an Hopf Algebra. There are examples of Hopf Algebra of general graphs that are well documented in the literature (see for instance \cite{MR2967484,MR1303288}) but we do not know at the moment if they can be adapted to this framework. In particular, the Euler characteristic of a graph has a different meaning of the one used here.
\section{Discussion}
We have seen that an extension of the Hopf algebra planar binary trees of Loday and Ronco provides a representation of a vector space, whose nature is still to be clarified, generated by the set of correlations functions typical from Matrix Models and that satisfy the recursion formula of Eynard and Orantin. This extension, obtained by identifying nearest neighbor leaves through a single edge, is only necessary for $g>0$. This procedure moves from planar binary trees to planar graphs with loops, binary in the internal vertices in the sense that each internal vertex has two children. In the process of showing that this class of graphs satisfies the full recursion formula of Eynard-Orantin we have provided an explicit formula for the solutions, that are obtained first by getting the sum of all planar binary trees of order $n$ through the $\ast$ product of $n$ factors of $\mathbf{(1)}$ computed in $k[Y^\infty]$ and then by connecting two consecutive leaves in all possible ways up to the genus $g$.
\bibliographystyle{amsplain}
|
\section{Introduction}
Extremal graph theory has enjoyed tremendous growth in recent decades. One of the central questions from which the theory originated can be described as follows. Given a \emph{forbidden graph} $H$, the Tur\'an problem asks to determine $\ext(n,H)$, the maximum possible number of edges in a graph on $n$ vertices without a copy of $H$. This number is called the \emph{Tur\'an number} of $H$.
Instances of this problem have many connections and applications to other areas.
In this paper we consider a multipartite version of the problem, suggested by Bollob\'as \cite{Bollobas78}.
Before stating the problem at hand and presenting our contributions, we begin with a brief survey of relevant results.
\subsection{Background} \label{subsect:turan_problem}
The fundamental Tur\'an theorem of 1941 \cite{Turan41} completely determined the Tur\'an numbers of a clique: the Tur\'an graph $T_{k-1}(n)$, the complete ${(k-1)}$-partite graph on $n$ vertices with parts as equal as possible, has the largest number of edges among all $K_k$-free $n$-vertex graphs. Thus, we have $\ext(n, K_k) = t_{k-1}(n)$, where $t_{k-1}(n)$ is the number of edges in $T_{k-1}(n)$. This theorem generalises a previous result by Mantel \cite{Mantel07} from 1907, which states that $\ext(n, K_3) = \lfloor\frac{n^2}{4}\rfloor$.
A large and important class of graphs for which the Tur\'an numbers are well-understood is formed by \emph{colour-critical graphs}, that is, graphs whose chromatic number can be decreased by removing an edge.
Simonovits \cite{Simonovits66} introduced the stability method to show that $\ext(n, H) = t_{k-1}(n)$ for all $n \ge n_0(H)$ sufficiently large, provided $H$ is a colour-critical graph with $\chi(H)=k$; furthermore, $T_{k-1}(n)$ is the unique extremal graph. As the cliques are colour-critical, Simonovits' theorem implies Tur\'an's theorem for large $n$.
For general graphs $H$ we still do not know how to compute the Tur\'an numbers $\ext(n,H)$ exactly; but if we are satisfied with an approximate answer the theory becomes quite simple: it is enough to know the chromatic number of $H$. The important and deep theorem of Erd\H{o}s and Stone \cite{ESt46} together with an observation of Erd\H{o}s and Simonovits \cite{ES66} shows that $\ext(n,H)=\left(\frac{\chi(H)-2}{\chi(H)-1}+o(1)\right)\frac{n^2}{2}$,
where the $o(1)$ term tends to $0$ as $n$ tends to infinity. In the literature, this result is usually referred as the Erd\H{o}s--Stone--Simonovits theorem.
In the years since these seminal theorems appeared, great efforts have been made to extend them, some of which are discussed in Nikiforov's survey \cite{Nikiforov11}. We are particularly interested in the following two extensions.
For every integer $s \ge 2$, let $K_{k-1}(s)$ denote the complete $(k-1)$-partite graph $K_{k-1}(s,\ldots,s)$, and let $K_{k-1}^+(s)$ be the graph obtained from $K_{k-1}(s)$ by adding an edge to the first class. Nikiforov \cite{Nikiforov10} and Erd\H{o}s \cite{Erdos63} (for $k=3$) proved that for all $k \ge 3$ and all sufficiently small $c>0$, every graph of sufficiently large order $n$ with $t_{k-1}(n)+1$ edges contains not only a $K_k$ but a copy of $K_{k-1}^+\bigl(\lfloor c \ln n \rfloor\bigl)$. For fixed $k$, the Erd\H{o}s-R\'enyi random graph $G_{n,p}$ shows that the lower bound $c\ln n$ on the size of the subgraph in this result is optimal up to a constant factor.
Seeking an extension of Tur\'an's theorem, Erd\H{o}s \cite{Erdos69} asked how many $K_k$ sharing a common edge must exist in a graph on $n$ vertices with $t_{k-1}(n)+1$ edges. Bollob\'as and Nikiforov \cite{BN08} sharpened Erd\H{o}s's result \cite{Erdos69} showing that for large enough $n$, every graph of order $n$ with $t_{k-1}(n)+1$ edges has an edge that is contained in $k^{-k-4}n^{k-2}$ copies of $K_k$. This result is
best possible, up to a $\hbox{poly}(k)$ factor.
In this paper we shall study analogues of these results for multipartite graphs. For a graph $H$ and an integer ${\ell \ge v(H)}$, let $d_{\ell}(H)$ be the minimum real number such that every $\ell$-partite graph $G=(V_1 \cup \ldots \cup V_{\ell},E)$ with $d(V_i,V_j):=\frac{e(V_i,V_j)}{\card{V_i}\card{V_j}} > d_{\ell}(H)$ for all $i \ne j$ contains a copy of $H$.
The problem of determining the exact value of $d_{\ell}(H)$ was suggested by Bollob\'as (see the discussion after the proof of Theorem VI.2.15 in \cite{Bollobas78}). However, it was first studied systematically by Bondy, Shen, Thomass\'e and Thomassen \cite{BSTT06}.
Amongst other things Bondy et.al. showed that for every graph $H$ the sequence $d_{\ell}(H)$ decreases to $\frac{\chi(H)-2}{\chi(H)-1}$ as $\ell$ tends to infinity.
To show the lower bound $d_{\ell}(H)\ge \frac{\chi(H)-2}{\chi(H)-1}$, they observed that the $\ell$-partite graph $G$ obtained from the empty graph on $\{1,\ldots,\ell\}$ by splitting each vertex $v$ of $\{1,\ldots,\ell\}$ into $\chi(H)-1$ vertices $v_1,v_2,\ldots,v_{\chi(H)-1}$, and joining two vertices $x_i$ and $y_j$ if and only if $x\ne y$ and $i\ne j$, has all edge densities equal to $\frac{\chi(H)-2}{\chi(H)-1}$. Since $G$ is $(\chi(H)-1)$-colourable (with vertex classes $V_i=\{v_i:v\in\{1,\ldots,\ell\}\}$ for $1\le i\le \chi(H)-1$), it does not contain a copy of $H$. For the opposite inequality $\lim\limits_{\ell \rightarrow \infty}d_{\ell}(H)\le \frac{\chi(H)-2}{\chi(H)-1}$, they used the Erd\H{o}s--Stone--Simonovits theorem together with an averaging argument.
When $H=K_3$, the aforementioned result of Bondy et. al. \cite{BSTT06} implies that $d_{\ell}(K_3)$ decreases to $\tfrac{1}{2}$ as $\ell$ tends to infinity. They also showed that $d_3(K_3)=\frac{-1+\sqrt{5}}{2}\approx 0.61$, $d_4(K_3)>0.51$, and speculated that $d_{\ell}(K_3)>\frac{1}{2}$ for all $\ell \ge 3$.
Refuting this conjecture, Pfender \cite{Pfender12} proved that $d_{\ell}(K_k)=\frac{k-2}{k-1}$ for large enough $\ell$. He also described the family $\mathcal{G}_{\ell}^{k}$ of extremal graphs; we shall define this family later in Section \ref{sect:extremal_graphs}.
\begin{theorem} [Pfender \cite{Pfender12}]
\label{thm:Pfender}
For every integer $k\ge 3$ there exists a constant $C=C(k)$ such that the following holds for every integer $\ell\ge C$. If $G=(V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\ell},E)$ is an $\ell$-partite graph with
\[
d(V_i,V_j) \ge \tfrac{k-2}{k-1} \ \text{for $i\ne j$,}
\]
then either $G$ contains a $K_k$ or $G$ is isomorphic to a graph in $\mathcal{G}_{\ell}^{k}$. In particular, $d_{\ell}(K_k)=\tfrac{k-2}{k-1}$ for every $\ell \ge C$.
\end{theorem}
\noindent This theorem can be seen as a multipartite version of the Tur\'an theorem. For an arbitrary graph $H$, Pfender suggested that $d_{\ell}(H)$ should be equal to $\frac{\chi(H)-2}{\chi(H)-1}$ for every $\ell\ge \ell_0(H)$ sufficiently large.
\subsection{Our results}
In this paper we shows that Pfender's suggestion is not quite true. In fact, we characterise those graphs for which the sequence $d_{\ell}(H)$ is eventually constant, calling them {\em almost colour-critical}.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.20\linewidth]{./PfenderGraph}
\caption{An almost colour-critical graph.}
\end{figure}
\vspace{-0.40cm}
\begin{definition}
A graph $H$ is called almost colour-critical if there exists a map $\phi$ from $V(H)$ to $\{1,2,\ldots,\chi(H)-1\}$ such that
\begin{compactitem}
\item[\rm (i)] The induced subgraph of $H$ on $\phi^{-1}(1)$ has maximum degree at most $1$,
\item[\rm (ii)] For $2 \le i \le \chi(H)-1$, $\phi^{-1}(i)$ is an independent set of $H$.
\end{compactitem}
\end{definition}
\noindent In other words, an almost colour-critical graph $H$ has a vertex-colouring with $\chi(H)-1$ colours that is almost proper: all colour classes but one are independent sets, and the exceptional class induces just a matching (see Figure 1). For example, cliques, or, more generally colour-critical graphs, are almost colour-critical while the complete $k$-partite graphs $K_k(s_1,\ldots,s_k)$ are not for every ${s_1 \ge 1,s_2 \ge 2, \ldots, s_k \ge 2}$.
Our main result shows that almost colour-critical graphs are exactly those for which the sequence $d_{\ell}(H)$ is eventually constant.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:turan}
The following statement holds for every graph $H$.
\begin{compactitem}
\item[\rm (1)] If $H$ is not almost colour-critical, then $d_{\ell}(H) \ge \tfrac{\chi(H)-2}{\chi(H)-1}+ \tfrac{1}{(\chi(H)-1)^2(\ell-1)^2}$ for every $\ell \ge v(H)$.
\item[\rm (2)] If $H$ is an almost colour-critical graph, then there exists a positive integer $C=C(H)$ so that $d_{\ell}(H)=\tfrac{\chi(H)-2}{\chi(H)-1}$ for every $\ell >C$.
\end{compactitem}
\end{theorem}
\noindent Note that the estimate in the first statement is tight for $H=K_{1,2}$, and the second statement implies Pfender's result since cliques are almost colour-critical. This result can be viewed as a multipartite version of the Simonovits theorem.
Since the proof uses the graph removal lemma, the resulting constant $C(H)$ is fairly large.
The rest of the paper deals with various extensions of Pfender's result. More precisely, we investigate the extensions of Tur\'an's theorem discussed in Section \ref{subsect:turan_problem} for balanced multipartite graphs. An $\ell$-partite graph $G$ on non-empty independent sets $V_1,\ldots,V_{\ell}$ is {\em balanced} if the vertex classes $V_1,\ldots,V_{\ell}$ are of the same size.
A multipartite version of the extension considered by Nikiforov \cite{Nikiforov10} and Erd\H{o}s \cite{Erdos63} can be stated as follows.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:complete_plus-weak}
Let $k$ and $\ell$ be integers with $k\ge 3$ and $\ell \ge e^{4k^{(k+6)k}}$, and let $G=\left(V_1\cup \ldots \cup V_{\ell},E\right)$ be a balanced $\ell$-partite graph on $n$ vertices such that
\[
d(V_i,V_j) \ge \tfrac{k-2}{k-1} \quad \text{for $i \ne j$}.
\]
Then, either $G$ is isomorphic to a graph in $\mathcal{G}_{\ell}^{k}$ or $G$ contains a copy of $K_{k-1}^{+}\bigl(\lfloor c \ln n \rfloor \bigl)$, where $c=k^{-(k+6)k}/2$.
\end{theorem}
\noindent For fixed $k$, the random graph $G_{n,p}$ shows that the lower bound $c\ln n$ on the size of the subgraph in this theorem is tight up to a
constant factor.
The extension of Tur\'an's theorem studied by Bollob\'as and Nikiforov \cite{BN08} has the following multipartite version.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:joints}
Let $k$ and $\ell$ be integers with $k\ge 3$ and $\ell \ge k^{12k}$, and let $G=\left(V_1\cup \ldots \cup V_{\ell},E\right)$ be a balanced $\ell$-partite graph on $n$ vertices such that
\[
d(V_i,V_j) \ge \tfrac{k-2}{k-1} \quad \text{for $i \ne j$}.
\]
Then, $G$ either contains a family of $k^{-2k^2}n^{k-2}$ cliques of order $k$ sharing a common edge or is isomorphic to a graph in $\mathcal{G}_{\ell}^{k}$.
\end{theorem}
\noindent With some minor modifications, this result follows from our proof of Theorem \ref{thm:complete_plus-weak}. For the sake of clarity we sketch these modifications after detailing the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:complete_plus-weak}.
\subsection{Organisation}
The remainder of this paper is organised as follows. In Section \ref{sect:preliminaries} we introduce some notation and definitions. In Section \ref{sect:turan_theorem} we extend ideas developed in \cite{Pfender12} to prove Theorem \ref{thm:turan}. A proof of Theorem \ref{thm:complete_plus-weak} is given in Section \ref{sect:complete_plus}. We sketch how to modify the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:complete_plus-weak} to get Theorem \ref{thm:joints} in Section \ref{sect:missing_proofs}, and close with some further remarks and open problems in Section \ref{sect:concluding}.
\section{Preliminaries} \label{sect:preliminaries}
\subsection{Notation}
All graphs in this paper are finite, simple and undirected. Given a graph $G$, we denote its vertex and edge sets by $V(H)$ and $E(H)$, and the cardinalities of these two sets by $v(H)$ and $e(H)$, respectively. The minimum degree of $G$ will be denoted by $\delta(G)$.
For a set $U \subseteq V(G)$, we write $G[U]$ for the subgraph of $G$ induced by $U$. The \emph{common neighbourhood} $N(U)$ of $U$ is the set of all vertices of $G$ that are adjacent to every vertex in $U$. Given a vertex $v \in V(G)$, let $\deg(v,U)$ stand for the number of vertices in $U$ adjacent to $v$. For pairwise disjoint vertex sets $W_1,\ldots,W_r \subseteq V(G)$, we write $G[W_1,\ldots,W_r]$ for the $r$-colourable graph which can be obtained from $G[W_1\cup\ldots\cup W_r]$ by deletion of edges in $G[W_i]$ for all $i \le r$.
Let $G$ be an $\ell$-partite graph on non-empty independent sets $V_1,\ldots,V_{\ell}$. For $X \subseteq V(G)$ and $i \le \ell$, write $X_i=X\cap V_i$. The edge density between $V_i$ and $V_j$ is
$d_{ij}:=d(V_i,V_j):=\frac{e(V_i,V_j)}{\card{V_i}\card{V_j}}$.
For $r\ge 2$ and $t_1\ge 1,\ldots,t_r\ge 1$, let $K_r(t_1,\ldots,t_r)$ be the complete $r$-partite graph with classes of sizes $t_1,\ldots, t_r$. If $t_1=\ldots=t_r=t$, we simply write $K_r(t)$ instead of $K_r(t_1,\ldots,t_r)$. For $r\ge 2$, $s\ge 1$ and $t_1\ge 2s$, $t_2\ge 1, \ldots,t_r\ge 1$, we denote by $K_r^{+s}(t_1,\ldots,t_r)$ the graph obtained from $K_r(t_1,\ldots,t_r)$ by adding a matching of size $s$ to the first vertex class. If $s=1$, we omit the upper index $s$. In particular, $K_r^{+s}(t)$ is the short form for $K_r^{+s}(t,\ldots,t)$ and $K_r^{+}(t)$ is nothing but $K_r^{+1}(t,\ldots,t)$.
For $a,b,c \in \mathbb{R}$, we write $a=b\pm c$ if $b-c\le a\le b+c$. In order to simplify the presentation, we omit floors and ceilings and treat large numbers as integers whenever this does not affect the argument. Unless stated otherwise, all logarithms are base $e$.
The set $\{1,2,\ldots,n\}$ of the first $n$ positive integers is denoted by $[n]$. For $k\in \mathbb{N}$, we define $\binom{X}{k}:=\{A\subseteq X:\card{A}=k\}$.
We use the symbol $\dot\bigcup$ for union of disjoint sets.
\subsection{Extremal graphs} \label{sect:extremal_graphs}
In this section we shall recall the definition of the family $\mathcal{G}_{\ell}^{k}$ of extremal graphs given by Pfender \cite{Pfender12}. For $k\ge 3$ and $\ell \ge (k-1)!$, a graph $G$ is in $\bar{\mathcal{G}}_{\ell}^{k}$ if it can be constructed as follows. Let $\{\pi_1,\pi_2,\ldots,\pi_{(k-1)!}\}$ be the set of all permutations of $\{1,\ldots,k-1\}$. For $1\le i\le \ell$ and $1\le s\le k-1$, pick non-negative integers $n_i^{s}$ such that
\begin{gather*}
n_i^{\pi_i(1)} \ge n_i^{\pi_i(2)}\ge \ldots \ge n_i^{\pi_i(k-1)} \ \text{for} \ 1\le i\le (k-1)!,\\
n_i^{1}=n_i^{2}=\ldots = n_i^{k-1}>0 \ \text{for} \ (k-1)!<i \le \ell, \ \textrm{and} \\
\sum_{s} n_i^{s} > 0 \ \text{for} \ 1 \le i \le \ell.
\end{gather*}
Vertex and edge sets of $G$ are defined as (see Figure 2)
\begin{align*}
V(G)&=\{(i,s,t): 1 \le i \le \ell, 1 \le s \le k-1, 1 \le t \le n_i^{(s)}\},\\
E(G)&=\{(i,s,t)(i',s',t'): i \ne i', s \ne s'\}.
\end{align*}
It is not hard to see that $G$ is an $(k-1)$-colourable $\ell$-partite graph with parts $V_i=\{(i,s,t):1\le s\le k-1,1\le t \le n_i^{s}\}$ for $1\le i\le \ell$, and colour classes $V^{(s)}=\{(i,s,t):1\le i\le \ell,1\le t\le n_i^{s}\}$ for $1\le s\le k-1$. Moreover, if all $n_i^{s}$ are equal, we get $d_{ij}=\frac{k-2}{k-1}$ for every $i \ne j$. Note that other weights $n_i^{(s)}$ can be used to achieve the inequality $d_{ij}\ge \frac{k-2}{k-1}$ for every $i\ne j$.
Let $\mathcal{G}_{\ell}^{k}$ be the family of graphs which can be obtained from graphs in $\bar{\mathcal{G}}_{\ell}^{k}$ by removal of some edges in $\{(i,s,t)(i',s',t'):1\le i<i'\le (k-1)!\}$.
The following simple observation by Pfender \cite{Pfender12} will be useful for our investigation.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:extremal_graphs}
Let $k \ge 3$ and $\ell \ge (k-1)!$ be integers. If $G=(V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\ell},E)$ is a $(k-1)$-colourable $\ell$-partite graph with $d(V_i,V_j)\ge \tfrac{k-2}{k-1}$ for $i \ne j$, then it is isomorphic to a graph in $\mathcal{G}_{\ell}^{k}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.70]
\coordinate (1) at (0.75,1); \node [below = 0.17cm of 1] {$n_1^{2}$};
\coordinate (a) at (0.75,3.5); \node [above = 0.17cm of a] {$n_1^{1}$};
\coordinate (2) at (2.25,1); \node [below =0.17cm of 2]{$n_2^{2}$};
\coordinate (b) at (2.25,3.5); \node [above = 0.17cm of b] {$n_2^{1}$};
\coordinate (3) at (3.75,1); \node [below =0.17cm of 3]{$n_3^{2}$};
\coordinate (c) at (3.75,3.5); \node [above = 0.17cm of c] {$n_3^{1}$};
\coordinate (4) at (5.25,1); \node [below =0.17cm of 4]{$\cdots \ n_{\ell-1}^{2}$};
\coordinate (d) at (5.25,3.5); \node [above = 0.17cm of d] {$\cdots \ n_{\ell-1}^{1}$};
\coordinate (5) at (6.75,1); \node [below =0.17cm of 5]{$\quad n_{\ell}^{2}$};
\coordinate (e) at (6.75,3.5); \node [above = 0.17cm of e] {$\quad n_{\ell}^{1}$};
\draw (a)--(3)--(b)--(4)--(c)--(5)--(d)--(1)--(e)--(2)--(a);
\draw (a)--(4)--(e)--(3)--(d)--(2)--(c)--(1)--(b)--(5)--(a);
\foreach \x in {(1),(2),(3),(4),(5)}{\draw[fill=blue] \x circle (0.25cm);}
\foreach \y in {(a),(b),(c),(d),(e)}{\draw[fill=red] \y circle(0.25cm);}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{A graph in $\bar{\mathcal{G}}_{\ell}^{3}$, all edges between different colours in different parts exists.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Infracolourable structures}
The following notation will play a key role in our investigation.
\begin{definition}
Given a real number $\eta \ge 0$, and integers $k\ge 3$ and $\ell \ge 2$, an $(\eta,k,\ell)$-{\em infracolourable structure} is an $\ell$-partite graph $G=(V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\ell},E)$ together with pairs $(D_i^{(s)},Y_i^{(s)})_{s\le k-1,i\le \ell}$ satisfying:
\begin{compactitem}
\item[\rm (i)] For every $i\le \ell$, $V_i=\dot\bigcup_{s\le k-1} Y_i^{(s)}$ and $\card{Y_i^{(1)}}\ge \card{Y_i^{(2)}} \ge \ldots \ge \card{Y_i^{(k-1)}}$;
\item[\rm (ii)] For every $i\le \ell$ and every $s\le k-1$, $D_i^{(s)} \subseteq Y_i^{(s)}$ and $\bigcup_{i\le \ell}Y_i^{(s)}\setminus D_i^{(s)}$ is an independent set;
\item[\rm (iii)] For every $s\le k-1$, each vertex $v\in \bigcup_{i\le \ell}D_i^{(s)}$ has at most $\eta \cdot \frac{v(G)}{k-1}$ neighbours in $\bigcup_{i\le \ell}Y_i^{(s)}$ and at least $3\eta \cdot \frac{v(G)}{k-1}$ non-neighbours in $\bigcup_{i\le \ell}V_i\setminus Y_i^{(s)}$.
\end{compactitem}
The graph $G$ is called the \emph{base graph} of the infracolourable structure.
\end{definition}
Infracolourable structures are useful for us mainly because theirs base graphs break the density conditions in our theorems.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:infracolourable}
Let $\eta$ be a positive real number, and let $k\ge 3$ and $\ell\ge 2$ be integers. Suppose that an $\ell$-partite graph $G=(V_1\cup \ldots\cup V_{\ell},E)$ together with a system of pairs $(D_i^{(s)},Y_i^{(s)})_{s\le k-1,i\le \ell}$ of vertex sets form an $(\eta,k,\ell)$-infracolourable structure. Then
\[
e(G)\le \tfrac{k-2}{k-1}\cdot\sum_{i<j}\card{V_i}\card{V_j}.
\]
In particular, there exist two different indices $i$ and $j$ such that $d(V_i,V_j)\le \frac{k-2}{k-1}$. Furthermore, the equality occurs if and only if there exists $i_0\in \{0,1,\ldots,\ell\}$ such that $D_i^{(s)}=\emptyset$ for all $s$ and all $i$, $\card{Y_i^{(s)}}=\tfrac{1}{k-1}\cdot\card{V_i}$ for all $s$ and all $i\ne i_0$, and $d(Y_i^{(s)},Y_j^{(t)})=1$ for all $s\ne t$ and $i\ne j$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
It follows from the assumption that
\begin{gather*}
e(G)\le\sum_{i<j \atop s \ne t}\card{Y_i^{(s)}}\card{Y_j^{(t)}} + \card{\bigcup_{i,s} D_i^{(s)}}\cdot \left(\eta\cdot\frac{v(G)}{k-1}-\tfrac{1}{2}\cdot 3\eta\cdot\frac{v(G)}{k-1}\right) \\
\le \sum_{i<j \atop s \ne t}\card{Y_i^{(s)}}\card{Y_j^{(t)}}
= \sum_{i<j}\card{V_i}\card{V_j}-\sum_{i<j \atop s \le k-1}\card{Y_i^{(s)}}\card{Y_j^{(s)}} \le \tfrac{k-2}{k-1}\cdot \sum_{i<j}\card{V_i}\card{V_j},
\end{gather*}
where in the last inequality we use Chebyshev's sum inequality.
\end{proof}
To find an infracolourable structure in host graphs we shall need the following technical lemma. It was implicitly stated in \cite{Pfender12}. We include a proof here for the sake of completeness.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:balanced}
Let $k\ge 3$ and $\ell\ge 2$ be integers, and let $\varepsilon$ be a real number with $0<\varepsilon <\tfrac{1}{4}$. Suppose that $G=(V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\ell},E)$ is an $\ell$-partite graph with $d(V_i,V_j)\ge \tfrac{k-2}{k-1}$ for all $i\ne j$. Assume that $X_i^{(s)}$ and $T_i$ be subsets of $V(G)$ for $i\le \ell$ and $s\le k-1$ with the following three properties:
\begin{compactitem}
\item[\rm (i)] For every $i\le \ell$, $V_i=X_i^{(1)}\dot\cup\ldots\dot\cup X_i^{(k-1)}\dot\cup T_i$;
\item[\rm (ii)] For every $i\le \ell$, $\card{X_i^{(1)}}\ge \ldots \ge \card{X_i^{(k-1)}}$ and $\card{T_i}\le \varepsilon \card{V_i}$;
\item[\rm (iii)] For every $s\le k-1$, $\bigcup_{i\le \ell}X_i^{(s)}$ is an independent set.
\end{compactitem}
Then there exists a subset $I_0\in \binom{\mathbb{N}}{k-1}$ so that $\card{X_i^{(s)}}=\left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}\pm k\sqrt{\varepsilon}\right)\card{V_i}$ for $s\le k-1$ and $i\notin I_0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
It suffices to show that for each $s\le k-1$ there is at most one index $i\le \ell$ such that
$\frac{\card{X_{i}^{(s)}}}{\card{V_i}}>\frac{1}{k-1}+\sqrt{\varepsilon}$.
Assume to the contrary that $\frac{\card{X_{i}^{(s)}}}{\card{V_i}}\ge \frac{\card{X_{j}^{(s)}}}{\card{V_j}}>\frac{1}{k-1}+\sqrt{\varepsilon}$ for some $s$ and $i\ne j$.
We first prove that $\frac{\card{X_{i}^{(s)}}}{\card{V_i}}\le 1-\varepsilon$. Otherwise, if $\frac{\card{X_{i}^{(s)}}}{\card{V_i}}>1-\varepsilon$, then
\[
d(V_i,V_j) \le 1-\frac{\card{X_i^{(s)}}}{\card{V_i}}\cdot \frac{\card{X_j^{(s)}}}{\card{V_j}} \le 1-(1-\varepsilon)\left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}+\sqrt{\varepsilon}\right) <\tfrac{k-2}{k-1}
\]
for $k\ge 3$ and $\varepsilon<\tfrac{1}{4}$, as $X_i^{(s)}\cup X_j^{(s)}$ is an independent set by (iii). But this contradicts the density condition that $d(V_i,V_j)\ge \frac{k-2}{k-1}$.
We shall get a contradiction by proving that $d(V_i,V_j) < \frac{k-2}{k-1}$. Indeed, we can infer from Chebyschev's sum inequality that
\begin{align*}
d(V_i,V_j) & \overset{(iii)}{\le} 1 -\frac{1}{\card{V_i}\card{V_j}}\cdot \sum_{t}\card{X_i^{(t)}}\card{X_j^{(t)}} \\
& \le 1-\frac{\card{X_i^{(s)}}\card{X_j^{(s)}}}{\card{V_i}\card{V_j}}-\frac{1}{(k-2)\card{V_i}\card{V_j}}
\cdot\left(\card{V_i}-\card{T_i}-\card{X_i^{(s)}}\right)\left(\card{V_j}-\card{T_j}-\card{X_j^{(s)}}\right)\\
&= 1-x_ix_j-\tfrac{1}{k-2}\left(1-t_i-x_i\right)\left(1-t_j-x_j\right),
\end{align*}
where $x_i=\frac{\card{X_{i}^{(s)}}}{\card{V_i}}$, $x_j=\frac{\card{X_{j}^{(s)}}}{\card{V_j}}$, $t_i=\frac{\card{T_i}}{\card{V_i}}$ and $t_j=\frac{\card{T_j}}{\card{V_j}}$. Since both $x_i$ and $x_j$ are bounded from below by $\frac{1}{k-1}$, the expression $f(x_i,x_j,t_i,t_j):=1-x_ix_j-\tfrac{1}{k-2}\left(1-t_i-x_i\right)\left(1-t_j-x_j\right)$ is decreasing with respect to both $x_i$ and $x_j$. Therefore, the density $d(V_i,V_j)$ is bounded from above by
\begin{align*}
f(x_i,x_j,t_i,t_j) &\le f\left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}+\sqrt{\varepsilon},\tfrac{1}{k-1}+\sqrt{\varepsilon},t_i,t_j\right)\le f\left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}+\sqrt{\varepsilon},\tfrac{1}{k-1}+\sqrt{\varepsilon},\varepsilon,\varepsilon\right) < \tfrac{k-2}{k-1},
\end{align*}
where the second inequality follows from the assumption that $t_i,t_j \in [0,\varepsilon]$. However, this contradicts the assumption that $d(V_i,V_j) \ge \frac{k-2}{k-1}$.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:turan}} \label{sect:turan_theorem}
In this section we will prove Therem \ref{thm:turan}. We begin with a proof of the first assertion.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:turan}(1)]
We prove by contradiction. Assume that $d_{\ell}(H)<\frac{\chi(H)-2}{\chi(H)-1}+\frac{1}{(\chi(H)-1)^2(\ell-1)^2}$. Let $r=\chi(H)-1$, and let $V_1,\ldots,V_{\ell}$ be $\ell$ disjoint sets of size $(\ell-1)r$. For $i \le \ell$, we partition $V_i$ into $r$ subsets $V_i^{(1)},\ldots,V_i^{(r)}$ of size $(\ell-1)$ each. We form a complete bipartite graph between $V_i^{(s)}$ and $V_j^{(t)}$ for $i<j$ and $s \ne t$. We then create a perfect matching in $V_1^{(1)} \cup \ldots \cup V_{\ell}^{(1)}$ such that there is exactly one edge between $V_i^{(1)}$ and $V_j^{(1)}$ for every $i \ne j$.
The resulting graph $G$ satisfies
\[
d(V_i,V_{j})=\frac{\chi(H)-2}{\chi(H)-1}+\frac{1}{(\chi(H)-1)^2(\ell-1)^2} >d_{\ell}(H)\quad \text{for $i \ne j$}.
\]
Thus, by the definition of $d_{\ell}(H)$, $G$ must contain a copy of $H$. From the construction of $G$, we can see that $H$ is an almost colour-critical graph. This finishes our proof of Theorem \ref{thm:turan}(1).
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{rmk:tighness}
The estimate in Theorem \ref{thm:turan}(1) is tight for $K_{1,2}$, that is $d_{\ell}(K_{1,2})=\frac{1}{(\ell-1)^2}$ for $\ell \ge 3$. Indeed, let $G=(V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\ell},E)$ be an $\ell$-partite graph with $d(V_i,V_j)>\frac{1}{(\ell-1)^2}$ for every $i\ne j$. We wish to show that $G$ contains a copy of $K_{1,2}$. Suppose to the contrary that $G$ is $K_{1,2}$-free. For $i\ne j$, we write $V_{i,j}$ for the set of vertices in $V_i$ with at least one neighbour in $V_j$.
Since $G$ is $K_{1,2}$-free, we see that
\begin{itemize}
\item[\rm(i)] the edges between $V_i$ and $V_j$ form a perfect matching between $V_{i,j}$ and $V_{j,i}$ for every $i\ne j$;
\item[\rm (ii)] $V_{i,j}$ and $V_{i,j'}$ are disjoint for all distinct indices $i,j$ and $j'$.
\end{itemize}
Notice that $V_{i,j}$ is non-empty for every $i\ne j$ as $d(V_i,V_j)>0$. Combining this with property (ii), we conclude that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:V-lower}
\card{V_i} \ge \sum_{j\in [\ell]\setminus \{i\}}\card{V_{i,j}} \ge \ell-1 \ \text{for $i\le \ell$}.
\end{equation}
Hence
\[
\sum_{1\le i<j \le \ell}\left(\frac{\card{V_{i,j}}}{\card{V_i}}+\frac{\card{V_{j,i}}}{\card{V_j}}\right)=\sum_{1\le i\le \ell}\left(\sum_{j'\ne i}\frac{\card{V_{i,j'}}}{\card{V_i}}\right) \le \ell.
\]
Consequently, there exist $1\le i<j\le \ell$ with $\frac{\card{V_{i,j}}}{\card{V_i}}+\frac{\card{V_{j,i}}}{\card{V_j}} \le \frac{\ell}{\binom{\ell}{2}}=\frac{2}{\ell-1}$. By appealing to the AM-GM inequality, we thus get $\sqrt{\card{V_{i,j}}\card{V_{j,i}}} \le \frac{1}{\ell-1}\cdot \sqrt{\card{V_i}\card{V_j}}$. This forces
\[
d(V_i,V_j)\overset{(i)}{=} \frac{\card{V_{i,j}}}{\card{V_i}\card{V_j}}\overset{(i)}{=} \frac{\sqrt{\card{V_{i,j}}\card{V_{j,i}}}}{\card{V_i}\card{V_j}} \le \frac{1}{(\ell-1)\sqrt{\card{V_i}\card{V_j}}} \overset{\eqref{eq:V-lower}}{\le} \frac{1}{(\ell-1)^2},
\]
contradicting the assumption that $d(V_i,V_j)>\frac{1}{(\ell-1)^2}$.
\end{remark}
To handle the second statement of Theorem \ref{thm:turan}, we shall prove a stronger result.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:key}
Let $H$ be an almost colour-critical graph. Then, there exists a constant $C=C(H)$ such that for every integer $\ell>C$, every $\ell$-partite graph $G=(V_1\cup \ldots \cup V_{\ell},E)$ with
\[
d(V_i,V_j) > \frac{\chi(H)-2}{\chi(H)-1} \quad \text{for $i \ne j$}
\]
contains a copy of $H$ whose vertices are in different parts of $G$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark} \label{rmk:universal_graph}
Suppose that $H$ is almost colour-critical. Let $k=\chi(H)$ and $q=v(H)$. From the definition of almost colour-critical graphs, $H$ is a subgraph $K^{+q}_{k-1}(2q)$. Moreover, it is easy to see that $\chi(K^{+q}_{k-1}(2q))=k=\chi(H)$ and $K^{+q}_{k-1}(2q)$ is almost colour-critical. Therefore, if Theorem \ref{thm:key} holds for $K^{+q}_{k-1}(2q)$, it will hold for $H$ as well.
\end{remark}
The main idea of the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:key} is as follows. Let $G=(V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\ell},E)$ be a counterexample. We first apply a stability result (Lemma \ref{lem:induced_subgraph}) to obtain an induced $(\chi(H)-1)$-colourable subgraph of $G$ which almost spans $V(G)$. Using embedding results (Lemmas \ref{lem:common_neighbours} and \ref{lem:embedding_complete}) we can then show that there exists a subset $I\subseteq [\ell]$ such that $G[\bigcup_{i\in I}V_i]$ is the base graph of an $(\eta,k,\card{I})$-infracolourable structure. But according to Lemma \ref{lem:infracolourable}, this forces $d(V_i,V_j)\le \frac{k-2}{k-1}$ for some $i,j \in I$, violating the density condition.
Our first step in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:key} will be to show that a counterexample $G$ must contain an induced $(\chi(H)-1)$-colourable subgraph which almost spans $V(G)$. For that we shall need the following stability result.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:induced_subgraph}
Given integers $k\ge 3$ and $q\ge 1$ and a real number $0<\varepsilon<\frac{1}{8k^2q}$, there exists a constant $C=C(k,q,\varepsilon)$ such that the following holds for $\ell \ge C$. Let $G=(V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\ell},E)$ be a balanced $\ell$-partite graph on $n$ vertices with $d(V_i,V_j)\ge \frac{k-2}{k-1}$ for all $i\ne j$. Suppose $G$ contains no copy of $K_{k-1}^{+q}(2q)$ whose vertices lie in different parts of $G$. Then, $G$ contains an induced $(k-1)$-colourable subgraph $F$ whose vertex classes $X^{(1)}, \ldots, X^{(k-1)}$ satisfy the following properties
\begin{compactitem}
\item[\rm (i)] For $s \le k-1$, $\card{X^{(s)}}= \left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}\pm\varepsilon\right)n$;
\item[\rm (ii)] For $s \le k-1$ and $v\in \bigcup_{t\ne s}X^{(t)}$, $\deg(v,X^{(s)})\ge \card{X^{(s)}}-\varepsilon n$.
\end{compactitem}
\end{lemma}
To prove Lemma \ref{lem:induced_subgraph} we require the following result whose proof can be found in Section \ref{sect:missing_proofs}.
\begin{prop} \label{prop:Erdos-Stone_stability}
For every graph $H$ and every $\varepsilon>0$, there exist positive constants $\gamma=\gamma(H,\varepsilon)$ and $C=C(H,\varepsilon)$ such that the following holds for $n \ge C$. Suppose that $G$ is an $n$-vertex graph with
${e(G) \ge \left(\frac{\chi(H)-2}{\chi(H)-1}-\gamma \right)\binom{n}{2}}$ containing at most $\gamma n^{v(H)}$ copies of $H$. Then, $G$ contains a ${(\chi(H)-1)}$-colourable subgraph of order at least $(1-\varepsilon)n$ and minimum degree at least $\left(\frac{\chi(H)-2}{\chi(H)-1}-\varepsilon\right)n$.
\end{prop}
Another tool that will be used in the proof of Lemma \ref{lem:induced_subgraph} and Theorem \ref{thm:key} is an embedding result. Before stating it, we shall introduce the necessary terminology. Let $G[W^{(1)},\ldots,W^{(r)}]$ be an $r$-colourable graph such that $W^{(s)}=\dot\bigcup_{i\ge 1} W^{(s)}_i$ for every $s\le r$. We call an embedding $f:K_r(a_1,\ldots,a_r) \rightarrow G$ \emph{good} if the $s$th vertex class of $K_r(a_1,\ldots,a_r)$ is mapped to $W^{(s)}$ for every $s \le r$, and for each index $i$ there is at most one vertex $v \in K_r(a_1,\ldots,a_r)$ with $f(v) \in \bigcup_{s\le r}W^{(s)}_i$.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:embedding_complete}
Suppose that $r\ge 2$ and $q\ge 1$ are integers, and let $G[W^{(1)},\ldots,W^{(r)}]$ be an $r$-colourable graph which satisfies the following properties
\begin{compactitem}
\item[{\rm (i)}] For $s\le r$, $W^{(s)}=\dot\bigcup_{i}W^{(s)}_i$ and $\card{W^{(s)}_i} < \frac{1}{2rq}\cdot\card{W^{(s)}}$ for all $i$,
\item[\rm (ii)] For $s\le r$ and $v \in \bigcup_{t \ne s}W^{(t
)}$, $\deg(v,W^{(s)}) > (1-\frac{1}{2rq})\cdot\card{W^{(s)}}$.
\end{compactitem}
Then, for every $r$-tuple of integers $a_1,\ldots,a_r \in [0,q]$, every good embedding from $K_r(a_1,\ldots,a_r)$ to $G$ can be extended to a good embedding from $K_r(q)$ to $G$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose $f$ is a good embedding from $K_r(a_1,\ldots,a_r)$ to $G$. To prove the lemma, it suffices to show that $f$ can be extended to a good embedding $g$ from $K_r(a_1,\ldots,a_s+1,\ldots,a_r)$ to $G$ whenever $a_s\le q-1$. Let $v$ be the vertex of $K_r(a_1,\ldots,a_s+1,\ldots,a_r)$ which is not in $K_r(a_1,\ldots,a_r)$, and let $X$ denote the set of vertices of $K_r(a_1,\ldots,a_r)$ which are not in the $s$th vertex class. By property (ii), we see that each vertex of $X$ has at most $\frac{1}{2rq}\cdot\card{W^{(s)}}$ non-neighbours in $W^{(s)}$, and thus $\card{N(X)\cap W^{(s)}} \ge \card{W^{(s)}}-\card{X}\cdot\frac{\card{W^{(s)}}}{2rq} \ge \tfrac{1}{2}\card{W^{(s)}}$. Note that, by property (i), each vertex of $X$ can forbid at most $\frac{1}{2rq}\cdot\card{W^{(s)}}$ vertices of $W^{(s)}$ from being the image of $v$. Therefore, the number of possible images of $v$ under $g$ is at least
$\card{N(X)\cap W^{(s)}}-\card{X}\cdot\frac{\card{W^{(s)}}}{2rq}
\ge \tfrac{1}{2}\card{W^{(s)}}-\card{X}\cdot\frac{\card{W^{(s)}}}{2rq}>0$,
where in the last inequality we use the inequality $\card{W^{(s)}}>0$ which is implied by property (i).
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:induced_subgraph}]
We denote $H=K_{k-1}^{+q}(2q)$, and let
\begin{equation*}\label{eq:induced_1}
\gamma=\gamma_{\ref{prop:Erdos-Stone_stability}}\left(H,\tfrac{\varepsilon}{2k}\right), \ C=\max\biggl\{2k^2q^2\gamma^{-1},8(k-1)^2q,4(k-1)q\varepsilon^{-1}, C_{\ref{prop:Erdos-Stone_stability}}(H,\tfrac{\varepsilon}{2k})\biggl\}.
\end{equation*}
Because $G=(V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\ell},E)$ is a balanced $\ell$-partite graph on $n$ vertices, we must have
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:induced_2}
\card{V_1}=\card{V_2}=\ldots=\card{V_{\ell}}=\frac{n}{\ell}:=m.
\end{equation}
In the first step, we shall use Proposition \ref{prop:Erdos-Stone_stability} to show that $G$ contains an almost spanning $(k-1)$-colourable subgraph.
Indeed, by the choice of $C$ we see that $n\ge \ell \ge C\ge C_{\ref{prop:Erdos-Stone_stability}}(H,\tfrac{\varepsilon}{2k})$.
Moreover, since $G$ contains no copy of $H$ whose vertices lie in different parts of $G$, the number of copies of $H$ in $G$ is at most
\[
\binom{v(H)}{2}\ell m^2n^{v(H)-2} <\tfrac{2k^2q^2}{\ell} \cdot (\ell m)^2n^{v(H)-2} \le \gamma n^{v(H)},
\]
since $n=\ell m$ and $\ell \ge C\ge 2k^2q^2\gamma^{-1}$.
Also, by the density condition
\[
e(G) \ge \binom{\ell}{2}\tfrac{k-2}{k-1}m^2 \overset{\eqref{eq:induced_2}}{\ge} \left(\tfrac{k-2}{k-1}-\tfrac{1}{\ell} \right)\binom{n}{2} \ge \left(\tfrac{k-2}{k-1}-\gamma\right)\binom{n}{2},
\]
assuming $\ell \ge C \ge 2k^2q^2\gamma^{-1}$.
Therefore, we can derive from Proposition \ref{prop:Erdos-Stone_stability} that $G$ contains a $(k-1)$-colourable subgraph $F'$ with
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:induced_3}
v(F')\ge(1-\tfrac{\varepsilon}{2k})n \ \textrm{and} \ \delta(F')\ge\left(\tfrac{k-2}{k-1}-\tfrac{\varepsilon}{2k}\right)n.
\end{equation}
If $W^{(1)},\ldots, W^{(k-1)}$ are vertex classes of $F'$, then \eqref{eq:induced_3} implies that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:induced_4}
\left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}-\tfrac{\varepsilon}{2}\right)n\le \card{W^{(s)}} \le \left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}+\tfrac{\varepsilon}{2k}\right)n \quad \textrm{for $s \le k-1$}.
\end{equation}
In the second step, we shall prove that the induced subgraph $G[V(F')]$ of $G$ does not contain a large monochromatic matching whose vertices are in different parts of $G$. Indeed, for $s\le k-1$, let $\mathcal{M}_{(s)}$ denote a maximum matching in $G[W^{(s)}]$ whose vertices are in different parts of $G$, and let $K$ be a subset of $[\ell]$ containing all indices $i$ such that $\bigcup_{s\le k-1}\mathcal{M}_{(s)}$ has a vertex in $V_i$. The size of $K$ will be bounded from above in terms of $k$ and $q$.
\begin{claim}
\label{eq:induced_5}
$\card{K} < 2(k-1)q$.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
We prove the claim by contradiction. Suppose that for some $s \le k-1$, $\mathcal{M}_{(s)}$ contains a matching of size $q$, say $\{x_1x_2,\ldots,x_{2q-1}x_{2q}\}$, .
We wish to show that the following two properties holds:
\begin{compactitem}
\item[\rm (i)] For $t\le k-1$ and $i\le \ell$, $W^{(t)}=W_1^{(t)} \dot\cup \ldots \dot\cup W_{\ell}^{(t)}$ and $\card{W_i^{(t)}}<\frac{1}{4(k-1)q}\cdot\card{W^{(t)}}$;
\item[\rm (ii)] For $t\le k-1$ and $v \in V(F')\setminus W^{(t)}$, $\deg_{F'}(v,W^{(t)}) >\left(1-\frac{1}{4(k-1)q}\right)\cdot\card{W^{(t)}}$.
\end{compactitem}
Property (i) follows from the estimate
\[
\card{W_i^{(t)}} \le \card{V_i}=\frac{n}{\ell}<\frac{1}{4(k-1)q}\cdot\left(\frac{1}{k-1}-\tfrac{\varepsilon}{2}\right)n\overset{\eqref{eq:induced_4}}{<} \frac{1}{4(k-1)q}\cdot\card{W^{(t)}}
\]
for $\ell \ge C \ge 8(k-1)^2q$ and $\varepsilon<\frac{1}{8k^2q}$. To prove (ii), assume that $v\in W^{(s)}$ for some $s\ne t$. Because $W^{(s)}$ is an independent set in $F'$, one has $\card{W^{(t)}}-d_{F'}(v,W^{(t)}) \le v(F')-\card{W^{(s)}}-\deg_{F'}(v)$. Hence by appealing to \eqref{eq:induced_3} and \eqref{eq:induced_4}, we get
\begin{align*}
\card{W^{(t)}}-d_{F'}(v,W^{(t)}) &\le n-\left(\frac{1}{k-1}-\tfrac{\varepsilon}{2}\right)n-\left(\frac{k-2}{k-1}-\tfrac{\varepsilon}{2k}\right)n\\
&\le \varepsilon n<\frac{1}{4(k-1)q}\cdot\left(\frac{1}{k-1}-\tfrac{\varepsilon}{2}\right)n \le \frac{1}{4(k-1)q}\cdot\card{W^{(t)}}
\end{align*}
for $\varepsilon<\frac{1}{8k^2q}$. This finishes our verification of (i) and (ii).
Finally, properties (i) and (ii) ensure that we can apply Lemma \ref{lem:embedding_complete} with $r_{\ref{lem:embedding_complete}}=k-1$ and $q_{\ref{lem:embedding_complete}}=2q$ to $G[W^{(1)},\ldots,W^{(r)}]$ to find a copy of $K_{k-1}(2q)$ whose $s$th vertex class is $\{x_1,\ldots,x_{2q}\}$ and vertices lie in different parts of $G$. Since $\{x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_{2q-1}x_{2q}\}$ is a matching in $G$, the graph $G$ contains a desired copy of $H$, which contradicts our hypothesis.
\end{proof}
To finish the proof, we shall show that $G$ contains an induced subgraph $F$ with the desired properties. For this purpose, we let $X^{(s)}=W^{(s)}\setminus \bigcup_{i \in K}V_i$ for $s\le k-1$. The maximality of $\mathcal{M}_{(s)}$ implies that $X^{(s)}$ is an independent set in $G$. So the induced subgraph $F=G[X^{(1)} \cup \ldots \cup X^{(k-1)}]$ is $(k-1)$-colourable. What is left is to prove that $F$ has the desired properties. Since $\varepsilon<\frac{1}{8k^2q}$ and $\ell\ge C\ge 4(k-1)q\varepsilon^{-1}$, we find that
\begin{gather*}
v(F)\ge v(F')-\card{\bigcup_{i\in K}V_i}\overset{\eqref{eq:induced_3},\text{Claim \ref{eq:induced_5}}}{\ge}\left(1-\tfrac{\varepsilon}{2k}\right)n-2(k-1)q\cdot \frac{n}{\ell}> (1-\varepsilon)n, \\
\delta(F)\ge \delta(F')-\card{\bigcup_{i\in K}V_i}\overset{\eqref{eq:induced_3},\text{Claim \ref{eq:induced_5}}}{\ge}\left(\tfrac{k-2}{k-1}-\tfrac{\varepsilon}{2k}\right)n-2(k-1)q\cdot\frac{n}{\ell}>\left(\tfrac{k-2}{k-1}-\tfrac{\varepsilon}{2}\right)n.
\end{gather*}
Moreover, by \eqref{eq:induced_4} we see that
$\card{X^{(s)}} \le \card{W^{(s)}} \le \left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}+\tfrac{\varepsilon}{2k}\right)n$ for $s\le k-1$,
and hence $\left(\frac{1}{k-1}-\tfrac{\varepsilon}{2}\right)n \le \card{X^{(s)}}\le \left(\frac{1}{k-1}+\tfrac{\varepsilon}{2k}\right)n$ for $s\le k-1$.
Therefore, for $s\le k-1$ and $v\in \bigcup_{t\ne s}X^{(t)}$, there are at most
$n-\card{X^{(s)}}-d_{F}(v) \le n-\left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}-\tfrac{\varepsilon}{2}\right)n-\left(\tfrac{k-2}{k-1}-\tfrac{\varepsilon}{2}\right)n=\varepsilon n$ missing edges in $F$ between $v$ and $X^{(s)}$. This completes our proof of Lemma \ref{lem:induced_subgraph}.
\end{proof}
We also need the following elementary lemma. It is probably well-known, but we could not find a reference. For completeness we include its proof in Section \ref{sect:missing_proofs}.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:common_neighbours}
Given integers $r\ge 1$ and $q\ge 2$ and a real number $d\in (0,1)$, there exist an integer $D=D(r,q,d)$ and a positive $\rho=\rho(r,q,d)$ so that the following holds. Suppose that $G$ is an $(r+1)$-colourable graph with vertex classes $U,W_{(1)},\ldots,W_{(r)}$. If $\card{U} \ge D$ and $\deg(u,W_{(s)})\ge d\card{W_{(s)}}$ for all $u \in U$ and $s\le r$, then there is a subset $A \in \binom{U}{q}$ with $\card{N(A) \cap W_{(s)}} \ge \rho\card{W_{(s)}}$ for $s\le r$.
\end{lemma}
To find an infracolourable structure in $G$ we shall make use of a consequence of Lemmas \ref{lem:embedding_complete} and \ref{lem:common_neighbours}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:bound_I}
Given integers $k\ge 3$ and $q \ge 1$ and a real number $\eta \in (0,1)$, there exist integers $C=C(k,q,\eta)$ and $D=D(k,q,\eta)$ and a positive $\delta=\delta(k,q,\eta)$ such that the following holds for $\ell \ge C$ and $\varepsilon \in (0,\delta)$. Suppose that $G=(V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\ell},E)$ is a balanced $\ell$-partite graph containing no copy of $K_{k}(2q)$ in $G$ whose vertices are in different parts of $G$. Assume $(X^{(s)}_i)_{s\le k-1, i\le \ell}$ are vertex sets satisfying:
\begin{compactitem}
\item[\rm (i)] For $i\le \ell$, $X_i^{(1)},\ldots, X_i^{(k-1)}$ are disjoint subsets of $V_i$,
\item[\rm (ii)] For $i\le \ell$ and $s\le k-1$, $\card{X^{(s)}_i}= \left(\frac{1}{k-1}\pm\varepsilon\right)\card{V_i}$,
\item[\rm (iii)] For every $s \le k-1$ and $v\in \bigcup_{i\le \ell, t\ne s}X_i^{(t)}$, $\deg(v,\bigcup_{i\le\ell}X_i^{(s)}) \ge \card{\bigcup_{i\le \ell}X_i^{(s)}}-\varepsilon \cdot v(G)$.
\end{compactitem}
Let $I$ be the subset of $[\ell]$ consisting of all indices $i\in [\ell]$ such that $V_i$ contains a vertex $v$ with $ \deg(v,\bigcup_{j\le \ell}X_j^{(s)}) \ge \eta \cdot v(G)$ for $s \le k-1$. Then $\card{I} \le D$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let
$D=D_{\ref{lem:common_neighbours}}\left(k-1,2q,\tfrac{k\eta}{4}\right)$, $C=\max\biggl\{4kD,2\eta^{-1}D,\frac{9(k-1)kq}{\rho}\biggl\}$ and
$\delta=\min\biggl\{\frac{1}{4k},\frac{\rho}{8(k-1)kq}\biggl\}$, where $\rho=\rho_{\ref{lem:common_neighbours}}\left(k-1,2q,\tfrac{k\eta}{4}\right)$.
We shall prove the lemma by contradiction. Assume that $\card{I} \ge D$. Let $J$ be an arbitrary subset of $I$ of size $D$. By the definition of $I$, for each index $j\in J$ we can find a vertex $v_j\in V_j$ such that $ \deg(v_j,\bigcup_{i\le \ell}X_i^{(s)}) \ge \eta \cdot v(G)$ for $s \le k-1$. Let $U=\{v_j:j\in J\}$.
For simplicity of notation, let $X^{(s)}:=\bigcup_{i\le \ell}X_i^{(s)}$ and $W^{(s)}:=\bigcup_{i \in [\ell]\setminus J}X_i^{(s)}$ for $s\le k-1$. Then, property (i) implies that $W^{(1)},\ldots,W^{(k-1)}$ are disjoint subsets of $V(G)$. By (i) and (ii), we find that
\begin{equation} \label{eq:bound_I_1}
\card{W^{(s)}}\ge \left(\frac{1}{k-1}-\varepsilon-\frac{D}{\ell}\right)\cdot v(G)\ge \tfrac{v(G)}{2k}
\end{equation}
for $\varepsilon \le \delta \le \frac{1}{4k}$ and $\ell\ge C\ge 4kD$.
Also, (i) and (ii) force $\card{W^{(s)}}\le \left(\frac{1}{k-1}+\varepsilon \right)v(G) \le \frac{2v(G)}{k}$, since $\varepsilon \le \delta \le \frac{1}{4k}$.
Combining these two inequalities, we conclude that
\[
\deg(v,W^{(s)}) \ge \deg(v,X^{(s)})-\card{\bigcup_{j\in J}V_j} \ge \eta \cdot v(G)-D\cdot\frac{v(G)}{\ell} \ge \tfrac{\eta}{2}\cdot v(G) \ge \tfrac{k\eta}{4}\cdot \card{W^{(s)}}
\]
for $v \in U$ and $s \le k-1$, as $\ell \ge 2\eta^{-1}D$. Furthermore, $\card{U}=D= D_{\ref{lem:common_neighbours}}\left(k-1,2q,\tfrac{k\eta}{4}\right)$, by the definition of $D$.
By applying Lemma \ref{lem:common_neighbours} to $G[U, W^{(1)}, \ldots, W^{(k-1)}]$ with $r_{\ref{lem:common_neighbours}}=k-1$, $q_{\ref{lem:common_neighbours}}=2q$ and $d_{\ref{lem:common_neighbours}}=\frac{k\eta}{4}$, we thus obtain a subset $A \in \binom{U}{2q}$ with
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bound_I_2}
\card{N(A)\cap W^{(s)}}\ge \rho \card{W^{(s)}}\quad\text{for $s\le k-1$}.
\end{equation}
In the rest of the proof we shall use Lemma \ref{lem:embedding_complete} to show that $G[N(A)\cap W^{(1)},\ldots,N(A)\cap W^{(k-1)}]$ contains a copy of $K_{k-1}(2q)$ whose vertices are in different parts of $G$. Since this copy lies in $N(A)$, together with vertices of $A$ it forms a copy of $K_k(2q)$ whose vertices belong to different parts of $G$, contradicting the assumption. It remains to verify the assumptions of Lemma \ref{lem:embedding_complete}.
Indeed, for $s \le k-1$, $N(A)\cap W^{(s)}$ does admit the partition
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bound_I_3}
N(A)\cap W^{(s)}=\dot\bigcup_{j \notin J}\bigl(N(A) \cap X_j^{(s)}\bigl).
\end{equation}
Moreover, since $N(A)\cap W^{(s)} \subseteq X^{(s)}$ for $s\le k-1$, we must have, for $s \le k-1$ and $v\in \bigcup_{t\ne s}\bigl(N(A)\cap W^{(t)}\bigl)$,
\begin{align*}
\card{N(A)\cap W^{(s)}}-\deg(v,N(A)\cap W^{(s)})&\le \card{\bigcup_{i\le \ell}X_i^{(s)}}-\deg(v,\bigcup_{i\le\ell}X_i^{(s)})\\
&\overset{(iii)}{\le}\varepsilon \cdot v(G) \le \tfrac{1}{4(k-1)q} \cdot \rho \cdot \frac{v(G)}{2k} \overset{\eqref{eq:bound_I_1}, \eqref{eq:bound_I_2}}{\le}\tfrac{1}{4(k-1)q}\cdot \card{N(A)\cap W^{(s)}},
\end{align*}
assuming $\varepsilon \le \delta \le \frac{\rho}{8(k-1)kq}$. It can be rewritten as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bound_I_4}
\deg(v,N(A)\cap W^{(s)}) \ge \left(1-\tfrac{1}{4(k-1)q}\right)\card{N(A)\cap W^{(s)}} \ \text{for $s\le k-1$ and $v\notin \bigcup_{t\ne s}(N(A)\cap W^{(t)}$}.
\end{equation}
Also, for every $j \notin J$ and $s \le k-1$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bound_I_5}
\card{N(A) \cap X_j^{(s)}} \le \card{V_j}=\tfrac{v(G)}{\ell}<\tfrac{1}{4(k-1)q} \cdot \rho \cdot \frac{v(G)}{2k} \overset{\eqref{eq:bound_I_1}, \eqref{eq:bound_I_2}}{\le}\tfrac{1}{4(k-1)q}\cdot \card{N(A)\cap W^{(s)}}
\end{equation}
because $\ell \ge C\ge \frac{9(k-1)kq}{\rho}$.
The inequalities \eqref{eq:bound_I_3}, \eqref{eq:bound_I_4} and \eqref{eq:bound_I_5} show that we can apply Lemma \ref{lem:embedding_complete} to $G[N(A)\cap W^{(1)},\ldots,N(A)\cap W^{(k-1)}]$ with $r_{\ref{lem:embedding_complete}}=k-1$ and $q_{\ref{lem:embedding_complete}}=2q$.
\end{proof}
We also require another consequence of Lemma \ref{lem:embedding_complete}, stated below.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:bound_J}
Given integers $k \ge 3$ and $q\ge 1$ and a real number $\eta \in \left(\frac{2q-1}{2(k-1)q},1\right)$, there exist an integer $C=C(k,q,\eta)$ and a positive $\delta=\delta(k,q,\eta)$ such that the following holds for every integer $\ell \ge C$ and every $\varepsilon \in (0,\delta)$.
Let $G=(V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\ell},E)$ be a balanced $\ell$-partite graph containing no copy of $K_{k-1}^{+q}(2q)$ whose vertices are in different parts of $G$. Assume $(X^{(s)}_i,Y^{(s)}_i)_{s\le k-1, i\le \ell}$ are pairs of vertex sets satisfying:
\begin{compactitem}
\item[\rm (i)] For $i\le \ell$ and $s\le k-1$, $Y_i^{(1)},\ldots, Y_i^{(k-1)}$ are disjoint subsets of $V_i$ and $X_i^{(s)}\subseteq Y_i^{(s)}$,
\item[\rm (ii)] For $i\le \ell$ and $s\le k-1$, $\card{X^{(s)}_i}= \left(\frac{1}{k-1}\pm\varepsilon\right)\card{V_i}$,
\item[\rm (iii)] For $s \le k-1$ and $v\in \bigcup_{i\le \ell, t\ne s}X_i^{(t)}$, $\deg(v,\bigcup_{i\le \ell}X_i^{(s)}) \ge \card{\bigcup_{i\le \ell}X_i^{(s)}}-\varepsilon \cdot v(G)$.
\end{compactitem}
For $i\le \ell$ and $s\le k-1$, let
$B_i^{(s)}$ denote a subset of $Y_i^{(s)}$ consisting of all vertices $v$ with $\deg(v,\bigcup_{j\le \ell}X_j^{(t)})<\eta\cdot v(G)$ for some $t \ne s$.
For $s \le k-1$, write $\mathcal{M}_{(s)}$ for a maximal matching in the induced subgraph $G\big[\bigcup_{i\le\ell}Y_i^{(s)}\setminus B_i^{(s)}\big]$ of $G$ whose vertices are in different parts of $G$, and set $J=\{j\in [\ell]: V_j \ \textrm{contains some vertex in $\bigcup_{s\le k-1} \mathcal{M}_{(s)}$}\}$. Then, $\card{J}<2(k-1)q$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Choose
\[
C=\frac{4(k-2)}{\eta'} \ \text{and} \ \delta=\min\biggl\{ \frac{q\eta'}{2q-1},\frac{\eta'}{4(k-2)}\biggl\}, \ \text{where $\eta'=\eta-\frac{2q-1}{2(k-1)q}$}.
\]
Notice that $\eta'>0$ as $\eta \in \left(\frac{2q-1}{2(k-1)q},1\right)$.
We prove the statement by contradiction. Suppose that $\mathcal{M}_{(s)}$ contains a matching $\{x_1x_2,\ldots,x_{2q-1}x_{2q}\}$ of size $q$ for some $s \le k-1$.
Let $X^{(t)}$ denote the vertex set $\bigcup_{i}X_i^{(s)}$ for $s\le k-1$. For $t \ne s$, define
$W_{(t)}= \bigcup_{i}\bigl(N(x_1,\ldots,x_{2q}) \cap X_i^{(t)}\bigl)$. Then property (i) implies that $W^{(1)},\ldots,W^{(k-1)}$ are disjoint subsets of $V(G)$.
We shall apply Lemma \ref{lem:embedding_complete} to find a copy of $K_{k-2}(2q)$ in $G \bigl[W_{(1)},\ldots,\widehat{W_{(s)}},\ldots,W_{(k-1)}\bigl]$ whose vertices are in different parts of $G$ (here $\widehat{W_{(s)}}$ stands for the empty set). Since this copy lies in $N(x_1,\ldots,x_{2q})$ and since $\{x_1x_2,\ldots,x_{2q-1}x_{2q}\}$ is a matching, $G$ contains a copy of $K_{k-1}^{+q}(2q)$ whose vertices belong to different parts of $G$, which is impossible. The remaining task is thus to verify the assumptions of Lemma \ref{lem:embedding_complete}. Indeed, from the definition of $W_{(t)}$ we see that, for $t\ne s$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:bound_J_1}
W_{(t)}= \dot\bigcup_{i}\bigl(N(x_1,\ldots,x_{2q}) \cap X_i^{(t)}\bigl).
\end{equation}
By the definition of $\mathcal{M}_{(s)}$, we have $\deg(x,X^{(t)}) \ge \eta \cdot v(G)$ for $x\in\{x_1,\ldots,x_{2q}\}$ and $t\ne s$. Hence
\begin{align}\label{eq:bound_J_2}
\notag \card{W_{(t)}} &=\card{N(x_1,\ldots,x_{2q})\cap X^{(t)}}\ge 2q \eta\cdot v(G)-(2q-1)\card{X^{(t)}}\\
& \hspace*{2cm}\overset{(ii)}{\ge} 2q\eta\cdot v(G)-(2q-1)\left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}+\varepsilon\right)v(G) \ge q\eta'\cdot v(G)
\end{align}
for $\varepsilon \le \delta \le \frac{q\eta'}{2q-1}$.
Together with the assumption $\ell \ge C = \frac{4(k-2)}{\eta'}$, this inequality implies that, for $i\le \ell$ and $t\ne s$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:bound_J_3}
\card{N(x_1,\ldots,x_{2q})\cap X_i^{(t)}} \le \card{V_i}=\frac{v(G)}{\ell} \le \tfrac{q\eta'}{4(k-2)q}\cdot v(G) \le \tfrac{1}{4(k-2)q}\cdot \card{W_{(t)}}.
\end{equation}
On the other hand, we can derive from property (iii) that, for $v\in \bigcup_{i\le \ell,p\notin \{s,t\}}X_i^{(p)}$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:bound_J_4}
\card{W_{(t)}}-\deg(v,W_{(t)})\le \varepsilon \cdot v(G) \le \tfrac{q\eta'}{4(k-2)q} \cdot v(G) \overset{ \eqref{eq:bound_J_2}}{\le} \tfrac{1}{4(k-2)q}\cdot\card{W_{(t)}},
\end{equation}
assuming $\varepsilon \le \delta \le \frac{\eta'}{4(k-2)}$.
It follows from \eqref{eq:bound_J_1}, \eqref{eq:bound_J_3} and \eqref{eq:bound_J_4} that we can apply Lemma \ref{lem:embedding_complete} to $G \bigl[W_{(1)},\ldots,\widehat{W_{(s)}},\ldots,W_{(k-1)}\bigl]$ with $r_{\ref{lem:embedding_complete}}=k-2$ and $q_{\ref{lem:embedding_complete}}=2q$.
\end{proof}
We are now ready to prove Theorem \ref{thm:key}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:key}]
Let $k=\chi(H)$. If $k=2$, then $H$ is a matching. The density condition implies that there is at least one edge between any two parts of $G$. Hence $G$ contains a matching of size $ \frac{\ell}{2}\ge e(H)$ whose vertices are in different parts of $G$.
So from now on we can focus on the case when $k\ge 3$. Moreover, as discussed in Remark \ref{rmk:universal_graph}, we can suppose that $H=K^{+q}_{k-1}(2q)$ for some positive integer $q$.
To prove Theorem \ref{thm:key}, we assume to the contrary that $G$ does not contain a copy of $H$ whose vertices are in different parts of $G$.
Without loss of generality we can suppose that each part of $G$ has exactly $m$ vertices, where $m$ is a sufficiently large integer.
Otherwise, multiply each vertex in each part $V_i$ by a factor of $\frac{m}{\card{V_i}}$, which has no effect on the densities, and creates no copy of $H$ whose vertices lie in different parts of $G$.
Choose $\ell=\max\{C_{\ref{lem:induced_subgraph}}(k,q,\varepsilon),1/\varepsilon\}$, where $\varepsilon>0$ is sufficiently small (to be specified later).
Let $\ell_1=\frac{\ell}{2(k-1)!}$,
$\ell_2=\ell_1-(k-1)$, $\ell_3=\frac{\ell_2}{(k-1)!}$ and $\ell_4=\ell_3-2(k-1)q-D$, where $D=D_{\ref{lem:bound_I}}\left(k,q,\frac{1}{(6q+10)(k-1)(k-1)!}\right)$.
Note that the parameters $\ell$ and $\ell_i$ both grow as $\Omega(1/\varepsilon)$.
Our goal is to find an infracolourable struture in $G$. In the first step, we apply Lemma \ref{lem:induced_subgraph} to $G$ with $k_{\ref{lem:induced_subgraph}}=k$, $q_{\ref{lem:induced_subgraph}}=q$ and $\varepsilon_{\ref{lem:induced_subgraph}}=\varepsilon<\frac{1}{8k^2q}$ to obtain an induced $(k-1)$-colourable subgraph $F$ of $G$ whose vertex classes $X^{(1)}, \ldots, X^{(k-1)}$ satisfy
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:key_1}
\card{X^{(s)}}=
\left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}\pm\varepsilon\right)n \ \text{for $s \le k-1$},\\
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:key_2}
\deg(v,X^{(s)}) \ge \card{X^{(s)}}-\varepsilon n \ \text{for $s \le k-1$ and $v\in \bigcup_{t\ne s}X^{(t)}$}.
\end{equation}
Let $T=V(G) \setminus V(F)$. The inequality \eqref{eq:key_1} implies that $\card{T} \le k\varepsilon n$. This forces $\card{T_i} \le 2k\varepsilon m$ for at least half of indices $i \le \ell$.
Since $\ell_1=\frac{\ell}{2(k-1)!}$, by the pigeon hole principle we can relabel the $V_i$ and the $X^{(s)}$ such that
$\card{X_i^{(1)}} \ge \card{X_i^{(2)}}\ge\ldots \ge \card{X_i^{(k-1)}}$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:key_3}
\card{T_i} \le 2k\varepsilon m \ \text{for $i\le \ell_1$}.
\end{equation}
Hence we can apply Lemma \ref{lem:balanced} with $\varepsilon_{\ref{lem:balanced}}=2k\varepsilon<\frac14$ to find a subset $I_0 \in \binom{\mathbb{N}}{k-1}$ such that $\card{X_i^{(s)}}=\left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}\pm k\sqrt{2k\varepsilon}\right)m$ for $s\le k-1$ and $i\in [\ell_1]\setminus I_0$. By reordering parts if necessary, we may assume that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:key_4}
\card{X_i^{(s)}}=\left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}\pm k\sqrt{2k\varepsilon}\right)m \quad \text{for $s\le k-1$ and $i\le \ell_2$}.
\end{equation}
For $i \le \ell_2$ we shall partition $V_i$ into $k-1$ subsets $Y_i^{(1)},\ldots, Y_i^{(k-1)}$ as follows. A vertex $v \in V_i$ is assigned to $Y_i^{(s)}$ if
$\deg\big(v,\bigcup_{j \le \ell_2}X_j^{(s)}\big)= \min_{t\le k-1} \deg\big(v,\bigcup_{j \le \ell_2}X_j^{(t)}\big)$; if there are more than one such index $s$, arbitrarily choose one of them.
\begin{claim}\label{eq:key_5}
$X_i^{(s)} \subseteq Y_i^{(s)} \subseteq X_i^{(s)}\dot\cup T_i$ and $\card{Y_i^{(s)}}=\left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}\pm 2k\sqrt{2k\varepsilon}\right)m$ for $s \le k-1$ and $i \le \ell_2$.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
Let $v$ be an arbitrary vertex of $X_i^{(s)}$. Since $X^{(s)}$ is an independent set of $G$, $v$ has no neighbours in $\bigcup_{j \le \ell_2}X_j^{(s)}$. It thus follows from the definition of $Y_i^{(s)}$ that $v \in Y_i^{(s)}$, and so $X_i^{(s)}$ is a subset of $Y_i^{(s)}$. Combining with the fact that $V_i=\left(\dot\bigcup_{s} X_i^{(s)}\right)\dot\cup T_i=\dot\bigcup_{s}Y_i^{(s)}$, we conclude that $Y_i^{(s)}\subseteq X_i^{(s)}\dot\cup T_i$ for $i \le \ell_2$ and $s\le k-1$.
As $X_i^{(s)}$ is a subset of $Y_i^{(s)}$, \eqref{eq:key_4} tells us that $\card{Y_i^{(s)}}\ge \card{X_i^{(s)}} \ge \left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}-k\sqrt{2k\varepsilon}\right)m$ for $i \le \ell_2$ and $s\le k-1$. Using \eqref{eq:key_3} and \eqref{eq:key_4}, we get
\[
\card{Y_i^{(s)}}\le \card{X_i^{(s)}}+\card{T_i} \le \left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}+k\sqrt{2k\varepsilon}+2k\varepsilon\right)m\le \left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}+2k\sqrt{2k\varepsilon}\right)m
\]
for $i\le \ell_2$ and $s\le k-1$, where the first inequality holds since $Y_i^{(s)}$ is a subset of $X_i^{(s)}\cup T_i$.
\end{proof}
Let $I=\bigl\{i\in [\ell_2]: \exists \ v_i \in V_i \ \text{with $\deg(v_i,X_1^{(s)}\cup\ldots\cup X_{\ell_2}^{(s)}) \ge \tfrac{1}{(6q+10)(k-1)!} \cdot \frac{\ell_2m}{k-1}$ for $s \le k-1$}\bigl\}$. We shall show that $I$ has bounded size.
\begin{claim} \label{claim:bound_I}
$\card{I}\le D$.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
We require $\varepsilon$ to be small enough so that $\max\{k\sqrt{2k\varepsilon},k^k\varepsilon\} < \delta_{\ref{lem:bound_I}}\left(k,q,\frac{1}{(6q+10)(k-1)(k-1)!}\right)$, and $\ell_2 \ge C_{\ref{lem:bound_I}}\left(k,q,\frac{1}{(6q+10)(k-1)(k-1)!}\right)$.
By \eqref{eq:key_4}, $\card{X_i^{(s)}}=\left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}\pm k\sqrt{2k\varepsilon}\right)m$ for $s\le k-1$ and $i\le \ell_2$. Moreover, for $s\le k-1$ and $v\in \bigcup_{i\le \ell_2, t\ne s}X_i^{(t)}$, we have
\begin{align*}
\deg(v,\bigcup_{i\le \ell_2}X_i^{(s)}) &\ge \card{\bigcup_{i\le \ell_2}X_i^{(s)}}+\deg(v,X^{(s)})-\card{X^{(s)}}\\
&\overset{\eqref{eq:key_2}}{\ge} \card{\bigcup_{i\le \ell_2}X_i^{(s)}}-\varepsilon n \ge \card{\bigcup_{i\le \ell_2}X_i^{(s)}}-k^k\varepsilon \ell_2 m.
\end{align*}
Therefore, we can apply Lemma \ref{lem:bound_I} to $G[V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\ell_2}]$ with input $k_{\ref{lem:bound_I}}=k$, $q_{\ref{lem:bound_I}}=q$ and $\eta_{\ref{lem:bound_I}}=\frac{1}{(6q+10)(k-1)(k-1)!}$ to conclude that $\card{I} \le D_{\ref{lem:bound_I}}\left(k,q,\frac{1}{(6q+10)(k-1)(k-1)!}\right)=D$.
\end{proof}
As $\ell_3=\frac{\ell_2}{(k-1)!}$, by reordering the $V_i$ and $Y^{(s)}$ if necessary we can ensure
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:key_6}
V_i=\dot\bigcup_{s}Y_i^{(s)} \ \text{and} \ \card{Y_i^{(1)}} \ge \card{Y_i^{(2)}}\ge \ldots \ge \card{Y_i^{(k-1)}} \quad \textrm{for $i \le \ell_3$}.
\end{equation}
For $i \le \ell_3$ and $s \le k-1$, let
$B_i^{(s)}$ be the set of all vertices $v \in Y_i^{(s)}$ with the property that $\deg(v,X_1^{(t)}\cup\ldots\cup X_{\ell_3}^{(t)})<\tfrac{2q}{2q+1}\cdot\frac{\ell_3m}{k-1}$ for some $t \ne s$.
For $s \le k-1$, let $\mathcal{M}_{(s)}$ denote a maximal matching in $G\big[\bigcup_{i \le \ell_3}Y_i^{(s)}\setminus B_i^{(s)}\big]$ whose vertices are in different parts of $G$, and write $J$ for the collection of all indices $j \in [\ell_3]$ so that $\bigcup_{s \le k-1} \mathcal{M}_{(s)}$ contains some vertex in $V_j$.
\begin{claim} \label{claim:bound_J}
$\card{J}<2(k-1)q$.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
We shall apply Lemma \ref{lem:bound_J} to $G[V_1\cup\ldots V_{\ell_3}]$ with $k_{\ref{lem:bound_J}}=k$, $q_{\ref{lem:bound_J}}=q$ and $\eta_{\ref{lem:bound_J}}=\frac{2q}{(k-1)(2q+1)}$ to get $\card{J}<2(k-1)q$. Note that $\card{X_i^{(s)}}=\left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}\pm k\sqrt{2k\varepsilon}\right)m$ for $s\le k-1$ and $i\le \ell_3$, by \eqref{eq:key_4}. Furthermore, for $s\le k-1$ and $v\in \bigcup_{i\le \ell_3, t\ne s}X_i^{(t)}$, we have
\[
\deg(v,\bigcup_{i\le \ell_3}X_i^{(s)}) \overset{\eqref{eq:key_2}}{\ge} \card{\bigcup_{i\le \ell_2}X_i^{(s)}}-\varepsilon n \ge \card{\bigcup_{i\le \ell_2}X_i^{(s)}}-k^{2k}\varepsilon \ell_3 m.
\]
Finally, we can choose $\varepsilon$ sufficiently small so that $\max\{k\sqrt{2k\varepsilon},k^{2k}\varepsilon\}<\delta_{\ref{lem:bound_J}}\left(k,q,\frac{2q}{(k-1)(2q+1)}\right)$ and $\ell_3 \ge C_{\ref{lem:bound_J}}\left(k,q,\frac{2q}{(k-1)(2q+1)}\right)$.
\end{proof}
From Claims \ref{claim:bound_I} and \ref{claim:bound_J} we can assume (relabelling parts once more if necessary) that $\{1,\ldots,\ell_3\}\setminus(I\cup J)=\{1,\ldots,\ell_4\}$. For $i \le \ell_4$ and $s \le k-1$, let
$D_i^{(s)}$ be the set consisting of all vertices $v \in Y_i^{(s)}$ such that $\deg(v,Y_1^{(t)}\cup\ldots\cup Y_{\ell_4}^{(t)})<\tfrac{2q+1}{2q+2}\cdot \frac{\ell_4m}{k-1}$ for some $t \ne s$.
\begin{claim} \label{claim:find_infracolourable}
The $\ell_4$-partite graph
$G[V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\ell_4}]$ together with pairs $(D_i^{(s)},Y_i^{(s)})_{s\le k-1, i\le \ell_4}$ of vertex sets form an $(\tfrac{1}{6q+9},k,\ell_4)$-infracolourable structure.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
We have to verify the following three properties:
\begin{compactitem}
\item[\rm (i)] For $i\le \ell_4$, $V_i=\dot\bigcup_{s\le k-1} Y_i^{(s)}$ and $\card{Y_i^{(1)}}\ge \card{Y_i^{(2)}} \ge \ldots \ge \card{Y_i^{(k-1)}}$;
\item[\rm (ii)] For $i\le \ell_4$ and $s\le k-1$, $D_i^{(s)} \subseteq Y_i^{(s)}$ and $\bigcup_{i\le \ell_4}Y_i^{(s)}\setminus D_i^{(s)}$ is an independent set;
\item[\rm (iii)] For $s\le k-1$, every vertex $v\in \bigcup_{i\le \ell_4}D_i^{(s)}$ has at most $\tfrac{1}{6q+9} \cdot \frac{\ell_4m}{k-1}$ neighbours in $\bigcup_{i\le \ell_4}Y_i^{(s)}$ and at least $\tfrac{1}{2q+3} \cdot \frac{\ell_4m}{k-1}$ non-neighbours in $\bigcup_{i\le \ell_4}V_i\setminus Y_i^{(s)}$.
\end{compactitem}
Property (i) follows directly from \eqref{eq:key_6}. For (ii), we observe that $B_i^{(s)} \subseteq D_i^{(s)}$ for $i \le \ell_4$ and $s \le k-1$. We then deduce property (ii) from the maximality of $\mathcal{M}_{(s)}$.
For (iii), we consider an arbitrary vertex $v \in \bigcup_{i\le \ell_4}D_i^{(s)}$. Assume to the contrary that $\deg(v,\bigcup_{i \le \ell_4}Y_i^{(s)})> \tfrac{1}{6q+9}\cdot\tfrac{\ell_4m}{k-1}$.
Then, by Claim \ref{eq:key_5}, we obtain
\[
\deg(v,\bigcup_{i \le \ell_4}X_i^{(s)}) \ge \deg(v,\bigcup_{i \le \ell_4}Y_i^{(s)})-\card{\bigcup_{i\le \ell_4}T_i} \\
\overset{\eqref{eq:key_3}}{\ge} \tfrac{1}{6q+9}\cdot\tfrac{\ell_4m}{k-1}-2k\varepsilon \ell_4 m > \tfrac{1}{(6q+10)(k-1)!}\cdot\tfrac{\ell_2m}{k-1}
\]
for $\varepsilon$ sufficiently small. On the other hand, by (ii), we must have $v\in \bigcup_{i\le \ell_4}D_i^{(s)}\subseteq\bigcup_{i\le \ell_4}Y_i^{(s)}$, and so $\deg(v,\bigcup_{i \le \ell_2}X_i^{(t)}) \ge \deg(v,\bigcup_{i \le \ell_2}X_i^{(s)})$ for all $t \le k-1$.
Therefore,
\begin{equation*}
\deg(v,\bigcup_{i \le \ell_2}X_i^{(t)}) \ge \deg(v,\bigcup_{i \le \ell_2}X_i^{(s)})\ge \deg(v,\bigcup_{i \le \ell_4}X_i^{(s)}) > \tfrac{1}{(6q+10)(k-1)!}\cdot\tfrac{\ell_2m}{k-1}
\]
for $t\le k-1$, as $v\in \bigcup_{i\le \ell_4}Y_i^{(s)}$. This contradicts the fact that $\{1,\ldots,\ell_4\} \cap I=\emptyset$.
Finally, by the definition of $\bigcup_{i\le \ell_4}D_i^{(s)}$, there exists $t\ne s$ such that $\deg(v,\bigcup_{i \le \ell_4}Y_i^{(t)})<\tfrac{2q+1}{2q+2}\cdot\frac{\ell_4m}{k-1}$. Consequently, the number of non-neighbours of $v$ in in $\bigcup_{i \le \ell_4}Y_i^{(t)}$ is at least
\[
\card{\bigcup_{i \le \ell_4}Y_i^{(t)}}-\tfrac{2q+1}{2q+2}\cdot\tfrac{\ell_4m}{k-1}\overset{\text{Claim \ref{eq:key_5}}}{\ge} \left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}-2k\sqrt{2k\varepsilon}\right)\ell_4m-\tfrac{2q+1}{2q+2}\cdot\tfrac{\ell_4m}{k-1} >\tfrac{1}{2q+3}\cdot\tfrac{\ell_4m}{k-1},
\]
assuming $\varepsilon$ is sufficiently small.
\end{proof}
Claim \ref{claim:find_infracolourable} tells us that $G[V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\ell_4}]$ is the base graph of an $(\tfrac{1}{6q+9},k,\ell_4)$-infracolourable structure. By appealing to Lemma \ref{lem:infracolourable}, we can find two indices $1\le i<j\le \ell_4$ with $d(V_i,V_j)\le \frac{k-2}{k-1}$, contradicting the assumption that $d(V_i,V_j)>\frac{k-2}{k-1}$. This completes our proof of Theorem \ref{thm:key}.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:complete_plus-weak}}
\label{sect:complete_plus}
In this section we shall prove a stronger version of Theorem \ref{thm:complete_plus-weak}.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:complete_plus-strong}
Let $k$ and $\ell$ be integers with $k\ge 3$ and $\ell \ge e^{2/c}$, where $c$ is a real number with $0<c \le k^{-(k+6)k}/2$. Suppose that $G=\left(V_1\cup \ldots \cup V_{\ell},E\right)$ be a balanced $\ell$-partite graph on $n$ vertices such that
\[
d(V_i,V_j) \ge \tfrac{k-2}{k-1} \quad \text{for $i \ne j$}.
\]
Then, $G$ either contains a copy of $K_{k-1}^{+}\bigl(\lfloor c \ln n \rfloor, \ldots, \lfloor c \ln n \rfloor, \lfloor n^{1-2\sqrt{c}}\rfloor \bigl)$ or is isomorphic to a graph in $\mathcal{G}_{\ell}^k$.
\end{theorem}
The idea of the proof is similar to that of Theorem \ref{thm:key}. We assume that $G$ does not contain a copy of $K_{k-1}^{+}\bigl(\lfloor c \ln n \rfloor, \ldots, \lfloor c \ln n \rfloor, \lfloor n^{1-2\sqrt{c}}\rfloor \bigl)$. We wish to show that $G$ is isomorphic to a graph in the family $\mathcal{G}_{\ell}^k$. For this purpose, we apply the stability lemma (Lemma \ref{lem:induced-stability_complete}) to find an induced $(k-1)$-colourable subgraph of $G$ which almost spans $V(G)$. We then use the embedding lemma (Lemma \ref{lem:embedding_complete-plus}) showing that $G$ contains a large infracolourable structure. To conclude the proof, we shall use a bootstrapping argument (Lemma \ref{bootstrap}) which allows leveraging a weak structure result into a strong structure result.
In the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:complete_plus-strong} we shall need the following stability lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:induced-stability_complete}
Let $k$ and $\ell$ be integers with $k\ge 3$ and $\ell \ge e^{2/c}$, where $c$ is a real number with $0< c \le k^{-(k+6)k}/2$. Let $G=(V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\ell},E)$ be a balanced $\ell$-partite graph such that $d(V_i,V_j)\ge \frac{k-2}{k-1}$ for $i\ne j$. If $G$ does not contain a copy of $K_{k-1}^{+}\bigl(\lfloor c \ln n \rfloor, \ldots, \lfloor c \ln n \rfloor, \lfloor n^{1-2\sqrt{c}}\rfloor \bigl)$, then $G$ has an induced $(k-1)$-colourable subgraph $F$ whose vertex classes $X^{(1)}, \ldots, X^{(k-1)}$ satisfy the following properties with $\varepsilon=4\ell^{-1/2}$
\begin{compactitem}
\item[\rm (i)] For $s \le k-1$, $\card{X^{(s)}}=\left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}\pm k\varepsilon\right)n$;
\item[\rm (ii)] For $s \le k-1$ and $v\in \bigcup_{t\ne s}X^{(t)}$, $\deg(v,X^{(s)})\ge \card{X^{(s)}}-k\varepsilon n$.
\end{compactitem}
\end{lemma}
To prove the above statement we need a stability lemma of Nikiforov \cite[Theorem 3]{Nikiforov10}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:Nikiforov_stability}
Let $k\ge 3$ be an integer, and let $c$ and $\delta$ be positive real numbers with $c < k^{-(k+6)k}/2$ and $\delta < \frac{1}{8k^8}$. Suppose that $G$ is a graph of order $n \ge e^{2/c}$ with $e(G) \ge \left(\frac{k-2}{k-1}-\delta\right)\binom{n}{2}$. If $G$ has no copy of $K_{k-1}^{+}\bigl(\lfloor c \ln n \rfloor, \ldots, \lfloor c \ln n \rfloor, \lfloor n^{1-2\sqrt{c}}\rfloor \bigl)$, then
$G$ contains an induced $(k-1)$-colourable subgraph $F$ of order $v(F)\ge(1-2\sqrt{\delta})n$ and minimum degree $\delta(F)\ge\left(\frac{k-2}{k-1}-4\sqrt{\delta}\right)n$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:induced-stability_complete}]
By the assumption, $\card{V_1}=\ldots=\card{V_{\ell}}=\frac{n}{\ell}:=m$. Together with the density condition, we conclude that $e(G) \ge \binom{\ell}{2}\tfrac{k-2}{k-1}m^2\ge\left(\tfrac{k-2}{k-1}-\tfrac{1}{\ell}\right)\tfrac{(\ell m)^2}{2} = \left(\tfrac{k-2}{k-1}-\tfrac{1}{\ell}\right)\tfrac{n^2}{2}$.
Notice that $c \le k^{-(k+6)k}$, $\frac{1}{\ell}<\frac{1}{8k^8}$ and $n\ge e^{2/c}$.
Thus, by applying Lemma \ref{lem:induced-stability_complete} to $G$ with $\delta_{\ref{lem:induced-stability_complete}}=\frac{1}{\ell}$ we obtain an $(k-1)$-colourable induced subgraph $F=G[X^{(1)}\cup\ldots\cup X^{(k-1)}]$ of $G$ with
$v(F)>(1-\varepsilon)n$ and $\delta(F)\ge\left(\tfrac{k-2}{k-1}-\varepsilon\right)n$. Since $\delta(F)\ge \left(\tfrac{k-2}{k-1}-\varepsilon\right)n$ and since $X^{(s)}$ is an independent set, we must have
\[
\card{X^{(s)}} \le n-\delta(F)\le \left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}+\varepsilon\right)n
\]
for $s\le k-1$. This implies that
\[
\card{X^{(s)}} \ge v(F)-(k-2)\left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}+\varepsilon\right)n \ge (1-\varepsilon)n-(k-2)\left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}+\varepsilon\right)n=\left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}-(k-1)\varepsilon\right)n
\]
for $s\le k-1$. Therefore, for $s\le k-1$ and $v\in \bigcup_{t\ne s}X^{(t)}$, the number of non-neighbours of $v$ in $X^{(s)}$ is at most
\[
n-\card{X^{(s)}}-d_F(v) \le n-\left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}-(k-1)\varepsilon\right)n-\left(\tfrac{k-2}{k-1}-\varepsilon\right)n=k\varepsilon n,
\]
as desired.
\end{proof}
The next ingredient we need is an embedding result.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:embedding_complete-plus}
Let $r \ge 2$ be an integer, and let $G$ be an $r$-colourable graph with vertex classes $W_{(1)},\ldots,W_{(r)}$ of the same size $h$. Suppose that $\deg(w,W_{(s)}) \ge \bigl(1-\frac{1}{r^2}\bigl)h$ for $s \le r$ and $w\in \bigcup_{t \ne s}W_{(t)}$. Then
\begin{compactitem}
\item[\rm (1)] $G$ contains at least $\tfrac{1}{2}h^r$ copies of $K_r$,
\item[\rm (2)] For every $\alpha \in (0,\tfrac{1}{4})$ and $s\le r$, $G$ contains a copy of $K_r(\lfloor \alpha^r \ln h \rfloor,\ldots,\lfloor \alpha^r \ln h \rfloor, \lfloor h^{1-\alpha^{r-1}}\rfloor)$ whose $s$th vertex class is a subset of $W_{(s)}$.
\end{compactitem}
\end{lemma}
The proof of the above lemma requires a simple result of Nikiforov \cite[Lemma 5]{Nikiforov10}.
\begin{lemma} \label{technical}
Let $r \ge 2$ be an integer, and let $\alpha$ be a real number in $(0,\tfrac{1}{4})$. Suppose that $B[U,W]$ is a bipartite graph with $\card{U}=p$ and $\card{W}=q$. If $p \ge 4\lfloor \alpha^r \ln q \rfloor$ and $e(B[U,W]) \ge \tfrac{1}{2}pq$, then $B[U,W]$ contains the complete bipartite graph $K(a,b)$ with $a=\lfloor \alpha^r \ln q \rfloor$ and $b=\lfloor q^{1-\alpha^{r-1}}\rfloor$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:embedding_complete-plus}]
(1) Let $w_s \in W_{(s)}$ for $s=1,\ldots, r$. Observe that $\{w_1,\ldots,w_r\}$ forms a clique of $G$ if and only if $w_s \in N(w_1,\ldots,w_{s-1}) \cap W_{(s)}$ for $s=2,\ldots, r$. In addition, $\card{N(w_1,\ldots,w_{s-1}) \cap W_{(s)}} \ge h-(s-1)\cdot\frac{h}{r^2}$. Thus, we can bound the number of copies of $K_r$ in $G$ from below by
\[
h^r \cdot\prod_{s=1}^{r}\bigl(1-\tfrac{s-1}{r^2}\bigl) \ge h^r\cdot\left(1-\sum_{s=1}^{r}\tfrac{s-1}{r^2}\right)=\tfrac{r+1}{2r}\cdot h^r >\tfrac{1}{2}h^r.
\]
(2) We proceed by induction on $r$. The base case $r=2$ follows from the first assertion and Lemma \ref{technical}. For the induction step, assume that $r>2$. The induction hypothesis implies that $G[W_{(1)}\cup \ldots \cup W_{(r-1)}]$ contains a copy of $K_{r-1}(m)$ with $m=\lfloor \alpha^{r-1} \ln h \rfloor$.
Let $U$ denote a set of $m$ disjoint copies of $K_{r-1}$ in $K_{r-1}(m)$.
Define a bipartite graph $B[U,W_{(r)}]$ with vertex classes $U$ and $W_{(r)}$, joining $R \in U$ to $w \in W_{(r)}$ if $R \cup \{w\}$ is a clique. We see that $\card{U}=m$ and $\card{W_{(r)}}=h$. Since $0<\alpha <1/4$, we have $m=\lfloor \alpha^{r-1} \ln h \rfloor \ge \lfloor 4 \alpha^r \ln h \rfloor \ge 4 \lfloor \alpha^r \ln h \rfloor$.
Furthermore, every vertex of $U$ has at least $h-r\cdot\frac{h}{r^2} \ge h/2$ neighbours in $W_{(r)}$.
Hence $e(B[U,W_{(r)}]) \ge mh/2$. The assertion then follows from the base case $r=2$.
\end{proof}
In order to find a large infracolourable structure in $G$ we shall use the following consequence of Lemma \ref{lem:embedding_complete-plus}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:plus_bound_I}
Let $k \ge 3$ and $\ell \ge 2$ be integers, and let $\varepsilon$ and $\alpha$ be positive real numbers with $\varepsilon<10^{-2}k^{-k}$ and $\alpha<\tfrac{1}{4}$. Suppose that $G=(V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\ell},E)$ is a balanced $\ell$-partite graph containing no copy of $K_{k-1}^{+}\bigl(\lfloor\alpha^{k-1}\ln(p)\rfloor,\ldots,\lfloor\alpha^{k-1}\ln(p)\rfloor, \lfloor p^{1-\alpha^{k-2}} \rfloor\bigl)$, where $p=\tfrac{1}{16(k-1)(k-1)!}\cdot v(G)$. Assume that $(X^{(s)}_i)_{s\le k-1, i\le \ell}$ are vertex sets so that
\begin{compactitem}
\item[\rm (i)] For $i\le \ell$, $X_i^{(1)},\ldots, X_i^{(k-1)}$ are disjoint subsets of $V_i$;
\item[\rm (ii)] For $s \le k-1$ and $v\in \bigcup_{i\le \ell, t\ne s}X_i^{(t)}$, $\deg(v,\bigcup_{i\le \ell}X_i^{(s)}) \ge \card{\bigcup_{i\le \ell}X_i^{(s)}}-\varepsilon \cdot v(G)$.
\end{compactitem}
Then, there are no vertices $v \in V(G)$ such that $\deg(v,\bigcup_{i\le \ell}X_i^{(s)}) \ge p$ for all $s \le k-1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose for the contradiction that there is $v \in V(G)$ with $\deg(v,\bigcup_{i}X_i^{(s)}) \ge p$ for all $s\le k-1$. Then,
for $s \le k-1$ there exists a subset
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:plus_bound_I_1}
W_{(s)} \subseteq N(v) \cap \left(\bigcup_{i}X_i^{(s)}\right) \ \textrm{with $\card{W_{(s)}}=p$}.
\end{equation}
By property (i), $W_{(1)},\ldots,W_{(k-1)}$ are disjoint subsets of $V(G)$.
On the other hand, property (ii) shows that for all $s \le k-1$ and $v \in \bigcup_{t\ne s}W_{(t)}$ one has
\begin{align}
\label{eq:plus_bound_I_2}
\notag \deg\bigl(v,W_{(s)}\bigl) &\ge \card{W_{(s)}}-\varepsilon \cdot v(G) \\
&\ge \card{W_{(s)}}-\frac{1}{(k-1)^2}\cdot \frac{1}{16(k-1)(k-1)!}\cdot v(G)=\left(1-\frac{1}{(k-1)^2}\right)\cdot\card{W_{(s)}},
\end{align}
as $\varepsilon<10^{-2}k^{-k}$.
Finally, it follows from \eqref{eq:plus_bound_I_1} and \eqref{eq:plus_bound_I_2} that we can apply Lemma \ref{lem:embedding_complete-plus}(2) to the graph $G[W_{(1)}, \ldots,W_{(k-1)}]$ with $r_{\ref{lem:embedding_complete-plus}}=k-1$, $h_{\ref{lem:embedding_complete-plus}}=p$ and $\alpha_{\ref{lem:embedding_complete-plus}}=\alpha$ to find a copy of $K_{k-1}\bigl(\lfloor\alpha^{k-1}\ln(p)\rfloor,\ldots,\lfloor\alpha^{k-1}\ln(p)\rfloor, \lfloor p^{1-\alpha^{k-2}} \rfloor\bigl)$. Since $W_{(1)} \cup \ldots \cup W_{(k-1)}$ lies in the neighbour of $v$, $G$ contains a copy of $K_{k-1}^{+}\bigl(\lfloor\alpha^{k-1}\ln(p)\rfloor,\ldots,\lfloor\alpha^{k-1}\ln(p)\rfloor, \lfloor p^{1-\alpha^{k-2}} \rfloor\bigl)$, which contradicts our assumption.
\end{proof}
To find a large infracolourable structure in $G$ we also require the following consequence of Lemma \ref{lem:embedding_complete-plus}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:plus_bound_J}
Let $k\ge 3$ and $\ell \ge 2$ be integers, and let $\varepsilon$ and $\alpha$ be positive real numbers with $\varepsilon<\frac{1}{12k^3}$ and $\alpha<\tfrac{1}{4}$. Let $G=(V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\ell},E)$ be a balanced $\ell$-partite graph containing no copy of $K_{k-1}^{+}\bigl(\lfloor\alpha^{k-1}\ln(p)\rfloor,\ldots,\lfloor\alpha^{k-1}\ln(p)\rfloor, \lfloor p^{1-\alpha^{k-2}} \rfloor\bigl)$, where $p=\tfrac{1}{4(k-1)}\cdot v(G)$.
Suppose $(X^{(s)}_i,Y^{(s)}_i)_{s\le k-1, i\le \ell}$ are pairs of vertex sets which satisfy
\begin{compactitem}
\item[\rm (i)] For every $i \le \ell$ and $s\le k-1$, $Y_i^{(1)},\ldots, Y_i^{(k-1)}$ are disjoint subsets of $V_i$ and $X_i^{(s)}\subseteq Y_i^{(s)}$;
\item[\rm (ii)] For $i\le \ell$ and $s\le k-1$, $ \card{X_i^{(s)}} = \left(\frac{1}{k-1}\pm \varepsilon\right)\card{V_i}$;
\item[\rm (iii)] For $s \le k-1$ and $v\in \bigcup_{i\le \ell, t\ne s}X_i^{(t)}$, $\deg(v,\bigcup_{i\le \ell}X_i^{(s)}) \ge \card{\bigcup_{i\le \ell}X_i^{(s)}}-\varepsilon \cdot v(G)$.
\end{compactitem}
For $i\le \ell$ and $s\le k-1$, let $B_i^{(s)}$ stands for a subset of $Y_i^{(s)}$ consisting of all vertices $v$ with $\deg(v,\bigcup_{j\le \ell}X_j^{(t)})< \tfrac{2}{3(k-1)}\cdot v(G)$ for some $t \ne s$.
Then, for $s\le k-1$, $\bigcup_{i\le \ell}Y_i^{(s)}\setminus B_i^{(s)}$ is an independent set of $G$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We prove by contradiction. Suppose that there exists an edge $\{x,y\}\in E(G)$ with $x, y \in \bigcup_{i}Y_i^{(s)} \setminus B_i^{(s)}$.
Let $t\ne s$. By the definition of $\bigcup_{i}B_i^{(s)}$, both $\deg(x, \bigcup_{i}X_i^{(t)})$ and $\deg(y, \bigcup_{i}X_i^{(t)})$ are at least $\tfrac{2}{3(k-1)}\cdot v(G)$.
Hence
\begin{align*}
\card{N(x,y) \cap \bigcup_{i}X_i^{(t)}} &\ge \deg(x, \bigcup_{i}X_i^{(t)})+\deg(y, \bigcup_{i}X_i^{(t)})-\card{\bigcup_{i}X_i^{(t)}}\\
& \overset{(ii)}{\ge} \frac{4}{3(k-1)}\cdot v(G)-\left(\frac{1}{k-1}+\varepsilon\right)\cdot v(G) \ge \frac{1}{4(k-1)}\cdot v(G),
\end{align*}
as $\varepsilon<\frac{1}{12k^3}$. It means that there is a subset
\begin{equation*}
\label{eq:plus_10}
W_{(t)} \subseteq N(x,y) \cap \bigcup_{i \le \ell_3}X_i^{(t)} \ \textrm{with $\card{W_{(t)}}=\tfrac{1}{4(k-1)}\cdot v(G)$}.
\end{equation*}
On the other hand, it follows from property (ii) that
$\card{\bigcup_{i}X_i^{(s)}}\ge \left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}-\varepsilon\right)v(G) >\tfrac{1}{4(k-1)}\cdot v(G)$ for $0<\varepsilon<\frac{1}{12k^3}$, and so there exists a subset
\begin{equation*}
\label{eq:plus_11}
W_{(s)} \subseteq \bigcup_{i}X_i^{(s)} \ \textrm{with $\card{W_{(s)}} =\tfrac{1}{4(k-1)}\cdot v(G)$}.
\end{equation*}
Analysis similar to that in the proof of Lemma \ref{lem:plus_bound_I} shows that $G[W_{(1)}, \ldots, W_{(k-1)}]$ must contain a copy of $K_{k-1}\bigl(\lfloor\alpha^{k-1}\ln(p)\rfloor,\ldots,\lfloor\alpha^{k-1}\ln(p)\rfloor, \lfloor p^{1-\alpha^{k-2}} \rfloor\bigl)$ whose $s$th vertex class is of size $\lfloor\alpha^{k-1}\ln(p)\rfloor$. Adding back vertices $x$ and $y$ to this class one gets a supgraph of the graph $K_{k-1}^{+}\bigl(\lfloor\alpha^{k-1}\ln(p)\rfloor,\ldots,\lfloor\alpha^{k-1}\ln(p)\rfloor, \lfloor p^{1-\alpha^{k-2}} \rfloor\bigl)$, contradicting the hypothesis.
\end{proof}
The last component of the proof is a bootstrapping argument which allows us to leverage a weak structure result into a strong structure result. Roughly speaking, it says that if $G$ contains an $\tilde{\ell}$-partite subgraph which is in $\mathcal{G}_{\tilde{\ell}}^k$, then $G$ must belong to $\mathcal{G}_{\ell}^k$.
\begin{lemma}\label{bootstrap}
Let $k\ge 3$ be an integer, and let $G=(V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\ell},E)$ be an $\ell$-partite graph with $\card{V_1}=\ldots=\card{V_{\ell}}=m$ and $d(V_i,V_j)\ge \frac{k-2}{k-1}$ for all $i\ne j$. Suppose that there exist an integer $\tilde{\ell}$ and disjoint subsets $Y_i^{(1)},\ldots,Y_i^{(k-1)}$ of $V_i$ for $1\le i\le \tilde{\ell}$ so that $\card{Y_i^{(s)}}=\tfrac{m}{k-1}$ and $d(Y_i^{(s)},Y_j^{(t)})=1$ for all $i\ne j$ and $s\ne t$. If $G$ does not contain a copy of $K_{k-1}^{+}\big(\frac{\tilde{\ell}m}{32k^2}\big)$, then $G$ is isomorphic to a graph in the family $\mathcal{G}_{\ell}^k$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We wish to show that $G$ is isomorphic to a graph in $\mathcal{G}_{\ell}^k$.
According to Lemma \ref{lem:extremal_graphs}, it suffices to prove $G$ is $(k-1)$-colourable.
By the assumption, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:bootstrap_1}
\card{Y_i^{(s)}}=\tfrac{m}{k-1}, \ \textrm{$d(Y_i^{(s)},Y_j^{(t)})=1$ for $s\ne t$ and $1 \le i < j \le \tilde{\ell}$}.
\end{equation}
We shall show that for $v \in V(G) \setminus \left(V_1\cup \ldots \cup V_{\tilde{\ell}}\right)$ there does not exist $s \le k-1$ with
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:bootstrap_2}
\deg\bigl(v,Y_1^{(s)} \cup \ldots \cup Y_{\tilde{\ell}}^{(s)}\bigl)\ge 1, \ \textrm{$\deg\bigl(v,Y_1^{(t)} \cup \ldots \cup Y_{\tilde{\ell}}^{(t)}\bigl) \ge \frac{\tilde{\ell}m}{2k}$ for all $t \ne s$}.
\end{equation}
We prove by contradiction. Suppose that \eqref{eq:bootstrap_2} holds. We can pick an index $i_0\in \{1,2,\ldots,\tilde{\ell}\}$ with $N(v) \cap Y_{i_0}^{(s)} \ne \emptyset$ whose existence is guaranteed by \eqref{eq:bootstrap_2}. We then arbitrarily add other indices to get a subset $I_{(s)} \subset \{1,\ldots,\tilde{\ell}\}$ of size $\frac{\tilde{\ell}}{8k}$. It follows from \eqref{eq:bootstrap_1} and \eqref{eq:bootstrap_2} that for each $t \ne s$, there are at least $\frac{\tilde{\ell}}{4}$ indices $i \le \tilde{\ell}$ with $\deg(v,Y_i^{(t)}) \ge \frac{m}{4k}$.
Hence we can find $k-1$ disjoint subsets $I_{(1)}, \ldots, I_{(k-1)}$ of size $\frac{\tilde{\ell}}{8k}$ of $\{1,\ldots,\tilde{\ell}\}$ with the property that $\deg(v,Y_i^{(t)}) \ge \frac{m}{4k}$ for all $t \ne s$ and $i \in I_{(t)}$. By \eqref{eq:bootstrap_1}, $G\big[\bigcup_{i \in I_{(1)}}Y_i^{(1)},\ldots,\bigcup_{i \in I_{(k-1)}}Y_i^{(k-1)}\big]$ is a complete $(k-1)$-partite graph. In addition, we have $\card{N(v)\cap\bigcup_{i \in I_{(s)}}Y_i^{(s)}} \ge \card{N(v)\cap Y_{i_0}^{(s)}}>0$ and
\begin{equation*}
\card{N(v)\cap\bigcup_{i \in I_{(t)}}Y_i^{(t)}}=\sum_{i\in I_{(t)}}\deg(v,Y_i^{(t)})\ge \card{I_{(t)}}\cdot \frac{m}{4k}=\frac{\tilde{\ell}m}{32k^2} \quad \text{for $t\ne s$}.
\end{equation*}
Therefore, by adding $v$ to the $s$th part of $G\big[\bigcup_{i \in I_{(1)}}Y_i^{(1)},\ldots,\bigcup_{i \in I_{(k-1)}}Y_i^{(k-1)}\big]$ we get a supergraph of $K_{k-1}^{+}\big(\frac{\tilde{\ell}m}{32k^2}\big)$ in $G$, contradicting our assumption.
We can infer from \eqref{eq:bootstrap_2} that
$\deg(v,V_1 \cup \ldots \cup V_{\tilde{\ell}}) \le \tfrac{k-2}{k-1} \cdot \tilde{\ell}m$ for all $v \in V(G) \setminus \left(V_1\cup \ldots \cup V_{\tilde{\ell}}\right)$. By the density condition, equality must hold. Again \eqref{eq:bootstrap_2} shows that for each $v \in V(G) \setminus \left(V_1\cup \ldots \cup V_{\tilde{\ell}}\right)$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bootstrap_3}
N(v) \cap \bigl(V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\tilde{\ell}}\bigl) = \bigcup_{i \le \tilde{\ell}} V_i \setminus Y_i^{(s)} \quad \text{for some $s\le k-1$.}
\end{equation} If $v \in V_i$ for some $i>\tilde{\ell}$, then we assign $v$ to $Z_i^{(s)}$. For $i\le \tilde{\ell}$ we let $Z_i^{(s)}=Y_i^{(s)}$ for $s\le k-1$. If we denote $Z^{(s)}= \dot\bigcup_{i} Z_i^{(s)}$ for $s\le k-1$, then $V=\dot\bigcup_{s} Z^{(s)}$. To prove $G$ is $(k-1)$-colourable, it is enough to show that $Z^{(1)},\ldots,Z^{(k-1)}$ are independent sets. Suppose to the contrary that for some $s\le k-1$, $Z^{(s)}$ contains an edge $\{u,v\}$ with $u\in Z_{i_1}^{(s)}$ and $v\in Z_{i_2}^{(s)}$. We can easily find $k-1$ disjoint subsets $J_{(1)},\ldots,J_{(k-1)}$ of size $\frac{\tilde{\ell}}{2(k-1)}$ of $[\tilde{\ell}]\setminus \{i_1,i_2\}$. Let $W^{(s)}=\{u,v\}\cup \left(\bigcup_{i\in J_{(s)}}Y_i^{(s)}\right)$ and $W^{(t)}=\bigcup_{i\in J_{(t)}}Y_i^{(t)}$ for $t\ne s$. It follows from \eqref{eq:bootstrap_1} and \eqref{eq:bootstrap_3} that $G[W^{(1)},\ldots,W^{(k-1)}]$ is a complete $(k-1)$-colourable graph with $\card{W^{(t)}}\ge \frac{\tilde{\ell}}{2(k-1)}\cdot \frac{m}{k-1}>\frac{\tilde{\ell}m}{32k^2}$ for $t \le k-1$. Combining this with the assumption that $\{u,v\}\in E(G)$, we conclude that $G$ contains a copy of $K_{k-1}^{+}\big(\frac{\tilde{\ell}m}{32k^2}\big)$, a contradiction.
\end{proof}
We now have all the necessary tools to prove Theorem \ref{thm:complete_plus-strong}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:complete_plus-strong}]
For convenience, we write $H=K_{k-1}^{+}\big(\lfloor c \ln n \rfloor,\ldots,\lfloor c \ln n \rfloor, \lfloor n^{1-2\sqrt{c}}\rfloor \big)$ and
$H^{-}=K_{k-1}\big(\lfloor c \ln n \rfloor,\ldots,\lfloor c \ln n \rfloor, \lfloor n^{1-2\sqrt{c}}\rfloor \big)$. Suppose $G$ has no copy of $H$. We wish to show that $G$ is isomorphic to a graph in $\mathcal{G}_{\ell}^k$. Since $G$ is a balanced $\ell$-partite graph on $n$ vertices, each partition set of $G$ has size $n/\ell:=m$. Let $\varepsilon=4\ell^{-1/2}$, $\ell_1=\frac{\ell}{2(k-1)!}-(k-1)$, $\ell_2=\frac{\ell_2}{(k-1)!}$ and $\ell_3=\ell_2-1$.
By Lemma \ref{lem:induced-stability_complete}, $G$ must contain an induced $(k-1)$-colourable subgraph $F$ whose vertex classes $X^{(1)}, \ldots, X^{(k-1)}$ satisfy
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:plus_1}
\card{X^{(s)}}=\left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}\pm k\varepsilon\right)n \ \text{for $s \le k-1$},\\
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:plus_2}
\deg(v,X^{(s)}) \ge \card{X^{(s)}}-k\varepsilon n \ \text{for $s \le k-1$ and $v\in \bigcup_{t\ne s}X^{(t)}$}.
\end{equation}
Let $T=V(G) \setminus V(F)$. As in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:key}, by relabelling parts we can assume that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:plus_4}
\card{T_i} \le 2k^2\varepsilon m, \ \text{and} \ \card{X_i^{(s)}}=\left(\tfrac{1}{k-1}\pm 2k^2\sqrt{\varepsilon}\right)m \quad \text{for $i\le \ell_1$ and $s\le k-1$}.
\end{equation}
For $i \le \ell_1$ we shall partition $V_i$ into $k-1$ subsets as follows. A vertex $v \in V_i$ is assigned to $Y_i^{(s)}$ if
$\deg\big(v,\bigcup_{j \le \ell_1}X_j^{(s)}\big)= \min_{t\le k-1}\deg\big(v,\bigcup_{j \le \ell_1}X_j^{(t)}\big)$; if there are more than one such index $s$, arbitrarily pick one of them.
\begin{claim}\label{eq:plus_5}
$X_i^{(s)} \subseteq Y_i^{(s)} \subseteq X_i^{(s)}\dot\cup T_i$ for $i\le \ell_1$ and $s\le k-1$.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
Because $X^{(s)}$ is an independent set in $G$, every vertex in $X_i^{(s)}$ has no neighbours in $\bigcup_{j \le \ell_1}X_j^{(s)}$, and so $X_i^{(s)}$ is a subset of $Y_i^{(s)}$. Since $V_i=\left(\dot\bigcup_{s} X_i^{(s)}\right)\dot\cup T_i=\dot\bigcup_{s}Y_i^{(s)}$ and $X_i^{(s)}\subseteq Y_i^{(s)}$ for $i\le \ell_1$ and $s \le k-1$, the inclusion relation $Y_i^{(s)} \subseteq X_i^{(s)}\dot\cup T_i$ holds for $i\le \ell_1$ and $s\le k-1$.
\end{proof}
We proceed by showing that $\bigcup_{i\le \ell_1}V_i$ does not contain a vertex which has relatively large degree to $\bigcup_{i \le \ell_1}Y_i^{(s)}$ for all $s \le k-1$.
\begin{claim} \label{claim:plus_bound_I} There are no vertices $v \in \bigcup_{i\le \ell_1}V_i$ with $\deg(v,\bigcup_{i \le \ell_1}Y_i^{(s)}) \ge \tfrac{1}{15(k-1)(k-1)!}\cdot \ell_1 m$ for all $s \le k-1$.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
We can derive from \eqref{eq:plus_2} that, for $s\le k-1$ and $v\in \bigcup_{i\le \ell_1,t \ne s}X_i^{(t)}$,
\begin{align*}
\deg(v,\bigcup_{i \le \ell_1}X_i^{(s)})&\ge \card{\bigcup_{i \le \ell_1}X_i^{(s)}}+\deg(v,X^{(s)})-\card{X^{(s)}}\\
&\ge \card{\bigcup_{i \le \ell_1}X_i^{(s)}}-k\varepsilon n \ge \card{\bigcup_{i \le \ell_1}X_i^{(s)}}-k^k\varepsilon \cdot \ell_1m.
\end{align*}
Applying Lemma \ref{lem:plus_bound_I} to $G[V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\ell_1}]$ with $k_{\ref{lem:plus_bound_I}}=k$, $\varepsilon_{\ref{lem:plus_bound_I}}=k^k\varepsilon$ and $\alpha_{\ref{lem:plus_bound_I}}=(2c)^{1/(k-1)}$, we conclude that either $G[V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\ell_1}]$ contains a copy of $K_{k-1}^{+}\bigl(\lfloor\alpha^{k-1}\ln(p)\rfloor,\ldots,\lfloor\alpha^{k-1}\ln(p)\rfloor, \lfloor p^{1-\alpha^{k-2}} \rfloor\bigl)$ or there are no vertices $v\in V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\ell_1}$ with $\deg(v,X_1^{(s)}\cup\ldots\cup X_{\ell}^{(s)}) \ge p$ for all $s$, where $p=\tfrac{1}{16(k-1)(k-1)!}\cdot \ell_1m$. Since $\alpha^{k-1}\ln(p)>c\ln(n)$, $p^{1-\alpha^{k-2}}>n^{1-2\sqrt{c}}$ and since $G$ has no copy of $K_{k-1}^{+}\bigl(\lfloor c \ln n \rfloor, \ldots, \lfloor c \ln n \rfloor, \lfloor n^{1-2\sqrt{c}}\rfloor \bigl)$, the former case is ruled out. The later case implies our statement.
\end{proof}
Since $\ell_2=\frac{\ell_1}{(k-1)!}$, by reordering parts if necessary we can assume that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:plus_6}
\card{Y_i^{(1)}} \ge \card{Y_i^{(2)}} \ge \ldots \ge \card{Y_i^{(k-1)}} \ \textrm{for $i \le \ell_2$}.
\end{equation}
For $i \le \ell_2$ and $s \le k-1$, let us denote
\[
D_i^{(s)}=\biggl\{v \in Y_i^{(s)}: \deg(v,Y_1^{(t)}\cup\ldots\cup Y_{\ell_2}^{(t)})< \tfrac{3}{4(k-1)}\cdot\ell_2m \ \text{for some $t \ne s$}\biggl\}.
\]
\begin{claim} \label{claim:plus_bound_J}
The vertex set $\bigcup_{i\le \ell_2}Y_i^{(s)}\setminus D_i^{(s)}$ is an independent set of $G$ for $s \le k-1$.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
For $i\le \ell_2$ and $s\le k-1$, let $B_i^{(s)}$ be the vertex set consisting of all vertices $v \in Y_i^{(s)}$ such that $\deg(v,\bigcup_{i\le \ell_2}X_i^{(t)})< \tfrac{2}{3(k-1)}\cdot \ell_2m$ for some $t \ne s$.
Note that, for $s\le k-1$ and $v\in \bigcup_{i\le \ell_2,t\ne s}X_i^{(s)}$, one has
\begin{align*}
\deg(v,\bigcup_{i \le \ell_2}X_i^{(s)})&\ge \card{\bigcup_{i \le \ell_2}X_i^{(s)}}+\deg(v,X^{(s)})-\card{X^{(s)}}\\
&\overset{\eqref{eq:plus_2}}{\ge} \card{\bigcup_{i \le \ell_2}X_i^{(s)}}-k\varepsilon n \ge \card{\bigcup_{i \le \ell_2}X_i^{(s)}}-k^{2k}\varepsilon \cdot \ell_2m.
\end{align*}
This estimate together with Claim \ref{eq:plus_5} and \eqref{eq:plus_4} show that we can apply Lemma \ref{lem:plus_bound_J} to $G[V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\ell_2}]$ with $k_{\ref{lem:plus_bound_J}}=k$, $\varepsilon_{\ref{lem:plus_bound_J}}=\max\{2k^2\sqrt{\varepsilon},k^{2k}\varepsilon\}$ and $\alpha_{\ref{lem:plus_bound_J}}=(2c)^{1/(k-1)}:=\alpha$ to conclude that either $G[V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\ell_2}]$ contains $K_{k-1}^{+}\bigl(\lfloor\alpha^{k-1}\ln(p)\rfloor,\ldots,\lfloor\alpha^{k-1}\ln(p)\rfloor, \lfloor p^{1-\alpha^{k-2}} \rfloor\bigl)$ or $\bigcup_{i\le \ell_2}Y_i^{(s)}\setminus B_i^{(s)}$ is an independent set of $G$ for $s \le k-1$, where $p=\tfrac{1}{4(k-1)}\cdot\ell_2m$. Since $\alpha^{k-1}\ln(p)>c\ln(n)$, $p^{1-\alpha^{k-2}}>n^{1-2\sqrt{c}}$ and since $G$ has no copy of $K_{k-1}^{+}\bigl(\lfloor c \ln n \rfloor, \ldots, \lfloor c \ln n \rfloor, \lfloor n^{1-2\sqrt{c}}\rfloor \bigl)$, the former case is ruled out. We can see that the later case implies our statement.
\end{proof}
Now we can find a large infracolourable structure in $G$, and then use Lemma \ref{bootstrap} to show that $G$ is isomorphic to a graph in $\mathcal{G}_{\ell}^k$.
\begin{claim}
$G$ is isomorphic to a graph in the family $\mathcal{G}_{\ell}^k$.
\end{claim}
\begin{proof}
Analogously to the proof of Claim \ref{claim:find_infracolourable}, we can infer from Claims \ref{claim:plus_bound_I} and \ref{claim:plus_bound_J}, \eqref{eq:plus_4} and \eqref{eq:plus_6} that ${G[V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\ell_2}]}$ together with pairs $(D_i^{(s)},Y_i^{(s)})_{s\le k-1, i\le \ell_2}$ form a $(\tfrac{1}{15},k,\ell_2)$-infracolourable structure. By Lemma \ref{lem:infracolourable} this implies that $e(G[V_1\cup\ldots\cup V_{\ell_2}]) \le \binom{\ell_2}{2}\frac{k-2}{k-1}m^2$ and hence the equality must occur by the density condition. Appealing to Lemma \ref{lem:infracolourable} once again, we see that there exists $i_0\in \{0,1,\ldots,\ell_2\}$ with $\card{Y_i^{(s)}}=\tfrac{m}{k-1}$ for all $s$ and all $i\in [\ell_2]\setminus\{i_0\}$, and $d(Y_i^{(s)},Y_j^{(t)})=1$ for all $s\ne t$ and $1\le i<j \le \ell_2$. Hence we can apply Lemma \ref{bootstrap} with $\tilde{\ell}=\ell_2-1$ to conclude that either $G$ contains a copy of $K_{k-1}^{+}\big(\frac{(\ell_2-1)m}{32k^2}\big)$ or $G$ is isomorphic to a graph in $\mathcal{G}_{\ell}^k$. The former can not happen since $G$ has no copy of $K_{k-1}^{+}\big(\lfloor c \ln n \rfloor,\ldots,\lfloor c \ln n \rfloor, \lfloor n^{1-2\sqrt{c}}\rfloor \big)$ and since $\frac{(\ell_2-1)m}{32k^2}>\max\{n^{1-2\sqrt{c}},c\ln n\}$. So $G$ must isomorphic to a graph in the family $\mathcal{G}_{\ell}^k$.
\end{proof}
This concludes our proof of Theorem \ref{thm:key}.
\end{proof}
\section{Missing proofs}\label{sect:missing_proofs}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:joints}}
\label{sect:joints}
In this section we sketch a proof of Theorem \ref{thm:joints}.
We follow essentially the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:complete_plus-strong}. We make the following alterations. Instead of Lemma \ref{lem:Nikiforov_stability} we use a stability result due to Bollob\'as and Nikiforov \cite[Theorem 9]{BN08}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:stability_joints}
Let $k \ge 2$ be an integer, and let $\delta$ be a positive with $\delta < \frac{1}{16k^8}$. Suppose that $G$ is a graph with $n > k^8$ vertices and $e(G) \ge \left(\frac{k-2}{k-1}-\delta \right)\binom{n}{2}$ edges. Then, either
$G$ contains a family of $k^{-(k+5)}n^{k-2}$ copies of $K_k$ sharing a common edge, or $G$ contains an induced $(k-1)$-colourable subgraph $F$ of size $v(F)\ge (1-2\sqrt{\delta})n$ and minimum degree $\delta(F)\ge \left(\frac{k-2}{k-1}-4\sqrt{\delta}\right)n$.
\end{lemma}
We replace Lemma \ref{lem:embedding_complete-plus} by the following embedding result.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:embedding_joints}
Let $r \ge 2$ be an integer, and let $G$ be an $r$-colourable graph with classes $W_{(1)},\ldots,W_{(r)}$ of the same size $h$. Suppose that $\deg(v,W_{(s)}) \ge \bigl(1-\frac{1}{r^2}\bigl)h$ for $s \le r$ and $v \in \bigcup_{t \ne s}W_{(t)}$. Then for every pair $(s,t)$ with $s\ne t$, there is an edge between $W_{(s)}$ and $W_{(t)}$ which is contained in $\tfrac{1}{2}h^{r-2}$ copies of $K_r$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
According to Lemma \ref{lem:embedding_complete-plus}, $G$ contains at least $\tfrac{1}{2}h^r$ copies of $K_r$. Hence there exists an edge between $W_{(s)}$ and $W_{(t)}$ which is shared by at least $h^r/(2h^2)=\tfrac{1}{2}h^{r-2}$ copies of $K_r$.
\end{proof}
The remainder of the proof is similar to that of Theorem \ref{thm:complete_plus-strong}.
\subsection{Proofs of Proposition \ref{prop:Erdos-Stone_stability} and Lemma \ref{lem:common_neighbours}}
To prove Proposition \ref{prop:Erdos-Stone_stability} we shall require the Erd\H{o}s-Simonovits stability theorem (Erd\H{o}s \cite{Erdos67} and Simonovits \cite[Theorem 8]{Simonovits66}, and the graph removal lemma (Ruzsa and Szemer\'edi \cite{RS78}).
\begin{theorem} [\bf{Stability theorem}]
\label{stability theorem}
For every graph $H$ and every $\varepsilon>0$, there exist positive constants $\delta=\delta(H,\varepsilon)$ and $C=C(H,\varepsilon)$ so that the following holds for every integer $n\ge C$. Every $n$-vertex $H$-free graph with at least $\left(\frac{\chi(H)-2}{\chi(H)-1}-\delta\right)\binom{n}{2}$ edges contains a $(\chi(H)-1)$-colourable subgraph of order at least $(1-\varepsilon)n$ and minimum degree at least $\left(\frac{\chi(H)-2}{\chi(H)-1}-\varepsilon\right)n$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theorem} [{\bf Graph removal lemma}]
\label{graph removal lemma}
For every graph $H$ and every $\delta>0$, there exists a positive constant $\gamma=\gamma(H,\delta)$ such that every graph on $n$ vertices with at most $\gamma n^{v(H)}$ copies of $H$ can be made $H$-free by removing from it at most $\delta \binom{n}{2}$ edges.
\end{theorem}
Now we can deduce Proposition \ref{prop:Erdos-Stone_stability} from Theorems \ref{stability theorem} and \ref{graph removal lemma} as follows.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{prop:Erdos-Stone_stability}]
Let $\delta=\delta_{\ref{stability theorem}}(H,\varepsilon)/2$, $\gamma=\min\{\gamma_{\ref{graph removal lemma}}(H,\delta),\delta\}$ and $C=C_{\ref{stability theorem}}(H,\varepsilon)$. Since $G$ contains at most $\gamma n^{v(H)}$ copies of $H$, Theorem \ref{graph removal lemma} shows that $G$ contains an $H$-free subgraph $G'$ with ${e(G')\ge e(G)-\delta \binom{n}{2}}$. Hence
\[
e(G')\ge \left(\frac{\chi(H)-2}{\chi(H)-1}-\gamma-\delta\right)\binom{n}{2} \ge \left(\frac{\chi(H)-2}{\chi(H)-1}-\delta_{\ref{stability theorem}}(H,\varepsilon)\right)\binom{n}{2}.
\]
Moreover, $v(G')=n \ge C = C_{\ref{stability theorem}}(H,\varepsilon)$.
Therefore, one can apply Theorem \ref{stability theorem} to obtain a $(\chi(H)-1)$-colourable subgraph $G''$ of $G'$ with
$v(G'')\ge (1-\varepsilon)n$ and $\delta(G'')\ge \left(\frac{\chi(H)-2}{\chi(H)-1}-\varepsilon\right)n$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lem:common_neighbours}]
Choose $D=qd^{-r}$ and $\rho=e^{-q}d^{rq}$.
Let $S$ be the set of tuples $(w_1,\ldots,w_r,A)$ where $w_s \in W_{(s)}$ for all $s$, and $A \in \binom{N(w_1,\ldots,w_r)}{q}$.
We find that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:appendix_1}
\card{S}=\sum\limits_{A \in \binom{U}{q}}\prod\limits_{s \le r}\card{N(A)\cap W_{(s)}}=\sum\limits_{(w_1,\ldots,w_r)}\binom{\card{N(w_1,\ldots,w_r)}}{q}.
\end{equation}
Moreover, our assumption implies that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:appendix_2}
\sum\limits_{(w_1,\ldots,w_r)}\card{N(w_1,\ldots,w_r)}=\sum\limits_{u \in U} \prod\limits_{s \le r}\deg(u,W_{(s)})\ge d^r\card{U}\cdot \prod\limits_{s \le r}\card{W_{(s)}}.
\end{equation}
Note that the function
\begin{equation*}
\binom{x}{q}=
\begin{cases}
x(x-1)\cdots(x-q+1)/q! & \text{if $x \ge q-1$}, \\
0 & \text{if $x < q-1$}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
is convex.
Thus, we can first apply Jensen's inequality to the right hand side of \eqref{eq:appendix_1} and then use the inequality \eqref{eq:appendix_2} to obtain
$\card{S} \ge \binom{d^r\card{U}}{q} \prod\limits_{s \le r}\card{W_{(s)}}$. We infer from this and the first identity in \eqref{eq:appendix_1} that there is a subset $A \in \binom{U}{q}$ with
\[
\prod\limits_{s \le r}\card{N(A)\cap W_{(s)}} \ge \frac{\binom{d^r\card{U}}{q}}{\binom{\card{U}}{q}} \cdot\prod\limits_{s \le r}\card{W_{(s)}} \ge e^{-q}d^{rq} \cdot\prod\limits_{s \le r}\card{W_{(s)}}=\rho \cdot\prod\limits_{s \le r}\card{W_{(s)}},
\]
where the second inequality holds since $\binom{\card{U}}{q} \le \left(\frac{e\card{U}}{q}\right)^q$, and
$\binom{d^r\card{U}}{q} \ge \left(\frac{d^r\card{U}}{q}\right)^q$ for $\card{U}\ge D=qd^{-r} \ge q$. Hence $\card{N(A)\cap W_{(s)}} \ge \rho\card{W_{(s)}}$ for $s\le r$.
\end{proof}
\section{Concluding remarks}
\label{sect:concluding}
Bollob\'as \cite[Corollary 3.5.4]{Bollobas78} showed that every $n$-vertex graph with $\lfloor \frac{n^2}{4} \rfloor + 1$ edges contains cycles of lengths from $3$ up to $\lfloor\frac{n+3}{2}\rfloor$, and thus strengthened the Mantel theorem. Using techniques developed in this paper we can prove the following multipartite version of this result; we omit the details.
\begin{theorem}\label{cycle lengths}
Let $\ell \ge 10^{20}$, and let $G=\left(V_1\cup \ldots \cup V_{\ell},E\right)$ be a balanced $\ell$-partite graph on $n$ vertices such that
\[
d(V_i,V_j) \ge \tfrac{1}{2} \quad \text{for $i \ne j$}.
\]
Then, $G$ either contains a cycle of length $h$ for each integer $h$ with $3 \le h \le (\tfrac{1}{2}-\frac{2}{\sqrt{\ell}})n$ or is isomorphic to a graph in $\mathcal{G}_{\ell}^{3}$.
\end{theorem}
\noindent The balanced $\ell$-partite graph obtained by taking the disjoint union of ${K_{\ell}\bigl(\lfloor\frac{n}{2\ell}\rfloor-1\bigl)}$ and $K_{\ell}\bigl(\lceil\frac{n}{2\ell}\rceil+1\bigl)$ has edge densities between parts strictly greater than $\frac{1}{2}$. However, every cycle of this graph has length at most $\frac{1}{2}n+2\ell=(\tfrac{1}{2}+o(1))n$ provided $\ell=o(n)$. Therefore, the bound $(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{2}{\sqrt{\ell}})n$ in the above result is asymptotically best possible.
A book in a graph is a collection of triangles sharing a common edge. The size of a book is the number of triangles. Let $b(G)$ be the size of the largest book in a graph $G$. Generalising Mantel's theorem, Erd\H{o}s \cite{Erdos62} showed that every $n$-vertex graph $G$ with $\lfloor \frac{n^2}{4}\rfloor +1$ edges satisfies $b(G) \ge \frac{n}{6}-O(1)$. The optimal bound $b(G) \ge \lfloor\frac{n}{6}\rfloor$ was obtained independently by Edwards in an unpublished manuscript \cite{Edwards77}, and by Khad\v{z}iivanov and Nikiforov in \cite{KN79}. We wonder whether a similar result holds for balanced multipartite graphs.
\begin{conj}
For every $\varepsilon>0$, there is a constant $C=C(\varepsilon)$ such that the following holds for $\ell>C$. Let $G=(V_1\cup \ldots \cup V_{\ell},E)$ be a balanced $\ell$-partite graph on $n$ vertices such that
\[
d(V_i,V_j)>\tfrac{1}{2} \quad \textrm{for every $i \ne j$}.
\]
Then, $b(G)>\left(\tfrac{1}{6}-\varepsilon\right)n$.
\end{conj}
\noindent According to Theorem \ref{thm:joints}, the above conjecture is true for $\varepsilon \ge \tfrac{1}{6}-3^{-18}$.
Assume $H$ is not an almost colour-critical graph. Theorem \ref{thm:turan}(1) tells us that $d_{\ell}(H)\ge \frac{\chi(H)-2}{\chi(H)-1}+\frac{1}{(\chi(H)-1)^2(\ell-1)^2}$ for every $\ell \ge v(H)$. Furthermore, this estimate is tight for $H=K_{1,2}$, as shown in Remark \ref{rmk:tighness}. It would be very interesting to have a characterisation of the equality case.
Bondy, Shen, Thomass\'e and Thomassen \cite{BSTT06} determined the value of $d_{\ell}(K_k)$ in the case when $\ell=k=3$, while Pfender \cite{Pfender12} obtained result in the case when $\ell$ is large enough in terms of $k$. The value of $d_{\ell}(K_k)$ is not known in the remaining cases. Nevertheless, when $\ell=k \ge 4$, Pfender \cite{Pfender} proposed the following conjecture (see \cite[Section 5]{Nagy11} for more details).
\begin{conj}
The critical edge density $d_{k}=d_k(K_k)$ satisfies the following recurrence formula:
\[
d_{2}=0, \quad d_{k}^2(1-d_{k-1})+d_{k}-1=0 \ \text{for $k \ge 3$}.
\]
\end{conj}
Finally, we emphasise that there are other interesting multipartite versions of the Tur\'an theorem. For instance, Bollob\'as, Erd\H{o}s and Szemer\'edi \cite{BES75} introduced the function $\delta_r(n)$ which is the smallest integer so that every $r$-partite graph with parts of size $n$ and minimum degree $\delta_r(n)+1$ contains a copy of $K_r$. The exact values of $\delta_r(n)$ was determined completely by Haxell and Szab\'o \cite{HS06} (for odd $r$), and Szab\'o and Tardos \cite{ST06} (for even $r$) via topological methods.
\section*{Acknowledgement}
The authors would like to thank Shagnik Das, Tibor Szab\'o and an anonymous referee for helpful suggestions that improved the presentation of this paper.
|
\section{Introduction}
There are a number of linear systems which model flow over vertices of
a graph with a given boundary condition. A classical example is the case of an
electrical network. Flow can be captured by measuring electric current between
points in the network, and the amount that is injected and removed from the
system. Here, the points at which voltage potential is measured can be
represented by vertices in a graph, and edges are associated to the ease with
which current passes between two points. The injection and extraction points
can be viewed as the boundary of the system, and the relationship of the flow
and voltage can be evaluated by solving a system of linear equations over the
measurement points.
Another example is a decision-making process among a network of agents. Each
agent decides on a value, but may be influenced by the decision of other agents
in the network. Over time, the goal is to reach consensus among all the agents,
in which each agrees on a common value. Agents are represented by vertices, and
each vertex has an associated value. The amount of influence an agent has on a
fellow agent is modeled by a weighted edge between the two representative
vertices, and the communication dynamics can be modeled by a linear system. In
this case, some special agents which make their own decisions can be viewed as
the boundary.
In both these cases, the linear systems are equations formulated in the graph
Laplacian. Spectral properties of the Laplacian are closely related to
reachability and the rate of diffusion across vertices in a graph \cite{ch0}.
Laplacian systems have been used to concisely characterize qualities such as
edge resistance and the influence of communication on edges
\cite{spielman:algorithms:10}. There is a substantial body of work on efficient
and nearly-linear time solvers for Laplacian linear systems
(\cite{forsythematrixmonte,st:nearlylinear:04,vaidya:preconditioners:91,kmp:optimalsdd:10,kmp:mlognsdd:11,lee2013efficient,kosz:combosdd:13,km:parallel:07,bgkmp:parallel:11,ps:parallelsdd:13,sachdeva2013matrix,ckmpprx:sdd:stoc14}, see also~\cite{vishnoi:lxb}).
The focus of this paper is a localized version of a Laplacian linear solver. In
a large network, possibly of hundreds of millions of vertices, the algorithms we
are dealing with and the solutions we are seeking are usually of finite support.
Here, by finite we mean the support size depends only on the requested output
and is independent of the full size of the network. Sometimes we allow sizes up
to a factor of $\log(n)$, where $n$ is the size of the network.
The setup is a graph and a boundary condition given by a vector with specified
limited support over the vertices. In the local setting, rather than computing
the full solution we compute the solution over a fraction of the graph and de
facto ignore the vertices with solution values below the multiplicative/additive
error bound. In essence we avoid computing the entire solution by focusing
computation on the subset itself. In this way, computation depends on the size
of the subset, rather than the size of the full graph. We distinguish the two
cases as ``global'' and ``local'' linear solvers, respectively. We remark that
in the case the solution is not ``local,'' for example, if \emph{all} values are
below the error bound, our alogrithm will return the zero vector -- a valid
approximate solution according to our definition of approximation.
In this paper, we show how local Laplacian linear systems with a boundary
condition can be solved and efficiently approximated by using Dirichlet heat
kernel pagerank, a diffusion process over an induced subgraph. We will
illustrate the connection between the Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank vector and
the Green's function, or the inverse of a submatrix of the Laplacian determined
by the subset. We also demonstrate the method of approximation using random
walks. Our algorithm approximates the solution to the system restricted to the
subset $S$ by performing $\greenscomplexity$ random walk steps, where $\gamma$
is the error bound for the solver and $\epsilon$ is the error bound for
Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank approximation, and $s$ denotes the size of $S$.
We assume that performing a random walk step and drawing from a distribution
with finite support require constant time. With this, our algorithm runs in
time $O\left( \gamma^{-2}\epsilon^{-3} \log^4(n) \log^2(\gamma^{-1} \log^3(n))
\right)$ when the support size of the solution is $O(\log n)$. Note that in our
computation, we do not intend to compute or approximate the matrix form of the
inverse of the Laplacian. We intend to compute an approximate local solution
which is optimal subject to the (relaxed) definition of approximation.
\subsection{A Summary of the Main Results}
\label{sec:mainresult}
We give an algorithm called \textsc{Local Linear Solver} for approximating a local solution of a
Laplacian linear system with a boundary condition. The algorithm uses the
connection between the inverse of the restricted Laplacian and the Dirichlet
heat kernel of the graph for approximating the local solution with a sampling of
Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank vectors (heat kernel pagerank restricted to a
subset $S$). It is shown in Theorem~\ref{thm:localsolver} that the output of
\textsc{Local Linear Solver}~approximates the exact local solution $x_S$ with absolute error
$O(\gamma\norm{b} + \norm{x_S})$ for boundary vector $b$ with probability at
least $1-\gamma$.
We present an efficient algorithm for approximating Dirichlet heat kernel
pagerank vectors, \texttt{ApproxDirHKPR}. The algorithm is an extension of the algorithm
in~\cite{cs:iwocahkpr}. The definition of $\epsilon$-approximate vectors is
given in Section~\ref{sec:hkprapprox}. We note that this notion of
approximation is weaker than the classical notions of total variation distance
among others. Nevertheless, this ``relaxed'' notion of approximation is used in
analyzing PageRank algorithms (see \cite{bbct:sublinearpr:waw12}, for example)
for massive networks.
The full algorithm for approximating a local linear solution, \texttt{GreensSolver}, is
presented in Section~\ref{sec:efficientsolver}. The algorithm is an invocation
of \textsc{Local Linear Solver}~with the \texttt{ApproxDirHKPR}~called as a subroutine. The full agorithm
requires $\greenscomplexity$ random walk steps by using the algorithm
\texttt{ApproxDirHKPR}~with a slight modification. Our algorithm achieves sublinear time
after preprocessing which depends on the size of the support of the boundary
condition. The error is similar to the error of \texttt{ApproxDirHKPR}.
\medskip It is worth pointing out a number of ways our methods can be
generalized. First, we focus on unweighted graphs, though extending our results
to graphs with edge weights follows easily with a weighted version of the
Laplacian. Second, we require the induced subgraph on the subset $S$ be
connected. However, if the induced subgraph is not connected the results can be
applied to components separately, so our requirement on connectivity can be
relaxed. Finally, we restrict our discussion to linear systems in the graph
Laplacian. However, by using a linear-time transformation due
to~\cite{gmz:parallel:95} for converting a symmetric, diagonally dominant linear
system to a Laplacian linear system, our results apply to a larger class of
linear systems.
\subsection{Organization}
In Section~\ref{sec:prelims}, we give definitions and basic facts for graph
Laplacian and heat kernel. In Section~\ref{sec:boundarycondition} the problem
is introduced in detail and provides the setting for the local solver. The
algorithm, \textsc{Local Linear Solver}, is presented in Section~\ref{sec:localsolver}. After
this, we extend the solver to the full approximation algorithm using approximate
Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank. In Section~\ref{sec:hkprapprox}, we give the
definition of local approximation and analyze the Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank
approximation algorithm. In Section~\ref{sec:efficientsolver}, the full
algorithm for computing an approximate local solution to a Laplacian linear
system with a boundary condition, \texttt{GreensSolver}, is given. Finally in
Section~\ref{sec:example} we illustrate the correctness of the algorithm with an
example network and specified boundary condition. The example demonstrates
visually what a local solution is and how \texttt{GreensSolver}~successfully approximates
the solution within the prescribed error bounds when the solution is
sufficiently local.
\section{Basic Definitions and Facts}
\label{sec:prelims}
Let $G$ be a simple graph given by vertex set $V = V(G)$ and edge set $E =
E(G)$. Let $u \sim v$ denote $\{u,v\}\in E$. When considering a real vector
$f$ defined over the vertices of $G$, we say $f\in\mathbb{R}^V$ and the \emph{support}
of $f$ is denoted by $\textmd{supp}(f) = \{v\in V : f(v) \neq 0\}$. For a subset of
vertices $S\subseteq V$, we say $s=|S|$ is the size of $S$ and use $f\in\mathbb{R}^S$ to
denote vectors defined over $S$. When considering a real matrix $M$ defined
over $V$, we say $M \in \mathbb{R}^{V\times V}$, and we use $M_S$ to denote the
submatrix of $M$ with rows and columns indexed by vertices in $S$. Namely,
$M_S\in \mathbb{R}^{S\times S}$. Similarly, for a vector $f\in\mathbb{R}^V$, we use $f_S$ to
mean the subvector of $f$ with entries indexed by vertices in $S$. The
\emph{vertex boundary} of $S$ is $\delta(S) = \{ u \in V \setminus S : \{u,v\}
\in E ~~\text{for some}~ v \in S\}$, and the \emph{edge boundary} is
$\partial(S) = \{ \{u,v\}\in E : u\in S, v\notin S \}$.
\subsection{Graph Laplacians and heat kernel}
\label{sec:graphlaplaciansandheatkernel}
For a graph $G$, let $A$ be the indicator adjacency matrix $A \in
\{0,1\}^{V\times V}$ for which $A_{uv} = 1$ if and only if $\{u,v\} \in E$. The
\emph{degree} of a vertex $v$ is the number of vertices adjacent to it, $d_v =
|\{u \in V | A_{uv} = 1\}|$. Let $D$ be the diagonal degree matrix with entries
$D_{vv} = d_v$ on the diagonal and zero entries elsewhere. The \emph{Laplacian}
of a graph is defined to be $L=D-A$. The \emph{normalized Laplacian}, $\L =
D^{-1/2}LD^{-1/2}$, is a degree-nomalized formulation of $L$, given by
\begin{equation*}
\L(u,v) =
\begin{cases}
1 &\mbox{ if } u = v,\\
\frac{-1}{\sqrt{d_ud_v}} &\mbox{ if } u\sim v,\\
0 &\mbox{ otherwise.}
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
Let $P=D^{-1}A$ be the transition probability matrix for a random walk on the
graph. Namely, if $v$ is a neighbor of $u$, then $P(u,v) = 1/d_u$ denotes the
probability of moving from vertex $u$ to vertex $v$ in a random walk step.
Another related matrix of significance is the \emph{Laplace operator}, $\Delta =
I-P$. We note that $\L$ is similar to $\Delta$.
The \emph{heat kernel} of a graph is defined for real $t>0$ by
\begin{equation*}
\H_t = e^{-t\L}.
\end{equation*}
Consider a similar matrix, denoted by $H_t = e^{-t\Delta} =
D^{-1/2}\H_tD^{1/2}$. For a given $t\in\mathbb{R}^+$ and a preference vector
$f\in\mathbb{R}^V$, the \emph{heat kernel pagerank} is defined by
\begin{equation*}
\rho_{t,f} = f^T H_t,
\end{equation*}
where $f^T$ denotes the transpose of $f$. When $f$ is a probability
distribution on $V$, we can also express the heat kernel pagerank as an
exponential sum of random walks. Here we follow the notation for random walks
so that a random walk step is by a right multiplication by $P$:
\begin{equation*}
\rho_{t,f} = f^T e^{-t\Delta} = e^{-t} \sum\limits_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{t^k}{k!}f^T
P^k.
\end{equation*}
\subsection{Laplacian Linear System}
\label{sec:laplacianlinearsystem}
The examples of computing current flow in an electrical network and consensus in
a network of agents typically require solving linear systems with a boundary
condition formulated in the Laplacian $L = D-A$, where $D$ is the diagonal
matrix of vertex degrees and $A$ is the adjacency matrix of the network. The
problem in the global setting is the solution to $L \mathtt{x} = \mathtt{b}$,
while the solution $\mathtt{x}$ is required to satisfy the boundary condition
$\mathtt{b}$ in the sense that $\mathtt{x}(v) = \mathtt{b}(v)$ for every vertex
$v$ in the support of $\mathtt{b}$. Because our analysis uses random walks, we
use the normalized Laplacian $\L = D^{-1/2} L D^{-1/2}$. We note that the
solution $x$ for Laplacian linear equations of the form $\L x = b$ is equivalent
to solving $L\mathtt{x} = \mathtt{b}$ if we take $\mathtt{x} = D^{-1/2}x$ and
$\mathtt{b} = D^{1/2}b$. Specifically, our local solver computes the solution
$x$ restricted to $S$, denoted $x_S$, and we do this by way of the discrete
Green's function.
\begin{runningexample}
To illustrate the local setting, we expand upon the problem of a network of
decision-making agents. Consider a communication network of agents in which a
certain subset of agents $f \subset V$ are \emph{followers} and an adjacent
subset $l \subset V\setminus f$ are \emph{leaders} (see
Figure~\ref{fig:consensus}). Imagine that the decision values of each agent
depend on neighbors as usual, but also that the values of the leaders are fixed
and will not change. Specifically, let $d_v$ denote the degree of agent $v$, or
the number of adjacent agents in the communication network, and let $x$ be a
vector of decision values of the agents. Suppose every follower $v_f$
continuously adjusts their decision according to the protocol:
\begin{equation*}
x(v_f) = x(v_f) - \frac{1}{\sqrt{d_{v_f}}}\sum\limits_{u\sim v_f}\frac{x(u)}{\sqrt{d_u}},
\end{equation*}
while every leader $v_l$ remains fixed at $b(v_l)$. Then the vector of decision
values $x$ is the solution to the system $\L x = b$, where $x$ is required to
satisfy the boundary condition.
In our example, we are interested in computing the decision values of the
followers of the network where the values of the leaders are a fixed boundary
condition, but continue to influence the decisions of the subnetwork of
followers.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{dolphins_subset_boundary}
\caption{A communication network of agents where the leaders (in purple) have
fixed decisions and the followers (in red) compute their decisions based on the
leaders and the subnetwork of followers. The local solution would be the
decisions of the followers.}
\label{fig:consensus}
\end{figure}
\end{runningexample}
\section{Solving Local Laplacian Linear Systems with a Boundary Condition}
\label{sec:boundarycondition}
For a general connected, simple graph $G$ and a subset of vertices $S$, consider
the linear system $ \L x = b, $ where the vector $b$ has non-empty support on
the vertex boundary of $S$. The global problem is finding a solution $x$ that
agrees with $b$, in the sense that $x(v) = b(v)$ for every vertex $b$ in the
support of $b$. In this case we say that $x$ \emph{satisfies the boundary
condition} $b$.
Specifically, for a vector $b\in\mathbb{R}^V$, let $S$ denote a subset of vertices in
the complement of $\textmd{supp}(b)$. Then $b$ can be viewed as a function defined on
the vertex boundary $\delta(S)$ of $S$ and we say $b$ is a \emph{boundary
condition} of $S$. Here we will consider the case that the induced subgraph on
$S$ is connected.
\begin{definition}
\label{def:S}
Let $G$ be a graph and let $b$ be a vector $b\in\mathbb{R}^V$ over the vertices of $G$
with non-empty support. Then we say a subset of vertices $S\subset
V$ is a \emph{$b$-boundable subset} if
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item $S \subseteq V\setminus \textmd{supp}(b)$,
\item $\delta(S) \cap \textmd{supp}(b) \neq \emptyset$,
\item the induced subgraph on $S$ is connected and $\delta(S) \neq
\emptyset$.\label{req:inverse}
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
We note that condition (\ref{req:inverse}) is required in our analysis later,
although the general problem of finding a local solution over $S$ can be dealt
with by solving the problem on each connected component of the induced subgraph
on $S$ individually. We remark that in this setup, we \emph{do not} place any
condition on $b$ beyond having non-empty support. The entries in $b$ may be
positive or negative.
The global solution to the system $\L x = b$ satisfying the boundary condition
$b$ is a vector $x\in \mathbb{R}^V$ with
\begin{align}\label{eq:x2}
x(v) =
\begin{cases}
\sum\limits_{u\sim v}\frac{x(u)}{\sqrt{d_vd_u}} &~\text{if} ~ v \in S\\
b(v) &~\text{if}~ v \not \in S
\end{cases}
\end{align}
for a $b$-boundable subset $S$. The problem of interest is computing the
\emph{local} solution for the \emph{restriction} of $x$ to the subset $S$,
denoted $x_S$.
The eigenvalues of $\L_S$ are called Dirichlet eigenvalues, denoted $\lambda_1
\leq \lambda_2 \leq \cdots \leq \lambda_s$ where $s = |S|$. It is easy to check
(see \cite{ch0}) that $0<\lambda_i\leq 2$ since we assume $\delta(S) \neq
\emptyset$. Thus $\L_S^{-1}$ exists and is well defined. In fact, $s^{-3} <
\lambda_1 \leq 1$.
Let $A_{S, \delta S}$ be the $s \times |\delta(S)|$ matrix by
restricting the columns of $A$ to $\delta(S)$ and rows to $S$. Requiring $S$ to
be a $b$-boundable subset ensures that the inverse $\L_S^{-1}$
exists~\cite{ch0}. Then the local solution is described exactly in the
following theorem.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:xS}
In a graph $G$, suppose $b$ is a nontrivial vector in $\mathbb{R}^V$ and $S$ is a
$b$-boundable subset. Then the local solution to the linear system $\L x = b$
satisfying the boundary condition $b$ satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{eq:xS}
x_S = \L_S^{-1}(D_S^{-1/2}A_{S, \delta S}D_{\delta S}^{-1/2}b_{\delta S}).
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The vector $b_1 := D_S^{-1/2}A_{\delta S}D_{\delta S}^{-1/2}b_{\delta S}$ is
defined over the vertices of $S$, and giveover the vertices of $S$ by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pfb1}
b_1(v) = \sum\limits_{u\in\delta(S), u\sim v}\frac{b(u)}{\sqrt{d_vd_u}}.
\end{equation}
Also, the vector $\L_Sx_S$ is given by, for $v \in S$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pflx}
\L_Sx_S(v) = x(v) - \sum\limits_{u\in S, u\sim v}\frac{x(u)}{\sqrt{d_vd_u}}.
\end{equation}
By (\ref{eq:x2}) and (\ref{eq:xS}), we have
\[
x_S(v) = \sum\limits_{u\in S, u\sim v}\frac{x(u)}{\sqrt{d_vd_u}} + \sum\limits_{u\in\delta(S), u\sim v}\frac{b(u)}{\sqrt{d_vd_u}},
\]
and combining (\ref{eq:pfb1}) and (\ref{eq:pflx}), we have that $x_S = \L_S^{-1}b_1$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Solving the local system with Green's function}
For the remainder of this paper we are concerned with the local solution $x_S$.
We focus our discussion on the restricted space using the assumptions that the
induced subgraph on $S$ is connected and that $\delta(S)\neq \emptyset$. In
particular, we consider the \emph{Dirichlet heat kernel}, which is the heat
kernel pagerank restricted to $S$.
The Dirichlet heat kernel is written by $\H_{S,t}$ and is defined as $\H_{S,t} =
e^{-t\L_S}$. It is the symmetric version of $H_{S,t}$, where $H_{S,t} =
e^{-t\Delta_S} = D_S^{-1/2}\H_{S,t} D_S^{1/2}$.
The spectral decomposition of $\L_S$ is
\begin{equation*}
\L_S= \sum_{i=1}^s \lambda_i \mathbb{P}_i,
\end{equation*}
where $\mathbb{P}_i$ are the projections to the $i$th orthonormal eigenvectors.
The Dirichlet heat kernel can be expressed as
\begin{equation*}
\H_{S,t} = \sum\limits_{i=1}^{s} e^{-t\lambda_i}\mathbb{P}_i.
\end{equation*}
Let $\mathcal{G}$ denote the inverse of $\L_S$. Namely, $\mathcal{G} \L_S = \L_S \mathcal{G} = I_S$. Then
\begin{align}
\label{gg}
\mathcal{G} & = \sum_{i=1}^{s} \frac{1}{\lambda_i} \mathbb{P}_i.
\end{align}
From (\ref{gg}), we see that
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{ng} \frac 1 2 \leq \norm{\mathcal{G}} \leq \frac 1 {\lambda_1},
\end{eqnarray}
where $\norm{\cdot}$ denotes the spectral norm. We call $\mathcal{G}$ the \emph{Green's
function}, and $\mathcal{G}$ can be related to $\H_{S,t}$ as follows:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:hkprex}
Let $\mathcal{G}$ be the Green's function of a connected induced subgraph on $S \subset
V$ with $s=|S|$. Let $\H_{S,t}$ be the Dirichlet heat kernel with respect to $S$.
Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathcal{G} = \int_0^{\infty} \H_{S,t}~ \mathrm{d}t.
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By our definition of the heat kernel,
\begin{align*}
\int_0^{\infty}\H_{S,t}~ \mathrm{d}t
&= \int_0^{\infty} \Big(\sum\limits_{i=1}^{s} e^{-t\lambda_i}\mathbb{P}_i \Big) \mathrm{d}t\\
&= \sum\limits_{i=1}^{s}
\Big(\int_0^{\infty}e^{-t\lambda_i}\,\mathrm{d}t\Big)\mathbb{P}_i\\
&= \sum\limits_{i=1}^{s} \frac{1}{\lambda_i}\mathbb{P}_i\\
&= \mathcal{G}.
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
Equipped with the Green's function, the solution (\ref{eq:xS}) can be expressed
in terms of the Dirichlet heat kernel. As a corollary to Theorem~\ref{thm:xS}
we have the following.
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:xSintegral}
In a graph $G$, suppose $b$ is a nontrivial vector in $\mathbb{R}^V$ and $S$ is a
$b$-boundable subset. Then the local solution to the linear system $\L x = b$
satisfying the boundary condition $b$ can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:xSintegral}
x_S = \int_0^{\infty}\H_{S,t} b_1 ~\mathrm{d}t,
\end{equation}
where $b_1 = D_S^{-1/2}A_{S, \delta S}D_{\delta S}^{-1/2}b_{\delta S}$.
\end{corollary}
The computation of $b_1$ takes time proportional to the size of the edge
boundary.
\section{A Local Linear Solver Algorithm with Heat Kernel Pagerank}
\label{sec:localsolver}
In the previous section, we saw how the local solution $x_S$ to the system
satisfying the boundary condition $b$ can be expressed in terms of integrals of
Dirichlet heat kernel in (\ref{eq:xSintegral}). In this section, we will show
how these integrals can be well-approximated by sampling a finite number of
values of Dirichlet heat kernel (Theorem~\ref{thm:sampler}) and Dirichlet heat
kernel pagerank (Corollary~\ref{cor:sampler}). All norms $\norm{\cdot}$ in this
section are the $L_2$ norm.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:sampler}
Let $G$ be a graph and $\L$ denote the normalized Laplacian of $G$. Let $b$ be
a nontrivial vector $b\in \mathbb{R}^V$ and $S$ a $b$-boundable subset, and let $b_1 =
D_S^{-1/2}A_{S, \delta S}D_{\delta S}^{-1/2}b_{\delta S}$. Then the local
solution $x_S$ to the linear system $\L x = b$ satisfying the boundary condition
$b$ can be computed by sampling $\H_{S,t} b_1$ for $r = \gamma^{-2} \log(s\gamma^{-1})$ values. If
$\hat{x}_S$ is the output of this process, the result has error bounded by
\begin{equation*}
\norm{x_S - \hat{x}_S} = O\big(\gamma(\norm{b_1} + \norm{x_S})\big)
\end{equation*}
with probability at least $1 - \gamma$.
\end{theorem}
We prove Theorem~\ref{thm:sampler} in two steps. First, we show how the
integral (\ref{eq:xSintegral}) can be expressed as a finite Riemann sum without
incurring much loss of accuracy in Lemma~\ref{lem:sum}. Second, we show in
Lemma~\ref{lem:sample} how this finite sum can be well-approximated by its
expected value using a concentration inequality.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:sum}
Let $x_S$ be the local solution to the linear system $\L x = b$ satisfying
the boundary condition $b$ given in (\ref{eq:xSintegral}). Then, for $T =
s^3 \log(s^3\gamma^{-1})$ and $N = T/\gamma$, the error incurred by taking a right
Riemann sum is
\begin{equation*}
\norm{x_S - \sum\limits_{j=1}^N \H_{S,jT/N} \frac{T}{N} b_1} \leq
\gamma(\norm{b_1} + \norm{x_S}),
\end{equation*}
where $b_1 = D_S^{-1/2}A_{S, \delta S}D_{\delta S}^{-1/2}b_{\delta S}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, we see that:
\begin{align}
\norm{\H_{S,t}} &= \norm{\sum\limits_i e^{-t\lambda_i}\mathbb{P}_i}\nonumber\\
&\leq e^{-t\lambda_1}\norm{\sum\limits_i \mathbb{P}_i}\nonumber\\
&= e^{-t\lambda_1}\label{eq:error}
\end{align}
where $\lambda_i$ are Dirichlet eigenvalues for the induced subgraph $S$. So
the error incurred by taking a definite integral up to $t=T$ to approximate the
inverse is the difference
\begin{align*}
\norm{x_S - \int_0^{T}\H_{S,t} b_1~\mathrm{d}t}
&= \norm{\int_T^{\infty}\H_{S,t} b_1~\mathrm{d}t}\\
&\leq \int_T^{\infty} e^{-t\lambda_1}\norm{b_1}~\mathrm{d}t\\
&\leq \frac{1}{\lambda_1} e^{-T\lambda_1} \norm{b_1}.
\end{align*}
Then by the assumption on $T$ the error is bounded by $\norm{x_S -
\int_0^{T}\H_{S,t} b_1~\mathrm{d}t} \leq \gamma\norm{b_1}$.
Next, we approximate the definite integral in $[0,T]$ by discretizing it. That
is, for a given $\gamma$, we choose $N= T/\gamma$ and divide the interval
$[0,T]$ into $N$ intervals of size $T/N$. Then a finite Riemann sum is close to
the definite integral:
\begin{align*}
\norm{\int_0^T \H_{S,t} b_1~\mathrm{d}t - \sum\limits_{j=1}^N
\H_{S,jT/N} b_1\frac{T}{N}}
&\leq \gamma \norm{\int_0^T \H_{S,t} b_1~\mathrm{d}t}\\
&\leq \gamma\norm{x_S}.
\end{align*}
This gives a total error bounded by $\gamma(\norm{b_1} + \norm{x_S})$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:sample}
The sum $\sum\limits_{j=1}^N \H_{S,jT/N}b_1 \frac{T}{N}$ can be approximated by
sampling $r = \gamma^{-2} \log(s\gamma^{-1})$ values of $\H_{S,jT/N}b_1$ where $j$ is drawn from
$[1,N]$. With probability at least $1 - \gamma$, the result has
multiplicative error at most $\gamma$.
\end{lemma}
A main tool in our proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:sample} is the following matrix
concentration inequality (see \cite{cr:spectrarandom:11}, also variations in
\cite{aw}, \cite{cm}, \cite{oli}, \cite{gross}, \cite{tropp}).
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:concentration}
Let $X_1, X_2, \dots, X_m$ be independent random $n\times n$ Hermitian matrices.
Moreover, assume that $\| X_i-\mathbb{E}(X_i)\|\leq M$ for all $i$, and put
$v^2=\|\sum_i\text{var}(X_i)\|$. Let $X=\sum_i X_i$. Then for any $a>0$,
\begin{equation*}
\P(\|X-\mathbb{E}(X)\|>a)\leq 2n\exp\left(-\frac{a^2}{2v^2+2Ma/3}\right),
\end{equation*}
where $\norm{\cdot}$ denotes the spectral norm.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:sample}]
Suppose without loss of generality that $\norm{b_1} = 1$. Let $Y$ be a random
variable that takes on the vector $\H_{S,jT/N} b_1$ for every $j\in[1,N]$ with
probability $1/N$. Then $\mathbb{E}(Y) = \frac{1}{N} \sum\limits_{j=1}^N \H_{S,jT/N}
b_1$. Let $X = \sum\limits_{i=1}^r X_j$ where each $X_j$ is a copy of $Y$, so
that $\mathbb{E}(X) = r\mathbb{E}(Y)$.
Now consider $\mathbb{Y}$ to be the random variable that takes on the projection
matrix $\H_{S,jT/N} b_1 (\H_{S, jT/N} b_1)^T$ for every $j\in[1,N]$ with
probability $1/N$, and $\mathbb{X}$ is the sum of $r$ copies of $\mathbb{Y}$.
Then we evaluate the expected value and variance of $\mathbb{X}$ as follows:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\norm{\mathbb{E}(\mathbb{X})} &=& r\norm{\mathbb{E}(\mathbb{Y})}\\
\norm{\textmd{Var}(\mathbb{X})} &=& r\norm{\textmd{Var}(\mathbb{Y})}
\leq \norm{\frac{r}{N}\sum_{j=1}^N \H_{S,jT/N} b_1
(\H_{S,jT/N} b_1)^T\norm{\H_{S,jT/N} b_1}^2}\\
&\leq& r\norm{\mathbb{E}(\mathbb{Y})}.
\end{eqnarray*}
We now apply Theorem~\ref{thm:concentration} to $\mathbb{X}$.
We have
\begin{align*}
\P\big( \norm{\mathbb{X} - \mathbb{E}(\mathbb{X})} \geq \gamma \norm{\mathbb{E}(\mathbb{X})}\big)
&\leq 2s \exp\left( -\frac{\gamma^2 \norm{\mathbb{E}(\mathbb{X})}^2}{2\textmd{Var}(\mathbb{X}) +
\frac{2\gamma \norm{\mathbb{E}(\mathbb{X})} M} 3} \right)\\
&\leq 2s \exp\left( -\frac{\gamma^2 r^2\norm{\mathbb{E}(\mathbb{Y})} }{r+ 2\gamma r
M/3} \right)\\
&\leq 2s \exp\left(-\frac{\gamma^2 r}{2} \right).
\end{align*}
Therefore we have $\P\big( \norm{\mathbb{X} - \mathbb{E}(\mathbb{X})} \geq \gamma
\norm{\mathbb{E}(\mathbb{X})}\big) \leq \gamma$ if we choose $r \geq \gamma^{-2} \log(s\gamma^{-1})$.
Further, this implies the looser bound:
\begin{equation*}
\P\big( \norm{X - \mathbb{E}(X)} \geq \gamma\norm{\mathbb{E}(X)} \big) \leq \gamma.
\end{equation*}
Then $\mathbb{E}(Y) = \frac{1}{r}\mathbb{E}(X)$ is close to $\frac{1}{r}X$ and
\begin{align*}
\norm{\sum\limits_{j=1}^N \H_{S,jT/N}b_1 \frac{1}{N} - \frac{1}{r} X}
& \leq \gamma \norm{\sum\limits_{j=1}^N \H_{S,jT/N}b_1 \frac{1}{N}}\\
\norm{\sum\limits_{j=1}^N \H_{S,jT/N}b_1\frac{T}{N} - \frac{T}{r} X}
& \leq \gamma \norm{\sum\limits_{j=1}^N \H_{S,jT/N}b_1 \frac{T}{N}}
\end{align*}
with probability at least $1-\gamma$, as claimed.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:sampler}]
Let $X$ be the sum of $r$ samples of $\H_{S,jT/N}b_1$ with $j$ drawn from
$[0,N]$, and let $\hat{x}_S = \frac{T}{r}X$. Then combining
Lemmas~\ref{lem:sum} and~\ref{lem:sample}, we have
\begin{align*}
\norm{x_S - \hat{x}_S}
&\leq \gamma\big(\norm{b_1} + \norm{x_S} + \norm{\sum\limits_{j=1}^N
\H_{S,jT/N}b_1 \frac{T}{N}}\big)\\
&\leq O\big(\gamma(\norm{b_1} + \norm{x_S})\big).
\end{align*}
By Lemma~\ref{lem:sample}, this bound holds with probability at least
$1-\gamma$ .
\end{proof}
The above analysis allows us to approximate the solution $x_S$ by sampling
$\H_{S,t}b_1$ for various $t$. The following corollary is similar to
Theorem~\ref{thm:sampler} except we use the asymmetric version of the Dirichlet
heat kernel which we will need later for using random walks. In particular, we
use Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank vectors. Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank is
also defined in terms of a subset $S$ whose induced subgraph is connected, and a
vector $f\in\mathbb{R}^S$ by the following:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:dirhkpr}
\rho_{S,t,f} = f^TH_{S,t}.
\end{equation}
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:sampler}
Let $G$ be a graph and $\L$ denote the normalized Laplacian of $G$. Let $b$ be
a nontrivial vector $b\in \mathbb{R}^V$ and $S$ be a $b$-boundable subset. Let $b_2 =
(D_S^{-1/2}A_{S, \delta S}D_{\delta S}^{-1/2}b_{\delta S})^TD_S^{1/2}$. Then
the local solution $x_S$ to the linear system $\L x = b$ satisfying the boundary
condition $b$ can be computed by sampling $\rho_{S,t,b_2}$ for $r =
\gamma^{-2} \log(s\gamma^{-1})$ values. If $\hat{x}_S$ is the output of this process, the result
has error bounded by
\begin{equation*}
\norm{x_S - \hat{x}_S} = O\big(\gamma(\norm{b_1} + \norm{x_S})\big),
\end{equation*}
where $b_1 = D_S^{-1/2}A_{\delta S}D_{\delta S}^{-1/2}b_{\delta S}$, with
probability at least $1 - \gamma$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
First, we show how $x_S$ can be given in terms of Dirichlet heat kernel
pagerank.
\begin{align*}
x_S^T &= \int_0^{\infty}b_1^T \H_{S,t} ~\mathrm{d}t\\
&= \int_0^{\infty}b_1^T (D_S^{1/2}H_{S,t} D_S^{-1/2}) ~\mathrm{d}t\\
&= \int_0^{\infty}b_2 H_{S,t} D_S^{-1/2} ~\mathrm{d}t,
~~\mbox{ where } b_2 = b_1^T D_S^{1/2}\\
&= \int_0^{\infty}\rho_{S,t,b_2} ~\mathrm{d}t ~D_S^{-1/2},
\end{align*}
and we have an expression similar to (\ref{eq:xSintegral}). Then by
Lemma~\ref{lem:sum}, $x_S^T$ is close to $\sum\limits_{j=1}^N \rho_{S,jT/N,b_2}
\frac{T}{N} D_S^{-1/2}$ with error bounded by $O\big(\gamma(\norm{b_1} +
\norm{x_S})\big)$. From Lemma~\ref{lem:sample}, this can be approximated to
within $O(\gamma\norm{x_S})$ multiplicative error using $r=\gamma^{-2} \log(s\gamma^{-1})$
samples with probability at least $1-\gamma$. This gives total additive and
multiplicative error within $O(\gamma)$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{The \textsc{Local Linear Solver}~Algorithm}
We present an algorithm for computing a local solution to a Laplacian linear
system with a boundary condition.
\begin{algorithm}
\floatname{algorithm}{Algorithm}
\caption{\textsc{Local Linear Solver}}
\label{alg:localsolver}
\textbf{input:} graph $G$, boundary vector $b\in\mathbb{R}^V$, subset $S\subset V$, solver error
parameter $0<\gamma<1$.\\
\textbf{output:} an approximate local solution $\mathtt{x}$ with additive and
multiplicative error $\gamma$ to the local system $x_S=\mathcal{G} b_1$ satisyfing the
boundary condition $b$.\\
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\State $s\gets |S|$
\State initialize a $0$-vector $\mathtt{x}$ of dimension $s$
\State $b_1 \gets D_S^{-1/2}A_{S, \delta S}D_{\delta S}^{-1/2}b_{\delta S}$
\State $b_2 \gets b_1^TD_S^{1/2}$
\State $T \gets s^3 \log(s^3\gamma^{-1})$
\State $N \gets T/\gamma$
\State $r \gets \gamma^{-2} \log(s\gamma^{-1})$
\For{$i=1$ to $r$}
\State draw $j$ from $[1,N]$ uniformly at random
\State $x_i \gets \rho_{S,jT/N, b_2}$
\State $\mathtt{x} \gets \mathtt{x} + x_i$
\EndFor\\
\Return $T/r \cdot \mathtt{x}D_S^{-1/2}$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:localsolver}
Let $G$ be a graph and $\L$ denote the normalized Laplacian of $G$. Let $b$ be a
nontrivial vector $b\in \mathbb{R}^V$, $S$ a $b$-boundable subset, and let $b_1 =
D_S^{-1/2}A_{S, \delta S}D_{\delta S}^{-1/2}b_{\delta S}$. For the linear
system $\L x = b$, the solution $x$ is required to satisfy the boundary
condition $b$, and let $x_S$ be the local solution. Then the approximate
solution $\mathtt{x}$ output by the \textsc{Local Linear Solver}~algorithm has an error bounded
by
\begin{equation*}
\norm{x_S-\mathtt{x}} = O\big( \gamma(\norm{b_1} + \norm{x_S})
\big)
\end{equation*}
with probability at least $1-\gamma$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The correctness of the algorithm follows from Corollary~\ref{cor:sampler}.
\end{proof}
The algorithm involves $r = \gamma^{-2} \log(s\gamma^{-1})$ Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank
computations, so the running time is proportional to the time for computing $b_2
e^{-T\Delta_S}$ for $T=s^3 \log(s^3\gamma^{-1})$.
In the next sections, we discuss an efficient way to approximate a Dirichlet heat
kernel pagerank vector and the resulting algorithm \texttt{GreensSolver}~that returns
approximate local solutions in sublinear time.
\section{Dirichlet Heat Kernel Pagerank Approximation Algorithm}
\label{sec:hkprapprox}
The definition of Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank in (\ref{eq:dirhkpr}) is given
in terms of a subset $S$ and a vector $f\in\mathbb{R}^S$. Our goal is to express this
vector as the stationary distribution of random walks on the graph in order to
design an efficient approximation algorithm.
Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank is defined over the vertices of a subset $S$ as
follows:
\begin{align*}
\rho_{S,t,f} &= f^T H_{S,t} = f^T e^{-t\Delta_S} = f^T e^{-t(I_S - P_S)}\\
&= \sum\limits_{k=0}^{\infty} e^{-t} \frac{t^k}{k!}f^T P_S^k.
\end{align*}
That is, it is defined in terms of the transition probability matrix $P_S$ --
the restriction of $P$ where $P$ describes a random walk on the graph. We can
interpret the matrix $P_S$ as the transition probability matrix of the following
so-called \emph{Dirichlet random walk}: Move from a vertex $u$ in $S$ to a
neighbor $v$ with probability $1/d_u$. If $v$ is not in $S$, abort the walk and
ignore any probability movement. Since we only consider the diffusion of
probability within the subset, any random walks which leave $S$ cannot be
allowed to return any probability to $S$. To prevent this, random walks that do
not remain in $S$ are ignored.
We recall some facts about random walks. First, if $g$ is a probabilistic
function over the vertices of $G$, then $g^T P^k$ is the probability
distribution over the vertices after performing $k$ random walk steps according
to $P$ starting from vertices drawn from $g$. Similarly, when $f$ is a
probabilistic fuction over $S$, $f^T P_S^k$ is the distribution after $k$
Dirichlet random walk steps. Consider a Dirichlet random walk process in which
the number of steps taken, $k$ (where steps are taken according to a Dirichlet
random walk as described above), is a Poisson random variable with mean $t$.
That is, $k$ steps are taken with probability $p_t(k) = e^{-t}\frac{t^k}{k!}$.
Then, the Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank is the expected distribution of this
process.
In order to use random walks for approximating Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank,
we perform some preprocessing for general vectors $f\in\mathbb{R}^S$. Namely, we do
separate computations for the positive and negative parts of the vector, and
normalize each part to be a probability distribution.
Given a graph and a vector $f\in\mathbb{R}^S$, the algorithm \texttt{ApproxDirHKPR}~computes
vectors that $\epsilon$-approximate the Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank
$\rho_{S,t,f}$ satisfying the following criteria:
\begin{definition}
\label{def:approxhkpr}
Let $G$ be a graph and let $S \subset V$ be a subset of vertices. Let
$f\in\mathbb{R}^S$ be a probability distribution vector over the vertices of $S$ and let
$\rho_{S,t,f}$ be the Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank vector according to $S$, $t$
and $f$. Then we say that $\nu \in \mathbb{R}^S$ is an \emph{$\epsilon$-approximate
Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank vector} if
\begin{enumerate}
\item for every vertex $v$ in the support of $\nu$,
$|\rho_{S,t,f}(v) - \nu(v)| \leq \epsilon \cdot \rho_{S,t,f}(v),$
and
\item for every vertex with $\nu(v) = 0$, it must be that $\rho_{S,t,f}(v) \leq \epsilon$.
\end{enumerate}
When $f$ is a general vector, an $\epsilon$-approximate Dirichlet heat kernel
pagerank vector has an additional additive error of $\epsilon\onenorm{f}$ by
scaling, where $\onenorm{\cdot}$ denotes the $L_1$ norm.
\end{definition}
For example, the zero-vector is an $\epsilon$-approximate of any vector with all
entries of value $< \epsilon$. We remark that for a vector $f$ with $L_1$ norm
$1$, the Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank vector $\rho_{S,t,f}$ has at most
$1/\epsilon$ entries with values at least $\epsilon$. Thus a vector that
$\epsilon$-approximates $\rho_{S,t,f}$ has support of size at most $1/\epsilon$.
\begin{algorithm}
\floatname{algorithm}{Algorithm}
\caption{\texttt{ApproxDirHKPR($G,t,f,S,\epsilon$)}}
\label{}
\algblock[Name]{Start}{End}
input: a graph $G$, $t\in\mathbb{R}^+$, vector $f\in\mathbb{R}^S$, subset $S\subset V$, error parameter $0 < \epsilon < 1$.\\
output: $\rho$, an $\epsilon$-approximation of $\rho_{S,t,f}$.\\
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\State $s \gets |S|$
\State initialize $0$-vector $\rho$ of dimension $s$
\State $f_+ \gets$ the positive portion of $f$
\State $f_- \gets$ the negative portion of $f$ so that $f = f_+ - f_-$
\State $f_+' \gets f_+/\onenorm{f_+}$
\Comment{\textit{normalize $f_+$ to be a probability distribution vector}}
\State $f_-' \gets f_-/\onenorm{f_-}$
\Comment{\textit{normalize $f_-$ to be a probability distribution vector}}
\State $r \gets \frac{16}{\epsilon^3}\log n$
\For {$r$ iterations}
\State choose a starting vertex $u_1$ according to the distribution vector
$f_+'$
\State $k \sim Poiss(t)$
\Comment{choose $k$ with probability $e^{-t}\frac{t^k}{k!}$}
\State $k \gets min\{k, t/\epsilon\}$\label{line:boundk}
\State simulate $k$ steps of a $P=D^{-1}A$ random walk
\If {the random walk leaves $S$}:
\State do nothing for the rest of this iteration
\Else
\State let $v_1$ be the last vertex visited in the walk
\State $\rho[v_1] \gets \rho[v_1] + \onenorm{f_+}$
\EndIf
\State choose a starting vertex $u_2$ according to the distribution vector
$f_-'$
\State $k \sim Poiss(t)$
\Comment{choose $k$ with probability $e^{-t}\frac{t^k}{k!}$}
\State $k \gets min\{k, t/\epsilon\}$\label{line:boundk2}
\State simulate $k$ steps of a $P=D^{-1}A$ random walk
\If {the random walk leaves $S$}:
\State do nothing for the rest of this iteration
\Else
\State let $v_2$ be the last vertex visited in the walk
\State $\rho[v_2] \gets \rho[v_2] + \onenorm{g_-}$
\EndIf
\EndFor\\
\State $\rho \gets \rho/r$\\
\Return $\rho$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
The time complexity of \texttt{ApproxDirHKPR}~is given in terms of random walk steps. As
such, the analysis assumes access to constant-time queries returning (i) the
destination of a random walk step, and (ii) a sample from a distribution.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:dirhkpralg}
Let $G$ be a graph and $S$ a proper vertex subset such that the induced subgraph
on $S$ is connected. Let $f$ be a vector $f\in\mathbb{R}^S$, $t\in\mathbb{R}^+$, and
$0<\epsilon<1$. Then the algorithm \texttt{ApproxDirHKPR($G,t,f,S,\epsilon$)}~ outputs an
$\epsilon$-approximate Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank vector $\hat{\rho}_{S,t,f}$ with
probability at least $1-\epsilon$. The running time of \texttt{ApproxDirHKPR}~ is
$O\Big( \epsilon^{-4} t\log n \Big)$, where the constant hidden in the big-O notation reflects
the time to perform a random walk step.
\end{theorem}
Our analysis relies on the usual Chernoff bounds restated below. They will be
applied in a similar fashion as in~\cite{bbct:sublinearpr:waw12}.
\begin{lemma}[\cite{bbct:sublinearpr:waw12}]
\label{lem:chernoff}
Let $X_i$ be independent Bernoulli random variables with $X = \sum\limits_{i =
1}^r X_i$. Then,
\begin{enumerate}
\item for $0 < \epsilon < 1$, $\P(X < (1-\epsilon)r\mathbb{E}(X)) < \exp(-\frac{\epsilon^2}{2}r\mathbb{E}(X))$
\item for $0 < \epsilon < 1$, $\P(X > (1+\epsilon)r\mathbb{E}(X)) < \exp(-\frac{\epsilon^2}{4}r\mathbb{E}(X))$
\item for $c \geq 1$, $\P(X > (1+c)r\mathbb{E}(X)) < \exp(-\frac{c}{2}r\mathbb{E}(X))$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:dirhkpralg}]
For the sake of simplicity, we provide analysis for the positive part of the
vector, $f := f_+$, noting that it is easily applied similarly to the negative
part as well.
The vector $f' = f/\onenorm{f}$ is a probability distribution and the heat
kernel pagerank $\rho'_{S,t,f} = \rho_{S,t,f}/\onenorm{f}$ can be interpreted as
a series of Dirichlet random walks in which, with probability
$e^{-t}\frac{t^k}{k!}$, $f'^TP_S^k$ is contributed to $\rho'_{S,t,f}$. This is
demonstrated by examining the coefficients of the terms, since
\begin{equation*}
e^{-t} \sum\limits_{k=0}^{\infty} \frac{t^k}{k!} = 1.
\end{equation*}
The probability of taking $k\sim Pois(t)$ steps such
that $k \geq t/\epsilon$ is less than $\epsilon$ by Markov's inequality.
Therefore, enforcing an upper bound of $K = t/\epsilon$ for the number of random
walk steps taken is enough mixing time with probability at least $1-\epsilon$.
For $k\leq t/\epsilon$, our algorithm approximates $f'^T P_S^k$ by simulating $k$ random
walk steps according to $P$ as long as the random walk remains in $S$. If the
random walk ever leaves $S$, it is ignored. To be specific, let $X^v_k$ be the
indicator random variable defined by $X^v_k = 1$ if a random walk beginning from
a vertex $u$ drawn from $f' = f/\onenorm{f}$ ends at vertex $v$ in $k$ steps
without leaving $S$. Let $X^v$ be the random variable that considers the random
walk process ending at vertex $v$ in \emph{at most} $k$ steps without leaving
$S$. That is, $X^v$ assumes the vector $X^v_k$ with probability
$e^{-t}\frac{t^k}{k!}$. Namely, we consider the combined random walk
\begin{equation*}
X^v= \sum_{k \leq t/\epsilon} e^{-t}\frac{t^k}{k!} X^v_k.
\end{equation*}
Now, let $\rho(k)_{S,t,f}$ be the contribution to the heat kernel pagerank
vector $\rho_{S,t,f}'$ of walks of length at most $k$. The expectation of each
$X^v$ is $\rho(k)_{S,t,f}(v)$. Then, by Lemma~\ref{lem:chernoff},
\begin{align*}
\P(X^v < (1-\epsilon) \rho(k)_{S,t,f}(v)\cdot r) &< \exp(-\rho(k)_{S,t,f}(v)r\epsilon^2/2)\\
&= \exp(-(8/\epsilon)\rho(k)_{S,t,f}(v)\log n)\\
&< n^{-4}
\end{align*}
for every component with $\rho_{S,t,f}'(v) > \epsilon$, since then
$\rho(k)_{S,t,f}(v) > \epsilon/2$. Similarly,
\begin{align*}
\P(X^v > (1+\epsilon) \rho(k)_{S,t,f}(v)\cdot r) &< \exp(-\rho(k)_{S,t,f}(v)r\epsilon^2/4)\\
&= \exp(-(4/\epsilon)\rho(k)_{S,t,f}(v)\log n)\\
&< n^{-2}.
\end{align*}
We conclude the analysis for the support of $\rho_{S,t,f}'$ by noting that $\hat{\rho}_{S,t,f} =
\frac{1}{r} X^v$, and we achieve an $\epsilon$-multiplicative error bound for
every vertex $v$ with $\rho_{S,t,f}'(v) > \epsilon$ with probability at least
$1-O(n^{-2})$.
On the other hand, if $\rho_{S,t,f}'(v)\leq\epsilon$, by the third part of
Lemma~\ref{lem:chernoff}, $\P(\hat{\rho}_{S,t,f}(v) > 2\epsilon) \leq n^{-8/\epsilon^2}$.
We conclude that, with high probability, $\hat{\rho}_{S,t,f}(v) \leq 2\epsilon$.
Finally, when $f$ is not a probability distribution, the above applies to $f' =
f/\onenorm{f}$. Let $\hat{\rho}_{S,t,f}'$ be the output of the algorithm using $f' =
f/\onenorm{f}$ and $\rho_{S,t,f}'$ be the corresponding Dirichlet heat kernel
pagerank vector $\rho_{S,t,f'}$. The full error of the Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank returned
is
\begin{align*}
\onenorm{\rho_{S,t,f} - \hat{\rho}_{S,t,f}} &\leq \onenorm{ \onenorm{f}\rho_{S,t,f}' -
\onenorm{f}\hat{\rho}_{S,t,f}' }\\
&\leq \onenorm{f}\onenorm{\rho_{S,t,f}' - \hat{\rho}_{S,t,f}'}\\
&\leq \epsilon\onenorm{f}\onenorm{\rho_{S,t,f}'}\\
&= \epsilon\onenorm{f}.
\end{align*}
For the running time, we use the assumptions that performing a random walk step
and drawing from a distribution with finite support require constant time.
These are incorporated in the random walk simulation, which dominates the
computation. Therefore, for each of the $r$ rounds, at most $K$ steps of the
random walk are simulated, giving a total of $rK = O\Big(\frac{16}{\epsilon^3}\log n \cdot
t/\epsilon\Big)= \tilde {O}(t)$ queries.
\end{proof}
\section{The \texttt{GreensSolver}~Algorithm}
\label{sec:efficientsolver}
Here we present the main algorithm, \texttt{GreensSolver}, for computing a solution to a
Laplacian linear system with a boundary condition. It is the
\textsc{Local Linear Solver}~algorithmic framework combined with the scheme for approximating
Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank. The scheme is an optimized version of the
algorithm \texttt{ApproxDirHKPR}~with a slight modification. We call the optimized version
\texttt{SolverApproxDirHKPR}.
\begin{definition}
Define \texttt{SolverApproxDirHKPR($G,t,f,S,\epsilon$)}~to be the algorithm \texttt{ApproxDirHKPR($G,t,f,S,\epsilon$)}~with the
following modification to lines \ref{line:boundk} and~\ref{line:boundk2} after
drawing $k\sim Poiss(t)$:
\begin{quote}
$k \gets min\{k, 2t\}$.
\end{quote}
Namely, this modification limits the length of random walk steps to at most $2t$.
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:solverapproxhkpr}
Let $G$ be a graph and $S$ a subset of size $s$. Let $T = s^3 \log(s^3\gamma^{-1})$, and
let $N = T/\gamma$ for some $0 < \gamma < 1$. Suppose $j$ is a random variable
drawn from $[1,\lfloor N \rfloor]$ uniformly at random and let $t = jT/N$. Then
if $\epsilon \geq \gamma$, the algorithm \texttt{SolverApproxDirHKPR}~returns a
vector that $\epsilon$-approximates $\rho_{S,t,f}$ with probability at least
$1-\epsilon$. Using the same query assumptions as Theorem~\ref{thm:dirhkpralg},
the running time of \texttt{SolverApproxDirHKPR}~is $O\left(\epsilon^{-3} t \log n
\right)$.
\end{theorem}
We will use the following Chernoff bound for Poisson random variables.
\begin{lemma}[\cite{mitzenmacherpandc}]
\label{lem:poissontails}
Let $X$ be a Poisson random variable with parameter $t$. Then, if $x > t$,
\begin{equation*}
\P(X \geq x) \leq e^{x-t-x\log(x/t)}.
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:solverapproxhkpr}]
Let $k$ be a Poisson random variable with parameter $t$. Similar to the proof
of Theorem~\ref{thm:dirhkpralg}, we use Lemma~\ref{lem:poissontails} to reason
that
\begin{align*}
\P(k \geq 2t) &\leq e^{2t-t-2t\log(2t/t)}\\
&= e^{t(1 - 2\log 2)}\\
&\leq \epsilon,
\end{align*}
as long as $t \geq \frac{ \log(\epsilon^{-1}) }{ 1-2\log 2 }$.
Let $E$ be the event that $t < \frac{ \log(\epsilon^{-1}) }{ 1-2\log 2 }$. The
probability of $E$ is
\begin{align*}
\P\left(jT/N < \frac{ \log(\epsilon^{-1})}{1-2\log 2}\right) &=
\P\left(j < \frac{ \log(\epsilon^{-1}) }{ \gamma(1 - 2\log 2) }\right)\\
&= \frac{ \log(\epsilon^{-1}) }{ (1-2\log 2) s^3 \log(s^3 \gamma^{-1}) },
\end{align*}
which is less than $\epsilon$ as long as $\epsilon \geq \left( \frac{ \gamma }{ s^3
} \right)^{(1-2\log 2)\epsilon s^3}$. This holds when $\epsilon \geq \gamma$.
As before, the algorithm consists of $r$ rounds of random walk simulation, where
each walk is at most $2t$. The algorithm therefore makes $r\cdot 2t =
\epsilon^{-3} 32t \log n$ queries, requiring $O\left(\epsilon^{-3} t \log n
\right)$ time.
\end{proof}
Below we give the algorithm \texttt{GreensSolver}. The algorithm is identical to
\textsc{Local Linear Solver}~with the exception of line~\ref{line:solverhkpr}, where we use the
approximation algorithm \texttt{SolverApproxDirHKPR}~for Dirichlet heat kernel
pagerank computation.
\begin{algorithm}
\floatname{algorithm}{Algorithm}
\caption{\texttt{GreensSolver($G,b,S,\gamma,\epsilon$)}}
\label{alg:approxgreen}
input: graph $G$, boundary vector $b\in\mathbb{R}^V$, subset $S\subset V$, solver error
parameter $0<\gamma<1$, Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank error parameter
$0<\epsilon<1$.\\
output: an approximate local solution $\mathtt{x}$ to the local system $x_S=\mathcal{G}
b_1$ satisyfing the boundary condition $b$.\\
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\State $s\gets |S|$
\State initialize a $0$-vector $\mathtt{x}$ of dimension $s$
\State $b_1 \gets D_S^{-1/2}A_{S, \delta S}D_{\delta S}^{-1/2}b_{\delta S}$
\State $b_2 \gets b_1^TD_S^{1/2}$
\State $T \gets s^3 \log(s^3\gamma^{-1})$
\State $N \gets T/\gamma$
\State $r \gets \gamma^{-2} \log(s\gamma^{-1})$
\For{$i=1$ to $r$}
\State draw $j$ from $[1,N]$ uniformly at random
\State $x_i \gets$
\texttt{SolverApproxDirHKPR}($G,jT/N,b_2,S,\epsilon$)\label{line:solverhkpr}
\State $\mathtt{x} \gets \mathtt{x} + x_i$
\EndFor\\
\Return $T/r \cdot \mathtt{x}D_S^{-1/2}$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:greensalg}
Let $G$ be a graph and $\L$ denote the normalized Laplacian of $G$. Let $b$ be
a nontrivial vector $b\in \mathbb{R}^V$ and $S$ a $b$-boundable subset, and let $b_1 =
D_S^{-1/2}A_{S, \delta S}D_{\delta S}^{-1/2}b_{\delta S}$. For the linear
system $\L x = b$, the solution $x$ is required to satisfy the boundary
condition $b$, and let $x_S$ be the local solution. Then the approximate
solution $\mathtt{x}$ output by the algorithm \texttt{GreensSolver}~satisfies the
following:
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item The error of $\mathtt{x}$ is $\norm{x_S-\mathtt{x}} = O\big(
\gamma(\norm{b_1} + \norm{x_S}) + \epsilon\onenorm{b_2} \big)$ with probability
at least $1-\gamma$,\label{greensalgacc}
\item The running time of \texttt{GreensSolver}~ is $\greenscomplexity$ where the big-O
constant reflects the time to perform a random walk step, plus additional
preprocessing time $O(|\partial(S)|)$, where $\partial(S)$ denotes the edge
boundary of $S$.\label{greensalgcomp}
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The error of the algorithm using true Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank vectors is
$O\big(\gamma(\norm{b_1} + \norm{x_S})\big)$ by Corollary~\ref{cor:sampler}, so
to prove (\ref{greensalgacc}) we address the additional error of vectors output
by the approximation of \texttt{SolverApproxDirHKPR}. By
Theorem~\ref{thm:solverapproxhkpr}, \texttt{SolverApproxDirHKPR}~outputs an
$\epsilon$-approximate Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank vector with probability at
least $1-\epsilon$. Let $\hat{\rho}_{S,t,f}$ be the output of an arbitrary run of
\texttt{SolverApproxDirHKPR($G,t,f,S,\epsilon$)}. Then $\norm{\rho_{S,t,f}-\hat{\rho}_{S,t,f}} \leq
\epsilon(\onenorm{\rho_{S,t,f'}} + \onenorm{f}) = \epsilon\onenorm{f}$ by the
definition of $\epsilon$-approximate Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank vectors,
where $f' = f/\onenorm{f}$ is the normalized vector $f$. This means that the
total error of \texttt{GreensSolver}~is
\begin{equation*}
\norm{x_S - \mathtt{x}} \leq O\left(\gamma(\norm{b_1} + \norm{x_S})\right) +
\epsilon\onenorm{b_2}.
\end{equation*}
Next we prove (\ref{greensalgcomp}). The algorithm makes $r = \gamma^{-2} \log(s\gamma^{-1})$
sequential calls to \texttt{SolverApproxDirHKPR}. The maximum possible value of $t$ is $T
= s^3 \log(s^3\gamma^{-1})$, so any call to \texttt{SolverApproxDirHKPR}~is bounded by $O\left(
\epsilon^{-3} s^3 \log(s^3 \gamma^{-1}) \log n\right)$. Thus, the total running
time is $\greenscomplexity$.
The additional preprocessing time of $O(|\partial(S)|)$ is for
computing the vectors $b_1$ and $b_2$; these may be computed as a preliminary
procedure.
\end{proof}
We note that the running time above is a sequential running time attained by
calling \texttt{SolverApproxDirHKPR}~$r$ times. However, by calling these in $r$ parallel
processes, the algorithm has a parallel running time which is simply the same as
that for \texttt{SolverApproxDirHKPR}.
\subsection{Restricted Range for Approximation}
Since \texttt{SolverApproxDirHKPR}~only promises approximate values for vertices whose true
Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank vector values are greater than $\epsilon$, the
\newline\texttt{GreensSolver}~algorithm can be optimized even further by preempting when this is
the case.
Figure~\ref{fig:dolphins1norm} illustrates how vector values drop as $t$ gets
large. The network is the same example network given in
Section~\ref{sec:laplacianlinearsystem} and is further examined in the next
section. We let $t$ range from $1$ to $T = s^3 \log(s^3\gamma^{-1}) \approx 108739$ for
$\gamma = 0.01$ and compute Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank vectors $\rho_{S,t,f}$.
The figure plots $L_1$ norms of the vectors as a solid line, and the absolute
value of the maximum entry in the vector as a dashed line. In this example, no
vector entry is larger than $0.01$ for $t$ as small as $250$.
\begin{figure}
\captionsetup{width=0.8\textwidth} \centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{dolphins1norm} \caption{How support values
of a Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank vector change for different values of $1
\leq t \leq T=s^3 \log(s^3\gamma^{-1})$. The solid line is the $L_1$ norm -- the sum of
all the support values -- and the dashed line is the absolute value of the
maximum entry in the vector. Note the x-axis is log-scale.}
\label{fig:dolphins1norm}
\end{figure}
Suppose it is possible to know ahead of time whether a vector $\rho_{S,t,f}$ will
have negligably small values for some value $t$. Then we could skip the
computation of this vector and simply treat it as a vector of all zeros.
From (\ref{eq:error}), the norm of Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank vectors are
monotone decreasing. Then it is enough to choose a threshold value $t'$ beyond
which $\onenorm{\rho_{S,t',f}} < \epsilon$, since any $\epsilon$-approximation
will return all zeros, and treat this as a cutoff for actually executing the
algorithm. An optimization heuristic is to only compute
$\texttt{SolverApproxDirHKPR($G,t,f,S,\epsilon$)}$ if $t$ is less than this threshold value $t'$.
Otherwise we can add zeros (or do nothing). That is, replace
line~\ref{line:solverhkpr} in \texttt{GreensSolver}~with the following:
\begin{algorithmic}
\If{$jT/N < t'$}
\State $x_i \gets$ \texttt{SolverApproxDirHKPR}($G,jT/N,b_2,S,\epsilon$)
\Else
\State do nothing
\EndIf
\end{algorithmic}
From (\ref{eq:error}), a conservative choice for $t'$ is $\frac{1}{\lambda_1}
\log(\epsilon^{-1})$.
\section{An Example Illustrating the Algorithm}
\label{sec:example}
We return to our example to illustrate a run of the Green's solver algorithm for
computing local linear solutions. The network is a small communication network
of dolphins~\cite{dolphins}.
In this example, the subset has a good cluster, which makes it a good
candidate for an algorithm in which computations are localized. Namely, it is
ideal for \texttt{SolverApproxDirHKPR}, which promises good approximation for vertices that
exceed a certain support threshold in terms of the error parameter $\epsilon$.
The support of the vector $b$ is limited to the set of leaders, which is the
vertex boundary of the subset of followers, $l = \delta(f)$. The vector is
plotted over the agents (vertices) in Figure~\ref{fig:dolphins_boundary_vector}.
\begin{figure}
\begin{centering}
\captionsetup{width=0.8\textwidth}
\makebox[\textwidth][c]{\includegraphics[width=1.2\textwidth]{dolphins_boundary_vector}}
\caption{The values of the boundary vector plotted against the agent IDs given
in Figure~\ref{fig:consensus}.}
\label{fig:dolphins_boundary_vector}
\end{centering}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{fig:dolphins_sample_hkpr_vector} plots the vector values of the
heat kernel pagerank vector $\rho_{t,b_2'}$ over the full set of agents. Here,
we use $b_2'$, the $n$-dimensional vector:
\begin{equation*}
b_2'(v)=
\begin{cases}
b_2(v) \mbox{ if $v\in S$,}\\
0 \mbox{ otherwise,}
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
and $t=50.0$. The components with largest absolute value are concentrated in the
subset of followers over which we compute the local solution. This indicates
that an output of \texttt{SolverApproxDirHKPR}~will capture these values well.
\begin{figure}
\captionsetup{width=0.8\textwidth}
\centering
\makebox[\textwidth][c]{\includegraphics[width=1.2\textwidth]{dolphins_sample_hkpr_vector}}
\caption{The node values of the full example communication network over a sample heat
kernel pagerank vector. The red bars correspond to the network of followers,
the purple to the leaders, and the white to the rest of the network.}
\label{fig:dolphins_sample_hkpr_vector}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Approximate solutions}
In the following figures, we plot the results of calls to our approximation
algorithms against the exact solution $x_S$ using the boundary vector of
Figure~\ref{fig:dolphins_boundary_vector}. The solution $x_S$ is computed by
Theorem~\ref{thm:xS}, and the appromimations are sample outputs of \textsc{Local Linear Solver}
and \texttt{GreensSolver}, respectively. The exact values of $x_S$ are represented by
circles, and the approximate values by triangles in each case. Note that we
permute the indices of the vertices in the solutions so that vector values in
the exact solution, $x_S$ are decreasing, for reading ease.\footnote{The results
of these experiments as well as the source code are archived at\newline
\url{http://cseweb.ucsd.edu/~osimpson/localsolverexample.html}.}
The result of a sample call to \textsc{Local Linear Solver}~with error parameter $\gamma = 0.01$
is plotted in Figure~\ref{fig:local_linear_solver}. The total relative error of
this solution is $\frac{\norm{x_S - \hat{x}_S}}{\norm{x_S}} = 0.02$, and the
absolute error $\norm{x_S - \hat{x}_S}$ is within the error bounds given in
Theorem~\ref{thm:localsolver}. That is, $\norm{x_S - \hat{x}_S} \leq
\gamma\left( \norm{b_1} + \norm{x_S} + \norm{x_{rie}} \right)$, where $x_{rie}$
is the solution obtained by computing the full Riemann sum (as in
Lemma~\ref{lem:sum}).
\begin{figure}
\captionsetup{width=0.8\textwidth}
\centering
\makebox[\textwidth][c]{\includegraphics[width=1.2\textwidth]{local_linear_solver}}
\caption{The results of a run of \textsc{Local Linear Solver}. Two vectors are plotted over IDs
of agents in the subset. The circles are exact values of $x_S$, while the
triangles are the approximate values returned by \textsc{Local Linear Solver}.}
\label{fig:local_linear_solver}
\end{figure}
The result of a sample call to \texttt{GreensSolver}~with parameters $\gamma=0.01,
\epsilon=0.1$ is plotted in Figure~\ref{fig:greens_alg_eps1}. In this case the
relative error is $\approx 2.05$, but the absolute error meets the error bounds
promised in Theorem~\ref{thm:greensalg} point (\ref{greensalgacc}).
Specifically,
\begin{align*}
\norm{x_S - \hat{x}_S} \leq \left( \gamma( \norm{b_1} + \norm{x_S} + \norm{x_{rie}}
) + \epsilon\onenorm{b_2} \right).
\end{align*}
\begin{figure}
\captionsetup{width=0.8\textwidth}
\centering
\makebox[\textwidth][c]{\includegraphics[width=1.2\textwidth]{greens_alg_eps1}}
\caption{The results of a run of \texttt{GreensSolver}~with $\gamma=0.01, \epsilon=0.1$.}
\label{fig:greens_alg_eps1}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{\normalfont\textbf{General remarks.}}While we have focused our
analysis on solving local linear systems with the normalized Laplacian $\L$ as
the coefficient matrix, our methods can be extended to solve local linear
systems expressed in terms of the Laplacian $L$ as well. There are numerous
applications involving solving such linear systems. Some examples are discussed
in~\cite{cs:hklinear:13}, and include computing effective resistance in
electrical networks, computing maximum flow by interior point methods,
describing the motion of coupled oscillators, and computing state in a network
of communicating agents. In addition, we expect the method of approximating
Dirichlet heat kernel pagerank in its own right to be useful in a variety of
related applications.
\paragraph{\normalfont\textbf{Acknowledgements.}} The authors would like to
thank the anonymous reviewers for their comments and suggestions. Their input has
been immensely helpful in improving the presentation of the results and clarifying
details of the algorithm.
{\footnotesize
\bibliographystyle{amsplain}
|
\section{Introduction}
\par Two-dimensional silicon and germanium (silicene and germanene)
\cite{Takeda50} have attracted great interest after the advent of
graphene \cite{Novoselov306}. The low dimensionality of graphene
\cite{Geim83} renders its charge density, electronic states, and
various physical and chemical properties readily controllable
\cite{Geim83,Singh56}, which is highly helpful for advanced
materials and devices. Apart from having these low-dimensional
benefits, silicene (Si) and germanene (Ge) are also expected to be easily
incorporated into existing silicon-based industry
\cite{Xu113,Jose47}.
\par Si and Ge have buckled hexagonal lattices \cite{Cahangirov102,Sahin80},
where quantum Hall effects, valley polarization, tunable band gap,
and fast intrinsic mobility have been discovered
\cite{Liu107,Ezawa109,Tsai4,Drummond85,Ni12,Pan112,Li2013}. This
indicates their promising applications in electronics, optics, and
fundamental-physics research. Si has been synthesized on various
substrates (Ag \cite{Lalmi97,Vogt108,Kara67}, Ir \cite{Meng13}, and
ZrB$_2$ \cite{Fleurence108}), while Ge is still under exploration.
Monolayer Si transistors operating at room temperature have been
fabricated recently \cite{Tao2015}. Si and Ge can be easily
functionalized in various environments. Chemical functionalizations
(e.g., hydrogenation) can controllably open a band gap in Si and Ge
by changing the orbital hybridization
\cite{Houssa98,Zheng7,Gao14,Ding100}, and hydrogenated germanene
(HGe) with a band gap of 1.53 eV has been synthesized
\cite{Bianco7}. The supporting substrates also have similar
functionalization effects on Si and Ge
\cite{Lin110,Chen110,Acun103,Cahangirov88,Yuan58}. These fast
synthesis and fabrication progresses lead to an urgent demand for
the knowledge of the thermal expansion and thermomechanics of
pristine/functionalized Si and Ge, because the accumulated thermal
strain and stress may influence the performance and lifetime of
devices working at finite temperatures.
\par In this letter, the phonon spectra, Gr\"uneisen constants, thermal expansion, and temperature-dependent stiffness of Si and Ge
are investigated by first-principles simulation. The roles of low dimensionality, layer thickness, and bond strength are
disentangled by analyzing the effects of chemical functionalization. The revealed physical picture is useful for understanding the
lattice dynamics of various two-dimensional systems.
The electronic structure and phonons are calculated using
density-functional methods \cite{methods}. The temperature dependent
lattice constant ($a$) is calculated using the self-consistent
quasiharmonic approximation (SC-QHA) method \cite{Huang2013}
\begin{equation}{\label{Equ_a_T}}
a(T)=\left(\frac{dE^e(a)}{da}\right)^{-1}\frac{1}{N_k}\sum_{k,\lambda}U_{k,\lambda}(T)\gamma_{k,\lambda},
\end{equation}
where $k$ and $\lambda$ are the wavevector and branch indices for a phonon mode; $N_k$ is the $k$-point number; $E^e$, $U_{k,\lambda}$, and $\gamma_{k,\lambda}$ are the total electronic energy, and
the internal energy and Gr\"uneisen constant
($\gamma=-\frac{a}{\omega}\frac{d\omega}{da}$) of a phonon mode, respectively. To
guarantee that $\gamma$ is calculated between two modes with the
same symmetry, the phononic $k{\cdot}p$ theory \cite{Huang2014} is
used to sort the phonon branches. Eq. (\ref{Equ_a_T}) is
self-consistently solved, and the phonon frequencies are updated
after each iteration step
($\Delta\omega\doteq-\gamma\frac{\Delta{a}}{a}\omega$). The
thermal-expansion coefficient ($\alpha=\frac{1}{a}\frac{da}{dT}$) can be re-expressed as \cite{Huang2013}
\begin{equation}{\label{Equ_expan_coeff}}
\alpha(T)=\frac{1}{\sum_{i=1}^3s_i}\frac{1}{N_k}\sum_{k,\lambda}C_V^{k,\lambda}(T)\gamma_{k,\lambda}\approx
\frac{2\sqrt{3}a^2}{B_{2D}N_k}\sum_{k,\lambda}C_V^{k,\lambda}(T)\gamma_{k,\lambda},
\end{equation}
where $C_V$ is the isovolume heat capacity and $B_{2D}$ is the two-dimensional bulk modulus
\begin{equation}{\label{Equ_bulk_modulus}}
B_{2D}(T)=A\frac{\partial^2F_{tot}}{\partial{A}^2}=\frac{1}{2\sqrt{3}a^2}\left[s_1-s_2+s_3+s_4\right],
\end{equation}
where $A$ ($=\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}a^2$) is the unit area and
\begin{eqnarray}{\label{Equ_s1_3}}
s_1=a^2\frac{d^2E^e(a)}{da^2}, s_2=a\frac{dE^e(a)}{da},\nonumber \\
s_3=\frac{1}{N_k}\sum_{k,\lambda}\left[U_{k,\lambda}-TC_V^{k,\lambda}\right]\gamma^2_{k,\lambda},
s_4=\frac{2}{N_k}\sum_{k,\lambda}U_{k,\lambda}\gamma_{k,\lambda}.
\end{eqnarray}
The contributions of thermal expansion and phonon excitation to
$B_{2D}$ are included in ($s_1-s_2$) and ($s_3+s_4$), respectively,
and the phonon excitation is omitted in the quasistatic bulk modulus
($B^*_{2D}$) \cite{Wang2010}. Temperatures higher than 600 K are not
considered here, due to the low thermodynamic/kinetic stability of
these systems found in experiments
\cite{Enriquez24,Vogt108,Bianco7}, as well as to the appearance of
high-order anharmonicity that not included in QHA
\cite{Walle2002,Zakharchenko2009}.
\par Hydrogenated Si and Ge (HSi and HGe) are used to study the effects of chemical functionalization. The structures are shown in
Fig. \ref{Fig_struct_Q}(a), and the calculated equilibrium lattice constants
($a$), buckling heights ($\Delta_z$), and bond lengths ($d$) are
listed in Tab. \ref{Tab_Struct}, which are consistent with other
experimental \cite{Enriquez24,Vogt108,Fleurence108,Bianco7} and
theoretical results \cite{Cahangirov102,Sahin80,Houssa98,Zheng7}.
The differential electron densities between the pre- and
post-bonding states ($\Delta{\rho}$) are projected onto the $z$
direction ($\Delta{\rho}_z$), which are shown in Fig.
\ref{Fig_struct_Q}(b) and (c). The $\sigma$ and $\pi$ bonds coexist
and compete with each other in buckled Si and Ge due to the
partial $sp^3$ orbital hybridization \cite{Cahangirov102,Sahin80}.
Therefore, apart from the space between the Si/Ge atoms
($|z|<\Delta_z$), the electrons also have some observable
accumulation ($\Delta\rho_z>0$) outside ($|z|>\Delta_z$) due to the
$\pi$ bonding (Fig. \ref{Fig_struct_Q}(b, c), left panels). Si has a
smaller $\Delta_z$ (0.22 \AA{}) than Ge (0.34 \AA{}), indicating the
less $sp^3$ hybridization in the former. Hydrogenation heightens
$\Delta_z$ (Tab. \ref{Tab_Struct}) and removes the $\pi$ electrons
(Fig. \ref{Fig_struct_Q}(b, c), right panels), due to the increased
$sp^3$ hybridization. The bond energy ($\epsilon_b$) is defined to
be the energy cost to break a Si--Si/Ge--Ge bond, which is used to
indicate the bond strength. Although the $\sigma$ bond is
strengthened by hydrogenation, the total strength ($\epsilon_b$) of
a Si--Si/Ge--Ge bond is decreased (Tab. \ref{Tab_Struct}), due to
the removal of the $\pi$ bond. On the other hand, hydrogenation
increases the dynamical stability of the bond, due to the removal of
the $\sigma$--$\pi$ competition. These changes in the bond
characteristics (hybridization, geometry, strength, and dynamical
stability) by hydrogenation will have profound effects on the
lattice dynamics.
\par A detailed knowledge on the vibrational states is a prerequisite
for understanding various phononic and thermodynamic properties. The
phonon dispersions and density of states ($g_{ph}$) of Si, HSi, Ge,
and HGe are shown in the left and middle panels of Fig.
\ref{Fig_phonons}, where the phonon branches are labeled according
to their initial symmetries at the $\Gamma$ point, and the
amplitudes of the in-plane (XY) and out-of-plane (Z) vibrations are
indicated by the line widths. The evolution of the phononic
eigenvectors of Si along the $\Gamma$K path are visualized in Fig.
\ref{Fig_vibrational_modes}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\scalebox{1.17}[1.17]{\includegraphics{lfhuang_fig1.eps}}
\caption{\label{Fig_struct_Q} (a) Structures and (b, c)
$\Delta\rho_z$ of pristine/hydrogenated Si and Ge. The origin
($\sigma$ and/or $\pi$ bondings) of the electron accumulation
($\Delta\rho_z>0$) near the Si/Ge atoms are indicated in shades.}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[ht]
\caption{\label{Tab_Struct} Equilibrium lattice constant ($a$),
zero-point expansion ($\delta_{zp}$), buckling hight ($\Delta_z$), bond
lengths ($d_{\text{X--X}}$ and $d_{\text{X--H}}$, $\text{X}=$Si or
Ge), and bond energy ($\epsilon_b$) of Si, HSi, Ge, and HGe.}
\begin{ruledtabular}
\begin{tabular}{ccccccc}
& $a$ (\AA{})& $\delta_{zp}$ (\%) & $\Delta_z$ (\AA{}) & $d_{\text{X--X}}$ (\AA{}) & $d_{\text{X--H}}$ (\AA{}) & $\epsilon_b$ (eV)\\\hline
Si & 3.87 & 0.13 & 0.224 & 2.28 & - & 2.91 \\
HSi & 3.89 & 0.11 & 0.359 & 2.36 & 1.501 & 2.51 \\
Ge & 4.04 & 0.12 & 0.340 & 2.43 & - & 2.41 \\
HGe & 4.07 & 0.13 & 0.367 & 2.46 & 1.552 & 2.00 \\
\end{tabular}
\end{ruledtabular}
\end{table}
The TA, TO, and LO branches in Si/Ge only consist of the XY
vibration, and the ZA branch of the Z vibration (Fig.
\ref{Fig_phonons}(a, c)). Thus, the atomic displacements in these
four modes (Fig. \ref{Fig_vibrational_modes}) are only modulated by
the Bloch phase factor ($e^{-i\bf{k\cdot{r}}}$). However, in the LA
and ZO branches, the XY and Z vibrations hybridize and swap with
each other at $k\sim0.22\Gamma$K/$\Gamma$M in Si
($0.40\Gamma$K/$\Gamma$M in Ge). This vibrational hybridization is
caused by the nonorthogonal covalent bonds, which also has been
observed in functionalized graphene \cite{Huang2014_2} and MoS$_2$
\cite{Huang2014} with nonorthogonal C--C and Mo--S bonds,
respectively. In planar graphene, the XY modes (TA, LA, TO, and LO)
are completely decoupled with the Z modes (ZA and ZO)
\cite{Huang2014_2}, because the C--C bonds in the XY plane are
orthogonal to the Z direction. The LA-ZO vibrational hybridization
changes the LA mode from XY to Z symmetry, which renders the LA
branch able to couple with the ZA branch at the Brillouin zone
boundary (Fig. \ref{Fig_phonons}(a, c)), where they are similar in
both frequency and symmetry. The LA-ZO and LA-ZA couplings result in
the flat dispersion of the LA branch at 110 cm$^{-1}$ in Si (60
cm$^{-1}$ in Ge). The acoustic/optical modes with Z vibration have
lower frequencies than their counterparts with XY vibration, because
the former ones mainly consist of the out-of-plane bending of the
Si--Si/Ge--Ge bonds, which are softer than the later ones consisting
of the in-plane bond bending/stretching. This is a low-dimensional
effect in phonon spectra. Ge has a larger buckling height $\Delta_z$
than Si, and the contribution of bond stretching in the ZO branch is
larger in more buckled layer, which tends to stiffen the ZO modes.
This is a thickness effect in the lattice dynamics of
low-dimensional systems \cite{Huang2013}.
\begin{figure*}[ht]
\scalebox{1.16}[1.16]{\includegraphics{lfhuang_fig2a.eps}}
\scalebox{1.16}[1.16]{\includegraphics{lfhuang_fig2b.eps}}
\scalebox{1.16}[1.16]{\includegraphics{lfhuang_fig2c.eps}}
\scalebox{1.16}[1.16]{\includegraphics{lfhuang_fig2d.eps}}
\caption{\label{Fig_phonons} Phonon dispersions, $g_{ph}$, and
$\gamma$ dispersions of (a) Si, (b) HSi, (c) Ge, and (d) HGe. The
line widths in the phonon dispersions are scaled by the amplitudes
of XY and Z vibrations, and the antisymmetric H modes in (b) and (d)
are labeled with the superscript "*".}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\scalebox{1.2}[1.2]{\includegraphics{lfhuang_fig3.eps}}
\caption{\label{Fig_vibrational_modes} The phonon modes in Si at
different $k$ points.}
\end{figure}
Therefore, the LA-ZO coupling in Ge is smaller than that in Si,
resulting in less XY (more Z) vibration in the LA (ZO) branch and
larger dispersive LA branch in Ge (Fig. \ref{Fig_phonons}(c)).
Hydrogenation additionally introduces four bending (TB, TB$^*$, LB,
and LB$^*$) and two stretching modes (ZS and ZS$^*$), and the H
atoms also have some resonating displacements in the acoustic and
optical modes (Fig. \ref{Fig_phonons}(b, d)). Hydrogenation
increases the layer thickness ($\Delta_z$, Tab. \ref{Tab_Struct}),
which stiffens the ZO modes and enlarges the LA-ZO frequency gap.
The
$\frac{\omega_{\text{ZO}}-\omega_{\text{LA}}}{(\omega_{\text{ZO}}+\omega_{\text{LA}})/2}$
ratio is increased from 0.51 (0.51) in Si (Ge) up to 0.69 (0.65) in
HSi (HGe), which significantly decreases the LA-ZO coupling, and the
increases XY (Z) vibration in the LA (ZO) branch. With less Z
vibration in the LA branch after hydrogenation, the LA-ZA coupling
at the zone boundary is then decreased due to their enlarged
symmetry difference, making the LA branch there more dispersive. In
addition, the ZA branches in both Ge and HGe have wiggles near the
$\Gamma$ point, which indicates their low dynamical stability
(originating from weak $\sigma$ bond and $\sigma$-$\pi$
competition). This agrees with the facts that Ge still has not be
synthesized due to the preferred germanium-substrate alloying
\cite{Kara67}, and that HGe has a low amorphodization/decomposition
temperature ($\lesssim$348 K) \cite{Bianco7}. HGe is synthesized
prior to Ge, which may be due to the dynamical-stability enhancement
by hydrogenation.
\par The Gr\"uneisen-constant ($\gamma$) dispersions
are shown in the right panels of Fig. \ref{Fig_phonons}.
$\gamma$(ZA) has large negative values, which is ubiquitous for the
bending ZA modes in two-dimensional systems \cite{Huang2014}. These
bending ZA modes resemble the flexural vibration in guitar string,
where a tensile makes the lattice/string stiffer to such bending
vibration, resulting in a higher frequency and then a negative
$\gamma$. This is called guitar-string analogy \cite{Fultz2010} or
membrane effect \cite{Mounet2005}. Apart from $\gamma$(ZA),
$\gamma$(TA) and $\gamma$(LA) also have negative values in Si and Ge. In a TA
mode, the lattice is transversely distorted in the XY plane (Fig.
\ref{Fig_vibrational_modes}), and the restoring force comes from
both the in-plane bending and stretching of the covalent bonds. Bond
bending negatively contributes to $\gamma$ due to the guitar-string
analogy, while bond stretching has a normal positive contribution to
$\gamma$. When the bond is not strong enough, the effect of bond
stretching can not compete with that of bond bending,
resulting in negative net $\gamma$(TA). Diamond and graphene only
have positive $\gamma$(TA) \cite{Mounet2005,Huang2014_2} due to the
strong C--C bonds, while bulk silicon and germanium have negative
$\gamma$(TA) \cite{Xu1991,Wei1994} due to the relatively weak Si--Si
and Ge--Ge bonds. Through the LA-ZO and LA-ZA couplings, the weight
of Z vibration in the LA branch increases when leaving the $\Gamma$
point (Fig. \ref{Fig_phonons}(a, c), left panels), which increases
the contribution of out-of-plane bond bending, and then results in
negative $\gamma$(LA), especially at the zone boundary. All the
optical branches only have positive $\gamma$, due to the dominating
effect of bond stretching, which is similar in functionalized graphene \cite{Huang2014_2,Mounet2005}.
However, the $\gamma$(ZO) in planar graphene is negative, because of the dominating bond-bending
effect in those ZO modes. Except for the rippling part of the $\gamma$(ZA) dispersion in Ge, hydrogenation increases the $\gamma$
of ZA, TA, and LA modes in Si and Ge, because the layer thickening
increases the positive contribution of bond stretching in these
acoustic modes. The abnormal rippling part of the $\gamma$(ZA) in Ge
is caused by the low bond dynamical stability, and those ripples in
$\gamma$(ZA) are largely suppressed by hydrogenation, because the
related ZA modes become closer to normal two-dimensional bending modes. The
$\gamma$(ZO) of Si is exceptionally high ($=9$) near the $\Gamma$
point, due to the stretching of the nonorthogonal strong $\pi$ bonds
in the lowly-buckled Si lattice (Tab. \ref{Tab_Struct}).
Hydrogenation more or less decreases the $\gamma$ of ZO, TO, and LO
modes in Si and Ge, because the elimination of the $\pi$ bond
decreases the bond strength and then the effect of bond stretching.
The bending and stretching hydrogen modes (TB, TB$^*$, LB,
LB$^*$, ZS, and ZS$^*$) in HSi and HGe all have near-zero $\gamma$,
because the restoring forces on those perpendicular C--H bonds
are insensitive to the lateral-size variation. This means that
hydrogenation is an ideal approach to study the effect of chemical
functionalization on the lattice dynamics of Si and Ge, because
those modes specific to H atoms have negligible effects on the
lattice anharmonicity.
\par The above analyzed phononic properties can help understand various thermodynamic properties of Si and Ge, as
well as the effects of functionalization. The calculated
thermal-expansion coefficient ($\alpha$), isovolume heat capacity
($C_V$), and quasiharmonic/quasistatic bulk modulus
($B_{2D}$/$B_{2D}^*$) of Si, HSi, Ge, and HGe are shown in Fig.
\ref{Fig_dynamic_properties}. A fully excited phonon branch
contributes 1.0 $k_B$ to $C_V$, and the nominal number of excited
branches is about three at 100 (50) K in both Si and HSi (Ge and
HGe) (Fig. \ref{Fig_dynamic_properties}(b)). This means that the
excitation of the three acoustic branches (ZA, TA, and LA) dominates
at temperatures lower than 100 (50) K, and the optical modes (ZO,
TO, and LO) are only considerably excited at higher temperatures.
Acoustic modes mostly have negative $\gamma$, while optical modes
only have positive $\gamma$ (Fig. \ref{Fig_phonons}, right panels).
Due to the subsequent excitation of these negative- and
positive-$\gamma$ modes, $\alpha$ firstly decreases with increasing
temperature until 100 (50) K (Fig. \ref{Fig_dynamic_properties}(a)),
and then increases. However, $\alpha$ is still consistently
negative, due to the dominating contribution from the
negative-$\gamma$ modes. Although the excitation of the additional H
modes makes the $C_V$ of HSi (HGe) larger than that of Si (Ge) above
120 K (Fig. \ref{Fig_dynamic_properties}(b)), its effect on the
minimum-$\alpha$ temperature is negligible due to their near-zero
$\gamma$ of these modes (Fig. \ref{Fig_phonons}(b, d), right
panels), and hydrogenation also has a negligible effect on the
expansion caused by the zero-point vibrations ($\delta_{zp}$, Tab.
\ref{Tab_Struct}). Therefore, the hydrogenation effect on the
lattice anharmonicity only comes from the chemical functionalization
on the Si--Si/Ge--Ge bond. Although the hydrogenation-induced
decreases of $B_{2D}$ (by 30\%, Fig.
\ref{Fig_dynamic_properties}(c)) and optical $\gamma$ (Fig.
\ref{Fig_phonons}(a, b)) tend to further decrease the negative
$\alpha$ (Eq. \ref{Equ_expan_coeff}), $\alpha$(HSi) is still close
to $\alpha$(Si),
\begin{figure}[ht]
\scalebox{0.83}[0.83]{\includegraphics{lfhuang_fig4a.eps}}
\scalebox{0.83}[0.83]{\includegraphics{lfhuang_fig4b.eps}}\\
\scalebox{0.83}[0.83]{\includegraphics{lfhuang_fig4c.eps}}
\scalebox{0.83}[0.83]{\includegraphics{lfhuang_fig4d.eps}}
\caption{\label{Fig_dynamic_properties} Temperature dependence of
(a) $\alpha$, (b) $C_V$, and (c, d) $B_{2D}$ and $B_{2D}^*$ of Si,
HSi, Ge, and HGe. In (c) and (d), the curve slopes (in $10^{-5}$
eV\AA{}$^{-2}$K$^{-1}$) at 300 K are indicated.}
\end{figure}
due to the canceling effect from the increase of acoustic $\gamma$
(Fig. \ref{Fig_phonons}(a, b)). $\alpha$(Ge) is much higher than
$\alpha$(HGe) (by $4\times10^{-6}$K$^{-1}$ above 300 K), because
$\gamma$(ZA) is significantly decreased by hydrogenation (Fig.
\ref{Fig_phonons}(c, d)), which negatively contributes to $\alpha$.
\par Thermal expansion is caused by the excitation of anharmonic phonons, while both thermal expansion and phononic excitation have individual
contributions to the thermomechanics (Eq. \ref{Equ_bulk_modulus} and
\ref{Equ_s1_3}). Both contributions are considered in the
temperature dependence of $B_{2D}$, while only the former
in that of $B_{2D}^*$. The negative thermal expansion results in the
increase of $B_{2D}^*$ under heating, due to the increased curvature
of the potential-energy surface under lattice contraction (i.e.,
$\frac{dB_{2D}^*}{da}<0$). The stiffening effect from the zero-point
vibrations makes $B_{2D}$ larger than $B_{2D}^*$ at low
temperatures. However, $B_{2D}$(T) curves have lower increasing
rates than their $B_{2D}^*$(T) counterparts, and the $B_{2D}$
of Si even decreases under heating, which is due to the softening
effect from the excitation of negative-$\gamma$ modes ($s_4$ term in
Eq. \ref{Equ_bulk_modulus}). Therefore, thermal expansion and phonon
excitation have reverse effects on $B_{2D}$, which also has been
observed in positively expanding MoS$_2$ \cite{Huang2014}. Although
hydrogenation decreases $B_{2D}$ and $B_{2D}^*$ due to the bond
weakening (Tab. \ref{Tab_Struct}), hydrogenation increases both the
slopes of $B_{2D}$(T) and $B_{2D}^*$(T) curves
($\frac{dB_{2D}}{dT}$ and $\frac{dB^*_{2D}}{dT}$).
$\frac{dB_{2D}^*}{dT}$ equals $a\frac{dB_{2D}^*}{da}\times\alpha$,
and the $\frac{dB^*_{2D}}{dT}$ of Si at 300 K is increased by
5.0$\times10^{-5}$ eV\AA{}$^{-2}$K$^{-1}$. As Si and HSi have the same $\alpha$, this increase is only ascribed to the
enlargement of potential-surface anharmonicity, namely, to the
decrease in $a\frac{dB_{2D}^*}{da}$ (from -6.3 to -13.3
eV\AA{}$^{-2}$). The increase in the $\frac{dB_{2D}}{dT}$ of Si by hydrogenation is even
larger (by 6.7$\times10^{-5}$ eV\AA{}$^{-2}$K$^{-1}$) than
$\frac{dB^*_{2D}}{dT}$, due to the increased acoustic $\gamma$ ($\frac{dB_{2D}}{dT}\sim\sum{C_V^{k,\lambda}\gamma_{k,\lambda}}$). The decrease in
the negative $\alpha$ of Ge by hydrogenation contributes to the increase of
$\frac{dB^*_{2D}}{dT}$ (by 3.1$\times10^{-5}$
eV\AA{}$^{-2}$K$^{-1}$ at 300 K), which is partially canceled by the
increase in $a\frac{dB_{2D}^*}{da}$ (from -18.6 to -13.8
eV\AA{}$^{-2}$). The increase in $\frac{dB_{2D}}{dT}$ (by
2.4$\times10^{-5}$ eV\AA{}$^{-2}$K$^{-1}$) is smaller than that of
$\frac{dB^*_{2D}}{dT}$, due to the decrease in $\gamma$(ZA) after
the dynamical-stability enhancement by hydrogenation (Fig.
\ref{Fig_phonons}(c, d)).
In summary, the roles of lattice dimensionality and bond
characteristics in the lattice dynamics of
silicene and germanene, as well as in the chemical functionalization
effects, have been revealed. For the substrate-supported silicene and germanene \cite{Lin110,Chen110,Acun103,Cahangirov88,Yuan58},
as well as other two-dimensional materials, the environmental interactions may
bring some complicated structural and electronic influences \cite{Gao592,Liu117,Cai2013}. The physical picture and analysis methods established here for
the correlation between structure, electronics, and lattice dynamics will be useful for studying the corresponding lattice anharmonicity therein.
This work is supported by the National Science Foundation of China
under Grant No. 11204305 and U1230202(NSAF), and the special Funds
for Major State Basic Research Project of China (973) under Grant
No. 2012CB933702. The calculations were performed in Center for
Computational Science of CASHIPS and on the ScGrid of Supercomputing
Center, Computer Network Information Center of CAS.
\bibliographystyle{apsrev}
|
\section{Introduction}
A usual way to describe the set of complex common zeros
$V(\mathbf{f})$ of a finite family of multivariate polynomials $\mathbf{f}$ with
rational coefficients is by means of the equidimensional
decomposition of the algebraic variety $V(\mathbf{f})$. Several
general algorithmic symbolic procedures computing polynomials characterizing each
equidimensional component have been proposed (see, for example,
\cite{GH91}, \cite{EM99}, \cite{JS02}, \cite{Lecerf03} and \cite{JKSS04}).
An alternative encoding of an equidimensional variety that
originated in the numerical algebraic geometry framework is by
means of a \textit{witness point set}, namely a suitable linear slicing of the variety consisting of a finite set of points containing as many points as the degree of the
variety (see \cite[Definition 13.3.1]{SW05}). This representation
has been applied for algorithmic numerical equidimensional and irreducible
decomposition (see \cite[Chapters 13-15]{SW05}). In this context, for instance, the software package PHCpack implements homotopy continuation methods to compute a numerical irreducible decomposition (see \cite{SVW03}). However, numerical approaches are subject to ill conditioning, which may lead to propagation of roundoff errors and inconclusive results.
In the symbolic framework, for certain families of polynomial systems, larger sets of points
representing the equidimensional components of a variety (called \textit{witness supersets}, as introduced in
\cite[Definition 13.6.1]{SW05}) can be computed with better
complexities than in previous symbolic decomposition procedures (see for instance,
\cite{HJS13}, where the case of sparse polynomial systems with $n$
equations in $n$ variables is considered), but no algorithm
discarding extra points within the same complexity order is known.
This motivates the search for new symbolic tools that may lead to
solve this problem.
A first question that arises in this context is, given a point $ \xi
\in V(\mathbf{f})$, to decide algorithmically whether it is
isolated or not (numerical algorithms dealing with this task can be
found in \cite[Section 13.7.2]{SW05}, \cite{BHPS09} or \cite{KL08}).
For a system of two polynomials in two variables, in
\cite[Proposition 5.3]{AV11} it is stated that, under certain
hypotheses, if the second term in the Puiseux series expansion at a
common root $\xi$ can be computed, then there exists a curve of
solutions for the original system; however, the result does not hold
for arbitrary bivariate polynomial systems. In \cite{AV12} the authors
extend this result to the case of $n$ variables and apply it
successfully to produce exact representations for solution sets of the cyclic $n$-roots problem.
In this paper we give conditions a vector of truncated Puiseux
series $\Theta$ centered at a point $\xi\in V(\mathbf{f})$ must
fulfill in order to ensure that $\xi$ is not an isolated point of
$V(\mathbf{f})$ in the general case. Moreover, if the dimension of
$V(\mathbf{f})$ is $1$, we give further conditions on $\Theta$ to
ensure that its initial part coincides with the initial part of a
Puiseux series expansion of a parametrization of a curve in
$V(\mathbf{f})$ containing $\xi$. We will assume that $\mathbf{f}$ does not vanish identically at $\Theta$ since, otherwise, the results follow straightforwardly.
We first consider the case of two polynomials in two variables by
means of elementary resultant-based techniques. The given conditions
depend on the degrees of the polynomials involved.
Then,
we deal with the general case of $n$-variate polynomial systems,
obtaining conditions that depend on invariants associated to the
ideal the polynomials generate and the degree of the variety they
define.
\section{Bivariate polynomials}\label{sec:2var}
The branches of a plane curve in $\C^2$ through a point can be
locally parametrized by means of Puiseux series (see, for example,
\cite{Walker}). A Puiseux series with complex coefficients
centered at $\xi_1 \in \C$ is a formal expression of the form
$\sum\limits_{i\in \N_0} a_i (t-\xi_1)^{\gamma_i}$, where $a_i\in
\C$ for every $i\in \N_0$, and $\{\gamma_i\}_{i \in\N_0}$ is a
family of rational numbers with bounded denominators such that
$\gamma_i<\gamma_{i+1}$ for every $ i \in \N_0$. We denote
$\textrm{ord}_{(t-\xi_1)} (\sum\limits_{i\in \N_0} a_i
(t-\xi_1)^{\gamma_i})= \min\{ \gamma_i \mid a_i\ne 0\}$ the order
of this Puiseux series. We will write $\C\{\{t-\xi_1\}\}$ for the
ring of all Puiseux series with complex coefficients centered at
$\xi_1$.
Given a polynomial $q\in \C[t,Y]$ and a point $\xi=(\xi_1,\xi_2) \in \C^2$ such that $q(\xi)=0$ and $q(\xi_1, Y) \not\equiv 0$, there is at least one Puiseux series $\sum\limits_{i\in \N_0}a_i(t-\xi_1)^{\gamma_i}$ such that $\gamma_0=0$, $a_0 = \xi_2$ and $q(t, \sum\limits_{i\in \N_0}a_i(t-\xi_1)^{\gamma_i})=0$ (such a Puiseux series will be called a parametrization of the curve through $\xi$).
In the following lemma we give conditions on the vanishing order of the polynomial $q$ at a truncated Puiseux series to establish to what extent it coincides with a parametrization of the curve defined by $q$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:aprox} Let $q\in \C[t, Y]$ and $\xi = (\xi_1, \xi_2)\in \C^2$ such that $q(\xi) =0$. Let $\theta=\sum\limits_{i=0}^N a_i(t-\xi_1)^{\gamma_i}$ with $a_0=\xi_2$ and
$\gamma_0, \dots, \gamma_N, L \in \Q$ such that
$0=\gamma_0<\dots<\gamma_N\le L$ and ${\rm
ord}_{(t-\xi_1)}(q(t,\theta))>L$.
If $L\ge {\rm mult}(\xi_1, c)$, where $c\in \C[t]$ is the
leading coefficient of $q$ as a polynomial in $\C[t][Y]$, then
there is a parametrization of a branch of the curve $V(q)\subset
\C^2$ through $\xi$ whose initial terms are $(t,\sum\limits_{i=0}^M
a_i(t-\xi_1)^{\gamma_i})$, where $M= \max \{ i \in \{0,\dots, N\}
\mid \gamma_i \le \dfrac{L-{\rm mult}(\xi_1, c)}{\deg_Y(q)}\}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Consider $q$ as a polynomial in $ \C\{\!\{t-\xi_1\}\!\}[Y]$ and its linear factorization
$q=c \prod\limits_{h=1}^{D}(Y-\eta_h)$, where $c\in \C[t]$. If no $\eta_h\in \C\{\!\{t-\xi_1\}\!\}$ begins with
$\sum\limits_{i=0}^{M}a_i(t-\xi_1)^{\gamma_i}$, by the definition
of $M$ we have that $\textrm{ord}_{(t-\xi_1)}q(t,\theta)= {\rm mult}(\xi_1, c) + \sum\limits_{h=1}^D \textrm{ord}_{(t-\xi_1)}(\theta - \eta_h)\le {\rm mult}(\xi_1, c) + D \, \dfrac{L-{\rm mult}(\xi_1, c)}{D} = L$,
contradicting the assumption that $\textrm{ord}_{(t-\xi_1)}(q(t,\theta))>L$.
\end{proof}
The following example shows that the bound given in the previous lemma can be attained:
\begin{example} Let $q \in \C[t, Y]$ be the polynomial $q(t,Y) = t^{d_1}(Y-1)^{d_2}$ and $\xi=(0,1)$ a zero of $q$. Here, $(t,1)$ is a curve in $V(q)$ passing through $\xi$. Let $\gamma, L \in \Q$ such that $L\ge d_1$ and $0< \gamma\le L$. Then $\theta= 1+t^\gamma$ satisfies that ${\rm{ord}}_t(q(t,\theta)) >L$ if and only if
$\dfrac{L-d_1}{d_2}<\gamma$, and the bound given by the lemma in this case is exactly
$\dfrac{L-d_1}{d_2}$.
\end{example}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:NH}
If $q(\xi) = 0$ and $\cfrac{\partial
q}{\partial X_2}(\xi)\ne 0$, there exists a unique
formal power series with integer exponents $\sum\limits_{i \in \N_0} c_i(t-\xi_1)^i$ such that $q(t,\sum\limits_{i \in \N_0} c_i(t-\xi_1)^i)=0$ and $c_0=\xi_2$, and the Newton-Hensel lifting
gives a constructive way to approximate it
(see \cite[Lemma 3]{HKPSW00}, \cite{GLS01} for algorithmic
versions of this result). In this case, under the assumptions of
Lemma \ref{lem:aprox}, $a_i = c_i$ for all $i\le L-{\rm mult}(\xi_1, c)$. This can be proved following the arguments in the proof of the lemma and using that there is at most one root
$\eta_{h}$ of $q$ such that ${\rm{ord}}_{(t-\xi_1)}(\xi_2-\eta_h)>0$.
\end{remark}
Now we analyze our main problem in the case of two bivariate polynomials. Consider first the following easy example:
\begin{example}
Let $f_1, f_2\in \C[X_1,X_2]$ be the polynomials
$$f_1(X_1,X_2)=X_2-1+X_1+X_1^{d_1}\mbox{ and }f_2(X_1,X_2)=
X_2-1+X_1+X_1^{d_2}.$$ It is clear that the zero sets of $f_1$ and $f_2$ in $\C^2$ are the curves parametrized by $(t, 1 - t - t^{d_1})$ and $(t, 1 - t - t^{d_2})$ respectively and, so, if $d_1 \ne d_2$, there is no curve of common
zeroes for these polynomials. Nonetheless, the terms of degree lower than $\min\{d_1,d_2\}$ of both expansions coincide. \end{example}
The question that arises is, given two polynomials $f_1,f_2 \in \C[X_1,X_2]$ with a common solution $\xi$, to what extent the Puiseux series expansions of parametrizations of curves of solutions through $\xi$ of $f_1$ and $f_2$ respectively must coincide in order to be able to conclude that $f_1$ and $f_2$ share a curve of solutions.
In \cite[Proposition 5.3]{AV11}, it is stated that, given
$f_i(X_1,X_2)=p_i(X_2)+P_i(X_1,X_2)$ for $i=1,2$, where $p_i$ have nonzero
constant term and all terms in $P_i$ have a positive power in $X_1$, and $\xi_2 \in \C-\{0 \}$ such that
$p_i(\xi_2)=0$, $\cfrac{\partial p_i}{\partial X_2}(\xi_2)\ne 0$
and $f_i(t,\xi_2)\neq 0$ for $i=1,2$, if the
exponents and coefficients of the first two terms $(X_1 = t, X_2 =
\xi_2 + a_1t^{\gamma_1})$ of the series expansions at the
common root $\xi= (0,\xi_2)$ coincide, there exists a curve of common
solutions containing $\xi$ and these first two terms are in fact the leading part of a
Puiseux series expansion of a regular common factor of $f_1$ and
$f_2$. As we can see in the previous example, this is not always
the case.
The example also shows that the precision required to ensure the existence of a curve of common zeros
containing $\xi$ depends on the degrees of the polynomials involved. Here we present a lower bound
for this precision.
\begin{proposition} \label{lem:bivariate} Let $f_1, f_2 \in \C[X_1, X_2]$
be polynomials with positive degree in the variable $X_2$ and with a common zero $\xi=(\xi_1,\xi_2)$. Let
$\theta=\sum\limits_{i= 0}^Na_i(t-\xi_1)^{\gamma_i}$ with
$a_0=\xi_2$ and $\gamma_0, \dots, \gamma_N, L \in \Q$ such that
$0=\gamma_0<\dots<\gamma_N\le L$ and ${\rm
ord}_{(t-\xi_1)}(f_j(t,\theta))>L $ for $j=1,2$. Let
$d_{ij}=\deg_{X_i}(f_j)$. If $L\ge d_{11}d_{22}+d_{12}d_{21},$
then there exists a curve of common zeroes of $f_1$ and $f_2$ that
contains $\xi$. Moreover, there is a parametrization of the curve
whose initial terms are $(t,\sum\limits_{i=
0}^{M}a_i(t-\xi_1)^{\gamma_i})$, where
$$M= \max\{i \in \{0, \dots, N\} \ | \ \gamma_i\le
\frac{L-(d_{11}d_{22}+d_{12}d_{21})-{\rm min}\{d_{11},
d_{12}\}}{{\rm min}\{d_{21}, d_{22}\}}+d_{11}+d_{12}\}.$$
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
If the resultant $\mbox{Res}_{X_2}(f_1,f_2)$ is not the zero
polynomial, then $\deg_{X_1}(\mbox{Res}_{X_2}(f_1,f_2)) \le
d_{11}d_{22} +d_{12} d_{21} $ and therefore,
$\textrm{ord}_{(t-\xi_1)}(\mbox{Res}_{X_2}(f_1,f_2)(t))\le L$. On
the other hand, since the order of any linear combination of $f_1$
and $f_2$ with coefficients in $\C[X_1,X_2]$, evaluated in
$(t,\theta)$ is higher than $L$, it follows that
$\textrm{ord}_{(t-\xi_1)}(\mbox{Res}_{X_2}(f_1,f_2)(t))>L$.
Therefore, if $L\ge d_{11}d_{22} +d_{12} d_{21}$, we have that
$\mbox{Res}_{X_2}(f_1,f_2)= 0$ and so, $f_1$ and $f_2$ have a
common factor depending on $X_2$.
Let $q:=\mbox{gcd}(f_1,f_2)\in\C[X_1,X_2]$ and let
$\widetilde{f}_1$, $\widetilde{f}_2$ be such that
$f_1=q\widetilde{f}_1$ and $f_2=q\widetilde{f}_2$. If $q(\xi) \ne
0$, then $\textrm{ord}_{(t-\xi_1)}(\widetilde f_j(t,\theta)) =
\textrm{ord}_{(t-\xi_1)}(f_j(t,\theta)) >L$ and, repeating the
arguments above, $\mbox{Res}_{X_2}(\widetilde f_1,\widetilde
f_2)=0$, which is a contradiction.
Similarly, as
$\mbox{Res}_{X_2}(\widetilde{f}_1,\widetilde{f}_2)(t)\neq 0$, it
follows that, for some $j$, $\textrm{ord}_{(t-\xi_1)}(\widetilde f_j(t,\theta)) \le
(d_{11}-d_{1q})(d_{22}-d_{2q})+(d_{12}-d_{1q})(d_{21}-d_{2q})$,
where $d_{iq}=\deg_{X_i}(q)$ for $i=1,2$. Then,
\[\begin{split}
\textrm{ord}_{(t-\xi_1)} q(t,\theta) & = \textrm{ord}_{(t-\xi_1)} f_j(t,\theta) - \textrm{ord}_{(t-\xi_1)} \widetilde{f}_j(t,\theta) \\
& > L - (d_{11}-d_{1q})(d_{22}-d_{2q})-(d_{12}-d_{1q})(d_{21}-d_{2q})\\
\end{split}
\]
Since $L - (d_{11}-d_{1q})(d_{22}-d_{2q})-(d_{12}-d_{1q})(d_{21}-d_{2q}) = L - (d_{11} d_{22} +d_{12} d_{21} )+ d_{2q} (d_{11}+d_{12}-2d_{1q}) + d_{1q}(d_{21}+d_{22})\ge d_{1q}$, by Lemma \ref{lem:aprox}, there is a parametrization of a curve passing through $\xi$ and contained in $V(q) \subset V(f_1, f_2)$ whose initial terms are $a_i(t-\xi_1)^{\gamma_i}$ as long as
\[ \gamma_i \le \dfrac{L - (d_{11}-d_{1q})(d_{22}-d_{2q})-(d_{12}-d_{1q})(d_{21}-d_{2q})- d_{1q}}{d_{2q}}.\]
As
\[ \begin{split}
& \dfrac{L - (d_{11}-d_{1q})(d_{22}-d_{2q})-(d_{12}-d_{1q})(d_{21}-d_{2q})- d_{1q}}{d_{2q}} \\
& =
\dfrac{ L - (d_{11} d_{22} +d_{12} d_{21} )+ d_{1q}(d_{21}+d_{22}-2d_{2q})- d_{1q}}{d_{2q}}+ d_{11}+d_{12}\\
& \ge \dfrac{L-(d_{11}d_{22}+d_{12}d_{21})-\min\{d_{11},
d_{12}\}}{{\rm min}\{d_{21}, d_{22}\}}+d_{11}+d_{12},
\end{split}\]
the proposition follows.
\end{proof}
As before, the given bound can be attained:
\begin{example} Let $f_1, f_2 \in \C[X_1, X_2]$ be the polynomials
$$f_1(X_1,X_2)= X_1^{d_{11}}(X_2-1)^{d_2}, \ f_2(X_1,X_2)=X_1^{d_{12}}(X_2-1)^{d_2}$$ and $\xi=(0,1)$ a
common zero. Here, $(t,1)$ is a curve of common solutions of $f_1$
and $f_2$ containing $\xi$. Let $\gamma, L \in \Q$ such that $L\ge
(d_{11}+d_{12})d_2$ and $ \gamma\le L$. The vector $(t,
1+t^\gamma)$ satisfies the hypothesis of Proposition
\ref{lem:bivariate} if and only if
$\dfrac{L-\min\{d_{11},d_{12}\}}{d_2}<\gamma$, which is exactly
the same bound given by the proposition.
\end{example}
\begin{remark}
If for $j=1$ or $j=2$, we have that $f_j(\xi) = 0$ and $\cfrac{\partial
f_{j}}{\partial X_2}(\xi)\ne 0$, under the assumptions of
Proposition \ref{lem:bivariate}, following Remark \ref{rem:NH}, there is a common solution curve for $f_1$ and $f_2$ having a parametrization whose initial
terms are $(t,\sum\limits_{i= 0}^{K}a_i(t-\xi_1)^i))$ for
$K=\lfloor L\rfloor-\min\{d_{11},d_{12}\}$.
\end{remark}
\section{Arbitrary Systems}\label{sec:nvar}
In this section we are going to extend the results of Section
\ref{sec:2var} to arbitrary multivariate polynomial equation
systems.
\subsection{Non-isolated points}
Let $\mathbf{f}=(f_1,\dots, f_m)$ be a polynomial system in
$\C[X_1,\dots,X_n]$ and $V(\mathbf{f})=V(f_1,\dots, f_m)$ be the
set of the common zeros of $\mathbf{f}$ in $\C^n$. Let
$\xi=(\xi_1,\dots, \xi_n)\in \C^n$ be a point in $V(\mathbf{f})$.
The next theorem presents a bound for the vanishing order required
on the system evaluated at a vector of truncated Puiseux series
centered at $\xi$ to ensure that $\xi$ lies in an irreducible
component $W$ of $V(\mathbf{f})$ such that
$\overline{\pi_{X_1}(W)} = \C$, where $\pi_{X_1}:\C^n\rightarrow
\C$ is the projection to the first coordinate, $\pi_{X_1}(x_1,
\dots, x_n)=x_1$, and the closure is taken with respect to the
Zariski topology. The bound is given in terms of the \emph{Noether
exponent} of the ideal $\langle f_1,\dots, f_m\rangle$, that is,
the minimum positive integer $e(\mathbf{f})$ such that
$\big(\sqrt{\langle f_1,\dots,
f_m\rangle}\big)^{e(\mathbf{f})}\subset \langle f_1,\dots,
f_m\rangle$.
In the sequel, for an irreducible variety $C\subset \C^n$ such
that $\overline{\pi_{X_1}(C)} = \C$, we will say that $C$ is a
variety \emph{with free variable $X_1$}.
\begin{theorem} \label{theo:curve} Let $\mathbf{f}=(f_1,\dots, f_m)$ be a polynomial
system in $\C[X_1, \dots, X_n]$ and $\xi=(\xi_1,\dots, \xi_n)\in \C^n$ be a
zero of $\mathbf{f}$. Let $\gamma_0, \dots, \gamma_N, L \in \Q$
such that $0=\gamma_0<\dots<\gamma_N\le L$ and
$$\Theta=(t,
\sum\limits_{i=0}^Na_{i2}(t-\xi_1)^{\gamma_i},
\dots,\sum\limits_{i=0}^Na_{in}(t-\xi_1)^{\gamma_i})$$ be a
Puiseux series vector with coefficients in $\C$ centered at $\xi_1$
such that $a_{0l}=\xi_l$ for all $2 \le l \le n$ and ${\rm
ord}_{(t-\xi_1)}(f_j(\Theta))>L$ for all $ 1 \le j \le m$. Let
$e(\mathbf{f})$ be the Noether exponent of $\langle f_1,\dots,
f_m\rangle$. If $L\ge e(\mathbf{f}),$ then there exists an
irreducible component $W$ of $V(\mathbf{f})$ with free variable
$X_1$ such that $\xi \in W$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\mathcal{V}$ be the algebraic variety of all irreducible
components of $V(\mathbf{f})$ with free variable $X_1$. If $\mathcal{V} = V(\mathbf{f})$, there is nothing to prove.
Let $p\in \C[X_1]$ be the monic polynomial of minimum degree that
vanishes over $\pi_{X_1}(V(\mathbf{f})- \mathcal{V})$. Suppose
$\mathcal{V}=\emptyset$; then $p\in \sqrt{ \langle f_1, \dots,
f_m\rangle}$ and so, $p^{e(\mathbf{f})}\in \langle f_1, \dots,
f_m\rangle$. Hence,
${\rm ord}_{(t-\xi_1)}(p(\Theta)^{e(\mathbf{f})})=
{e(\mathbf{f})}{\rm ord}_{(t-\xi_1)}(p(t))\le e(\mathbf{f})\le L$.
As the order of any linear combination of $f_1, \dots, f_m$
evaluated in $\Theta$ is higher than $L$, it follows that
$\mathcal{V}\neq\emptyset$.
Assume now that $\xi \not\in \mathcal{V}.$ Then, for every
irreducible component $C$ of $V(\mathbf{f})$ such that $\xi \in
C$, $\pi_{X_1}(C)=\xi_1$. Let $q \in \C[X_1, \dots, X_n]$ such
that $q$ vanishes over the union of all irreducible components of
$V(\mathbf{f})$ that do not contain $\xi$ and $q(\xi)\neq 0$.
Then $(X_1-\xi_1)q \in \sqrt{\langle f_1, \dots, f_m\rangle}$ and
so, $((X_1-\xi_1)q)^{e(\mathbf{f})}$ is a linear combination of
$f_1, \dots, f_m$ with coefficients in $\C[X_1, \dots, X_n]$;
then, ${\rm ord}_{(t-\xi_1)} (((t-\xi_1)
q(\Theta))^{e(\mathbf{f})}) > L$. But ${\rm
ord}_{(t-\xi_1)}q(\Theta) = 0$. This leads to a contradiction and,
consequently, $\xi\in \mathcal{V}$.
\end{proof}
The following trivial example shows that the bound $L\ge e(\mathbf{f})$ in the previous theorem is sharp.
\begin{example} Let $\mathbf{f}=(x_1^e, x_2,\dots, x_n)$. Then, $V(\mathbf{f}) = \{ 0\}$ and it is easy to see that $e(\mathbf{f}) = e$. Consider $\xi= 0$ and $\Theta =(t,0,0,\dots, 0)$. Then ${\rm{ord}}_t(f_1(\Theta)) = e$ and $f_j(\Theta)=0$ for every $2\le j \le n$. However, $V(\mathbf{f})$ contains no curve.
\end{example}
\begin{remark} \label{rem:noether} Any explicit upper bound for $e(\mathbf{f})$ provides an explicit bound for the parameter $L$ in Theorem \ref{theo:curve}. For instance, the following bounds could be applied:
\begin{itemize}
\item If $\deg(f_j)\le d$ for every $1\le j \le m$, then $e(\mathbf{f})
\le d^{\min\{n,m\}}$ (see \cite[Theorem 1.3]{Jelonek2005}).
\item For polynomials $f_1,\dots, f_m$ with supports
$\cA_1,\dots, \cA_m\subset (\Z_{\ge 0})^n$ respectively ($\cA_i$
is the set of vectors of exponents of the monomials of $f_i$ with
nonzero coefficients for all $1 \le i \le m$), $e(\mathbf{f}) \le n^{n+2}
n! {\rm vol}_n(\cA \cup\Delta_n)$, where $\cA =
\bigcup_{j=1}^m \cA_j$ and $\Delta_n$ is the standard simplex of
$\R^n$ (see \cite{Sombra99}).
Under certain assumption on an associated polytope, the following smaller bound holds:
$e(\mathbf{f}) \le \min\{n+1, m\}^2 n! {\rm vol}_n(\cA \cup\Delta_n)$
(see \cite[Theorem 2.10]{Sombra99}).
\end{itemize}
\end{remark}
\subsection{Varieties of dimension 1}\label{sec:dimV le1}
Under certain assumptions, for a point $\xi$ in an algebraic variety $V(\mathbf{f})$, Theorem \ref{theo:curve} in the previous section ensures the
existence of a positive dimensional component of $V(\mathbf{f})$ with free variable $X_1$ containing
$\xi$.
If, in addition to the conditions
of Theorem \ref{theo:curve}, $\dim(V(\mathbf{f}))= 1$, a question that arises naturally is
to what extent the given Puiseux series vector coincides with the
expansion of a parametrization of a curve in $V(\mathbf{f})$
containing the point $\xi$. In this section we give a degree bound
that enables us to answer this question. The bound depends on the Noether exponent of the ideal and the degree $\deg(V(\mathbf{f}))$ of the variety (for the definition of degree we use, see \cite{Heintz83}).
In order to deal with
$1$-dimensional varieties, we will use the notion of a
\emph{geometric resolution}, widely used in computational
algebraic geometry (see for instance \cite{GLS01}).
\begin{definition}
Let $V= \{\xi^{(1)}, \dots, \xi^{(D)}\}\subset \overline k^n$ be a
zero-dimensional variety defined by polynomials in $k[X_1,\dots, X_n]$, where $k$ is a field of characteristic $0$ and $\overline k$ an algebraic closure of $k$. Given a
linear form $\ell = \ell_1X_1 + \dots + \ell_n X_n$ in $k[X_1,
\dots, X_n]$ such that $\ell(\xi^{(i)})\ne \ell(\xi^{(j)})$ if $i
\ne j$, the following polynomials completely characterize $V$:
\begin{itemize}
\item the minimal polynomial $q = \prod\limits_{i=1}^D(Y - \ell(\xi^{(i)})) \in k[Y]$ of $\ell$ over
the variety $V$ (where $Y$ is a new variable),
\item polynomials $v_1, \dots, v_n \in k[Y]$ with $\deg(v_j) < D$ for every $1 \le j \le n$
satisfying $\xi^{(i)} = ( v_1(\ell(\xi^{(i)})),\dots, v_n(\ell(\xi^{(i)})))$ for every $1\le i\le D$.
\end{itemize}
The family of univariate polynomials $(q, v_1,\dots, v_n) \in
k[Y]^{n+1}$ is called the \emph{geometric resolution} of $V$ (or the geometric resolution of $k[V]$) associated
with $\ell$. We have
$$V = \{(v_1 (y), \dots, v_n (y)) \in \overline k^n \mid y
\in \overline k, q(y)=0\}.$$
\end{definition}
The notion of geometric resolution can be extended to any equidimensional variety. In our situation, it can be defined as follows:
Let $\mathcal{V}\subset \C^n$ be an equidimensional variety of dimension $1$ defined by polynomials in $\C[X_1,\dots, X_n]$ such that $X_1$ is free for each irreducible component of $\mathcal{V}$. By considering $\C(X_1) \otimes \C[\mathcal{V}]$, we are in a zero-dimensional situation, and a \emph{geometric resolution of $\mathcal{V}$ with free variable $X_1$} is a geometric resolution $(q, v_{2},\dots, v_n) \in \C(X_1)[Y]^{n}$ of $\C(X_1) \otimes \C[\mathcal{V}]$ associated to a linear form $\ell \in \C[X_{2},\dots, X_n]$.
\begin{theorem} \label{theo:dim1} Let $\mathbf{f}=(f_1,\dots, f_m)$ be a polynomial
system in $\C[X_1, \dots, X_n]$ such that $\dim(V(\mathbf{f}))\le
1$ and $\xi=(\xi_1,\dots, \xi_n)\in \C^n$ be a zero of $\mathbf{f}$. Let
$\gamma_0, \dots, \gamma_N, L \in \Q$ such that
$0=\gamma_0<\dots<\gamma_N\le L$ and
$$\Theta=(t,\sum\limits_{i=0}^Na_{i2}(t-\xi_1)^{\gamma_i},
\dots,\sum\limits_{i=0}^Na_{in}(t-\xi_1)^{\gamma_i})$$ be a
Puiseux series vector with coefficients in $\C$ centered at
$\xi_1$ such that $a_{0l}=\xi_l$ for all $2 \le l \le n$ and ${\rm
ord}_{(t-\xi_1)}(f_j(\Theta))>L$ for all $ 1 \le j \le m$. Let
$e(\mathbf{f})$ be the Noether exponent of $\langle f_1, \dots,
f_m\rangle$. If $L\ge e(\mathbf{f})\deg(V(\mathbf{f}))$, there exists a curve $W$ in
$V(\mathbf{f})$ with free variable $X_1$ such that $\xi \in W$ and
there is a parametrization of $W$ whose initial terms are
$\Theta_M:=(t,\sum\limits_{i=0}^M a_{i2}(t-\xi_1)^{\gamma_i},
\dots,\sum\limits_{i=0}^M a_{in}(t-\xi_1)^{\gamma_i})$, where
$$M= \max \Big\{ i\in \{0,\dots, N\} \mid \gamma_i \le \dfrac{L}{e(\mathbf{f})
\deg(V(\mathbf{f}))}\Big\}.$$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem \ref{theo:curve}, the point $\xi$ lies in an
irreducible component $W$ of $V(\mathbf{f})$ with free variable
$X_1$. Let $\mathcal{V}$ be the union of all the irreducible
components of $V(\mathbf{f})$ with free variable $X_1$, which is a
nonempty equidimensional variety of dimension $1$. Replace $X_1$
by $t$ in the polynomials $f_1,\dots, f_m$, and consider the ideal
$\C(t) \otimes \langle \mathbf{f}\rangle \subset \C(t)[X_2,\dots,
X_n]$ and its zeros $\eta_1,\dots, \eta_D\in
\C\{\!\{t-\xi_1\}\!\}^{n-1}$. Let $\ell=\sum\limits_{k=2}^n\ell_k
X_k$ be a generic linear form and $(q, v_2, \dots, v_n)\in
\C(t)[Y]$ be the geometric resolution of $\mathcal{V}$ associated
with $\ell$. Then, $q(Y)=\prod_{h=1}^{D}\limits(Y-\ell(\eta_h))$ and $D\le \deg(\mathcal{V})$.
As $\ell$ is
generic, we may assume that, for every $1\le h\le D$,
$\textrm{ord}_{(t-\xi_1)}(\ell(\Theta)-\ell(\eta_h))=\min \{
\textrm{ord}_{(t-\xi_1)}
((\Theta)_k-(\eta_h)_k): 2\le k \le n\}$.
Let $\varphi: \mathcal{V} \to \C^2$ be the map $\varphi(x) =
(x_1,\ell(x_2,\dots, x_n))$. Then, there is a polynomial $c\in
\C[t]$ such that $\hat q(t,Y):=c(t) q(Y) \in \C[t,Y]$ and $\hat q$ defines
the Zariski closure of $\varphi(\mathcal{V})$. Note that
$\deg_t(c) + D \le \deg (\hat q )\le
\deg(\mathcal{V})$ (see \cite[Lemma 2]{Heintz83}).
As in the proof of Theorem \ref{theo:curve}, let $p\in \C[X_1]$ be
a monic polynomial of minimum degree that vanishes over
$\pi_{X_1}(V(\mathbf{f})- \mathcal{V})$ (if $\mathcal{V} = V(\mathbf{f})$ take $p=1$). We have that $\deg(p)\le
\deg(V(\mathbf{f}))-\deg(\mathcal{V})$. Since $\hat q(X_1,
\ell)p(X_1)$ vanishes over $V(\mathbf{f})$, it follows that $(\hat
q(X_1, \ell)p(X_1))^{e(\mathbf{f})}$ is a linear combination of
$f_1, \dots, f_m$ with coefficients in $\C[X_1, \dots, X_n]$;
therefore, $\mbox{ord}_{(t-\xi_1)}((\hat q(t, \ell(\Theta))
p(t))^{e(\mathbf{f})})>L$. Then,
\[
\begin{split}
\mbox{ord}_{(t-\xi_1)}(\hat q(t, \ell(\Theta)))
& > \frac{L}{e(\mathbf{f})}-\deg(p)
\ge \frac{L}{e(\mathbf{f})}- \deg(V(\mathbf{f}))+\deg(\mathcal{V}) \\
& \ge \Big(\frac{L}{e(\mathbf{f}) \deg(V(\mathbf{f}))}-1\Big)\deg(V(\mathbf{f}))+ D +\deg_t(c)\\
& \ge\frac{LD}{e(\mathbf{f}) \deg(V(\mathbf{f}))} + \deg_t(c).
\end{split}
\]
Since $c$ is the leading coefficient of $\hat q$ and $\deg_t(c) \ge {\rm mult}(\xi_1, c)$, by Lemma \ref{lem:aprox}, there exists $1\le h \le D$ such that
\[ \textrm{ord}_{(t-\xi_1)}( \ell(\Theta) - \ell(\eta_h)) > \dfrac{\frac{LD}{e(\mathbf{f}) \deg(V(\mathbf{f}))} + \deg_t(c) - {\rm mult}(\xi_1, c)}{D}\ge \frac{L}{e(\mathbf{f}) \deg(V(\mathbf{f}))}.\]
The theorem follows by our assumption on $\ell$.
\end{proof}
Although Theorem \ref{theo:dim1} states that, in the general case, a large number of terms only provide a few ones of the initial part of a parametrization, the following example shows that the precision order is sharp for certain choices of the parameters.
\begin{example} Let $\mathbf{f} = (\prod\limits_{k=1}^d (x_1 - kx_2)^e, x_3,\dots, x_n)$,
and $\xi = 0$ a common zero. It is easy to see that $e(\mathbf{f})=
e$ and $\deg(V(\mathbf{f})) = d$. Taking $L= ed$, the vector
$\Theta = (t, t+t^{1+\varepsilon},0,\dots,0)$ satisfies the
hypothesis from Theorem \ref{theo:dim1} for all $\varepsilon>0$
since ${\rm{ord}}_t(f_1(\Theta))= e (d+\varepsilon)>L$ and
$f_j(\Theta)=0$ for all $ 2 \le j \le n-1$. In this
case the precision bound from the previous theorem is exactly $\frac{L}{de}=1$ which
coincides with the first terms from $\Theta$ that correspond to a parametrization of a
curve in $V(\mathbf{f})$ for all $\varepsilon >0$.
\end{example}
\begin{remark} Explicit upper bounds for both $e(\mathbf{f})$ and
$\deg(V(\mathbf{f}))$ provide explicit bounds for the parameters in Theorem \ref{theo:dim1}. For instance, using the bounds for $e(\mathbf{f})$ already stated in Remark \ref{rem:noether}, we have:
\begin{itemize}
\item If $\deg(f_j)\le d$ for every $1\le j \le m$, then
$\deg(V(\mathbf{f})) \le d^{\min\{n,m\}}$ (see \cite[Theorem
1]{Heintz83}). Therefore, for
$L\ge d^{2\min\{n,m\}}$ and $\Theta$ satisfying the conditions of the statement, if $\gamma_M \le L d^{-2\min\{n,m\}}$, then $\Theta_M$ is the initial part of a parametrization of a curve in $V(\mathbf{f})$ containing $\xi$.
\item For polynomials $f_1,\dots, f_m$ with supports
$\cA_1,\dots, \cA_m\subset (\Z_{\ge 0})^n$ respectively,
$\deg(V(\mathbf{f}))\le n! {\rm vol}_n(\cA \cup\Delta_n)$ (see
\cite[Proposition 2.12]{KPS01}), where $\cA = \bigcup_{j=1}^m \cA_j$ and $\Delta_n$ is the standard
simplex of $\R^n$. Therefore, using the bound for $e(\mathbf{f})$ stated in Remark \ref{rem:noether}, for $L \ge n^{n+2} (n! {\rm vol}_n(\cA \cup\Delta_n))^2$ and $\Theta$ satisfying the conditions of the statement, if $\gamma_M \le L\, n^{-n-2}(n! {\rm vol}_n(\cA \cup\Delta_n))^{-2}$, then $\Theta_M$ is the initial part of a parametrization of a curve in $V(\mathbf{f})$ containing $\xi$.
When $m=n$, the sharper bound
$\deg(V(\mathbf{f}))\le\mathcal{MV}_n(\cA_1\cup\Delta_n, \dots,
\cA_n\cup\Delta_n)$ holds (see \cite[Theorem 16]{HJS13}), where $\mathcal{MV}_n$ denotes the $n$-dimensional mixed volume. This leads to sharper bounds for $L$ and the precision order $\gamma_M$.
Under certain assumptions on an associated polytope, the bounds from \cite[Theorem 2.10]{Sombra99} also lead to improved estimates.
\end{itemize}
\end{remark}
\bigskip
\noindent \textbf{Acknowledgements.} This work was partially supported by the Argentinean research grants
CONICET PIP 0099/11 and UBACYT 20020120100133 (2013-2016).
|
\section*{Acknowledgements}}{}
\newcommand{\set}[1]{\text{$\mathcal{#1}$}}
\newcommand{\graph}[1]{\text{$\mathcal{#1}$}}
\renewcommand{\vector}[1]{\textbf{#1}}
\newcommand{\diffusion}[2]{\text{$\vector{#1}^{(#2)}$}}
\newcommand{\spectral}[1]{\text{$\widehat{#1}$}}
\renewcommand{\matrix}[1]{\textbf{#1}}
\newcommand{\matrixCell}[3]{\text{$\matrix{#1}_{\node{#2}, \node{#3}}$}}
\newcommand{\node}[1]{\text{$#1$}}
\newcommand{\edge}[2]{\text{$\left(\node{#1}, \node{#2}\right)$}}
\newcommand{\text{$\Delta_t$}}{\text{$\Delta_t$}}
\newcommand{\text{$\Delta_\omega$}}{\text{$\Delta_\omega$}}
\newcommand{\text{$\Delta_t^2$}}{\text{$\Delta_t^2$}}
\newcommand{\text{$\Delta_\omega^2$}}{\text{$\Delta_\omega^2$}}
\newcommand{\text{$\Delta_s$}}{\text{$\Delta_s$}}
\newcommand{\graphSpread}[2]{\text{$\Delta_{\graph{#1}, \node{#2}}$}}
\newcommand{\text{$\Delta_s^2$}}{\text{$\Delta_s^2$}}
\newcommand{\squaredGraphSpread}[2]{\text{$\Delta_{\graph{#1}, \node{#2}}^2$}}
\newcommand{\squaredDistance}[1]{\text{$d_{#1}^2$}}
\newcommand{\distance}[1]{\text{$d_{#1}$}}
\newcommand{\text{$-\nabla^2$}}{\text{$-\nabla^2$}}
\newcommand{\normalizedLaplacian}[1]{\text{$\matrix{\L}_{\matrix{#1}}$}}
\newcommand{\laplacian}[1]{\text{$\matrix{L}_{\matrix{#1}}$}}
\newcommand{\inverse}[1]{\text{$\bar{\text{#1}}$}}
\newcommand{\eigenValues}[1]{\text{$\Lambda_{#1}$}}
\newcommand{\eigenVectors}[1]{\text{$\mathcal{X}_{#1}$}}
\newcommand{\text{$\lambda$}}{\text{$\lambda$}}
\newcommand{\text{$\boldsymbol{f}$}}{\text{$\boldsymbol{f}$}}
\newcommand{\uncertaintyCurve}[1]{\text{$\gamma_{\node{#1}}$}}
\newcommand{\dirichletForm}[3]{\text{$S_{\graph{#1}, #2}(\vector{#3})$}}
\DeclareMathOperator*{\mathDiag}{\mathrm{diag}}
\DeclareMathOperator*{\mathShortestPath}{\mathrm{shortest\_path}}
\DeclareMathOperator*{\mathPath}{\mathrm{path}}
\DeclareMathOperator*{\nlongrightarrow}{~\longarrownot\longrightarrow~}
\newcommand{\emph{i.e }}{\emph{i.e }}
\newcommand{\text{ s.t. }}{\text{ s.t. }}
\newcommand{\text{$\mathbb{Z}$}}{\text{$\mathbb{Z}$}}
\newcommand{\text{$\mathbb{R}$}}{\text{$\mathbb{R}$}}
\title{Toward An Uncertainty Principle For Weighted Graphs}
\twoauthors
{Bastien Pasdeloup, R\'eda Alami, Vincent Gripon\sthanks{This work was supported by the European Research Council under the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) / ERC grant agreement n\degree~290901.}}
{Telecom Bretagne\\
UMR CNRS Lab-STICC\\
<EMAIL>}
{Michael Rabbat}
{McGill University\\
ECE dept.\\
<EMAIL>}
\begin{document}
\maketitle
\begin{abstract}
The uncertainty principle states that a signal cannot be localized both in time and frequency.
With the aim of extending this result to signals on graphs, Agaskar \& Lu \cite{Agaskar2012} introduce notions of graph and spectral spreads.
They show that a graph uncertainty principle holds for some families of unweighted graphs.
This principle states that a signal cannot be simultaneously localized both in graph and spectral domains.
In this paper, we aim to extend their work to weighted graphs.
We show that a naive extension of their definitions leads to inconsistent results such as discontinuity of the graph spread when regarded as a function of the graph structure.
To circumvent this problem, we propose another definition of graph spread that relies on an inverse similarity matrix.
We also discuss the choice of the distance function that appears in this definition.
Finally, we compute and plot uncertainty curves for families of weighted graphs.
\end{abstract}
\begin{keywords}
Signal processing on graphs, uncertainty principle, weighted graphs.
\end{keywords}
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
In classical signal processing holds an uncertainty principle stating that a signal cannot be localized both in time and frequency domains \cite{Folland1997}.
This tradeoff is defined by the following equation
\begin{equation}
\text{$\Delta_t^2$} \text{$\Delta_\omega^2$} \geq \frac{1}{4}
\label{classicalUncertainty}
\end{equation}
in which \text{$\Delta_t^2$}{} is the \emph{time spread} of the signal and \text{$\Delta_\omega^2$}{} its \emph{frequency spread}.
Graph signal processing \cite{Shuman2013a} is a generalization of classical Fourier analysis in which the support for the signal is not necessarily a uniform sampling in time but may be a more complex structure, represented as a graph.
This emerging domain has received a lot of interest recently \cite{Hammond2011, Narang2011, Shuman2013b} and has been applied to fields such as image denoising \cite{Shuman2013a} and social networks \cite{Rabbat2014}.
In the context of signal processing on graphs, \cite{Agaskar2012} introduces a spectral graph uncertainty principle analog to \eqref{classicalUncertainty}, stating that a signal on a graph cannot be localized both in the graph domain and in the spectral domain.
For a given signal, the authors propose notions of \emph{graph spread} around a node \node{u_0}, that we denote by \squaredGraphSpread{G}{u_0}, and \emph{spectral spread} around frequency 0, that we denote by \text{$\Delta_s^2$}.
Note that the choice to consider spectral spread around 0 makes sense for diffusion of signals on graphs, which in most cases converge to a signal aligned with first eigenvalue of the Laplacian.
They show that for a fixed node \node{u_0} and any signal \vector{x} on a graph, $(\squaredGraphSpread{G}{u_0}(\vector{x}), \text{$\Delta_s^2$}(\vector{x}))$ is higher than a certain curve called \emph{uncertainty curve}.
The authors then plot this curve for some particular unweighted graphs for which an equation can be determined, and propose an efficient algorithm to estimate it for any unweighted graph.
In this paper, we aim to extend the results of~\cite{Agaskar2012} to weighted graphs.
We first review the uncertainty principle for unweighted graphs in \secref{uncertaintyUnweighted}.
Then, we show in \secref{uncertaintyWeighted} that a naive use of the method introduced in \cite{Agaskar2012} leads to inconsistent results when applied to weighted graphs, and propose a new definition for the graph spread.
Additionally, we discuss in \secref{examplesOfDistances} the choice of the distance function that appears in our definition of graph spread.
Finally, in \secref{results}, we use our definition to plot uncertainty curves for some weighted graphs, using various distance functions, and conclude in \secref{conclusion}.
%
\section{Uncertainty principle for unweighted graphs}
\label{uncertaintyUnweighted}
\subsection{Context and definitions}
\label{context}
In this document, we consider a connected, simple graph $\graph{G} = (\set{V}, \set{E}, \matrix{W})$ composed of a set of $|\set{V}| = N$ nodes, a set of edges \set{E}, and a matrix \matrix{W}.
Without loss of generality, we label the nodes using integers (\emph{i.e } $\set{V} = \left\{1 \dots N \right\}$).
In the definition of \graph{G}, \matrix{W} is a symmetric matrix of real values such that \matrixCell{W}{u}{v} denotes the weight associated with edge $\edge{u}{v} \in \set{E}$.
In the particular case of unweighted graphs, \matrix{W} is the binary adjacency matrix of \graph{G}.
A signal \vector{x} on a graph \graph{G} is a set of real values associated with the nodes of \set{V}.
Mathematically, $\vector{x} = \left\{\vector{x}(1) \dots \vector{x}(N) \right\}$ is a vector of $\text{$\mathbb{R}$}^N$.
\figref{graphWithSignal} depicts an example of graph carrying a signal.
\begin{figure}
\begin{subFigure}{0.7\linewidth}
\input{graphWithSignal.tex}
\end{subFigure}
\begin{subFigure}{0.2\linewidth}
\colorbar{-1}{1}{2.5cm}
\end{subFigure}
\caption
{
Example of graph carrying a signal \vector{x}.
The value of \vector{x} associated with each node is described by a color according to the given scale.
}
\label{graphWithSignal}
\end{figure}
A signal \vector{x} is said to be smooth on a graph \graph{G} if nearby nodes carry similar values of signal.
Such a measure of smoothness is given by the discrete $p$-Dirichlet form \cite{Shuman2013a} of the signal:
\begin{equation}
\resizebox{0.85\hsize}{!}
{$
\dirichletForm{G}{p}{x} \triangleq \frac{1}{p} \sum\limits_{\node{u} \in \set{V}} \left( \sum\limits_{\node{v} \in \set{V} \text{ s.t. } \edge{u}{v} \in \set{E}} \matrixCell{W}{u}{v} (\vector{x}(\node{v}) - \vector{x}(\node{u}))^p \right)^{\frac{1}{p}}
$}
\;.
\label{dirichletForm}
\end{equation}
A smooth signal is associated with a low \dirichletForm{G}{p}{x} value.
In particular, $\dirichletForm{G}{p}{x} = 0$ if and only if \vector{x} is constant.
When interpreting the significance of \graph{G} with respect to a signal \vector{x}, \eqref{dirichletForm} gives us that \emph{\matrix{W} is analogous to a similarity between nodes}, with the noticeable exception of $\matrixCell{W}{u}{u} = 0$.
More generally, a zero value in \matrix{W} indicates the absence of an edge in \graph{G}.
As a consequence \set{E} is redundant with \matrix{W} and can be dropped from the definition of \graph{G}.
The normalized Laplacian \normalizedLaplacian{W} of \matrix{W} \cite{Chung1997} is a difference operator analogous to the Laplacian operator arising for example in the study of heat diffusion, wave propagation, and harmonic analysis.
It is defined by
\begin{equation}
\normalizedLaplacian{W} \triangleq \matrix{I} - \matrix{D}^{-\frac{1}{2}} \matrix{W} \matrix{D}^{-\frac{1}{2}}
\label{normalizedLaplacian}
\end{equation}
where \matrix{D} is the diagonal matrix of nodes degrees.
Since \matrix{D} and \matrix{W} are both symmetric real matrices, \normalizedLaplacian{W} can be diagonalized and described by its orthonormal eigenvectors $\eigenVectors{\normalizedLaplacian{W}} = (\text{$\boldsymbol{f}$}_1 \dots \text{$\boldsymbol{f}$}_N)$ and associated eigenvalues $\eigenValues{\normalizedLaplacian{W}} = (\text{$\lambda$}_1 \leq \dots \leq \text{$\lambda$}_N)$.
%
\subsection{Notions of spreads for unweighted graphs}
\label{spreadsUnweighted}
The notions of graph and spectral spreads introduced in this paper are an extension of~\cite{Agaskar2012}.
In the following paragraphs we recall their definitions.
The graph spread $\squaredGraphSpread{G}{u_0}(\vector{x})$ of a signal \vector{x} around a given node \node{u_0} is defined by
\begin{equation}
\squaredGraphSpread{G}{u_0}(\vector{x}) \triangleq \frac{1}{\|\vector{x}\|_2^2} \sum\limits_{\node{u} \in \set{V}} \squaredDistance{geo(\matrix{W})}(\node{u_0}, \node{u}) \vector{x}(\node{u})^2
\label{graphSpread}
\end{equation}
where $\vector{x}(\node{u})$ is the value of \vector{x} at node \node{u}, and $\squaredDistance{geo(\matrix{W})}(\node{u_0}, \node{u})$ is the squared geodesic distance -- shortest path -- between \node{u_0} and \node{u} using weights matrix \matrix{W}.
Informally, this definition of $\squaredGraphSpread{G}{u_0}(\vector{x})$ quantifies the distance from \node{u_0} to signal \vector{x}.
It allows us to introduce a notion of locality of the signal in \graph{G}: the smaller the graph spread is, the more \vector{x} is concentrated around \node{u_0}.
The spectral spread $\text{$\Delta_s^2$}(\vector{x})$ of \vector{x} is defined by
\begin{equation}
\text{$\Delta_s^2$}(\vector{x}) \triangleq \frac{1}{\|\vector{x}\|_2^2} \sum\limits_{n = 1}^{N} \text{$\lambda$}_n \spectral{x}_n^2
\label{spectralSpread}
\end{equation}
where $\spectral{\vector{x}} = (\spectral{x}_1 \dots \spectral{x}_N) \triangleq (\text{$\boldsymbol{f}$}_{1}^\top \vector{x} \dots \text{$\boldsymbol{f}$}_{N}^\top \vector{x})$ is the graph Fourier transform \cite{Shuman2013a} of \vector{x}.
One can show that for any signal \vector{x} on an unweighted graph \graph{G}, there exists a relation between \eqref{graphSpread} and \eqref{spectralSpread} such that any pair $(\squaredGraphSpread{G}{u_0}(\vector{x}), \text{$\Delta_s^2$}(\vector{x}))$ is constrained from below by a certain curve \uncertaintyCurve{u_0}.
\figref{exampleUncertaintyCurves} depicts the uncertainty curve for some chosen graphs of $100$ nodes.
Additional examples of uncertainty curves are proposed in \cite{Agaskar2012}.
\begin{figure}
\Large
{
\input{exampleUncertaintyCurves.tex}
\caption
{
Examples of uncertainty curves for some unweighted graphs of $100$ nodes.
For the star graph, the middle node (\emph{i.e } the node connected to all others) is chosen as \node{u_0}.
}
\label{exampleUncertaintyCurves}
}
\end{figure}
It is shown in \cite{Agaskar2012} that any uncertainty curve intersects the horizontal axis at exactly one location $(1, 0)$ obtained for a signal \vector{x} localized at node \node{u_0}.
Moreover, the curve reaches a spectral spread of $0$ for $\vector{x} = \text{$\boldsymbol{f}$}_1$ \cite{Agaskar2012}.
In this case, the associated graph spread is equal to $\text{$\boldsymbol{f}$}_1^\top \matrix{P}^2 \text{$\boldsymbol{f}$}_1$, where $\matrix{P} = \mathDiag\limits_{\node{u} \in \set{V}}(\distance{geo(\matrix{W})}(\node{u_0}, \node{u}))$.
In the remainder of this document, we consider unit-norm signals to simplify the reasoning.
Therefore, \eqref{graphSpread} becomes
\begin{equation}
\squaredGraphSpread{G}{u_0}(\vector{x}) \triangleq \sum\limits_{\node{u} \in \set{V}} \squaredDistance{geo(\matrix{W})}(\node{u_0}, \node{u}) \vector{x}(\node{u})^2
\label{graphSpreadUnitNorm}
\end{equation}
and \eqref{spectralSpread} becomes
\begin{equation}
\text{$\Delta_s^2$}(\vector{x}) \triangleq \sum\limits_{n = 1}^{N} \text{$\lambda$}_n \spectral{x}_n^2
\;.
\label{spectralSpreadUnitNorm}
\end{equation}
%
%
\section{Towards an uncertainty principle for weighted graphs}
\label{uncertaintyWeighted}
In this section we aim to extend the definitions of~\cite{Agaskar2012} to weighted graphs.
In the next subsection, we show that a naive use of \eqref{graphSpreadUnitNorm} leads to inconsistent results such as discontinuity of the graph spread when regarded as a function of \graph{G}.
\subsection{Discontinuity of the graph spread for weighted graphs}
\label{discontinuityGraphSpread}
Let us consider the graph \graph{G} in \figref{problemGeodesic} in which \node{u_0} is fixed and \vector{x} is equally distributed among the nodes.
\begin{figure}
\begin{subFigure}{0.5\linewidth}
\resizebox{0.99\hsize}{!}
{
\input{problemGeodesic.tex}
}
\caption{}
\label{problemGeodesicGraph}
\end{subFigure}
\begin{subFigure}{0.4\linewidth}
\resizebox{0.7\hsize}{!}
{
\bordermatrix
{
~ & \node{u_0} & \node{u} & \node{v} \cr
\node{u_0} & 0 & \varepsilon & 1 \cr
\node{u} & \varepsilon & 0 & 2 \cr
\node{v} & 1 & 2 & 0 \cr
}
}
\caption{}
\label{problemGeodesicMatrix}
\end{subFigure}
\caption
{
Example weighted graph \subfigref{problemGeodesicGraph} for which we want to compute the uncertainty curve, and associated matrix of weights \subfigref{problemGeodesicMatrix}.
We consider a signal \vector{x} equally reparted on the nodes (\emph{i.e } $\forall \node{w} \in \set{V} : \vector{x}(\node{w}) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}$).
}
\label{problemGeodesic}
\end{figure}
Using \eqref{graphSpreadUnitNorm}, we obtain that $\squaredGraphSpread{G}{u_0}(\vector{x}) = \squaredDistance{geo(\matrix{W})}(\node{u_0}, \node{u}) \vector{x}(\node{u})^2 + \squaredDistance{geo(\matrix{W})}(\node{u_0}, \node{v}) \vector{x}(\node{v})^2 = \frac{\varepsilon^2 + 1}{3} \underset{\varepsilon \to 0}{\longrightarrow} \frac{1}{3}$.
It seems reasonable to expect that as $\varepsilon$ tends to $0$, \squaredGraphSpread{G}{u_0} tends to the limit case where $\varepsilon = 0$.
In particular, \squaredGraphSpread{G}{u_0} should be robust to measurement noise in scenarios where \matrix{W} is not perfectly known.
\figref{limitProblemGeodesic} depicts the matrix of weights associated with the limit graph \graph{G'}.
\begin{figure}
\begin{subFigure}{0.5\linewidth}
\resizebox{0.99\hsize}{!}
{
\input{limitProblemGeodesic.tex}
}
\caption{}
\label{limitProblemGeodesicGraph}
\end{subFigure}
\begin{subFigure}{0.4\linewidth}
\resizebox{0.7\hsize}{!}
{
\bordermatrix
{
~ & \node{u_0} & \node{u} & \node{v} \cr
\node{u_0} & 0 & 0 & 1 \cr
\node{u} & 0 & 0 & 2 \cr
\node{v} & 1 & 2 & 0 \cr
}
}
\caption{}
\label{limitProblemGeodesicMatrix}
\end{subFigure}
\caption
{
Matrix of weights \subfigref{limitProblemGeodesicMatrix} representing the limit of \figref{problemGeodesicMatrix} when $\varepsilon \longrightarrow 0$, and associated graph \graph{G'} \subfigref{limitProblemGeodesicGraph}.
The edge \edge{u_0}{u} has been removed since $\matrixCell{W}{u_0}{u} = 0$.
}
\label{limitProblemGeodesic}
\end{figure}
Again, we use \eqref{graphSpreadUnitNorm} to compute the graph spread for \graph{G'} around \node{u_0}.
With this graph, we obtain that $\squaredGraphSpread{G'}{u_0}(\vector{x}) = \frac{10}{3}$, leading to a discontinuity of $\graph{G} \mapsto \squaredGraphSpread{G}{u_0}$.
\begin{remark}
Looking closely at the above mentioned example, we point out that there is a misuse of \matrix{W} in the definition of \squaredGraphSpread{G}{u_0}.
As a matter of fact \eqref{dirichletForm} gives us that \matrix{W} is a similarity matrix, whereas \eqref{graphSpreadUnitNorm} uses it as a distance matrix.
More generally we expect the graph spread to grow with the distance between nodes in a graph, that is to say as the similarity decreases.
In the next subsection we propose a generic framework for a rectified definition of the graph spread in the case of weighted graphs.
\end{remark}
%
\subsection{Expected behavior of a graph spread}
\label{expectedBehaviorGraphSpread}
In order to define a new notion of graph spread that does not lead to unexpected behaviors as in \secref{discontinuityGraphSpread}, we present some desired properties on \squaredGraphSpread{G}{u_0}.
We expect from a graph spread notion that it captures the locality of a signal \vector{x} in the graph domain.
In other words, for a fixed node \node{u_0}, the graph spread around \node{u_0} should measure the extent to which the signal \vector{x} is concentrated around \node{u_0}.
To achieve this, we would like to ensure the following properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\squaredGraphSpread{G}{u_0}(\vector{x})$ should be small if \vector{x} is localized around \node{u_0}, and should increase as the distance between \node{u_0} and the nodes carrying \vector{x} increases.
\item Additionally, the only situation leading to $\squaredGraphSpread{G}{u_0}(\vector{x}) = 0$ should be when the signal is entirely localized on $u_0$ or nodes that are \emph{indistinguishable} from $u_0$.
\item A third desired property is that the graph spread should be \emph{similar} for graphs with \emph{similar} weights (continuity of $\graph{G} \mapsto \squaredGraphSpread{G}{u_0}$).
\end{itemize}
Moreover it appears to us that the choice of the geodesic distance in \eqref{graphSpreadUnitNorm} is arbitrary.
In order to be compliant with the previously enumerated properties, we characterize the class of acceptable functions \distance{}:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \label{prop1} $\forall \node{u}, \node{v} \in \set{V} : \distance{}(\node{u}, \node{v}) \geq 0$.
\item \label{prop2} $\forall \node{u}, \node{v} \in \set{V} : \distance{}(\node{u}, \node{v}) = 0 \Leftrightarrow \forall \node{w} \in\set{V} : \distance{}(\node{u}, \node{w}) = \distance{}(\node{v}, \node{w})$.
\item \label{prop3} \distance{} is continuous, and if we increase \matrixCell{W}{u}{v} for a single edge \edge{u}{v}, then $\forall \node{u'}, \node{v'} \in \set{V} : \distance{}(\node{u'}, \node{v'})$ does not increase.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{remark}
The geodesic distance \squaredDistance{geo(\matrix{W})} based on \matrix{W} is not compliant with \itemref{prop3} (not continuous and increasing with \matrix{W}).
\end{remark}
%
%
\section{Examples of compliant distances for graph spread}
\label{examplesOfDistances}
In this section we propose two choices of distances compliant with the previously introduced properties.
\subsection{Inverse similarity matrix}
\label{inverseSimilarityMatrix}
The distance described in this subsection is a simple rectified version of \eqref{graphSpreadUnitNorm} and is compatible with it in the case of unweighted graphs.
Let us consider a graph \graph{G}.
We introduce a new matrix \matrix{\inverse{S}} as follows:
\begin{equation}
\forall \node{u}, \node{v} \in \set{V} : \matrixCell{\inverse{S}}{u}{v} \triangleq \left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\infty & \textbf{if } \matrixCell{W}{u}{v} = 0 \\
0 & \textbf{if } \matrixCell{W}{u}{v} = \infty \\
\frac{1}{\matrixCell{W}{u}{v}} & \textbf{otherwise}
\end{array}
\right.
\;.
\label{similarityMatrix}
\end{equation}
We propose to use it instead of \matrix{W} in \eqref{graphSpreadUnitNorm}.
\begin{remark}
The choice of taking the inverse is arbitrary and could be replaced by other functions.
Standard alternatives are Gaussian kernels, as shown later in \secref{resultsGaussian}.
In some cases weighted similarity graphs are constructed from distance graphs and in such cases it appears more natural to use the latter directly instead of estimating it back from \matrix{W}.
Some examples of such graphs are given in the next section.
\end{remark}
We now show that the squared geodesic distance using \matrix{\inverse{S}}, \squaredDistance{geo(\matrix{\inverse{S}})}, is compliant with the three properties enounced in \secref{expectedBehaviorGraphSpread}:
\begin{enumerate}
\item is trivially true, since $\squaredDistance{geo(\matrix{\inverse{S}})}(\node{u}, \node{v})$ features a square.
\item is ensured for any couple of nodes (\node{u}, \node{v}) being $0$-distant (according to \matrix{\inverse{S}}), as for any node \node{w} the shortest path $\node{w} \rightarrow \dots \rightarrow \node{u}$ can be extended to $\node{w} \rightarrow \dots \rightarrow \node{u} \rightarrow \node{v}$ without changing its length (since we add $0$ to it).
\item is in most cases trivial.
The only concern is when an edge is removed from \graph{G}.
Such a scenario occurs in the case where the similarity between two nodes \node{u} and \node{v} becomes zero.
By definition of $\matrix{\inverse{S}}$, this corresponds to a distance between \node{u} and \node{v} that diverges to infinity.
It is obvious that eventually the shortest paths of \matrix{\inverse{S}} do not include this edge.
\end{enumerate}
With this function, the definition of graph spread in \eqref{graphSpreadUnitNorm} now becomes
\begin{equation}
\squaredGraphSpread{G}{u_0}(\vector{x}) \triangleq \sum\limits_{\node{u} \in \set{V}} \squaredDistance{geo(\matrix{\inverse{S}})}(\node{u_0}, \node{u}) \vector{x}(\node{u})^2
\;.
\label{graphSpreadCorrectedUnitNorm}
\end{equation}
%
\subsection{Diffusion distance}
\label{diffusionDistance}
Another distance function we study in this paper is the diffusion distance, as defined in \cite{Segarra2014}.
Given a graph adjacency matrix \matrix{W} and its associated (non-normalized) Laplacian matrix \laplacian{W} \cite{Chung1997}, \distance{diff} is defined in matrix form for some constant parameter $\alpha$ as follows:
\begin{equation}
\forall \node{u}, \node{v} \in \set{V} : \distance{diff}(\node{u}, \node{v}) \triangleq \| (\matrix{I} + \alpha \laplacian{W})^{-1} (\vector{x}_\node{u} - \vector{x}_\node{v}) \|
\label{diffusionDistance}
\end{equation}
where $\vector{x}_\node{u}$ is a unit-norm signal having only one non-zero value on node \node{u}.
One can show that \distance{diff} verifies the three desired properties presented in \secref{expectedBehaviorGraphSpread}.
In the remaining of the document, we set $\alpha = 1$ and use the $l_2$ norm.
%
%
\section{Results for classical weighted graphs}
\label{results}
In this section we introduce several classical weighted graphs and plot their uncertainty curves considering both inverse similarity matrix and diffusion distance.
Curves are plotted using the Sandwich algorithm introduced in \cite{Agaskar2012}.
By comparing the resulting curves to known uncertainty curves \cite{Agaskar2012} obtained for graphs such as the ring or star graphs, one can evaluate the \emph{amount of uncertainty} associated to the graph under study.
\subsection{Random graph}
\label{resultsRandom}
We call random graph a graph which adjacency symmetric matrix \matrix{W} is such that each non-null coordinate \matrixCell{W}{u}{v} is drawn uniformly between 0 and 1.
Using the previously introduced distance functions, we plot in \figref{randomGraphs} the uncertainty curves for such families of graphs.
The curves are normalized such that the graph spread associated with $\text{$\Delta_s^2$}(\vector{x}) = 0$ is at most equal to $1$ for each distance function used.
\begin{figure}
\Large
{
\input{randomGraphs.tex}
\caption
{
Examples of uncertainty curves for some randomly weighted families of graphs of $10$ nodes.
The curves are computed for the two distance functions \distance{geo(\matrix{\inverse{S}})} and \distance{diff}.
Mean uncertainty curves for $100$ random weights.
}
\label{randomGraphs}
}
\end{figure}
It is interesting to notice that the choice of the distance does not impact the relative order of the curves.
Additionally, the intersection between the uncertainty curves associated to the star and complete graphs is kept when switching the distance function.
The main difference is the smoothness of the curves.
Using \distance{diff} tends to produce uncertainty curves that are more regular than when using \distance{geo(\matrix{\inverse{S}})}.
%
\subsection{Gaussian kernel}
\label{resultsGaussian}
We consider graphs obtained using a Gaussian kernel.
The idea is to build a distance graph and to apply a Gaussian kernel to all weights to obtain \matrix{W}.
The Gaussian kernel has two parameters $\alpha$ and $\beta$ and is defined as follows:
\begin{equation}
g: x \mapsto \alpha \exp\left(-\beta x^2\right)
\;.
\label{gaussianKernel}
\end{equation}
We consider a set \set{S} of $N$ sensors uniformly distributed in a $1 \times 1$ square.
We define a symmetric matrix \matrix{E} as follows.
Fix some radius $r$ such that if two sensors \node{u} and \node{v} are at Euclidean distance $\distance{euc}(\node{u}, \node{v})$ less than $r$, then $\matrixCell{E}{u}{v} = \frac{\distance{euc}(\node{u}, \node{v})}{\max\limits_{\node{u'}, \node{v'} \in \set{V}} \distance{euc}(\node{u'}, \node{v'})}$ and $\matrixCell{E}{u}{v}=0$ otherwise.
\matrix{W} is then defined by applying $g$ to each cell of \matrix{E}.
\figref{gaussianKernel} depicts the mean uncertainty curves for random geometric graphs.
When computing the uncertainty curve using the squared geodesic distance \squaredDistance{geo(\matrix{E})}, we directly use the matrix of Euclidean distances \matrix{E}, and do not retrieve it from \matrix{W} (see remark in \secref{inverseSimilarityMatrix}).
The curves are normalized so that no value of \squaredGraphSpread{G}{u_0} exceeds $1$ for each distance function.
\begin{figure}
\Large
{
\input{gaussianKernel.tex}
\caption
{
Uncertainty curves for random geometric graphs of $10$ nodes.
Parameters $(\alpha, \beta, r)$ are respectively fixed to $(1, 1, 0.3)$.
Mean uncertainty curves for $100$ random graphs.
}
\label{gaussianKernel}
}
\end{figure}
Additionally, we apply the same Gaussian kernel to semi-localized graphs.
We use the same graph as presented in \cite{Shuman2013a} (Example 2).
Such a graph is obtained by connecting pixels of the $32 \times 32$ cameraman image to their eight neighbors, weighting connections using $g$ over the difference of intensity of pixels to obtain \matrix{W}.
This method for constructing graphs for images has been previously used for example in \cite{Narang2012}.
\figref{cameramanImage} depicts the picture from which the graph is extracted.
\figref{cameramanCurve} shows the associated uncertainty curves using the distances \distance{geo(\matrix{\inverse{S}})}\footnote
{
Contrary to the study of random geometric graphs, we do not directly use a matrix of distances \matrix{D} associated to the difference of pixels intensity, but retreive \matrix{\inverse{S}} from \matrix{W} using \eqref{similarityMatrix}.
As a matter of fact, two adjacent pixels with identical intensity result in a distance of $0$ if using \matrix{D}, and would cause the discontinuity problem previously introduced.
A solution to cope with this problem is to add an $\varepsilon$ noise to all edge weights.
However, this leads to hard to visualize curves.
Therefore, for the sake of comprehension, we use \squaredDistance{geo(\matrix{\inverse{S}})} and not \squaredDistance{geo(\matrix{D})}.
}
and \distance{diff}.
\begin{figure}
\begin{subFigure}{0.3\linewidth}
\vspace{0.08cm}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{cameraman.png}
\vspace{0.08cm}
\caption{}
\label{cameramanImage}
\end{subFigure}
\begin{subFigure}{0.6\linewidth}
\Large
{
\input{cameraman.tex}
\caption{}
\label{cameramanCurve}
}
\end{subFigure}
\caption
{
Computation of the normalized uncertainty curves \subfigref{cameramanCurve} associated to the image \subfigref{cameramanImage}, for the introduced distance functions.
Parameters $(\alpha, \beta)$ are respectively fixed to $(1, 1)$.
}
\label{cameraman}
\end{figure}
%
\section{Conclusion}
\label{conclusion}
In this work, we have extended the notion of uncertainty on graphs introduced in \cite{Agaskar2012} to weighted graphs, and pointed out important properties of the distance function used in the definition of graph spread.
We have shown the applicability of our work on classical families of graphs, as well as on semi-localized graphs that are encountered in real-life use-cases.
A direction of our future work will focus on side aspects, such as determining a way to efficiently choose the node used as \node{u_0} in the computation of \squaredGraphSpread{G}{u_0} to perform better comparisons of uncertainty curves.
We will also investigate some properties that could be derived from the uncertainty of a given graph when considering some categories of signals.
%
\bibliographystyle{IEEEbib}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{Sec:Intro}
\IEEEPARstart{C}{onsider} the problem of reconstructing a sequence of sparse signals from a limited number of measurements. Let~$x[k] \in \mathbb{R}^n$ be the signal at time~$k$ and $y[k] \in \mathbb{R}^{m_k}$ be the vector of signal measurements at time~$k$, where~$m_k \ll n$. Assume the signals evolve according to the dynamical model
\begin{subequations}\label{Eq:IntroStateSpace}
\begin{align}
x[k] &= f_k\big(\{x[i]\}_{i=1}^{k-1}\big) + \epsilon[k]
\label{Eq:IntroStateSpaceModel}
\\
y[k] &= A_k\,x[k]\,,
\label{Eq:IntroStateSpaceObservations}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where~$\epsilon[k] \in \mathbb{R}^n$ is modeling noise and~$A_k \in \mathbb{R}^{m_k \times n}$ is a sensing matrix. In~\eqref{Eq:IntroStateSpaceModel}, $f_k:(\mathbb{R}^n)^{k-1} \xrightarrow{} \mathbb{R}^n$ is a known, but otherwise arbitrary, map that describes~$x[k]$ as a function of past signals. We assume that each~$x[k]$ and~$\epsilon[k]$ is sparse, i.e., it has a small number of nonzero entries. Our goal is to reconstruct the signal sequence~$\{x[k]\}$ from the measurement sequence~$\{y[k]\}$. We require the reconstruction scheme to be recursive (or online), i.e., $x[k]$ is reconstructed before acquiring measurements of any future signal~$x[i]$, $i>k$, and also to use a minimal number of measurements. We formalize the problem as follows.
\mypar{Problem statement}
\textit{Given two unknown sparse sequences~$\{x[k]\}$ and~$\{\epsilon[k]\}$ satisfying~\eqref{Eq:IntroStateSpace}, design an online algorithm that \text{1)} uses a minimal number of measurements~$m_k$ at time~$k$, and \text{2)} perfectly reconstructs each~$x[k]$ from~$y[k]$ acquired as in~\eqref{Eq:IntroStateSpaceObservations}, and possibly $x[i]$, $i<k$.}
Note that our setting immediately generalizes from the case where each~$x[k]$ is sparse to the case where~$x[k]$ has a sparse representation in a linear, invertible transform.\footnote{If~$x[k]$ is not sparse but $z[k] := \Psi x[k]$ is, where~$\Psi$ is an invertible matrix, then redefine~$f_k$ as the composition $f_k^z = \Psi^{-1} \circ f_k \circ \Psi$ and~$A_k$ as $A_k^z:= A_k \Psi^{-1}$. The signal~$z[k]$ satisfies~\eqref{Eq:IntroStateSpace} with~$f_k^z$ and~$A_k^z$.}
\subsection{Applications}
Many problems require estimating a sequence of signals from a sequence of measurements satisfying the model in~\eqref{Eq:IntroStateSpace}. These include classification and tracking in computer vision
systems~\cite{Forsyth02-ComputerVision-AModernApproach,Chellappa09-StatisticalMethodsAndModelsForVideoBasedTrackingModelingAndRecognition},
radar
tracking~\cite{Herman09-HighResolutionRadarCS},
dynamic
MRI~\cite{Eldar14-ApplicationCSLongitudinalMRI}
and several tasks in wireless sensor
networks~\cite{Ribeiro10-KalmanFilterInWSN}.
Our application focus, however, is \textit{compressive background subtraction}~\cite{Cevher08-CompressiveSensingForBackgroundSubtraction}. Background subtraction is a key task for detecting and tracking objects in a video sequence and it has been applied, for example, in video
surveillance
\cite{Maddalena08-SelfOrganizingApproachBackgroundSubtractionVisualSurveillanceApplications,Brutzer11-EvaluationBackgroundSubtractionTechniquesVideoSurveillance},
traffic monitoring~\cite{Tseng02-RealTimeVideoSurveillanceForTrafficMonitoringUsingVirtualLineAnalysis,Cheung03-RobustTechniquesForBackgroundSubtractionUrbanTrafficVideo}, and medical imaging~\cite{Profio86-DigitalBackgroundSubtractionForFluorescenceImaging,Otazo14-LowRankPlusSparseMatrixDecompositionAcceleratedDynamicMRI}. Although there are many background subtraction techniques, e.g.,
\cite{Picardi04-BackgroundSubtractionTechniques-AReview,Chellappa09-StatisticalMethodsAndModelsForVideoBasedTrackingModelingAndRecognition,Candes11-RobustPrincipalComponentAnalysis},
most of them assume access to full frames and, thus, are inapplicable in compressive video
sensing~\cite{Wakin06-CompressiveImagingForVideoRepresentationAndCoding,Sankaranarayanan12-CSMUVI,Sankaranarayanan13-CompressiveAcquisitionForLinearDynamicalSystems},
a technology used in cameras where sensing is expensive (e.g., infrared, UV wavelengths).
In compressive video sensing, one has access not to full frames as in conventional video, but only to a small set of linear measurements of each frame, as in~\eqref{Eq:IntroStateSpaceObservations}. Cevher et al.~\cite{Cevher08-CompressiveSensingForBackgroundSubtraction} noticed that background subtraction is possible in this context if the foreground pixels, i.e., those associated to a moving object, occupy a small area in each frame. Assuming the background image is known beforehand, compressed sensing techniques~\cite{Donoho06-CompressedSensing,Candes06-RobustUncertaintyPrinciplesExactSignalReconstructionHighlyIncomplete} such as $\ell_1$-norm minimization allow reconstructing each foreground.
This not only reconstructs the original frame (if we add the reconstructed foreground to the known background), but also performs background subtraction as a by-product~\cite{Cevher08-CompressiveSensingForBackgroundSubtraction}.
We mention that, with the exception of~\cite{Warnell12-AdaptiveRateCompressiveSensingBackgroundSubtraction,Warnell14-AdaptiveRateCompressiveSensingUsingSideInformation}, most approaches to compressive video sensing and to compressive background subtraction assume a fixed number of measurements for all frames~\cite{Wakin06-CompressiveImagingForVideoRepresentationAndCoding,Cevher08-CompressiveSensingForBackgroundSubtraction,Park09-MultiscaleFrameworkForCompressiveSensingOfVideo,Reddy11-P2C2,Sankaranarayanan12-CSMUVI,Sankaranarayanan13-CompressiveAcquisitionForLinearDynamicalSystems}. If this number is too small, reconstruction of the frames fails. If it is too large, reconstruction succeeds, but at the cost of spending unnecessary measurements in some or all frames. The work in~\cite{Warnell12-AdaptiveRateCompressiveSensingBackgroundSubtraction,Warnell14-AdaptiveRateCompressiveSensingUsingSideInformation} addresses this problem with an online scheme that uses cross validation to compute the number of required measurements. Given a reconstructed foreground, \cite{Warnell12-AdaptiveRateCompressiveSensingBackgroundSubtraction,Warnell14-AdaptiveRateCompressiveSensingUsingSideInformation} estimates the area of the true foreground using extra cross-validation measurements. Then, assuming that foreground areas of two consecutive frames are the same, the phase diagram of the sensing matrix, which was computed beforehand, gives the number of measurements for the next frame. This approach, however, fails to use information from past frames in the reconstruction process, information that, as we will see, can be used to significantly reduce the number of measurements.
\subsection{Overview of our approach and contributions}
\label{SubSubSec:OverviewAndContributions}
\mypar{Overview}
Our approach to adaptive-rate signal reconstruction is based on the recent theoretical results of~\cite{Mota14-CSSideInfo,Mota14-CSwithSideInfo-GlobalSIP}. These characterize the performance of sparse reconstructing schemes in the presence of side information. The scheme we are most interested in is the \textit{$\ell_1$-$\ell_1$ minimization}:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:L1L1}
\begin{array}[t]{ll}
\underset{x}{\text{minimize}} & \|x\|_1 + \beta \|x - w\|_1 \\
\text{subject to} & Ax = y\,,
\end{array}
\end{equation}
where~$x \in \mathbb{R}^n$ is the optimization variable and~$\|x\|_1:= \sum_{i=1}^n|x_i|$ is the $\ell_1$-norm. In~\eqref{Eq:L1L1}, $y \in \mathbb{R}^m$ is a vector of measurements and~$\beta$ is a positive parameter. The vector~$w \in \mathbb{R}^n$ is assumed known and is the so-called \textit{prior} or \textit{side information}: a vector similar to the vector that we want to reconstruct, say~$x^\star$. Note that if we set~$\beta = 0$ in \eqref{Eq:L1L1}, we obtain \textit{basis pursuit}~\cite{Donoho98-AtomicDecompositionBasisPursuit}, a well-known problem for reconstructing sparse signals and which is at the core of the theory of \textit{compressed sensing}~\cite{Candes06-RobustUncertaintyPrinciplesExactSignalReconstructionHighlyIncomplete,Donoho06-CompressedSensing}. Problem~\eqref{Eq:L1L1} generalizes basis pursuit by integrating the side information~$w$. The work in~\cite{Mota14-CSSideInfo,Mota14-CSwithSideInfo-GlobalSIP} shows that, if~$w$ has reasonable quality and the entries of~$A$ are drawn from an i.i.d.\ Gaussian distribution, the number of measurements required by~\eqref{Eq:L1L1} to reconstruct~$x^\star$ is much smaller than the number of measurements required by basis pursuit. Furthermore, the theory in~\cite{Mota14-CSSideInfo,Mota14-CSwithSideInfo-GlobalSIP} establishes that~$\beta = 1$ is an optimal choice, irrespective of any problem parameter. This makes the reconstruction problem~\eqref{Eq:L1L1} parameter-free.
We address the problem of recursively reconstructing a sequence of sparse signals satisfying~\eqref{Eq:IntroStateSpace} as follows.
Assuming the measurement matrix is Gaussian,\footnote{Although Gaussian matrices are hard to implement in practical systems, they have optimal performance. There are, however, other more practical matrices with a similar performance, e.g., \cite{Berinde08-SparseRecoveryUsingSparseMatrices,Liutkus14-ImagingWithNature-CompressiveImagingUsingMultiplyScatteringMedium}.} we propose an algorithm that uses~\eqref{Eq:L1L1} with~$w = f_k\big(\{x[i]\}_{i=1}^{k-1}\big)$ to reconstruct each signal~$x[k]$. And, building upon the results of~\cite{Mota14-CSSideInfo,Mota14-CSwithSideInfo-GlobalSIP}, we equip our algorithm with a mechanism to automatically compute an estimate on the number of required measurements. As application, we consider compressive background subtraction and show how to generate side information from past frames.
\mypar{Contributions}
We summarize our contributions as follows:
\newcounter{Contributions}
\begin{list}{\roman{Contributions})}{\usecounter{Contributions}}
\item
We propose an adaptive-rate algorithm for reconstructing sparse sequences satisfying the model in~\eqref{Eq:IntroStateSpace}.
\item
We establish conditions under which our algorithm reconstructs a finite sparse sequence~$\{x[i]\}_{i=1}^k$ with large probability.
\item
We describe how to apply the algorithm to compressive background subtraction problems, using motion-compensated extrapolation to predict the next image to be acquired. In other words, we show how to generate side information.
\item
Given that images predicted by motion-compensated extrapolation are known to exhibit Laplacian noise, we then characterize the performance of~\eqref{Eq:L1L1} under this model.
\item
Finally, we show the impressive performance of our algorithm for performing
compressive background subtraction on a sequence of real images.
\end{list}
Besides the incorporation of a scheme to compute a minimal number of measurements on-the-fly, there is another aspect that makes our algorithm fundamentally different from prior work. As overviewed in \sref{Sec:RelatedWork}, most prior algorithms for reconstructing dynamical sparse signals work well only when the sparsity pattern of~$x[k]$ varies slowly with time. Our algorithm, in contrast, operates well even when the sparsity pattern of~$x[k]$ varies arbitrarily between consecutive time instants, as shown by our theory and experiments. What is required to vary slowly is the ``quality'' of the prediction given by each~$f_k$ (i.e., the quality of the side information) and, to a lesser extent, not the sparsity pattern of~$x[k]$ but only its sparsity, i.e., the \textit{number of} nonzero entries.
\subsection{Organization}
\sref{Sec:RelatedWork} overviews related work. In \sref{Sec:Preliminaries}, we state the results from~\cite{Mota14-CSSideInfo,Mota14-CSwithSideInfo-GlobalSIP} that are used by our algorithm. \sref{Sec:DynamicalSignalReconstruction} describes the algorithm and establishes reconstruction guarantees. \sref{Sec:ApplicationToBackgroundSubtraction} concerns the application to compressive background subtraction. Experimental results illustrating the performance of our algorithm are shown in section~\ref{Sec:ExperimentalResults}; and section~\ref{Sec:Conclusions} concludes the paper. The appendix
contains the proofs of our results.
\section{Related work}
\label{Sec:RelatedWork}
There is an extensive literature on reconstructing time-varying signals from limited measurements. Here, we provide an overview by referring a few landmark papers.
\mypar{The Kalman filter}
The classical solution to estimate a sequence of signals satisfying~\eqref{Eq:IntroStateSpace} or, in the control terminology, the state of a dynamical system, is
the Kalman filter~\cite{Kalman60-NewApproachLinearFilteringAndPredictionProblems}. The Kalman filter is an online algorithm that is least-squares optimal when the model is linear, i.e., $f_k\big(\{x[i]\}_{i=0}^{k-1}\big) = F_k x[k]$, and the sequence~$\{\epsilon[k]\}$ is Gaussian and independent across time. Several extensions are available when these assumptions do not hold~\cite{Haykin01-KalmanFilteringAndNeuralNetworks,Geromel99-OptimalLinearFilteringUnderParameterUncertainty,Ghaoui01-RobustFilteringDiscreteTimeSystemsBoundedNoiseParametricUncertainty}. The Kalman filter and its extensions, however, are inapplicable to our scenario, as they do not easily integrate the additional knowledge that the state is sparse.
\mypar{Dynamical sparse signal reconstruction}
Some prior work incorporates signal structure, such as sparsity, into online sparse reconstruction procedures. For example, \cite{Vaswani08-KalmanFilteredCS,Vaswani09-AnalyzingKalmanFilteredCS} adapts a Kalman filter to estimate a sequence of sparse signals. Roughly, we have an estimate of the signal's support at each time instant and use the Kalman filter to compute the (nonzero) signal values. When a change in the support is detected, the estimate of the support is updated using compressed sensing techniques. The work in~\cite{Vaswani08-KalmanFilteredCS,Vaswani09-AnalyzingKalmanFilteredCS}, however, assumes that the support varies very slowly and does not provide any strategy to update (or compute) the number of measurements; indeed, the number of measurements is assumed constant along time. Related work that also assumes a fixed number of measurements includes~\cite{Ziniel10-TrackingAndSmoothingTimeVaryingSparseSignalsBP}, which uses approximate belief propagation, and
\cite{Carmi10-MethodsForSparseSignalRecoveryUsingKalmanFiltering},
which integrates sparsity knowledge into a Kalman filter via a pseudo-measurement technique. The works in~\cite{Balzano10-OnlineIdentificationAndTrackingOfSubspacesFromHighlyIncompleteInformation,Balzano14-LocalConvergenceOfAnAlgorithmForSubspaceIdentificationFromPartialData-GROUSE} and~\cite{Chi13-PETRELS} propose online algorithms named GROUSE and PETRELS, respectively, for estimating signals that lie on a low-dimensional subspace. Their model can be seen as a particular case of~\eqref{Eq:IntroStateSpace}, where each map~$f_k$ is linear and depends only on the previous signal. Akin to most prior work, both GROUSE and PETRELS assume that the rank of the underlying subspace (i.e., the sparsity of~$x[k]$) varies slowly with time, and fail to provide a scheme to compute the number of measurements.
We briefly overview the work in~\cite{Charles11-SparsityPenaltiesDynamicalSystemEstimation}, which is
probably the closest to ours.
Three dynamical reconstruction schemes are studied
in~\cite{Charles11-SparsityPenaltiesDynamicalSystemEstimation}. The one with the best performance is
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:RombergProb}
\underset{x}{\text{minimize}}\,\,\|x\|_1 + \beta\|x - w\|_1 + \beta_2\|Ax - y\|_2^2\,,
\end{equation}
where~$\beta_2 > 0$ and~$\|\cdot\|_2$ is the Euclidean $\ell_2$-norm. Problem~\eqref{Eq:RombergProb} is the Lagrangian version of the problem we obtain by replacing the constraints of~\eqref{Eq:L1L1} with~$\|Ax - y\|_2 \leq \sigma$, where~$\sigma$ is a bound on the measurement noise; see problem~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Noisy} below. For~$\beta_2$ in a given range, the solutions of~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Noisy} and~\eqref{Eq:RombergProb} coincide. This is why the approach in~\cite{Charles11-SparsityPenaltiesDynamicalSystemEstimation} is so closely related to ours. Nevertheless, using~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Noisy} has two important advantages: first, in practice, it is easier to obtain bounds on the measurement noise~$\sigma$ than it is to tune~$\beta_2$; second, and more importantly, the problem in~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Noisy} has well-characterized reconstruction guarantees~\cite{Mota14-CSSideInfo,Mota14-CSwithSideInfo-GlobalSIP}. It is exactly those guarantees that enable our scheme for computing of the number of measurements online. The work in~\cite{Charles11-SparsityPenaltiesDynamicalSystemEstimation}, as most prior work, assumes a fixed number of measurements for all signals.
\section{Preliminaries: Static signal \\reconstruction using $\ell_1$-$\ell_1$ minimization}
\label{Sec:Preliminaries}
This section reviews some results from~\cite{Mota14-CSSideInfo}, namely reconstruction guarantees
for~\eqref{Eq:L1L1} in a static scenario, i.e., when we estimate just one signal, not a sequence. As mentioned before, $\beta = 1$ is an optimal choice: it not only minimizes the bounds in~\cite{Mota14-CSSideInfo}, but also leads to the best results in practice. This is the reason why we use~$\beta=1$ henceforth.
\mypar{\boldmath{$\ell_1$}-\boldmath{$\ell_1$} minimization}
Let~$x^\star \in \mathbb{R}^{n}$ be a sparse vector, and assume we have~$m$ linear measurements of~$x^\star$: $y = Ax^\star$, where~$A \in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$. Denote the \textit{sparsity} of~$x^\star$ with $s := |\{i\,:\, x_i^\star \neq 0\}|$, where~$|\cdot|$ is the cardinality of a set. Assume we have access to a signal~$w \in \mathbb{R}^n$ similar to~$x^\star$ (in the sense that $\|x^\star - w\|_1$ is small) and suppose we attempt to reconstruct~$x^\star$ by solving the $\ell_1$-$\ell_1$ minimization problem~\eqref{Eq:L1L1} with~$\beta = 1$:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:L1L1Simple}
\begin{array}[t]{ll}
\underset{x}{\text{minimize}} & \|x\|_1 + \|x - w\|_1 \\
\text{subject to} & Ax = y\,.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
The number of measurements that problem~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Simple} requires to reconstruct~$x^\star$ is a function of the ``quality'' of the side information~$w$. Quality in~\cite{Mota14-CSSideInfo} is measured in terms of the following parameters:
\begin{subequations}\label{Eq:QualityParameters}
\begin{align}
\xi &:= \big|\{i\,:\, w_i \neq x_i^\star = 0\}\big| - \big|\{i\,:\, w_i = x_i^\star \neq 0\}\big|\,,
\label{Eq:xi}
\\
\overline{h}
&:=
\big|
\{i\,:\, x_i^\star > 0, \,\,x_i^\star > w_i\} \cup \{i\,:\, x_i^\star < 0, \,\,x_i^\star < w_i\}
\big|\,.
\label{Eq:hBar}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Note that the number of components of~$w$ that contribute to~$\overline{h}$ are the ones defined on the support of~$x^\star$; thus, $0\leq \overline{h}\leq s$.
\begin{Theorem}[Th.\ 1 in \cite{Mota14-CSSideInfo}]
\label{Thm:L1L1}
Let~$x^\star, w \in \mathbb{R}^n$ be the vector to reconstruct and the side information, respectively. Assume~$\overline{h} > 0$ and that there exists at least one index~$i$ for which $x_i^\star = w_i = 0$. Let the entries of~$A \in \mathbb{R}^{m \times n}$ be i.i.d.\ Gaussian with zero mean and variance~$1/m$. If
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:L1L1Bound}
m \geq 2\overline{h}\log\Big(\frac{n}{s + \xi/2}\Big) + \frac{7}{5}\Big(s + \frac{\xi}{2}\Big) + 1\,,
\end{equation}
then, with probability at least $1 - \exp\big(-\frac{1}{2}(m - \sqrt{m})^2\big)$, $x^\star$ is the unique solution of~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Simple}.
\end{Theorem}
Theorem~\ref{Thm:L1L1} establishes that if the number of measurements is larger than~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Bound}
then, with high probability, \eqref{Eq:L1L1Simple} reconstructs~$x^\star$ perfectly. The bound
in~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Bound} is a function of the signal dimension~$n$ and sparsity~$s$, and of the
quantities~$\xi$ and~$\overline{h}$, which depend on the signs of the entries of~$x^\star$ and~$w -
x^\star$, but not on their magnitudes. When~$w$ approximates~$x^\star$ reasonably well, the bound
in~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Bound} is much smaller than the one for basis pursuit\footnote{Recall that basis pursuit is~\eqref{Eq:L1L1} with~$\beta = 0$.} in~\cite{Chandrasekaran12-ConvexGeometryLinearInverseProblems}:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:ChandrasekaranBound}
m \geq 2s\log\Big(\frac{n}{s}\Big) + \frac{7}{5}s + 1\,.
\end{equation}
Namely, \cite{Chandrasekaran12-ConvexGeometryLinearInverseProblems} establishes that if~\eqref{Eq:ChandrasekaranBound} holds and if~$A \in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$ has i.i.d.\ Gaussian entries with zero mean and variance~$1/m$ then, with probability similar to the one in Theorem~\ref{Thm:L1L1}, $x^\star$ is the unique solution to basis pursuit.
Indeed, if~$\overline{h}\ll s$ and~$\xi$ is larger than a small negative constant,
then~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Bound} is much smaller than~\eqref{Eq:ChandrasekaranBound}. Note that, in practice,
the quantities~$s$, $\xi$, and~$\overline{h}$ are unknown, since they depend on the unknown
signal~$x^\star$. In the next section, we propose an online scheme to estimate them using past signals.
\mypar{Noisy case} Theorem~\ref{Thm:L1L1} has a counterpart for noisy measurements, which we state informally; see~\cite{Mota14-CSSideInfo} for details. Let~$y = Ax^\star + \eta$, where~$\|\eta\|_2 \leq \sigma$. Let also~$A \in \mathbb{R}^{m\times n}$ be as in Theorem~\ref{Thm:L1L1} with
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:L1L1BoundNoisy}
m \geq \frac{1}{(1-\tau)^2}\bigg[2\overline{h}\log\Big(\frac{n}{s + \xi/2}\Big) + \frac{7}{5}\Big(s + \frac{\xi}{2}\Big) + \frac{3}{2}\bigg]\,,
\end{equation}
where~$0<\tau<1$. Let~$\hat{x}_{\text{noisy}}$ be any solution of
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:L1L1Noisy}
\begin{array}[t]{ll}
\underset{x}{\text{minimize}} & \|x\|_1 + \beta \|x - w\|_1 \\
\text{subject to} & \|Ax - y\|_2 \leq \sigma\,.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
Then, with overwhelming probability, $\|\hat{x}_{\text{noisy}} - x^\star\|_2 \leq 2\sigma/\tau$, i.e., \eqref{Eq:L1L1Noisy} reconstructs~$x^\star$ stably. Our algorithm, described in the next section, adapts easily to the noisy scenario, but we provide reconstruction guarantees only for the noiseless case.
\begin{algorithm}[h!]
\caption{\small Adaptive-Rate Sparse Signal Reconstruction}
\algrenewcommand\algorithmicrequire{\textbf{Input:}}
\label{Alg:AdaptiveRate}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\small
\Require $0\leq\alpha\leq1$, a positive sequence $\{\delta_k\}$, and estimates $\hat{s}_1$ and $\hat{s}_2$ of the sparsity of $x[1]$ and~$x[2]$, respectively.
\Statex
\algrenewcommand\algorithmicrequire{\textbf{Part I: Initialization}}
\Require
\For{the first two time instants $k=1,2$} \label{SubAlg:BegFirstFor}
\State Set $m_k = 2\hat{s}_k\log(n/\hat{s}_k) + (7/5)\hat{s}_k + 1$ \label{SubAlg:step1}
\State Generate Gaussian matrix $A_k \in \mathbb{R}^{m_k \times n}$ \label{SubAlg:step2}
\State Acquire~$m_k$ measurements of $x[k]$: $y[k] = A_k\, x[k]$ \label{SubAlg:step3}
\State Find~$\hat{x}[k]$ such that \label{SubAlg:step4}
$$
\hat{x}[k]
\in
\begin{array}[t]{cl}
\underset{x}{\arg\min} & \|x\|_1 \\
\text{s.t.} & A_k\, x = y[k]
\end{array}
$$
\EndFor \label{SubAlg:EndFirstFor}
\State Set~$w[2] = f_2(\hat{x}[1])$ and compute \label{SubAlg:step5}
\begin{align*}
\hat{\xi}_2
&:=
\big|\{i\,:\, w_i[2] \neq \hat{x}_i[2] = 0\}\big| - \big|\{i\,:\, w_i[2] = \hat{x}_i[2] \neq 0\}\big|
\\
\hat{\overline{h}}_2
&:=
\big|
\{i\,:\, \hat{x}_i[2] > 0, \,\,\hat{x}_i[2] > w_i[2]\} \cup \{i\,:\, \hat{x}_i[2] < 0,
\\& \qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad \hat{x}_i[2] < w_i[2]\}
\big|
\,.
\end{align*}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\State Set
$\hat{\overline{m}}_2 = 2\hat{\overline{h}}_2\log\big(n/(\hat{s}_2 + \hat{\xi}_2/2)\big) + (7/5)\big(\hat{s}_2 + \hat{\xi}_2/2\big) + 1$
\label{SubAlg:step6}
\State Set $\phi_3 = \hat{\overline{m}}_2$
\label{SubAlg:step7}
\Statex
\algrenewcommand\algorithmicrequire{\textbf{Part II: Online estimation}}
\Require
\For{each time instant $k = 3,4,5,\ldots$} \label{SubAlg:BegSecondFor}
\State Set $m_k = (1 + \delta_k)\phi_k$ \label{SubAlg:ChooseMeas}
\State Generate Gaussian matrix $A_k \in \mathbb{R}^{m_k \times n}$ \label{SubAlg:step10}
\State Acquire $m_k$ measurements of $x[k]$: $y[k] = A_k\, x[k]$ \label{SubAlg:step11}
\State Set $w[k] = f_k(\{\hat{x}[i]\}_{i=1}^{k-1})$ and find $\hat{x}[k]$ such that \label{SubAlg:step12}
$$
\hat{x}[k]
\in
\begin{array}[t]{cl}
\underset{x}{\arg\min} & \|x\|_1 + \big\|x - w[k]\big\|_1\\
\text{s.t.} & A_k\, x = y[k]
\end{array}
$$
\State Compute
\begin{align*}
\hat{s}_k &= |\{i\,:\, \hat{x}[k] \neq 0\}|
\\
\hat{\xi}_k
&=
\big|\{i\,:\, w_i[k] \neq \hat{x}_i[k] = 0\}\big| - \big|\{i\,:\, w_i[k] = \hat{x}_i[k] \neq 0\}\big|
\\
\hat{\overline{h}}_k
&=
\big|
\{i\,:\, \hat{x}_i[k] > 0, \,\,\hat{x}_i[k] > w_i[k]\} \cup \{i\,:\, \hat{x}_i[k] < 0,
\\& \qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad \hat{x}_i[k] < w_i[k]\}
\big|
\,.
\end{align*}
\label{SubAlg:h_barxi}
\vspace{-0.4cm}
\State Set $\hat{\overline{m}}_k = 2\hat{\overline{h}}_k\log\big(n/(\hat{s}_k + \hat{\xi}_k/2)\big) + (7/5)\big(\hat{s}_k + \hat{\xi}_k/2\big) + 1$
\label{SubAlg:mk}
\vspace{-0.21cm}
\State Update $\phi_{k+1} = (1-\alpha)\phi_k + \alpha \,\hat{\overline{m}}_k$
\label{SubAlg:PhiUpdate}
\vspace{0.1cm}
\EndFor \label{SubAlg:EndSecondFor}
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\section{Online sparse signal estimation}
\label{Sec:DynamicalSignalReconstruction}
Algorithm~\ref{Alg:AdaptiveRate} describes our online scheme for reconstructing a sparse sequence~$\{x[k]\}$ satisfying~\eqref{Eq:IntroStateSpace}. Although described for a noiseless measurement scenario, the algorithm adapts to the noisy scenario in a straightforward way, as discussed later. Such an adaptation is essential when using it on a real system, e.g., a single-pixel camera~\cite{Duarte08-SinglePixelImagingViaCompressiveSampling}.
\subsection{Algorithm description}
The algorithm consists of two parts: the initialization, where the first two signals~$x[1]$ and~$x[2]$ are reconstructed using basis pursuit, and the online estimation, where the remaining signals are reconstructed using $\ell_1$-$\ell_1$ minimization.
\mypar{Part I: Initialization}
In steps~\ref{SubAlg:BegFirstFor}-\ref{SubAlg:EndFirstFor}, we compute the number of measurements~$m_1$ and~$m_2$ according to the bound in~\eqref{Eq:ChandrasekaranBound}, and then reconstruct~$x[1]$ and~$x[2]$ via basis pursuit. The expressions for~$m_1$ and~$m_2$ in step~\ref{SubAlg:step1} require estimates~$\hat{s}_1$ and~$\hat{s}_2$ of the sparsity of~$x[1]$ and~$x[2]$, which are given as input to the algorithm. Henceforth, variables with hats refer to estimates. Steps~\ref{SubAlg:step5}-\ref{SubAlg:step7} initialize the estimator~$\phi_k$: during Part~II of the algorithm, $\phi_k$ should approximate the right-hand side of~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Bound} for~$x[k]$, i.e., with~$s=s_k$, $\overline{h} = \overline{h}_k$, and~$\xi = \xi_k$, where the subscript~$k$ indicates that these are parameters associated with~$x[k]$.
\mypar{Part II: Online estimation}
The loop in Part~II starts by computing the number of measurements as $m_k = (1+\delta_k)\phi_k$, where~$\delta_k$, an input to the algorithm, is a (positive) safeguard parameter. We take more measurements from~$x[k]$ than the ones prescribed by~$\phi_k$, because $\phi_k$ is only an approximation to the bound in~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Bound}, as explained next. After acquiring measurements from~$x[k]$, we reconstruct it as~$\hat{x}[k]$ via $\ell_1$-$\ell_1$ minimization with $w[k] = f_k(\{\hat{x}[i]\}_{i=1}^{k-1})$ (step~\ref{SubAlg:step12}). Next, in step~\ref{SubAlg:h_barxi}, we compute the sparsity~$\hat{s}_k$ and the quantities in~\eqref{Eq:QualityParameters}, $\hat{\xi}_k$ and~$\hat{\overline{h}}_k$, for~$\hat{x}[k]$. If the reconstruction of~$x[k]$ is perfect, i.e., $\hat{x}[k] = x[k]$, then all these quantities match their true values. In that case, $\hat{\overline{m}}_k$ in step~\ref{SubAlg:mk} will also match the true value of the bound in~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Bound}. Note, however, that the bound for~$x[k]$, $\hat{\overline{m}}_k$, is computed only after~$x[k]$ is reconstructed. Consequently, the number of measurements used in the acquisition of~$x[k]$, $k>2$, is a function of the bound~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Bound} for~$x[k-1]$. Since the bounds for~$x[k]$ and~$x[k-1]$ might differ, we take more measurements than the ones specified by~$\phi_k$ by a factor~$\delta_k$, as in step~\ref{SubAlg:ChooseMeas}.
Also, we mitigate the effect of failed reconstructions by filtering~$\hat{\overline{m}}_k$ with an exponential moving average filter, in step~\ref{SubAlg:PhiUpdate}. Indeed, if reconstruction fails for some~$x[k]$, the resulting~$\hat{\overline{m}}_k$ might differ significantly from the true bound in~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Bound}. The role of the filter is to smooth out such variations.
\mypar{Extension to the noisy case}
Algorithm~\ref{Alg:AdaptiveRate} can be easily extended to the scenario where the acquisition process is noisy, i.e., $y[k] = A_k x[k] + \eta_k$. Assume that~$\eta_k$ is arbitrary noise, but has bounded magnitude, i.e., we know~$\sigma_k$ such that~$\|\eta_k\|_2 \leq \sigma_k$. In that case, the constraint in the reconstruction problems in steps~\ref{SubAlg:step4} and~\ref{SubAlg:step12} should be replaced by~$\|A_k x - y[k]\|_2 \leq \sigma_k$. The other modification is in steps~\ref{SubAlg:step6} and~\ref{SubAlg:mk}, whose expressions for~$\hat{\overline{m}}_k$ are multiplied by~$1/(1-\tau)^2$ as in~\eqref{Eq:L1L1BoundNoisy}. Our reconstruction guarantees, however, hold only for the noiseless case.
\mypar{Remarks}
We will see in the next section that Algorithm~\ref{Alg:AdaptiveRate} works well when each~$\delta_k$ is chosen according to the prediction quality of~$f_k$: the worse the prediction quality, the larger~$\delta_k$ should be. In practice, it may be more convenient to make~$\delta_k$ constant, as we do in our experiments in \sref{Sec:ExperimentalResults}. Note that the conditions under which our algorithm performs well differ from the majority of prior work. For example, the algorithms in~\cite{Vaswani08-KalmanFilteredCS,Vaswani09-AnalyzingKalmanFilteredCS,Cevher08-CompressiveSensingForBackgroundSubtraction,Ziniel10-TrackingAndSmoothingTimeVaryingSparseSignalsBP,Warnell12-AdaptiveRateCompressiveSensingBackgroundSubtraction,Carmi10-MethodsForSparseSignalRecoveryUsingKalmanFiltering,Kanevsky10-KalmanFilteringForCompressedSensing,Chi13-PETRELS,Balzano10-OnlineIdentificationAndTrackingOfSubspacesFromHighlyIncompleteInformation,Balzano14-LocalConvergenceOfAnAlgorithmForSubspaceIdentificationFromPartialData-GROUSE,Warnell14-AdaptiveRateCompressiveSensingUsingSideInformation} work well when the sparsity pattern of~$x[k]$ varies slowly between consecutive time instants. Our algorithm, in contrast, works well when the quality parameters~$\xi_k$ and~$\overline{h}_k$ of the side information and also the sparsity~$s_k$ of~$x[k]$ vary slowly; in other words, when the quality of the prediction of~$f_k$ varies slowly.
\subsection{Reconstruction guarantees}
The following result bounds the probability with which Algorithm~\ref{Alg:AdaptiveRate} with~$\alpha = 1$ perfectly reconstructs a finite-length sequence~$\{x[i]\}_{i=1}^k$. The idea is to rewrite the condition that~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Bound} applied to~$x[i-1]$ is $(1+\delta_i)$ times larger than~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Bound} applied to~$x[i]$. If that condition holds for the entire sequence then, using \thref{Thm:L1L1} and assuming that the matrices~$A_k$ are drawn independently, we can bound the probability of successful reconstruction. The proof is in \aref{Sec:AppProofLemmaDelta}.
\begin{Lemma}\label{lem:Delta}
Let~$\alpha = 1$, $\underline{m} := \min\big\{m_1, m_2, \min_{i=3,\ldots,k} \hat{\overline{m}}_i\big\}$, and fix~$k > 2$.
Let also, for all~$i = 3,\ldots,k$,
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:LemDelta}
\delta_i \geq
\frac{2\big[\overline{h}_i \log(\frac{n}{u_i}) - \overline{h}_{i-1} \log(\frac{n}{u_{i-1}})\big] + \frac{7}{5}(u_i - u_{i-1})}{2\overline{h}_{i-1}\log(\frac{n}{u_{i-1}}) + \frac{7}{5}u_{i-1} + 1}\,,
\end{equation}
where~$u_i := s_i + \xi_i/2$. Assume $\hat{s}_q \geq s_q := |\{j: x_j[q] \neq 0\}|$, for~$q=1,2$, i.e., that the initial sparsity estimates~$\hat{s}_1$ and~$\hat{s}_2$ are not smaller than the true sparsity of~$x[1]$ and~$x[2]$. Assume also that the matrices~$\{A_i\}_{i=1}^k$ in Algorithm~\ref{Alg:AdaptiveRate} are drawn independently. Then, the probability (over the sequence of matrices~$\{A_i\}_{i=1}^k$) that Algorithm~\ref{Alg:AdaptiveRate} reconstructs~$x[i]$ perfectly in all time instants $1\leq i \leq k$ is at least
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:LemProb}
\Big(1 - \exp\Big[-\frac{1}{2}(\underline{m} - \sqrt{\underline{m}})^2\Big]\Big)^k\,.
\end{equation}
\end{Lemma}
When the conditions of Lemma~\ref{lem:Delta} hold, the probability of perfect reconstruction decreases with
the length~$k$ of the sequence, albeit at a very slow rate: for example, if~$\underline{m}$ is as small
as~$8$, then~\eqref{Eq:LemProb} equals~$0.9998$ for~$k=10^2$, and~$0.9845$ for~$k=10^4$. If~$\underline{m}$
is larger, these numbers are even closer to~$1$.
\mypar{Interpretation of~\eqref{Eq:LemDelta}}
As shown in the proof, condition~\eqref{Eq:LemDelta} is equivalent to~$(1 + \delta_i)\overline{m}_{i-1} \geq \overline{m}_i$, where~$\overline{m}_i$ is~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Bound} applied to~$x[i]$. To get more insight about this condition, rewrite it as
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:ConditionOnDeltaRenewed}
\delta_i
\geq
\frac{\overline{h}_i - \overline{h}_{i-1} + c_1(n)}{\overline{h}_{i-1} + c_2(n)}\,,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{align*}
c_1(n) &:=
\frac{
2\overline{h}_{i-1}\log u_{i-1} - 2\overline{h}_i\log u_i + \frac{7}{5}(u_i - u_{i-1})
}{
2\log n
}
\\
c_2(n) &:=
\frac{
\frac{7}{5}u_{i-1} + 1 - 2\overline{h}_{i-1}\log u_{i-1}
}{
2\log n
}\,.
\end{align*}
Suppose~$\{x[i]\}$ and~$\{\epsilon[i]\}$ are signals for which~$n \gg u_i, \overline{h}_i$. In that case, $c_1(n), c_2(n) \simeq 0$, and condition~\eqref{Eq:ConditionOnDeltaRenewed} tells us that the oversampling factor~$\delta_i$ should be larger than the relative variation of~$\overline{h}_i$ from time~$i-1$ to time~$i$. In general, the magnitude of~$c_1(n)$ and~$c_2(n)$ can be significant, since they approach zero at a relatively slow rate, $o(1/\log n)$. Hence, those terms should not be ignored.
\mypar{Remarks on the noisy case}
There is an inherent difficulty in establishing a counterpart of \lref{lem:Delta} for the noisy measurement scenario: namely, the quality parameters~$\xi$ and~$\overline{h}$ in~\eqref{Eq:QualityParameters} are not continuous functions of~$x$. So, no matter how close a reconstructed signal is from the original one, their quality parameters can differ arbitrarily. And, for the noisy measurement case, we can never guarantee that the reconstructed and the original signals are equal; at most, if~\eqref{Eq:L1L1BoundNoisy} holds, they are within a distance~$2\sigma/\tau$, for $0<\tau<1$.
So far, we have considered~$\{x[k]\}$ and~$\{\epsilon[k]\}$ to be deterministic sequences. In the next section, we will model~$\{\epsilon[k]\}$ (and thus~$\{x[k]\}$) as a Laplacian stochastic process.
\section{Compressive Video Background subtraction}
\label{Sec:ApplicationToBackgroundSubtraction}
We now consider the application of our algorithm to compressive video background subtraction. We start by modeling the problem of compressive background subtraction as the estimation of a sequence of sparse signals satisfying~\eqref{Eq:IntroStateSpace}. Our background subtraction system, based on Algorithm~\ref{Alg:AdaptiveRate}, is then introduced. Finally, we establish reconstruction guarantees for our scheme when~$\epsilon[k]$ in~\eqref{Eq:IntroStateSpaceModel} is Laplacian noise.
\subsection{Model}
Let~$\{Z[k]\}_{k\geq 1}$ be a sequence of images, each with resolution~$N_1 \times N_2$, and let~$z[k] \in \mathbb{R}^n$ with~$n := N_1 \cdot N_2$ be the (column-major) vectorization of the $k$th image. At time instant~$k$, we collect~$m_k$ linear measurements of~$Z[k]$: $u[k] = A_k z[k]$, where~$A_k \in \mathbb{R}^{m_k \times n}$ is a measurement matrix. We decompose each image~$Z[k]$ as~$Z[k] = X[k] + B$, where~$X[k]$ is the $k$th foreground image, typically sparse, and~$B$ is the background image, assumed known and to be the same in all the images. Let~$x[k]$ and~$b$ be vectorizations of~$X[k]$ and~$B$, respectively.
Because the background image is known, we take measurements from it using~$A_k$: $u^b[k] = A_k b$. Then, as suggested in~\cite{Cevher08-CompressiveSensingForBackgroundSubtraction}, we subtract~$u^b[k]$ to~$u[k]$:
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:BackgroundSubtrMeasurements}
y[k]:= u[k] - u^b[k] = A_k (z[k] - b) = A_k x[k]\,.
\end{equation}
This equation tells us that, although we cannot measure the foreground image~$x[k]$ directly, we can still construct a
vector measurements, $y[k]$, as if we would. Given that~$x[k]$ is usually sparse, the theory of compressed sensing tells us that it can be reconstructed by solving, for example, basis pursuit~\cite{Candes06-RobustUncertaintyPrinciplesExactSignalReconstructionHighlyIncomplete,Donoho06-CompressedSensing}. Specifically, if~$x[k]$ has sparsity~$s_k$ and the entries of~$A_k$ are realizations of i.i.d.\ zero-mean Gaussian random variables with variance~$1/m_k$, then~$2s_k\log(n/s_k) + (7/5)s_k + 1$ measurements suffice to reconstruct~$x[k]$ perfectly~\cite{Chandrasekaran12-ConvexGeometryLinearInverseProblems} [cf.\ \eqref{Eq:ChandrasekaranBound}].
Notice that~\eqref{Eq:BackgroundSubtrMeasurements} is exactly the equation of measurements in~\eqref{Eq:IntroStateSpaceObservations}. Regarding equation~\eqref{Eq:IntroStateSpaceModel}, we will use it to model the estimation of the foreground of each frame, $x[k]$, from previous foregrounds, $\{x[i]\}_{i=1}^{k-1}$. We use a motion-compensated extrapolation technique, as explained in \ssref{SubSec:Extrapolation}. This technique is known to produce image estimates with an error well modeled as Laplacian and, thus, each~$\|\epsilon[k]\|_1$ is expected to be small. This perfectly aligns with the way we integrate side information in our reconstruction scheme: namely, the second term in the objective of the optimization problem in step~\ref{SubAlg:step12} of Algorithm~\ref{Alg:AdaptiveRate} is nothing but~$\|\epsilon[k]\|_1$.
\subsection{Our background subtraction scheme}
Fig.~\ref{Fig:BlockDiagram} shows the block diagram of our compressive background subtraction scheme and, essentially, translates Algorithm~\ref{Alg:AdaptiveRate} into a diagram. The scheme does not apply to the reconstruction of the first two frames, which are reconstructed as in~\cite{Cevher08-CompressiveSensingForBackgroundSubtraction}, i.e., by solving basis pursuit. This corresponds to Part I of Algorithm~\ref{Alg:AdaptiveRate}. The scheme in Fig.~\ref{Fig:BlockDiagram} depicts Part II of Algorithm~\ref{Alg:AdaptiveRate}. The motion extrapolation module constructs a motion-compensated prediction~$e[k]$ of the current frame, $z[k]$, by using the two past (reconstructed) frames, $\hat{z}[k-2]$ and~$\hat{z}[k-1]$. Motion estimation is performed in the image domain ($z[k]$) rather than in the foreground domain ($x[k]$), as the former contains more texture, thereby yielding a more accurate motion field. Next, the background frame~$b$ is subtracted from~$e[k]$ to obtain a prediction of the foreground~$x[k]$, i.e., the side information~$w[k]$. These two operations are modeled in Algorithm~\ref{Alg:AdaptiveRate} with the function~$f_k$, which takes a set of past reconstructed signals (in our case, $\hat{x}[k-2]$ and~$\hat{x}[k-1]$, to which we add~$b$, obtaining~$\hat{z}[k-2]$ and~$\hat{z}[k-1]$, respectively), and outputs the side information~$w[k]$. This is one of the inputs of the $\ell_{1}$-$\ell_{1}$ block, which solves the optimization problem~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Simple}. To obtain the other input, i.e., the set of foreground measurements~$y[k]$, we proceed as specified in equation~\eqref{Eq:BackgroundSubtrMeasurements}: we take measurements~$u[k] = A_k z[k]$ of the current frame and, using the same matrix, we take measurements of the background~$u[k] = A_k b$. Subtracting them we obtain~$y[k] = u[k] - u^b[k]$. The output of the $\ell_1$-$\ell_1$ module is the estimated foreground~$\hat{x}[k]$, from which we obtain the estimate of the current frame as $\hat{z}[k] = \hat{x}[k] + b$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\psscalebox{0.98}{
\begin{pspicture}(8.2,4.7)
\pssignal(0.3,4.5){zpp}{$\hat{z}[k-2]$}
\pssignal(1.8,4.5){zp}{$\hat{z}[k-1]$}
\pssignal(0.74,2.6){b}{{\footnotesize \textsf{background}}\,\, $b$}
\pssignal(0.98,0.5){z}{{\footnotesize \textsf{current frame}}\,\, $z[k]$}
\pssignal(8.2,2.6){zh}{$\hat{z}[k]$}
\psblock[FillColor=black!15!white](1.1,3.5){ME}{\footnotesize \textsf{motion extrapolation}}
\psblock(4.1,1.5){Ak1}{$A_k$}
\psblock(4.1,0.5){Ak2}{$A_k$}
\psblock[FillColor=black!15!white](6.0,3.5){L1L1}{$\ell_1$-$\ell_1$}
\dotnode(4.1,2.6){dot1}
\dotnode(7.0,3.5){dot2}
\nput[labelsep=3pt]{45}{dot2}{$\hat{x}[k]$}
\dotnode(6.0,0.5){dot3}
\pscircleop(4.1,3.5){op1}
\nput{210}{op1}{$\scriptstyle +$}
\nput{300}{op1}{$\scriptstyle -$}
\pscircleop(6.0,1.5){op2}
\nput{210}{op2}{$\scriptstyle -$}
\nput{300}{op2}{$\scriptstyle +$}
\nput{58}{op2}{$y[k]$}
\pscircleop(7.0,2.6){op3}
\nput{60}{op3}{$\scriptstyle +$}
\nput{150}{op3}{$\scriptstyle +$}
\psset{style=Arrow,arrowinset=0.05,arrowsize=5pt,labelsep=3pt}
\psline(0.3,4.3)(0.3,3.8)
\psline(1.8,4.3)(1.8,3.8)
\ncline{ME}{op1}
\naput{$e[k]$}
\ncline{-}{b}{dot1}
\ncline{dot1}{Ak1}
\ncline{z}{Ak2}
\ncline{dot1}{op1}
\ncline{op1}{L1L1}
\naput{$w[k]$}
\ncline{-}{L1L1}{dot2}
\ncline{dot2}{op3}
\ncline{op2}{L1L1}
\ncline{-}{Ak2}{dot3}
\naput{$u[k]$}
\ncline{dot3}{op2}
\ncline{Ak1}{op2}
\naput{$u^b[k]$}
\ncline{op3}{zh}
\ncline{dot1}{op3}
\end{pspicture}
}
\caption{Block diagram of Algorithm~\ref{Alg:AdaptiveRate} when applied to background subtraction. The main blocks are highlighted.}
\label{Fig:BlockDiagram}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Motion-compensated extrapolation}
\label{SubSec:Extrapolation}
To obtain an accurate predition~$e[k]$, we use a motion-compensated extrapolation technique similar to what is used in distributed video coding for generating decoder-based motion-compensated predictions~\cite{Girod05-DistributedVideoCoding,Deligiannis12-SideInformationDependentCorrelationChannelEstimationHashBasedDistributedVideoCoding,natario2006extrapolating}.
Our technique is illustrated in \fref{Fig:MCEschema}. In the first stage, we perform forward block-based motion estimation between the reconstructed frames~$\hat{z}[k-2]$ and~$\hat{z}[k-1]$. The block matching algorithm is performed with half-pel accuracy and considers a block size of~$\gamma\times{\gamma}$ pixels and a search range of~$\rho$ pixels. The required interpolation for half-pel motion estimation is performed using the 6-tap filter of H.264/AVC~\cite{wiegand2003overview}. In addition, we use the $\ell_{1}$-norm (or sum of absolute differences: SAD) as error metric. The resulting motion vectors are then spatially smoothed by applying a weighted vector-median filter~\cite{alparone1996adaptively}. The filtering improves the spatial coherence of the resulting motion field by removing outliers (i.e., motion vectors that are far from the true motion field). Assuming linear motion between~$\hat{z}[k-2]$ and~$\hat{z}[k-1]$, and~$\hat{z}[k-1]$ and~$\hat{z}[k]$, we linearly project the motion vectors between~$\hat{z}[k-2]$ and~$\hat{z}[k-1]$ to obtain~$e[k]$, our estimate of~$z[k]$; see \fref{Fig:MCEschema}. During motion compensation, pixels in~$e[k]$ that belong to overlapping prediction blocks are estimated as the average of their corresponding motion-compensated pixel predictors in~$\hat{z}[k-1]$. Pixels in uncovered areas (i.e., no motion-compensated predictor is available) are estimated by taking averaging the three neighbor pixel values in~$e[k]$ (up, left and up-left pixel positions, following a raster scan of the frame) and the corresponding pixel in $\hat{z}[k-1]$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\psscalebox{0.98}{
\begin{pspicture}(8.2,3.8)
\psset{blendmode=2}
\def\frameskew#1{
\pspolygon*[linecolor=#1,opacity=0.3](0,0)(1.4,1.0)(1.4,3.8)(0,2.8)
}
\def\littlebk[#1]#2{
\pspolygon*[linestyle=#1,linecolor=#2,opacity=0.6](0,0)(0.4,0.2857)(0.4,0.8)(0,0.5143)
}
\def\ball#1{
\psellipse*[linecolor=#1](0,0)(0.05,0.05)
}
\psset{arrowsize=5.0pt,arrowinset=0.18,linewidth=0.7pt}
\rput(0,0){\frameskew{black!70!white}}
\rput(0.3,1.0){\littlebk[solid]{red}}
\rput(0.9,2.2){\littlebk[solid]{green}}
\rput(0.8,1.5){\littlebk[solid]{blue}}
\rput(0.3,1.9){\littlebk[solid]{black}}
\psline[linecolor=green!40!black]{->}(4.2,2.4)(1.1,2.6)
\psline[linecolor=red!40!black]{->}(3.8,1.6)(0.55,1.4)
\psline[linecolor=blue!40!black]{->}(4.2,1.9)(1.05,1.95)
\psline[linecolor=black!90!white]{->}(3.8,2.1)(0.55,2.3)
\rput(3.25,0){\frameskew{black!70!white}}
\rput(4.0,1.4857){\littlebk[solid]{blue}}
\rput(3.6,1.2){\littlebk[solid]{red}}
\rput(4.0,1.99){\littlebk[solid]{green}}
\rput(3.6,1.7143){\littlebk[solid]{black}}
\rput(4.2,2.4){\ball{darkgreen}}
\rput(3.8,1.6){\ball{darkred}}
\rput(3.8,2.1){\ball{black!90!white}}
\rput(4.2,1.9){\ball{darkblue}}
\rput(6.5,0){\frameskew{red!70!white}}
\rput(6.70,1.83){\littlebk[solid]{green}}
\rput(7.40,1.47){\littlebk[solid]{black}}
\rput(6.75,1.45){\littlebk[solid]{blue}}
\rput(7.1,1.42){\littlebk[solid]{red}}
\rput(6.9,2.2258){\ball{darkgreen}}
\rput(7.3,1.8154){\ball{darkred}}
\rput(6.95,1.8563){\ball{darkblue}}
\rput(7.6,1.8662){\ball{black!90!white}}
\psset{linestyle=dashed,dash=3pt 2.5pt}
\psline[linecolor=green!40!black]{->}(6.9,2.2258)(4.2,2.4)
\psline[linecolor=red!40!black]{->}(7.3,1.8154)(3.8,1.6)
\psline[linecolor=blue!40!black]{->}(6.95,1.8563)(4.2,1.9)
\psline[linecolor=black!90!white]{->}(7.6,1.8662)(3.8,2.1)
\rput[lt](0.60,0.4){$\hat{z}[k-2]$}
\rput[lt](3.85,0.4){$\hat{z}[k-1]$}
\rput[lt](7.10,0.4){$e[k]$}
\rput[lt](1.8,3.5){\footnotesize \textsf{estimation}}
\rput[lt](5.0,3.5){\footnotesize \textsf{extrapolation}}
\end{pspicture}
}
\vspace{0.1cm}
\caption{Scheme of motion-compensated extrapolation. We use the motion between matching blocks in $\hat{z}[k-2]$ and $\hat{z}[k-1]$ to create an estimate~$e[k]$ of frame~$z[k]$.
}
\label{Fig:MCEschema}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Reconstruction guarantees for Laplacian modeling noise}
It is well known that the noise produced by a motion-compensated prediction module, as the one just described, is Laplacian \cite{Girod05-DistributedVideoCoding,Deligiannis14-MaximumLikelihoodLaplacianCorrelationChannelEstimationLayeredWynerZivCoding}. In our model, that corresponds to each~$\epsilon[k]$ in~\eqref{Eq:IntroStateSpaceModel} being Laplacian. We assume each~$\epsilon[k]$ is independent from the matrix of measurements~$A_k$.
\mypar{Model for~\boldmath{$\epsilon[k]$}}
As in \cite{Girod05-DistributedVideoCoding,Deligiannis14-MaximumLikelihoodLaplacianCorrelationChannelEstimationLayeredWynerZivCoding,fan2010transform} (and references therein), we assume that~$\epsilon[k]$ is independent from~$\epsilon[l]$, for $k\neq l$, and that the entries of each~$\epsilon[k]$ are independent and have zero-mean. The probability distribution of~$\epsilon[k]$ is then
\begin{align}
\mathbb{P}(\epsilon[k] \leq u)
&=
\mathbb{P}(\epsilon_1[k] \leq u_1, \,\,\epsilon_2[k] \leq u_2,\ldots, \,\,\epsilon_n[k] \leq u_n)
\notag
\\
&=
\prod_{j=1}^n \mathbb{P}(\epsilon_j[k] \leq u_j)
\notag
\\
&=
\prod_{j=1}^n \int_{-\infty}^{u_j} \frac{\lambda_j}{2} \exp\big[-\lambda_j |\epsilon_j| \ \big]\,d\epsilon_j\,,
\label{Eq:ProbDistributionEpsilon}
\end{align}
where~$u \in \mathbb{R}^n$, and~$\lambda_j\geq 0$ is the parameter of the distribution of~$\epsilon_j[k]$. The entries of~$\epsilon[k]$, although independent, are not identically distributed,
since they have possibly different parameters~$\lambda_j$. The variance~$\sigma_j^2$ of each
component~$\epsilon_j[k]$ is given by~$\sigma_j^2 = 2/\lambda_j^2$.
\mypar{Resulting model for~\boldmath{$x[k]$}}
The sequence~$\{\epsilon[k]\}$ being stochastic implies that~$\{x[k]\}$ is also stochastic. Indeed, if each~$f_k$ in~\eqref{Eq:IntroStateSpace} is measurable, then~$\{x[k]\}_{k\geq 2}$ is a
sequence of random variables. Given the independence across time and across components
of the sequence~$\{\epsilon[k]\}$, the distribution of~$x[k]$ given~$\{x[i]\}_{i=1}^{k-1}$ is also
Laplacian, yet not necessarily with zero-mean. That is, for~$u \in \mathbb{R}^n$ and~$k\geq 2$,
\begin{align}
&\mathbb{P}\Big(x[k] \leq u \,\,\big|\,\, \{x[i]\}_{i=1}^{k-1}\Big)
\notag
\\
&=
\mathbb{P}\Big(f_k(\{x[i]\}_{i=1}^{k-1}) + \epsilon[k] \leq u \,\,\big|\,\, \{x[i]\}_{i=1}^{k-1}\Big)
\notag
\\
&=
\mathbb{P}\Big(\epsilon[k] \leq u - f_k(\{x[i]\}_{i=1}^{k-1})\,\,\big|\,\, \{x[i]\}_{i=1}^{k-1}\Big)
\notag
\\
&=
\prod_{j=1}^n \int_{-\infty}^{u_j - [f_k( \{x[i]\}_{i=1}^{k-1})]_j} \frac{\lambda_j}{2} \exp\big[-\lambda_j |\epsilon_j| \big]\,d\epsilon_j
\notag
\\
&=
\prod_{j=1}^n \int_{-\infty}^{u_j} \frac{\lambda_j}{2} \exp\Big[\!-\lambda_j \big|z_j - [ f_k(\{x[i]\}_{i=1}^{k-1})]_j\big| \Big]\,dz_j
\label{Eq:ProbDistributionX}
\end{align}
where~$[f_k(\{x[i]\}_{i=1}^{k-1})]_j$ is the $j$th component of~$f_k(\{x[i]\}_{i=1}^{k-1})$.
In words, the distribution of each component of~$x[k]$ conditioned on all past realizations~$x[i]$, $1\leq i < k$, is Laplacian with mean~$[f_k(\{x[i]\}_{i=1}^{k-1})]_j$ and parameter~$\lambda_j$. Furthermore, it is independent from the other components.
\mypar{Reconstruction guarantees}
Note that~$\{x[k]\}$ and $\{\epsilon[k]\}$ being stochastic processes implies that the quantities in~\eqref{Eq:QualityParameters}, which we will denote with~$\xi_k$ and~$\overline{h}_k$ for signal~$x[k]$, are random variables. Hence, at each time~$k$, the conditions of Theorem~\ref{Thm:L1L1}, namely that $\overline{h}_k > 0$ and that there is at least one index~$i$ such that~$x_i[k] = w_i[k] = 0$, become events, and may or may not hold. We now impose conditions on the variances~$\sigma_j^2 = 2/\lambda_j$ that guarantee the conditions of Theorem~\ref{Thm:L1L1} are satisfied and, thus, that $\ell_1$-$\ell_1$ minimization reconstructs~$x[k]$ perfectly, with high probability. Given a set~$S \in \{1,\ldots,n\}$, we use~$S^c$ to denote its complement in~$\{1,\ldots,n\}$.
\begin{Theorem}
\label{Thm:LaplacianModelingNoise}
Let~$w \in \mathbb{R}^n$ be given. Let~$\epsilon$ have distribution~\eqref{Eq:ProbDistributionEpsilon}, where the variance of component~$\epsilon_j$ is $\sigma_j^2 = 2/\lambda_j^2$. Define~$x^\star := w + \epsilon$, and the sets $\Sigma := \{j\,:\, \sigma_j^2 \neq 0\}$ and $\mathcal{W} := \{j\,:\, w_j \neq 0\}$.
Assume~$\Sigma^c \cap \mathcal{W}^c \neq \emptyset$, that is, there exists~$j$ such that~$\sigma_j^2 = 0$ and~$w_j = 0$. Assume~$A \in \mathbb{R}^{m \times n}$ is generated as in \thref{Thm:L1L1} with a number of measurements
\begin{multline}\label{Eq:lemConditionsLaplacianModelNumMeas}
m \geq 2(\mu + t)\log\bigg(\frac{n}{\big|\Sigma\big| + \frac{1}{2}\big|\Sigma^c \cap \mathcal{W}\big|}\bigg)
\\
+ \frac{7}{5}\Big(\big|\Sigma\big| + \frac{1}{2}\big|\Sigma^c \cap \mathcal{W}\big|\Big) + 1\,,
\end{multline}
for some~$t>1$, where
$
\mu := \frac{1}{2}\sum_{j \in \Sigma} \big[1 + \exp\big(-\sqrt{2}|w_j|/\sigma_j\big)\big]
$.
Let~$\hat{x}$ denote the solution of $\ell_1$-$\ell_1$ minimization~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Simple}. Then,
\begin{multline}\label{Eq:lemConditionsLaplacianProb}
\mathbb{P}\big(\hat{x} = x^\star\big)
\geq
\bigg[1 - \exp\Big(-\frac{(m - \sqrt{m})^2}{2}\Big)\bigg]
\times\\\times
\bigg[1 - \exp\Big(-\frac{2\mu^2}{|\Sigma|}\Big) - \exp\Big(-\frac{2(t-1)^2}{|\Sigma|}\Big)\bigg]\,.
\end{multline}
\end{Theorem}
The proof is in \aref{Sec:AppProofLemmaConditions}. By assuming each component~$\epsilon_j$ is Laplacian with parameter~$\lambda_j = \sqrt{2}/\sigma_j$ (independent from the other components), \thref{Thm:LaplacianModelingNoise} establishes a lower bound on the number of measurements that guarantee perfect reconstruction of~$x^\star$ with probability as in~\eqref{Eq:lemConditionsLaplacianProb}. Note that all the quantities in~\eqref{Eq:lemConditionsLaplacianModelNumMeas} are deterministic. This contrasts with the direct application of \thref{Thm:L1L1} to the problem, since the right-hand side of~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Bound} is a function of the random variables~$s$, $\overline{h}$, and~$\xi$. The assumption $\Sigma^c \cap \mathcal{W}^c \neq \emptyset$ implies~$\Sigma^c \neq \emptyset$, which means that some components of~$\epsilon$ have zero variance and, hence, are equal to zero with probability~$1$.
Note that, provided the variances~$\sigma_j^2$ are known, all the quantities in~\eqref{Eq:lemConditionsLaplacianModelNumMeas}, and consequently in~\eqref{Eq:lemConditionsLaplacianProb}, are known.
The proof of \thref{Thm:LaplacianModelingNoise} uses the fact that the sparsity of~$x^\star$ is $s = |\Sigma| + |\Sigma^c \cap \mathcal{W}|/2$ with probability~$1$. This implies that the bound in~\eqref{Eq:lemConditionsLaplacianModelNumMeas} is always smaller than the one for basis pursuit in~\eqref{Eq:ChandrasekaranBound} whenever~$\mu + t < s = |\Sigma| + |\Sigma^c \cap \mathcal{W}|$. Since~$\mu \leq |\Sigma|$, this holds if~$t < |\Sigma^c \cap \mathcal{W}|/2$.
We state without proof a consequence of~\thref{Thm:LaplacianModelingNoise} that is obtained by reasoning as in \lref{lem:Delta}:
\begin{Corollary}
\label{Cor:LaplacianModellingNoiseAlg}
Let~$\{\epsilon[k]\}$ be a stochastic process where~$\epsilon[k]$ has distribution~\eqref{Eq:ProbDistributionEpsilon} and each~$\epsilon[k]$ is independent from~$\epsilon[l]$, $k\neq l$. Assume that~$\{x[k]\}$ is generated as in~\eqref{Eq:IntroStateSpaceModel} and consider Algorithm~\ref{Alg:AdaptiveRate} with~$\alpha = 1$ at iteration~$k>2$. Assume that~$\epsilon[k]$ and~$A_k$ are independent. Assume also, for~$i=3,\ldots,k$, that
\begin{multline}\label{Eq:CorDelta}
\delta_i \geq
\bigg\{
2\Big[ (\mu_i + t_i)\log\Big(\frac{n}{u_i}\Big) - (\mu_{i-1} + t_{i-1})\log\Big(\frac{n}{u_{i-1}}\Big)\Big] \\ + \frac{7}{5}(u_i - u_{i-1})
\bigg\}
\Big/
\bigg\{
2(\mu_{i-1} + t_{i-1})\log\Big(\frac{n}{u_{i-1}}\Big) + \frac{7}{5}u_{i-1} + 1
\bigg\}
\,,
\end{multline}
where~$u_i := |\Sigma_i| + |\Sigma_i^c \cap \mathcal{W}_i|/2$, and the quantities~$\mu_i$, $t_i$, $\Sigma_i$, and~$\mathcal{W}_i$ are defined as in \thref{Thm:LaplacianModelingNoise} for signal~$x[i]$. Assume the initial sparsity estimates satisfy $\hat{s}_1 \geq s_1$ and $\hat{s}_2 \geq s_2$ with probability~$1$, where~$s_1$ and~$s_2$ are the sparsity of~$x[1]$ and~$x[2]$. Then, the probability over the sequences $\{A_i\}_{i=1}^k$ and $\{\epsilon[i]\}_{i=1}^k$ that Algorithm~\ref{Alg:AdaptiveRate} reconstructs $x[i]$ perfectly in all time instants $1\leq i \leq k$ is at least
\begin{multline*
\prod_{i=1}^k
\bigg[1 - \exp\Big(-\frac{(m_i - \sqrt{m_i})^2}{2}\Big)\bigg]
\bigg[1 - \exp\Big(-\frac{2\mu_i^2}{|\Sigma_i|}\Big) \\- \exp\Big(-\frac{2(t_i-1)^2}{|\Sigma_i|}\Big)\bigg]\,.
\end{multline*}
\end{Corollary}
\coref{Cor:LaplacianModellingNoiseAlg} establishes reconstruction guarantees of Algorithm~\ref{Alg:AdaptiveRate} when the modeling noise~$\epsilon[k]$ in~\eqref{Eq:IntroStateSpaceModel} is Laplacian. In contrast with \lref{lem:Delta}, the bound in~\eqref{Eq:CorDelta} is a function of known parameters, but it requires the variances~$\sigma_j^2[i]$ of each~$\epsilon_j[i]$, which can be estimated from the past frame in a block-based way~\cite{Deligiannis12-SideInformationDependentCorrelationChannelEstimationHashBasedDistributedVideoCoding,Deligiannis14-MaximumLikelihoodLaplacianCorrelationChannelEstimationLayeredWynerZivCoding}. For some insight on~\eqref{Eq:CorDelta}, assume~$u_i \simeq u_{i-1}$, $t_i = t_{i-1}$, and that~$n$ is large enough so that terms not depending on it are negligible. Then, \eqref{Eq:CorDelta} becomes $\delta_i \gtrsim (\mu_i - \mu_{i-1})/(\mu_{i-1} + t_{i-1})$, and we can select
\begin{align}
\delta_i &= 2\kappa - 1 \simeq \frac{\kappa - \frac{1}{2}}{\frac{1}{|\Sigma_{i-1}|} + \frac{1}{2}} = \frac{|\Sigma_i| - \frac{1}{2}|\Sigma_{i-1}|}{1 + \frac{1}{2}|\Sigma_{i-1}|}
\geq \frac{\mu_i - \mu_{i-1}}{\mu_{i-1} + t_{i-1}}\,,
\label{Eq:DeltaLaplacianApprox}
\end{align}
where~$\kappa := |\Sigma_i|/|\Sigma_{i-1}|$, and the inequality is due to~$|\Sigma_i|/2\leq \mu_i \leq |\Sigma_i|$. The approximation in~\eqref{Eq:DeltaLaplacianApprox} holds if~$|\Sigma_{i-1}| \gg 2$, which is often the case in practice. The expression in~\eqref{Eq:DeltaLaplacianApprox} tells us that, for large~$n$, $\delta_i$ is mostly determined by the ratio~$\kappa$: if~$\kappa > 1$ (resp. $<1$), then we should select~$\delta_i > 1$ (resp. $<1$). We observe that, in practice, \eqref{Eq:CorDelta} and \eqref{Eq:DeltaLaplacianApprox} give conservative estimates for~$\delta_i$. We will see in the next section that selecting a small, constant~$\delta_i$ (namely~$0.1$) leads to excellent results without compromising perfect reconstruction.
\begin{figure*}
\raggedleft
\begin{pspicture}(18,0.2)
\rput[l](0.0,-1.4){\sf Original}
\rput[b](3.380,0.1){\sf background}
\rput[b](6.580,0.16){\sf frame $\mathsf{4}$}
\rput[b](9.750,0.16){\sf frame $\mathsf{100}$}
\rput[b](12.92,0.16){\sf frame $\mathsf{150}$}
\rput[b](16.05,0.16){\sf frame $\mathsf{250}$}
\rput[lb](0.0,-4.8){\sf Estimated}
\rput[lb](0.0,-7.9){\sf Reconstructed}
\rput[lb](0.0,-11.0){\sf Reconstructed foreground}
\rput[lb](0.0,-11.5){\sf (binarized)}
\end{pspicture}
\def\widthHall{3.035cm}
\includegraphics[width=\widthHall]{figures/VolkanAlg/Hall_original_f1.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthHall]{figures/VolkanAlg/Hall_original_f4.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthHall]{figures/VolkanAlg/Hall_original_f100.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthHall]{figures/VolkanAlg/Hall_original_f150.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthHall]{figures/VolkanAlg/Hall_original_f250.eps}
\hspace{0.35cm}
\vspace{0.1cm}
\includegraphics[width=\widthHall]{figures/VolkanAlg/Hall_estimated_image_f4.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthHall]{figures/VolkanAlg/Hall_estimated_image_f100.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthHall]{figures/VolkanAlg/Hall_estimated_image_f150.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthHall]{figures/VolkanAlg/Hall_estimated_image_f250.eps}
\hspace{0.35cm}
\vspace{0.1cm}
\includegraphics[width=\widthHall]{figures/VolkanAlg/Hall_reconstructed_image_f4.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthHall]{figures/VolkanAlg/Hall_reconstructed_image_f100.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthHall]{figures/VolkanAlg/Hall_reconstructed_image_f150.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthHall]{figures/VolkanAlg/Hall_reconstructed_image_f250.eps}
\hspace{0.35cm}
\vspace{0.1cm}
\includegraphics[width=\widthHall]{figures/VolkanAlg/Hall_reconstructed_foreground_f4.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthHall]{figures/VolkanAlg/Hall_reconstructed_foreground_f100.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthHall]{figures/VolkanAlg/Hall_reconstructed_foreground_f150.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthHall]{figures/VolkanAlg/Hall_reconstructed_foreground_f250.eps}
\hspace{0.35cm}
\caption{
Hall sequence. The top panel shows the background and~$4$ different frames of the original
sequence, which consists of~$282$ frames. The remaining panels show the estimated
frames~$e[k]$, the reconstructed frame~$\hat{z}[k]$, and the reconstructed
foreground~$\hat{x}[k]$ (binarized for better visualization).
}
\label{Fig:HallSequence}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subfigure[Quantities related to the number of measurements.]{\label{SubFig:HallMeasurements}
\readdata{\dataCSOracle}{figures/VolkanAlg/HallCSmeasurements_oracle.dat}
\readdata{\dataLLMinOracle}{figures/VolkanAlg/HallL1L1meas_oracle.dat}
\readdata{\dataLLmeasEstim}{figures/VolkanAlg/HallL1L1meas_estim.dat}
\readdata{\dataMeasurements}{figures/VolkanAlg/HallMeasurements.dat}
\psscalebox{0.96}{
\begin{pspicture}(8.8,5.1)
\def\xMax{300}
\def\xMin{0}
\def\xNumTicks{6}
\def\yMax{6000}
\def\yMin{0}
\def\yNumTicks{6}
\def\xIncrement{50}
\def\yIncrement{1000}
\def\xOrig{0.60}
\def\yOrig{0.80}
\def\SizeX{8.00}
\def\SizeY{3.80}
\def\xTickIncr{1.33}
\def\yTickIncr{0.64}
\input{auxFiles/prettyDataPlots}
\psset{xunit=\xScale\psunit,yunit=\yScale\psunit,linewidth=0.8pt}
\dataplot[origin={\xDataOrig,\yDataOrig},showpoints=false,linestyle=dotted,dotsep=0.6pt,linecolor=black!90!white]{\dataCSOracle}
\dataplot[origin={\xDataOrig,\yDataOrig},showpoints=false,linestyle=dotted,dotsep=0.6pt,linecolor=green!90!white]{\dataLLMinOracle}
\dataplot[origin={\xDataOrig,\yDataOrig},showpoints=false,linestyle=dashed,dash=4pt 1pt,linecolor=blue!70!white]{\dataLLmeasEstim}
\dataplot[origin={\xDataOrig,\yDataOrig},showpoints=false,linestyle=solid,dotsep=0.8pt,linecolor=red!70!white]{\dataMeasurements}
\psset{xunit=\psunit,yunit=\psunit}
\rput[lb](-0.16,4.92){\small \textbf{\sf Number of measurements}}
\rput[ct](4.25,0.14){\small \textbf{\sf Frame index}}
\rput[lt](5.56,2.45){\footnotesize {\sf \color{red!70!black}{measurements $\mathsf{m_k}$}}}
\psline[linewidth=0.7pt,linecolor=red!70!black](5.6,1.74)(5.6,2.2)
\rput[lb](6.9,0.95){\footnotesize {\sf \color{blue!70!black}{estimate $\mathsf{\phi_k}$}}}
\psline[linewidth=0.7pt,linecolor=blue!70!black](6.83,1.05)(6.83,1.38)
\rput[lb](0.7,0.95){\footnotesize {\sf \color{green!70!black}{$\mathsf{\ell_1}$-$\mathsf{\ell_1}$ bound (oracle)}}}
\rput[lb](1.65,4.15){\footnotesize {\sf CS bound (oracle)}}
\end{pspicture}
}
\hfill
}
\subfigure[Relative errors of estimation and reconstruction.]{\label{SubFig:HallErrors}
\readdata{\estimError}{figures/VolkanAlg/Hall_EstimError.dat}
\readdata{\recError}{figures/VolkanAlg/Hall_RecError.dat}
\psscalebox{0.96}{
\begin{pspicture}(8.8,5.1)
\def\xMax{300}
\def\xMin{0}
\def\xNumTicks{6}
\def\yMax{8}
\def\yMin{0}
\def\yNumTicks{8}
\def\xIncrement{50}
\def\yIncrement{1}
\def\xOrig{0.60}
\def\yOrig{0.80}
\def\SizeX{8.00}
\def\SizeY{3.80}
\def\xTickIncr{1.33}
\def\yTickIncr{0.48}
\definecolor{colorXAxis}{gray}{0.55}
\definecolor{colorBackground}{gray}{0.93}
\def 0.15{0.15}
\def 0.12{0.12}
\def 0.08{0.08}
\fpAdd{\xNumTicks}{1}{\xNumTicksPOne}
\fpAdd{\yNumTicks}{1}{\yNumTicksPOne}
\FPadd \xEndPoint \xOrig \SizeX
\FPadd \yEndPoint \yOrig \SizeY
\FPset \unit 1
\FPsub \xRange \xMax \xMin
\FPdiv \xScale \SizeX \xRange
\FPdiv \xMultByOrigin \unit \xScale
\FPmul \xDataOrig \xMultByOrigin \xOrig
\FPsub \yRange \yMax \yMin
\FPdiv \yScale \SizeY \yRange
\FPdiv \yMultByOrigin \unit \yScale
\FPmul \yDataOrig \yMultByOrigin \yOrig
\fpSub{\yOrig}{0.15}{\xPosLabels}
\fpSub{\xOrig}{0.12}{\yPosLabels}
\fpAdd{\yOrig}{0.08}{\xTickTop}
\psframe*[linecolor=colorBackground](\xOrig,\yOrig)(\xEndPoint,\yEndPoint)
\multido{\nx=\xOrig+\xTickIncr, \iB=\xMin+\xIncrement}{\xNumTicksPOne}{
\rput[t](\nx,\xPosLabels){\small $\mathsf{\iB}$}
\psline[linewidth=0.8pt,linecolor=colorXAxis](\nx,\yOrig)(\nx,\xTickTop)
}
\multido{\ny=\yOrig+\yTickIncr, \nB=\yMin+\yIncrement}{\yNumTicksPOne}{
\psline[linecolor=white,linewidth=0.8pt](\xOrig,\ny)(\xEndPoint,\ny)
}
\psline[linewidth=1.2pt,linecolor=colorXAxis]{-}(\xOrig,\yOrig)(\xEndPoint,\yOrig)
\rput[r](0.52,0.81){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-9}}$}
\rput[r](0.52,1.28){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-8}}$}
\rput[r](0.52,1.76){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-7}}$}
\rput[r](0.52,2.23){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-6}}$}
\rput[r](0.52,2.74){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-5}}$}
\rput[r](0.52,3.20){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-4}}$}
\rput[r](0.52,3.69){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-3}}$}
\rput[r](0.52,4.18){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-2}}$}
\rput[r](0.52,4.62){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-1}}$}
\psset{xunit=\xScale\psunit,yunit=\yScale\psunit,linewidth=0.8pt}
\dataplot[origin={\xDataOrig,\yDataOrig},showpoints=false,linestyle=dashed,dash=4pt 1pt,linecolor=blue!70!white]{\estimError}
\dataplot[origin={\xDataOrig,\yDataOrig},showpoints=false,linestyle=solid,dotsep=0.8pt,linecolor=red!70!white]{\recError}
\psset{xunit=\psunit,yunit=\psunit}
\rput[lb](-0.1,4.92){\small \textbf{\sf Relative error}}
\rput[ct](4.25,0.14){\small \textbf{\sf Frame index}}
\rput[lt](5.85,1.60){\footnotesize {\sf \color{red!70!black}{reconstruction $\mathsf{\hat{z}[k]}$}}}
\rput[lb](5.85,4.25){\footnotesize {\sf \color{blue!70!black}{estimation $\mathsf{e[k]}$}}}
\end{pspicture}
}
}
\caption{
Results for the Hall sequence. \text{(a)} Number of measurements~$m_k$ taken from each frame (solid red line) and estimate~$\phi_k$ (dashed blue line); the dotted lines are the right-hand side of~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Bound} and~\eqref{Eq:ChandrasekaranBound} (green and black, respectively).
\text{(b)} Relative error of estimation $\|e[k] - z[k]\|_2/\|z[k]\|_2$, and reconstruction $\|\hat{z}[k] - z[k]\|_2/\|z[k]\|_2$. Figure \text{(b)} is illustrative, since the reconstruction error is mostly determined by the precision of the solver for~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Simple}.
}
\label{Fig:ResultsHall}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\raggedleft
\begin{pspicture}(18,0.2)
\rput[l](0.0,-1.4){\sf Original}
\rput[b](3.380,0.1){\sf background}
\rput[b](6.580,0.16){\sf frame $\mathsf{5}$}
\rput[b](9.750,0.16){\sf frame $\mathsf{75}$}
\rput[b](12.92,0.16){\sf frame $\mathsf{100}$}
\rput[b](16.05,0.16){\sf frame $\mathsf{170}$}
\rput[lb](0.0,-4.8){\sf Estimated}
\rput[lb](0.0,-7.9){\sf Reconstructed}
\rput[lb](0.0,-11.0){\sf Reconstructed foreground}
\rput[lb](0.0,-11.5){\sf (binarized)}
\end{pspicture}
\def\widthPETS{3.035cm}
\includegraphics[width=\widthPETS]{figures/VolkanAlg/PETS_original_f1.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthPETS]{figures/VolkanAlg/PETS_original_f5.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthPETS]{figures/VolkanAlg/PETS_original_f75.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthPETS]{figures/VolkanAlg/PETS_original_f100.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthPETS]{figures/VolkanAlg/PETS_original_f170.eps}
\hspace{0.35cm}
\vspace{0.1cm}
\includegraphics[width=\widthPETS]{figures/VolkanAlg/PETS_estimated_image_f5.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthPETS]{figures/VolkanAlg/PETS_estimated_image_f75.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthPETS]{figures/VolkanAlg/PETS_estimated_image_f100.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthPETS]{figures/VolkanAlg/PETS_estimated_image_f170.eps}
\hspace{0.35cm}
\vspace{0.1cm}
\includegraphics[width=\widthPETS]{figures/VolkanAlg/PETS_reconstructed_image_f5.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthPETS]{figures/VolkanAlg/PETS_reconstructed_image_f75.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthPETS]{figures/VolkanAlg/PETS_reconstructed_image_f100.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthPETS]{figures/VolkanAlg/PETS_reconstructed_image_f170.eps}
\hspace{0.35cm}
\vspace{0.1cm}
\includegraphics[width=\widthPETS]{figures/VolkanAlg/PETS_reconstructed_foreground_f5.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthPETS]{figures/VolkanAlg/PETS_reconstructed_foreground_f75.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthPETS]{figures/VolkanAlg/PETS_reconstructed_foreground_f100.eps}
\includegraphics[width=\widthPETS]{figures/VolkanAlg/PETS_reconstructed_foreground_f170.eps}
\hspace{0.35cm}
\caption{
PETS sequence. The top panel shows the background and~$4$ different frames of the original sequence, which consists of~$171$ frames. The remaining panels show the estimated frames~$e[k]$, the reconstructed frame~$\hat{z}[k]$, and the reconstructed foreground~$\hat{x}[k]$ (binarized for better visualization).
}
\label{Fig:PETSSequence}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subfigure[Quantities related to the number of measurements.]{\label{SubFig:PETSMeasurements}
\readdata{\dataCSOraclePETS}{figures/VolkanAlg/PETSCSmeasurements_oracle.dat}
\readdata{\dataLLMinOracle}{figures/VolkanAlg/PETSL1L1meas_oracle.dat}
\readdata{\dataLLmeasEstim}{figures/VolkanAlg/PETSL1L1meas_estim.dat}
\readdata{\dataMeasurements}{figures/VolkanAlg/PETSMeasurements.dat}
\psscalebox{0.96}{
\begin{pspicture}(8.8,5.1)
\def\xMax{180}
\def\xMin{0}
\def\xNumTicks{9}
\def\yMax{3500}
\def\yMin{0}
\def\yNumTicks{7}
\def\xIncrement{20}
\def\yIncrement{500}
\def\xOrig{0.60}
\def\yOrig{0.80}
\def\SizeX{8.00}
\def\SizeY{3.80}
\def\xTickIncr{0.89}
\def\yTickIncr{0.55}
\input{auxFiles/prettyDataPlots}
\psset{xunit=\xScale\psunit,yunit=\yScale\psunit,linewidth=0.8pt}
\dataplot[origin={\xDataOrig,\yDataOrig},showpoints=false,linestyle=dotted,dotsep=0.6pt,linecolor=black!90!white]{\dataCSOraclePETS}
\dataplot[origin={\xDataOrig,\yDataOrig},showpoints=false,linestyle=dotted,dotsep=0.6pt,linecolor=green!90!white]{\dataLLMinOracle}
\dataplot[origin={\xDataOrig,\yDataOrig},showpoints=false,linestyle=dashed,dash=4pt 1pt,linecolor=blue!70!white]{\dataLLmeasEstim}
\dataplot[origin={\xDataOrig,\yDataOrig},showpoints=false,linestyle=solid,dotsep=0.8pt,linecolor=red!70!white]{\dataMeasurements}
\psset{xunit=\psunit,yunit=\psunit}
\rput[lb](-0.16,4.92){\small \textbf{\sf Number of measurements}}
\rput[ct](4.25,0.14){\small \textbf{\sf Frame index}}
\rput[lb](3.1,0.89){\footnotesize {\sf \color{red!70!black}{measurements $\mathsf{m_k}$}}}
\rput[lb](3.37,1.4){\footnotesize {\sf \color{blue!70!black}{estimate $\mathsf{\phi_k}$}}}
\psline[linewidth=0.7pt,linecolor=blue!70!black](3.32,1.55)(3.32,2.39)
\rput[lb](0.73,4.2){\footnotesize {\sf \color{green!70!black}{$\mathsf{\ell_1}$-$\mathsf{\ell_1}$ bound (oracle)}}}
\psline[linewidth=0.7pt,linecolor=green!70!black](0.68,4.3)(0.68,3.0)
\rput[l](5.1,3.25){\footnotesize {\sf CS bound (oracle)}}
\end{pspicture}
}
}
\hfill
\subfigure[Relative errors of estimation and reconstruction.]{\label{SubFig:PETSErrors}
\readdata{\estimError}{figures/VolkanAlg/PETSEstimError.dat}
\readdata{\recError}{figures/VolkanAlg/PETSRecError.dat}
\psscalebox{0.96}{
\begin{pspicture}(8.8,5.1)
\def\xMax{180}
\def\xMin{0}
\def\xNumTicks{9}
\def\yMax{8}
\def\yMin{0}
\def\yNumTicks{8}
\def\xIncrement{20}
\def\yIncrement{1}
\def\xOrig{0.60}
\def\yOrig{0.80}
\def\SizeX{8.00}
\def\SizeY{3.80}
\def\xTickIncr{0.89}
\def\yTickIncr{0.48}
\definecolor{colorXAxis}{gray}{0.55}
\definecolor{colorBackground}{gray}{0.93}
\def 0.15{0.15}
\def 0.12{0.12}
\def 0.08{0.08}
\fpAdd{\xNumTicks}{1}{\xNumTicksPOne}
\fpAdd{\yNumTicks}{1}{\yNumTicksPOne}
\FPadd \xEndPoint \xOrig \SizeX
\FPadd \yEndPoint \yOrig \SizeY
\FPset \unit 1
\FPsub \xRange \xMax \xMin
\FPdiv \xScale \SizeX \xRange
\FPdiv \xMultByOrigin \unit \xScale
\FPmul \xDataOrig \xMultByOrigin \xOrig
\FPsub \yRange \yMax \yMin
\FPdiv \yScale \SizeY \yRange
\FPdiv \yMultByOrigin \unit \yScale
\FPmul \yDataOrig \yMultByOrigin \yOrig
\fpSub{\yOrig}{0.15}{\xPosLabels}
\fpSub{\xOrig}{0.12}{\yPosLabels}
\fpAdd{\yOrig}{0.08}{\xTickTop}
\psframe*[linecolor=colorBackground](\xOrig,\yOrig)(\xEndPoint,\yEndPoint)
\multido{\nx=\xOrig+\xTickIncr, \iB=\xMin+\xIncrement}{\xNumTicksPOne}{
\rput[t](\nx,\xPosLabels){\small $\mathsf{\iB}$}
\psline[linewidth=0.8pt,linecolor=colorXAxis](\nx,\yOrig)(\nx,\xTickTop)
}
\multido{\ny=\yOrig+\yTickIncr, \nB=\yMin+\yIncrement}{\yNumTicksPOne}{
\psline[linecolor=white,linewidth=0.8pt](\xOrig,\ny)(\xEndPoint,\ny)
}
\psline[linewidth=1.2pt,linecolor=colorXAxis]{-}(\xOrig,\yOrig)(\xEndPoint,\yOrig)
\rput[r](0.52,0.81){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-9}}$}
\rput[r](0.52,1.28){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-8}}$}
\rput[r](0.52,1.76){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-7}}$}
\rput[r](0.52,2.23){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-6}}$}
\rput[r](0.52,2.74){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-5}}$}
\rput[r](0.52,3.20){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-4}}$}
\rput[r](0.52,3.69){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-3}}$}
\rput[r](0.52,4.18){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-2}}$}
\rput[r](0.52,4.62){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-1}}$}
\psset{xunit=\xScale\psunit,yunit=\yScale\psunit,linewidth=0.8pt}
\dataplot[origin={\xDataOrig,\yDataOrig},showpoints=false,linestyle=dashed,dash=4pt 1pt,linecolor=blue!70!white]{\estimError}
\dataplot[origin={\xDataOrig,\yDataOrig},showpoints=false,linestyle=solid,dotsep=0.8pt,linecolor=red!70!white]{\recError}
\psset{xunit=\psunit,yunit=\psunit}
\rput[lb](-0.1,4.92){\small \textbf{\sf Relative error}}
\rput[ct](4.25,0.14){\small \textbf{\sf Frame index}}
\rput[lb](3.7,2.41){\footnotesize {\sf \color{red!70!black}{reconstruction $\mathsf{\hat{z}[k]}$}}}
\rput[lt](3.7,4.11){\footnotesize {\sf \color{blue!70!black}{estimation $\mathsf{e[k]}$}}}
\end{pspicture}
}
}
\caption{
Results for the PETS sequence. The displayed quantities are the same as in Fig.~\ref{Fig:ResultsHall}.
}
\label{Fig:ResultsPETS}
\end{figure*}
\section{Experimental results}
\label{Sec:ExperimentalResults}
We applied the scheme described in the previous section to two sequences of images: the Hall monitor sequence\footnote{Obtained from \url{http://trace.eas.asu.edu/yuv/}} and a sequence from the PETS 2009 database.\footnote{Obtained from \url{http://garrettwarnell.com/ARCS-1.0.zip}} The Hall monitor sequence has~$282$ frames\footnote{The original sequence has~$300$ frames, but we removed the first~$18$, since they contain practically no foreground.} with two people walking in an office; the top panel of Fig.~\ref{Fig:HallSequence} shows the background image and frames~$4$, $100$, $150$, and~$250$. The PETS sequence is a sequence of~$171$ frames with several people walking on a street; the top panel of Fig.~\ref{Fig:PETSSequence} shows the background image and frames~$5$, $75$, $100$, and~$170$. Since the background of both sequences is static and the foreground in each frame is sparse, we can apply our scheme to simultaneously reconstruct and perform background subtraction on each frame. The remaining panels of Figs.~\ref{Fig:HallSequence} and~\ref{Fig:PETSSequence} show the estimated frames, the reconstructed frames, and the reconstructed foregrounds, binarized for better visualization (note that the foreground pixels are dark).
\mypar{Experimental setup}
In both sequences, we set the oversampling parameters as~$\delta := \delta_k = 0.1$, for all~$k$, and the filter parameter as~$\alpha = 0.5$. While for the Hall sequence we used the true sparsity of the first two foregrounds, i.e., $\hat{s}_1 = s_1= 417$ and~$\hat{s}_2 = s_2 = 446$, for the PETS sequence we set these input parameters to values much smaller than their true values: $10 = \hat{s}_1 \ll s_1= 194$ and~$10 = \hat{s}_2 \ll s_2 = 211$. In spite of this poor initialization, the algorithm was able to quickly adapt, as we will see. For memory reasons, we downsampled each frame of the Hall sequence to $128 \times 128$ and each frame of the PETS sequence to~$116\times 116$. We also removed camera noise from each frame, i.e., isolated pixels, by preprocessing the full sequences. For the motion estimation, we used a block size of $\gamma\times \gamma = 8 \times 8$, and a search limit of~$6$. Finally, we mention that, after computing the side information~$w[k]$ for frame~$k$, we amplified the magnitude of its components by~$30\%$. This, according to the theory in~\cite{Mota14-CSSideInfo}, improves the quality of the side information. To solve basis pursuit in the reconstruction of the first two frames we used \textsc{spgl1}~\cite{Friedlander08-ProbingParetofrontierBasisPursuit-spgl1,vanDenBerg11-SparseOptimizationWithLeastSquaresConstraints-spgl1}.\footnote{Available at \url{http://www.math.ucdavis.edu/~mpf/spgl1/}} To solve $\ell_1$-$\ell_1$ minimization problem~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Simple} in the reconstruction of the remaining frames we used \textsc{decopt}~\cite{TranDinh14-ConstrainedConvexMinimizationViaModelBasedExcessiveGap,TranDinh14-APrimalDualAlgorithmicFrameworkForConstrainedConvexMinimization}.\footnote{Available at \url{http://lions.epfl.ch/decopt/}}
\mypar{Results}
We benchmark Algorithm~\ref{Alg:AdaptiveRate} with the CS (oracle) bound given by~\eqref{Eq:ChandrasekaranBound}. Note that the prior state-of-the-art in compressive background subtraction, \cite{Warnell12-AdaptiveRateCompressiveSensingBackgroundSubtraction,Warnell14-AdaptiveRateCompressiveSensingUsingSideInformation}, requires always more measurements than the ones given by~\eqref{Eq:ChandrasekaranBound}. The results of the experiments are in \fref{Fig:ResultsHall} for the Hall sequence and in \fref{Fig:ResultsPETS} for the PETS sequence. Figs.~\ref{SubFig:HallMeasurements} and~\ref{SubFig:PETSMeasurements} show the number of measurements~$m_k$ Algorithm~\ref{Alg:AdaptiveRate} took from each frame and the corresponding estimate~$\phi_k$ of~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Bound}. These figures also show the bounds~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Bound} and~\eqref{Eq:ChandrasekaranBound} as if an oracle told us the true values of~$s_k$, $\overline{h}_k$, and~$\xi_k$. We can see that~$m_k$ and~$\phi_k$ are always below the CS bound~\eqref{Eq:ChandrasekaranBound}, except at a few frames in Fig.~\ref{SubFig:PETSMeasurements} (PETS sequence). In those frames, there is no foreground and thus the number of required measurements approaches zero. Since there are no such frames in the Hall sequence, all quantities in Fig.~\ref{SubFig:HallMeasurements} do not exhibit such large fluctuations. Fig.~\ref{SubFig:HallMeasurements} clearly shows the advantage of our algorithm with respect to using standard CS (i.e., basis pursuit)~\cite{Cevher08-CompressiveSensingForBackgroundSubtraction,Warnell12-AdaptiveRateCompressiveSensingBackgroundSubtraction,Warnell14-AdaptiveRateCompressiveSensingUsingSideInformation}, even if CS reconstruction is performed using the knowledge of the true foreground sparsity: our algorithm required an average of~$33\%$ of the measurements that standard (oracle) CS required. Recall that the performance of the prior state-of-the-art algorithm~\cite{Warnell12-AdaptiveRateCompressiveSensingBackgroundSubtraction,Warnell14-AdaptiveRateCompressiveSensingUsingSideInformation} is always above the CS bound line. In Figs.~\ref{SubFig:HallMeasurements} and~\ref{SubFig:PETSMeasurements}, the estimate~$\phi_k$ is very close to the oracle bound~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Bound} and, for most frames, the number of measurements~$m_k$ is larger than~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Bound}, even though the oversampling factor~$\delta=0.1$ is quite small. In fact, $m_k$ was smaller than~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Bound} in less than~$7\%$ (resp.\ $30\%$) of the frames for the Hall (resp.\ PETS) sequence. Yet, the corresponding frames were reconstructed with a relatively small error, as shown in Figs.~\ref{SubFig:HallErrors} and~\ref{SubFig:PETSErrors}, and the algorithm quickly adapted.
Figs.~\ref{SubFig:HallErrors} and~\ref{SubFig:PETSErrors} show the relative errors of the estimated image~$e[k]$ and the reconstruction image~$\hat{z}[k]$, i.e., $\|e[k] - z[k]\|_2/\|z[k]\|_2$ and~$\|\hat{z}[k] - z[k]\|_2/\|z[k]\|_2$. It can be seen that the estimation errors were approximately constant, around $0.01$ for the Hall sequence and around~$0.93$ for the PETS sequence. The reconstruction error is essentially determined by the precision of the solver for~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Simple}. It varied between $3.8\times 10^{-9}$ and~$3.5\times 10^{-6}$ for the Hall sequence [Fig.~\ref{SubFig:HallErrors}]. For the PETS sequence [Fig.~\ref{SubFig:PETSErrors}], it was always below~$10^{-5}$ except at three instances, where the reconstruction error approached the estimation error. These correspond to the frames with no foreground (making the bounds in~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Bound} and~\eqref{Eq:ChandrasekaranBound} approach zero) and to the initial frames, where the number of measurements was much smaller than~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Bound}. In spite of these ``ill-conditioned'' frames, our algorithm was able to quickly adapt in the next frames, and follow the $\ell_1$-$\ell_1$ bound curve closely.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subfigure[Quantities related to the number of measurements.]{\label{SubFig:HallMeasurementsNoisy}
\readdata{\dataCSOracle}{figures/noisy/HallCSmeasurements_oracle.dat}
\readdata{\dataLLMinOracle}{figures/noisy/HallL1L1meas_oracle.dat}
\readdata{\dataLLmeasEstim}{figures/noisy/HallL1L1meas_estim.dat}
\readdata{\dataMeasurements}{figures/noisy/HallMeasurements.dat}
\psscalebox{0.96}{
\begin{pspicture}(8.8,5.1)
\def\xMax{300}
\def\xMin{0}
\def\xNumTicks{6}
\def\yMax{6000}
\def\yMin{0}
\def\yNumTicks{6}
\def\xIncrement{50}
\def\yIncrement{1000}
\def\xOrig{0.60}
\def\yOrig{0.80}
\def\SizeX{8.00}
\def\SizeY{3.80}
\def\xTickIncr{1.33}
\def\yTickIncr{0.64}
\input{auxFiles/prettyDataPlots}
\psset{xunit=\xScale\psunit,yunit=\yScale\psunit,linewidth=0.8pt}
\dataplot[origin={\xDataOrig,\yDataOrig},showpoints=false,linestyle=dotted,dotsep=0.6pt,linecolor=black!90!white]{\dataCSOracle}
\dataplot[origin={\xDataOrig,\yDataOrig},showpoints=false,linestyle=dotted,dotsep=0.6pt,linecolor=green!90!white]{\dataLLMinOracle}
\dataplot[origin={\xDataOrig,\yDataOrig},showpoints=false,linestyle=dashed,dash=4pt 1pt,linecolor=blue!70!white]{\dataLLmeasEstim}
\dataplot[origin={\xDataOrig,\yDataOrig},showpoints=false,linestyle=solid,dotsep=0.8pt,linecolor=red!70!white]{\dataMeasurements}
\psset{xunit=\psunit,yunit=\psunit}
\rput[lb](-0.16,4.92){\small \textbf{\sf Number of measurements}}
\rput[ct](4.25,0.14){\small \textbf{\sf Frame index}}
\rput[lt](5.56,2.55){\footnotesize {\sf \color{red!70!black}{measurements $\mathsf{m_k}$}}}
\psline[linewidth=0.7pt,linecolor=red!70!black](5.6,1.96)(5.6,2.3)
\rput[lb](6.9,1.07){\footnotesize {\sf \color{blue!70!black}{estimate $\mathsf{\phi_k}$}}}
\psline[linewidth=0.7pt,linecolor=blue!70!black](6.83,1.20)(6.83,1.53)
\rput[lb](0.7,0.97){\footnotesize {\sf \color{green!70!black}{$\mathsf{\ell_1}$-$\mathsf{\ell_1}$ bound (oracle)}}}
\rput[lb](2.45,3.55){\footnotesize {\sf CS bound (oracle)}}
\end{pspicture}
}
\hfill
}
\subfigure[Relative errors of estimation and reconstruction.]{\label{SubFig:HallErrorsNoisy}
\readdata{\estimError}{figures/noisy/Hall_EstimError.dat}
\readdata{\recError}{figures/noisy/Hall_RecError.dat}
\psscalebox{0.96}{
\begin{pspicture}(8.8,5.1)
\def\xMax{300}
\def\xMin{0}
\def\xNumTicks{6}
\def\yMax{8}
\def\yMin{0}
\def\yNumTicks{8}
\def\xIncrement{50}
\def\yIncrement{1}
\def\xOrig{0.60}
\def\yOrig{0.80}
\def\SizeX{8.00}
\def\SizeY{3.80}
\def\xTickIncr{1.33}
\def\yTickIncr{0.48}
\definecolor{colorXAxis}{gray}{0.55}
\definecolor{colorBackground}{gray}{0.93}
\def 0.15{0.15}
\def 0.12{0.12}
\def 0.08{0.08}
\fpAdd{\xNumTicks}{1}{\xNumTicksPOne}
\fpAdd{\yNumTicks}{1}{\yNumTicksPOne}
\FPadd \xEndPoint \xOrig \SizeX
\FPadd \yEndPoint \yOrig \SizeY
\FPset \unit 1
\FPsub \xRange \xMax \xMin
\FPdiv \xScale \SizeX \xRange
\FPdiv \xMultByOrigin \unit \xScale
\FPmul \xDataOrig \xMultByOrigin \xOrig
\FPsub \yRange \yMax \yMin
\FPdiv \yScale \SizeY \yRange
\FPdiv \yMultByOrigin \unit \yScale
\FPmul \yDataOrig \yMultByOrigin \yOrig
\fpSub{\yOrig}{0.15}{\xPosLabels}
\fpSub{\xOrig}{0.12}{\yPosLabels}
\fpAdd{\yOrig}{0.08}{\xTickTop}
\psframe*[linecolor=colorBackground](\xOrig,\yOrig)(\xEndPoint,\yEndPoint)
\multido{\nx=\xOrig+\xTickIncr, \iB=\xMin+\xIncrement}{\xNumTicksPOne}{
\rput[t](\nx,\xPosLabels){\small $\mathsf{\iB}$}
\psline[linewidth=0.8pt,linecolor=colorXAxis](\nx,\yOrig)(\nx,\xTickTop)
}
\multido{\ny=\yOrig+\yTickIncr, \nB=\yMin+\yIncrement}{\yNumTicksPOne}{
\psline[linecolor=white,linewidth=0.8pt](\xOrig,\ny)(\xEndPoint,\ny)
}
\psline[linewidth=1.2pt,linecolor=colorXAxis]{-}(\xOrig,\yOrig)(\xEndPoint,\yOrig)
\rput[r](0.52,0.81){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-9}}$}
\rput[r](0.52,1.28){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-8}}$}
\rput[r](0.52,1.76){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-7}}$}
\rput[r](0.52,2.23){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-6}}$}
\rput[r](0.52,2.74){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-5}}$}
\rput[r](0.52,3.20){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-4}}$}
\rput[r](0.52,3.69){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-3}}$}
\rput[r](0.52,4.18){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-2}}$}
\rput[r](0.52,4.62){\footnotesize $\mathsf{10^{-1}}$}
\psset{xunit=\xScale\psunit,yunit=\yScale\psunit,linewidth=0.8pt}
\dataplot[origin={\xDataOrig,\yDataOrig},showpoints=false,linestyle=solid,dotsep=0.8pt,linecolor=red!70!white]{\recError}
\dataplot[origin={\xDataOrig,\yDataOrig},showpoints=false,linestyle=dashed,dash=4pt 1pt,linecolor=blue!70!white]{\estimError}
\psset{xunit=\psunit,yunit=\psunit}
\rput[lb](-0.1,4.92){\small \textbf{\sf Relative error}}
\rput[ct](4.25,0.14){\small \textbf{\sf Frame index}}
\rput[lt](5.85,3.50){\footnotesize {\sf \color{red!70!black}{reconstruction $\mathsf{\hat{z}[k]}$}}}
\rput[lb](5.85,4.25){\footnotesize {\sf \color{blue!70!black}{estimation $\mathsf{e[k]}$}}}
\end{pspicture}
}
}
\caption{
Results for the Hall sequence for the noisy measurement case. The quantities are the same as in \fref{Fig:ResultsHall}. The CS bound curve in \text{(a)} was truncated at $6000$ measurements so that the vertical scale is the same as in \fref{SubFig:HallMeasurements}.
}
\label{Fig:ResultsHallNoisy}
\end{figure*}
\mypar{Noisy measurements}
We also applied the version of Algorithm~\ref{Alg:AdaptiveRate} that handles noisy measurements, i.e., $y[k] = A_k x[k] + \eta_k$, with~$\|\eta_k\|_2 \leq \sigma_k$, to the Hall sequence. In this case, $\eta_k$ was a vector of i.i.d.\ Gaussian entries with zero mean and variance~$4/m_k$, and we used~$\sigma_k = 2$ for all frames. The number of measurements was computed as in~\eqref{Eq:L1L1BoundNoisy} with~$\tau = 0.1$. The results are shown in \fref{Fig:ResultsHallNoisy}. It can be seen that all the quantities in \fref{SubFig:HallMeasurementsNoisy} are slightly larger than in \fref{SubFig:HallMeasurements} (we truncated the CS bound in \fref{SubFig:HallMeasurementsNoisy} so that the vertical scales are the same). Yet, all the curves have the same shape. The most noticeable difference between the noisy and the noiseless case is the reconstruction error (\fref{SubFig:HallErrorsNoisy}), which is about~$3$ orders of magnitude larger for the noisy case.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{Sec:Conclusions}
We proposed and analyzed an online algorithm for reconstructing a sparse sequence of signals from a limited number of measurements. The signals vary across time according to a nonlinear dynamical model, and the measurements are linear. Our algorithm is based on $\ell_1$-$\ell_1$ minimization and, assuming Gaussian measurement matrices, it estimates the required number of measurements to perfectly reconstruct each signal, automatically and on-the-fly. We also explored the application of our algorithm to compressive video background subtraction and tested its performance on sequences of real images. It was shown that the proposed algorithm allows reducing the number of required measurements with respect to prior compressive video background subtraction schemes by a large margin.
\appendices
\section{Proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:Delta}}
\label{Sec:AppProofLemmaDelta}
First, note that condition~\eqref{Eq:LemDelta} is a function only of the parameters of the sequences~$\{x[k]\}$ and~$\{\epsilon[k]\}$ and, therefore, is a deterministic condition. Simple algebraic manipulation shows that it is equivalent to
\begin{multline*}
(1+\delta_i)
\bigg[
2\overline{h}_{i-1} \log\Big(\frac{n}{u_{i-1}}\Big) + \frac{7}{5}u_{i-1} + 1
\bigg]
\geq 2\overline{h}_i \log\Big(\frac{n}{u_i}\Big) \\ + \frac{7}{5}u_i + 1\,,
\end{multline*}
or
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:ProofLemma1EquivalentCondition}
(1+\delta_i) \overline{m}_{i-1} \geq \overline{m}_i\,,
\end{equation}
where~$\overline{m}_i$ is the right-hand side of~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Bound} applied to~$x[i]$, that is,
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:ProofLemma1DefOverlinem}
\overline{m}_i := 2\overline{h}_i\log\Big(\frac{n}{s_i + \xi_i/2}\Big) + \frac{7}{5}\Big(s_i + \frac{\xi_i}{2}\Big) + 1\,.
\end{equation}
Notice that the source of randomness in Algorithm~\ref{Alg:AdaptiveRate} is the set of matrices (random variables)~$A_k$, generated in steps~\ref{SubAlg:step2} and~\ref{SubAlg:step10}. Define the event~$S_i$ as ``perfect reconstruction at time~$i$.'' Since we assume that~$\hat{s}_1$ and~$\hat{s}_2$ are larger than the true sparsity of~$x[1]$ and~$x[2]$, there holds~\cite{Chandrasekaran12-ConvexGeometryLinearInverseProblems}
\begin{align}
\mathbb{P}(S_i)
\geq
1 - \exp\Big[-\frac{1}{2}(m_i - \sqrt{m_i})^2\Big]
\notag
\\
\geq
1 - \exp\Big[-\frac{1}{2}(\underline{m} - \sqrt{\underline{m}})^2\Big]\,,
\label{Eq:ProofLemma1ProbS1S2}
\end{align}
for~$i=1,2$, where the second inequality is due to $m_i \geq \underline{m}$ and $1-\exp(-(1/2)(x - \sqrt{x})^2)$ being an increasing function.
Next, we compute the probability of the event ``perfect reconstruction at time~$i$'' given that there was ``perfect reconstruction at all previous time instants~$l<i$,'' i.e., $\mathbb{P}(S_i |\bigwedge_{l<i} S_{l})$, for all~$i=3,\ldots,k$. Since we assume~$\alpha = 1$, we have~$\phi_i = \hat{\overline{m}}_{i-1}$ and step~\ref{SubAlg:ChooseMeas} of Algorithm~\ref{Alg:AdaptiveRate} becomes~$m_i = (1+\delta_i)\hat{\overline{m}}_{i-1}$, for all~$i \geq 3$. Under the event~$S_{i-1}$, i.e., $\hat{x}[i-1] = x[i-1]$, we have $\hat{\overline{h}}_{i-1} = \overline{h}_{i-1}$, $\hat{\xi}_{i-1} = \xi_{i-1}$, and~$\hat{\overline{m}}_{i-1} = \overline{m}_{i-1}$, where $\overline{m}_{i-1}$ is defined in~\eqref{Eq:ProofLemma1DefOverlinem}. (The hat variables are random variables.) Consequently, due to our assumption~\eqref{Eq:ProofLemma1EquivalentCondition}, step~\ref{SubAlg:ChooseMeas} can be written as $m_i = (1+\delta_i)\hat{\overline{m}}_{i-1} = (1+\delta_i)\overline{m}_{i-1} \geq \overline{m}_i$. This means~\eqref{Eq:L1L1Bound} is satisfied and hence, for~$i\geq 3$,
\begin{align}
\mathbb{P}\Big(S_i\,\big|\, \bigwedge_{l<i} S_{l}\Big)
&\geq
1 - \exp\Big[-\frac{1}{2}(m_i - \sqrt{m_i})^2\Big]
\notag
\\
&\geq
1 - \exp\Big[-\frac{1}{2}(\underline{m} - \sqrt{\underline{m}})^2\Big]\,,
\label{Eq:ProofLowerB}
\end{align}
where, again, we used the fact that $m_i \geq \underline{m}$ and that $1-\exp(-(1/2)(x - \sqrt{x})^2)$ is an increasing function.
Finally, we bound the probability that there is perfect reconstruction at all time instants~$1\leq i \leq k$:
\begin{align}
\mathbb{P}(S_1 &\wedge S_2 \wedge \cdots \wedge S_k)
\notag
\\
&=
\mathbb{P}(S_1)\mathbb{P}(S_2|S_1)\prod_{i=3}^k\mathbb{P}(S_i|S_1 \wedge \cdots \wedge S_{i-1})
\label{Eq:ProofLemma1LastStep1}
\\
&=
\mathbb{P}(S_1)\mathbb{P}(S_2)\prod_{i=3}^k\mathbb{P}\Big(S_i\,\big|\, \bigwedge_{l< i} S_l\Big)
\label{Eq:ProofLemma1LastStep2}
\\
&\geq
\bigg(1 - \exp \Big[-\frac{1}{2}(\underline{m} - \sqrt{\underline{m}})^2\Big]\bigg)^k\,.
\label{Eq:ProofLemma1LastStep3}
\end{align}
From~\eqref{Eq:ProofLemma1LastStep1} to~\eqref{Eq:ProofLemma1LastStep2} we used the independence between~$S_1$ and~$S_2$. From~\eqref{Eq:ProofLemma1LastStep2} to~\eqref{Eq:ProofLemma1LastStep3}, we used~\eqref{Eq:ProofLemma1ProbS1S2} and~\eqref{Eq:ProofLowerB}.
\hfill\qed
\section{Proof of Theorem~\ref{Thm:LaplacianModelingNoise}}
\label{Sec:AppProofLemmaConditions}
Recall the definitions of~$\xi$ and~$\overline{h}$ in~\eqref{Eq:QualityParameters}:
\begin{align*}
\xi
&=
\big|\{j\,:\, w_j \neq x_j^\star = 0\}\big| - \big|\{j\,:\, w_j = x_j^\star \neq 0\}\big|
\\
\overline{h}
&=
\big|
\{j\,:\, x_j^\star > 0, \,\,\epsilon_j > 0\} \cup \{j\,:\, x_j^\star < 0,
\epsilon_j < 0\}
\big|\,,
\end{align*}
where we rewrote~$\overline{h}$ using~$x^\star = w + \epsilon$. Define the events $\mathcal{A} := \text{``}\,\exists_j\,:\, x_j = w_j = 0\,\text{''}$, $\mathcal{B} := \text{``}\,\overline{h} > 0\,\text{''}$, and
$$
\mathcal{C} := \text{``}\,m \geq 2\overline{h}\log\Big(\frac{n}{s + \xi/2}\Big) + \frac{7}{5}\Big(s + \frac{\xi}{2}\Big) + 1\,\text{,''}
$$
which are the assumptions of Theorem~\ref{Thm:L1L1}. In~$\mathcal{C}$, $m$ and~$n$ are deterministic, whereas~$s$, $\overline{h}$, and~$\xi$ are random variables. Then,
\begin{align}
&\mathbb{P}\big(\hat{x} = x^\star \big)
\geq
\mathbb{P}\Big(\hat{x} = x^\star\,\Big|\, \mathcal{A} \wedge \mathcal{B} \wedge \mathcal{C}\Big)
\cdot\mathbb{P}\big(\mathcal{A} \wedge \mathcal{B} \wedge \mathcal{C} \big)
\notag
\\
&\geq
\bigg[1 - \exp\Big(-\frac{(m - \sqrt{m})^2}{2}\Big)\bigg]
\cdot\mathbb{P}\big(\mathcal{A}\wedge \mathcal{B} \wedge \mathcal{C}\big)\,,
\label{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1Step1AllTerms}
\end{align}
where we used Theorem~\ref{Thm:L1L1}. The rest of the proof consists of lower bounding~$\mathbb{P}\big(\mathcal{A} \wedge \mathcal{B} \wedge \mathcal{C}\big)$.
\mypar{Lower bound on \boldmath{$\mathbb{P}\big(\mathcal{A} \wedge \mathcal{B} \wedge \mathcal{C}\big)$}}
Recall that~$w$ is fixed and that each component~$x_j^\star$ is determined by $x_j^\star = w_j + \epsilon_j$. Due to the continuity of the distribution of~$\epsilon$, with probability~$1$, no component $j \in \Sigma$ (i.e., $\sigma_j^2 \neq 0$) contributes to~$\xi$. When~$j \in \Sigma^c$, we have two cases:
\begin{itemize}
\item $j \in \Sigma^c \cap \mathcal{W}$ (i.e., $\sigma_j^2 = 0$ and $w_j \neq 0$): in this case, we have~$x_j^\star = w_j$ with probability~$1$. Hence, these components contribute to the second term of~$\xi$.
\item $j \in \Sigma^c \cap \mathcal{W}^c$ (i.e., $\sigma_j^2 = 0$ and $w_j = 0$): in this case, we also have~$x_j^\star = w_j$ with probability~$1$. However, these components do not contribute to~$\xi$.
\end{itemize}
We conclude $\mathbb{P}\big(\mathcal{D}\big) = \mathbb{P}\big(\xi = -\big|\Sigma^c \cap \mathcal{W}\big|\big) = 1$, where~$\mathcal{D}$ is the event ``$\xi = -\big|\Sigma^c \cap \mathcal{W}\big|$.'' From the second case above we also conclude that our assumption $\Sigma^c \cap \mathcal{W}^c \neq \emptyset$ implies $\mathbb{P}\big(\mathcal{A}\big) = 1$. We can then write
\begin{align}
\mathbb{P}\big(\mathcal{A} \wedge \mathcal{B} \wedge \mathcal{C}\big)
&=
\mathbb{P}\big(\mathcal{A}\big)\cdot\mathbb{P}\big(\mathcal{B} \wedge \mathcal{C}\,\big|\, \mathcal{A}\big)
=
\mathbb{P}\big(\mathcal{B} \wedge \mathcal{C}\,\big|\, \mathcal{A}\big)
\notag
\\
&\geq
\mathbb{P}\big(\mathcal{B} \wedge \mathcal{C}\,\big|\, \mathcal{A},\, \mathcal{D}\big)
\cdot
\mathbb{P}\big(\mathcal{D}\,\big|\, \mathcal{A}\big)
\label{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1StepA-Justification1}
\\
&=
\mathbb{P}\big(\mathcal{B} \wedge \mathcal{C}\,\big|\, \mathcal{A},\, \mathcal{D}\big)
\cdot
\mathbb{P}\big(\mathcal{D}\big)
\label{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1StepA-Justification2}
\\
&=
\mathbb{P}\big(\mathcal{B} \wedge \mathcal{C}\,\big|\, \mathcal{A},\, \mathcal{D}\big)
\label{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1StepA-Justification3}
\\
&=
\mathbb{P}\big( 0 < \overline{h} \leq \mu + t \,\big|\, \mathcal{A},\, \mathcal{D}\big)\,.
\label{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1StepA1}
\end{align}
From~\eqref{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1StepA-Justification1} to~\eqref{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1StepA-Justification2}, we used the fact that the events~$\mathcal{A} = \text{``}\Sigma^c \cap \mathcal{W}^c \neq \emptyset\text{''}$ and $\mathcal{D} = \text{``}\xi = -|\Sigma^c \cap \mathcal{W}|\text{''}$ are independent. This follows from the independence of the components of~$\epsilon$ and the disjointness of~$\Sigma^c \cap \mathcal{W}^c$ and~$\Sigma^c \cap \mathcal{W}$. From~\eqref{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1StepA-Justification3} to~\eqref{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1StepA1}, we used the fact that event~$\mathcal{C}$ conditioned on~$\mathcal{D}$ is equivalent to $\overline{h} \leq \mu + t$. To see why, note that the sparsity of~$x^\star$ is given by~$s = |\Sigma| + |\Sigma^c \cap \mathcal{W}|$; thus, given~$\mathcal{D}$, $s + \xi/2$ equals~$|\Sigma| + |\Sigma^c \cap \mathcal{W}|/2$; now, subtract the expression in assumption~\eqref{Eq:lemConditionsLaplacianModelNumMeas} from the expression that defines event~$\mathcal{C}$:
$$
0 \geq 2(\overline{h} - \mu - t)\log\bigg[\frac{n}{|\Sigma| + \frac{1}{2}|\Sigma^c \cap \mathcal{W}|}\bigg]\,.
$$
Using the fact that $n = |\Sigma| + |\Sigma^c| \geq |\Sigma| + |\Sigma^c \cap \mathcal{W}| \geq |\Sigma| + |\Sigma^c \cap \mathcal{W}|/2$, we conclude that~$\mathcal{C}$ is equivalent to the event ``$\overline{h} \leq \mu + t$.'' We now bound~\eqref{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1StepA1} as follows:
\begin{align}
&\mathbb{P}\big(0 < \overline{h} \leq \mu + t\,\big|\,\mathcal{A},\,\mathcal{D}\big)
\notag
\\
&\geq
\mathbb{P}\big(0 < \overline{h} < \mu + t -1\,\big|\,\mathcal{A},\,\mathcal{D}\big)
\notag
\\
&=
1 - \mathbb{P}\big(\overline{h} \leq 0\,\big|\,\mathcal{A},\,\mathcal{D} \big) - \mathbb{P}\big(\overline{h} \geq \mu + t -1 \,\big|\,\mathcal{A},\,\mathcal{D} \big)
\notag
\\
&=
1 - \mathbb{P}\big(\overline{h} -\mu \leq -\mu\,\big|\,\mathcal{A},\,\mathcal{D}\big)
-\mathbb{P}\big(\overline{h} - \mu \geq t -1\,\big|\,\mathcal{A},\,\mathcal{D}\big)
\label{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1StepB1}
\\
&\geq
1 - \exp\bigg[-\frac{2\mu^2}{\big|\Sigma\big|}\bigg] - \exp\bigg[-\frac{2(t-1)^2}{\big|\Sigma\big|}\bigg]\,,
\label{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1StepB2}
\end{align}
where the last step, explained below, is due to Hoeffding's
inequality~\cite{Lugosi09-ConcentrationOfMeasureInequalities}.
Note that once this step is proven, \eqref{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1StepB2} together with~\eqref{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1Step1AllTerms} and~\eqref{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1StepA1} give~\eqref{Eq:lemConditionsLaplacianProb}, proving the theorem.
\mypar{Proof of step~\eqref{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1StepB1}-\eqref{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1StepB2}}
Hoeffding's inequality states that if~$\{Z_j\}_{j=1}^L$ is a sequence of independent random variables and $\mathbb{P}(0\leq Z_j \leq 1) = 1$ for all~$j$, then
\cite[Th.4]{Lugosi09-ConcentrationOfMeasureInequalities}:
\begin{align}
\mathbb{P}\bigg(\sum_{j=1}^L Z_j - \sum_{j=1}^L \mathbb{E}\big[Z_j\big] \geq \tau\bigg) &\leq \exp\Big[-\frac{2\tau^2}{L}\Big]
\label{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1Hoeffding1}
\\
\mathbb{P}\bigg(\sum_{j=1}^L Z_j - \sum_{j=1}^L \mathbb{E}\big[Z_j\big] \leq -\tau\bigg) &\leq \exp\Big[-\frac{2\tau^2}{L}\Big]\,,
\label{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1Hoeffding2}
\end{align}
for any~$\tau > 0$. We apply~\eqref{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1Hoeffding2} to the second term in~\eqref{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1StepB1} and~\eqref{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1Hoeffding1} to the third term. This is done by showing that $\overline{h}$ is the sum of~$|\Sigma|$ independent random variables, taking values in~$[0,1]$ with probability~$1$, and whose expected values sum to~$\mu$. Note that~$\mu > 0$ by definition, and~$t>1$ by assumption.
We start by noticing that the components of~$\epsilon$ that contribute to~$\overline{h}$ are the ones for which~$\sigma_j^2 \neq 0$, i.e., $j \in \Sigma$ (otherwise, $\epsilon_j = 0$ with probability~$1$). Using the relation~$x_j^\star = w_j + \epsilon_j$ [cf.\ \eqref{Eq:IntroStateSpaceModel}], we then have $\overline{h} = \sum_{j \in \Sigma} Z_j$, where $Z_j$ is the indicator of the event
\begin{equation}\label{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1Indicator}
\epsilon_j > \max \big\{0, \, -w_j\big\}
\quad
\text{or}
\quad
\epsilon_j < \min \big\{0, \, -w_j\big\}\,,
\end{equation}
that is, $Z_j = 1$ if~\eqref{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1Indicator} holds, and $Z_j = 0$ otherwise. By construction, $0\leq Z_j\leq 1$ for all~$j$. Furthermore, because the components of~$\epsilon$ are independent, so are the random variables~$Z_j$. All we have left to do is to show that the sum of the expected values of~$Z_j$ conditioned on~$\mathcal{A}$ and~$\mathcal{D}$ equals~$\mu$. This involves just simple integration. Let~$j \in \Sigma$. Then,
\begin{align}
&\mathbb{E}\Big[Z_j\,\big|\, \mathcal{A},\,\mathcal{D}\Big]
=
\mathbb{P}\big(Z_j = 1\,\big|\, \mathcal{A},\,\mathcal{D}\big)
\label{Eq:ComputationOfBernoulliParameter0}
\\
&=
\mathbb{P}\big( \epsilon_j > \max \big\{0, \, -w_j\big\} \big)
+
\mathbb{P}\big( \epsilon_j < \min \big\{0, \, -w_j\big\} \big)
\label{Eq:ComputationOfBernoulliParameter1}
\\
&=
\frac{1 + \exp\big(-\lambda_j\big|w_j\big|\big)}{2}
\label{Eq:ComputationOfBernoulliParameter2}
\\
&=
\frac{1 + \exp\big(-\sqrt{2}\big|w_j\big|/\sigma_j\big)}{2}\,.
\label{Eq:ComputationOfBernoulliParameter3}
\end{align}
From~\eqref{Eq:ComputationOfBernoulliParameter0} to~\eqref{Eq:ComputationOfBernoulliParameter1}, we used the fact that the events in~\eqref{Eq:ProofLemmaConditionsTheoremL1L1Indicator} are disjoint for any~$w_j$. From~\eqref{Eq:ComputationOfBernoulliParameter1} to~\eqref{Eq:ComputationOfBernoulliParameter2}, we used the fact that~$\lambda_j$ is finite for~$j \in \Sigma$, and
\begin{align*}
\mathbb{P}\big( \epsilon_j > \max \big\{0, \, -w_j\big\} \big)
&=
\int_{\max\{-w_j, 0\}}^{+\infty} \frac{\lambda_j}{2}\exp(-\lambda_j |u|)\,du
\\
&=
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\frac{1}{2} &,\,\, w_j > 0
\vspace{0.3cm}
\\
\frac{1}{2}\exp\big(\lambda_j w_j\big) &,\,\, w_j < 0
\end{array}
\right.
\\
\mathbb{P}\big( \epsilon_j < \min \big\{0, \, -w_j\big\} \big)
&=
\int_{-\infty}^{\min\{-w_j, 0\}} \frac{\lambda_j}{2}\exp(\lambda_j |u|)\,du
\\
&=
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
\frac{1}{2}\exp\big(-\lambda_i w_j\big) &,\,\, w_j > 0
\vspace{0.3cm}
\\
\frac{1}{2}&,\,\, w_j < 0\,.
\end{array}
\right.
\end{align*}
And from~\eqref{Eq:ComputationOfBernoulliParameter2} to~\eqref{Eq:ComputationOfBernoulliParameter3} we simply replaced~$\lambda_j = \sqrt{2}/\sigma_j$. The expected value of~$\overline{h}$ conditioned on~$\mathcal{A}$ and~$\mathcal{D}$ is then
\begin{align*}
\mathbb{E}\Big[\overline{h}\,\big|\, \mathcal{A},\,\mathcal{D}\Big]
&=
\mathbb{E}\Big[\sum_{j \in \Sigma} Z_j\,\big|\, \mathcal{A},\,\mathcal{D}\Big]
=
\sum_{j \in \Sigma} \mathbb{E}\Big[ Z_j\,\big|\, \mathcal{A},\,\mathcal{D}\Big]
\\
&=
\frac{1}{2}\sum_{j \in \Sigma} \Big[1 + \exp\big(-\sqrt{2}\big|w_j\big|/\sigma_j\big)\Big]
=:
\mu\,,
\end{align*}
where we used~\eqref{Eq:ComputationOfBernoulliParameter3}.
\hfill\qed
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
{
|
\section{\label{sec:level1}Introduction}
\begin{figure}[b]
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Full_Level_Scheme_Rb_D2}
\caption{\label{fig:im2}Fine and hyperfine energy-level splittings for the $D_2$ transitions of $^{85}$Rb and $^{87}$Rb.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[b]
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{level_scheme_dm=1+dm=2}
\caption{\label{fig:im1}Absorption from the ground-state hyperfine magnetic sublevel $m_{F_g}$
and creation of $\Delta{m_F}$=1 and $\Delta{m_F}$=2 coherences in the excited state when the magnetic field $B$ = 0.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[b]
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Rb85-splits}
\caption{\label{fig:im3}(Color online) Energy shifts of the magnetic sublevels $m_F$ as a function of
magnetic field for $^{85}$Rb. Zero energy corresponds to the excited-state fine-structure level 5$^2$P$_{3/2}$. The numbers above the lines correspond to the values of $m_F$.
Level crossings are marked by squares for $\Delta m_F=1$ and circles for $\Delta m_F=2$.
}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Rb87-splits}
\caption{\label{fig:im5}(Color online) Energy shifts of the magnetic sublevels $m_F$ as a function of
magnetic field for $^{87}$Rb. Zero energy corresponds to the excited-state fine-structure level 5$^2$P$_{3/2}$. The numbers above the lines correspond to the values of $m_F$.
Level crossings are marked by squares for $\Delta m_F=1$ and circles for $\Delta m_F=2$.
}
\end{figure}
The frequency, direction, and polarization of light emitted from an ensemble of atoms is a sensitive probe of their
quantum state~\cite{Auzinsh:2010book}. Changes in polarization such as, for example, rotation of the plane of polarization,
are used to develop sensitive magnetometers~\cite{Budker:2002}. Other uses of nonlinear magneto-optical resonances include electromagnetically induced transparency~\cite{Harris:1997}, information storage using light~\cite{Phillips:2001, Liu:2001}, atomic clocks~\cite{Knappe:2005}, optical switches~\cite{Yeh:1982}, filters~\cite{Cere:2009}, and isolators~\cite{Weller:2012}.
When linearly polarized light interacts with an ensemble of atoms, it usually aligns the angular momentum of the atoms in the excited state as well as in the ground state. Angular momentum alignment can be symbolically represented by a double-headed arrow. If the angular momentum of the atoms is aligned along the quantization axis (longitudinal alignment), the populations of magnetic sublevels with quantum number $+m_F$ and $-m_F$ are equal, but the population may vary as a function of \(|{m_F}|\). But if the angular momentum is aligned perpendicularly to the quantization axis (transverse alignment), then, in quantum terms, it means that there is coherence between magnetic sublevels with quantum numbers that differ by $\Delta{m_F}=2$ (see Fig.~\ref{fig:im1}).
In a similar way we can introduce longitudinal and transverse orientation of angular momentum. In the case of orientation of the angular momentum, the spatial distribution can be represented symbolically by a single-headed arrow, and in the case of longitudinal orientation, the magnetic sublevels with quantum numbers $+m_F$ and $-m_F$ in general have different populations. However, the case of transverse orientation corresponds to coherence between magnetic sublevels with values that differ by $\Delta{m_F}=1$ (see Fig.~\ref{fig:im1}).
The fluorescence from an aligned ensemble of atoms is expected to be linearly polarized, but in the case of oriented atoms, the fluorescence will possess a circularly polarized component as well.
Alignment created by linear polarized excitation can be converted to orientation by external interactions
such as a magnetic field gradient~\cite{Fano:1964} or anisotropic collisions~\cite{Lombardi:1967,Rebane:1968,Manabe:1981}.
This process is called alignment-to-orientation conversion (AOC)\cite{Auzinsh:2005MolPol}.
Interaction with an electric field also can produce orientation from an initially aligned
population~\cite{Lombardi:1969}.
A magnetic field by itself cannot create orientation from alignment because it is an axial field that is symmetric
under reflection in the plane perpendicular to the field direction.
However, the hyperfine interaction can cause a nonlinear dependence of the energies of the magnetic sublevels on the
magnitude of the magnetic field---the nonlinear Zeeman effect (see Fig. \ref{fig:im3} and Fig. \ref{fig:im5}),
and this nonlinear dependence can break the symmetry. If, in addition, the linearly polarized exciting radiation can be
decomposed into linearly ($\pi^0$) and circularly ($\sigma^{\pm}$) polarized components
with respect to the quantization axis (see Fig.~\ref{fig:im7}), then $\Delta m_F=1$ coherences can be created, which leads to
orientation in a direction transverse to the initial alignment.
AOC in an external magnetic field was first studied theoretically
for cadmium~\cite{Lehmann:1964} and sodium~\cite{Baylis:1968}, and observed experimentally in cadmium~\cite{Lehmann:1969} and in the $D_2$ line of rubidium atoms~\cite{Krainska-Miszczak:1979}. Also the conversion in the opposite sense---conversion of an oriented state into an aligned---is possible~\cite{Weiss:1978}.
Nevertheless, the action of external perturbations can break the symmetry of the population distribution and allow linearly
polarized exciting radiation to produce orientation, which is manifested by the presence of circularly polarized fluorescence.
Earlier, AOC in rubidium atoms was studied at excitation with weak laser radiation in the linear absorption regime~\cite{Alnis:2001}. The perturbing factor in that case was the joint action of the hyperfine interaction and the external magnetic field, which led to nonlinear splitting of the Zeeman magnetic sublevels. The magnetic sublevels of the angular momentum hyperfine levels in Rb atoms in an external magnetic field start to be affected by the nonlinear Zeeman effect already at moderate field strengths of several tens of Gauss.
However, many practical and experimental applications require higher intensity excitation, in which case the absorption becomes nonlinear.
As a result, the theoretical description is no longer simple and requires sophisticated methods in order to predict changes
in the degree of circular polarization, which reaches maximum values on the order of only a few percent.
Therefore, we have applied a theoretical model developed for the description of such magneto optical-effects like dark and bright resonances, to describe experimental signals of AOC
in the $D_2$ line of rubidium.
Because the splittings between the excited-state hyperfine levels are of the order of tens of
megahertz for both rubidium isotopes (see Fig.~\ref{fig:im2}), the $D_2$ line is a very good candidate for
demonstrating AOC phenomena at relatively low magnetic fields.
The model satisfactorily calculates the degree of polarization for magnetic fields up to at least 85 Gauss,
making it a powerful tool for experiments that deal with these effects.
We studied the AOC phenomenon experimentally by exciting the $D_2$ line of rubidium with linearly polarized light for the case of nonlinear absorption and modeled the line shapes of the resulting magneto-optical signals theoretically.
Both circularly polarized components of the fluorescence were recorded in the experiment rather than just the difference as was done earlier~\citep{Alnis:2001}.
Moreover, in the present study the magnetic field range was markedly extended in comparison
to previous studies~\cite{Alnis:2001}, which allowed us to reveal additional signal structure.
\section{\label{sec:level2}Experiment}
Rubidium atoms in a vapor cell were excited with linearly polarized light whose polarization vector made a
45$^{\circ}$ angle with an externally applied magnetic field. Laser induced fluorescence (LIF) was observed
in the direction perpendicular to the plane containing the magnetic field $\mathbf{B}$ and the electric field vector $\mathbf{E}$ of the
exciting radiation (see Fig. \ref{fig:im7}) \citep{Auzinsh:1996}. The fluorescence in the observation direction passed through a
two-lens system. Between the two lenses, a zero-order quarter-wave plate (Thorlabs WPQ10M-780) converted
circularly polarized light into linearly polarized light. Next, a linear polarizer served as an analyzer, which
allowed one or another circularly polarized fluorescence component to pass, depending on the relative angle between the
analyzer axis and the fast axis of the quarter-wave plate.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{excitation_geometry_dm=1}
\caption{\label{fig:im7}(Color online) Excitation and observation geometry.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{exp_setup_dm=1}
\caption{\label{fig:im8}(Color online) Top view of the experimental setup. Although in the top view it appears that the beam is parallel to the $y$ axis, in fact it enters the coils at an angle of 45$^{\circ}$ with respect to $y$ axis in the $yz$ plane}
\end{figure}
\indent The experimental apparatus is shown schematically in Fig. \ref{fig:im8}.
Rubidium atoms from a natural isotopic mixture were contained in a cylindrical Pyrex cell (length and diameter both 25 mm)
with optical quality windows. The rubidium cell was located at the center of three pairs of mutually orthogonal
Helmholtz coils. The magnetic field was scanned in the $z$-direction, while the two remaining coils
were used to compensate the ambient static magnetic field.
We estimate that the ambient magnetic field was compensated to better than 0$\pm$20 mG.
In order to scan the magnetic field in both directions, a bipolar power supply (Kepco BOP-50-8-M) was used,
reaching magnetic field values of 85 G in both directions.
The laser used in these experiments was a Toptica DL Pro grating-stabilized, tuneable, single-mode diode laser.
The frequency of the laser excitation was stabilized by generating a saturated absorption spectrum and locking the laser frequency to a saturated absorption peak in this signal using a Toptica DigiLock 110 feedback control module.
The frequency was additionally monitored by a HighFinesse WS/7 Wavemeter.
The temperature and current of the laser were controlled by Toptica DTC 110 and DCC 110 controllers, respectively.
The diameter of the beam was 1.90~mm at the full width at half maximum (FWHM) as determined from the Gaussian fit obtained
by a beam profiler (Thorlabs BP104-VIS). The ellipticity of the laser beam was compensated by an anamorphic prism pair.
The laser power was changed using neutral density filters placed before the linear polarizer.
The LIF of the two opposite circularly polarized light components was collected on a photodiode (Thorlabs FDS100).
Each component was measured separately and multiple scans were acquired and averaged before switching the analyzing
polarizer in order to measure the orthogonally polarized component. The signal was amplified by a transimpedance
amplifier based on a TL072 op-amp with a gain of 10$^6$ followed by a voltage amplifier
with a gain of 10$^4$ (Roithner multiboard).
The signals were stored after each scan on a PC using an Agilent DSO5014A oscilloscope.
A residual misalignment in the experimental setup introduced a slight asymmetry in the signal, but it could be eliminated by
averaging the signals recorded for positive and negative values of magnetic field.
In order to compare experiment with theory, both components were normalized to the maximum of the $\sigma^+$ component, making it possible to compare the relative intensities of the two components in arbitrary units. The background was measured in two different ways: by detuning the laser frequency from resonance and by blocking the laser beam. Both produced equal results. In the fitting process a constant background was introduced, which was close to the experimentally measured background.
The experimental results were very sensitive to any slight misalignment of the analyzing polarizer that could distort the measured strengths of each circular polarization component. Therefore, to find the best agreement between experiment and theory, a parameter was varied that represented the
relative strength of each experimentally measured fluorescence component. This factor was usually around 10$\%$ and never more than 22$\%$.
\section{\label{sec:level3}Theoretical model}
A well-tested model based on optical Bloch equations (OBEs) that are solved for steady state excitation conditions is used to describe
the experiment theoretically. The ensemble of rubidium atoms is described by a quantum density matrix $\rho$
that is written in the basis $\xi, F_i, m_{F_i}$, where $F_i$ denotes the quantum number of the total atomic
angular momentum including nuclear spin $I$ for either the ground ($i = g$) or the excited ($i = e$) state,
$m_{F_i}$ is the magnetic quantum number and $\xi$ stands for all the other quantum numbers that are irrelevant
in the context of our experiment. Thus, the general OBEs \cite{Stenholm:2005},
\begin{equation}\label{eq:liouville}
i\hbar\frac{\partial \rho}{\partial t} = \left[\hat H,\rho\right] + i\hbar\hat R\rho,
\end{equation}
can be transformed into explicit rate equations for the Zeeman coherences within the ground ($\rho_{g_ig_j}$)
and excited ($\rho_{e_ie_j}$) states, respectively.
To do so, the laser radiation is described as a classically oscillating electric field
$\mathbf{E}(t)$ with a stochastically fluctuating phase. Thus, the interaction operator can be written in the dipole approximation with dipole operator $\hat{\mathbf{d}}$.
\begin{equation}\label{eq:v-operator}
\hat V = -\hat{\mathbf{d}}\cdot \mathbb{E}(t)
\end{equation}
The interaction with the magnetic field is described by the operator
\begin{equation}\label{eq:zeeman-effect}
\hat H_B = \frac{\mu_B}{\hbar}\left(g_J\mathbf{J} + g_I\mathbf{I}\right)\cdot \mathbf{B},
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{J}$ and $\mathbf{I}$ are, respectively, the total electronic angular momentum and nuclear spin, which
together make up the total atomic angular momentum $\mathbf{F}$.
The quantities $g_J$ and $g_I$ are the respective Land\'{e} factors,
$\mathbf{B}$ is the external magnetic field, $\mu_B$ is Bohr's magneton, and $\hbar$ is Planck's constant.
The matrix elements for the electric dipole transition can be written in explicit matrix form with the help of Wigner-Eckart
theorem~\cite{Auzinsh:2009b}.
Thus the total interaction Hamiltonian in (\ref{eq:liouville}) is
\begin{equation}
\hat H = \hat H_0 + \hat H_B + \hat V,
\end{equation}
where $H_0$ governs the internal energy of an unperturbed atom.
The relaxation operator in (\ref{eq:liouville}) includes terms for the spontaneous relaxation rate $\Gamma$
and the transit relaxation rate $\gamma$, which is the inverse of the average time an atom takes to traverse the laser beam.
By applying the rotating wave approximation, averaging over and decorrelating from the stochastic phases,
and eliminating the optical coherences as described in detail by Blush and Auzinsh~\cite{Blushs:2004},
the rate equations for the Zeeman coherences are obtained:
\begin{subequations} \label{eq:zc}
\begin{align}
\frac{\partial \rho_{g_ig_j}}{\partial t} =& \left(\Xi_{g_ie_m} + \Xi_{g_je_k}^{\ast}\right)\sum_{e_k,e_m}d_{g_ie_k}^\ast d_{e_mg_j}\rho_{e_ke_m} - \nonumber\\ -& \sum_{e_k,g_m}\Big(\Xi_{g_je_k}^{\ast}d_{g_ie_k}^\ast d_{e_kg_m}\rho_{g_mg_j} + \nonumber\\ +& \Xi_{g_ie_k}d_{g_me_k}^\ast d_{e_kg_j}\rho_{g_ig_m}\Big) - i \omega_{g_ig_j}\rho_{g_ig_j} -\nonumber\\-& \gamma\rho_{g_ig_j} + \sum_{e_ke_l}\Gamma_{g_ig_j}^{e_ke_l}\rho_{e_ke_l} + \lambda\delta(g_i,g_j) \label{eq:zcgg} \\
\frac{\partial \rho_{e_ie_j}}{\partial t} =& \left(\Xi_{g_me_i}^\ast + \Xi_{g_ke_j}\right)\sum_{g_k,g_m}d_{e_ig_k} d_{g_me_j}^\ast\rho_{g_kg_m} -\nonumber\\-& \sum_{g_k,e_m}\Big(\Xi_{g_ke_j}d_{e_ig_k} d_{g_ke_m}^\ast\rho_{e_me_j} + \nonumber\\ +& \Xi_{g_ke_i}^\ast d_{e_mg_k} d_{g_ke_j}^\ast\rho_{e_ie_m}\Big) - i \omega_{e_ie_j}\rho_{e_ie_j} -\nonumber\\ - & (\Gamma + \gamma)\rho_{e_ie_j}. \label{eq:zcee}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
The first two terms in both equations describe the population increase/decrease and the creation of
Zeeman coherences within the respective atomic states due to the interaction of atoms with the laser radiation.
The elements of the transition dipole matrix are given by $d_{ij}$ [obtained from ({\ref{eq:v-operator})],
and $\Xi_{ij}$, which is defined below in equation (\ref{eq:xi}), gives the atom-field interaction strength.
The third term of the rate equations (\ref{eq:zc}) describes the destruction of coherence by the magnetic field, and
$\omega_{ij}$ is the energy difference between magnetic sub-levels $\vert i\rangle$ and $\vert j\rangle$ and can be obtained by
diagonalizing the matrix $\hat H_0 + \hat H_B$.
The fourth term describes the population loss and destruction of coherence caused by relaxation.
The fifth term in (\ref{eq:zcgg}) describes repopulation of the ground state by spontaneous transitions and the sixth,
repopulation by transit relaxation.
If we assume that the atomic density matrix outside the interaction region is normalized,
then $\lambda = \frac{1}{n_g}\gamma$, where $n_g$ is the total number of magnetic sub-levels in the ground state.
The quantity $\Xi_{g_ie_j}$ in equation \eqref{eq:zc} describes the strength of interaction between the laser radiation and the atoms and is expressed as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:xi}
\Xi_{g_ie_j} = \frac{\Omega_{R}^{2}}{\frac{\Gamma+\gamma+\Delta\omega}{2}+\dot\imath\left(\bar\omega-\mathbf{k}_{\bar\omega}\cdot\mathbf{v}
+\omega_{g_ie_j}\right)},
\end{equation}
where $\Omega_{R}$ is the reduced Rabi frequency, used as a theoretical parameter that corresponds to the
laser power density in the experiment,
$\Delta\omega$ is the finite spectral width of the exciting radiation,
$\bar \omega$ is the central frequency of the exciting radiation,
$\mathbf{k}_{\bar\omega}$ the wave vector of exciting radiation,
and $\mathbf{k}_{\bar\omega}\mathbf{v}$ is the Doppler shift experienced by an atom moving with velocity $\mathbf{v}$.
During the experiment steady interaction conditions were maintained.
Thus, we can apply steady state conditions
\begin{equation}\label{eq:steady}
0 = \frac{\partial \rho_{g_ig_j}}{\partial t} = \frac{\partial \rho_{e_ie_j}}{\partial t},
\end{equation}
obtaining from (\ref{eq:zc}) a set of linear equations
that can be solved numerically to obtain the density matrix components that correspond to the population and the Zeeman coherences
of the ground and excited states. Once the density matrix is known we use the following expression to obtain
the intensity (up to a constant factor $\tilde{I}_0$) of an arbitrary polarized fluorescence component with polarization
denoted by $\mathbf{e}$:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:fluorescence}
I_{fl}(\mathbf{e}) = \tilde{I}_0\sum\limits_{g_i,e_j,e_k} d_{g_ie_j}^{\ast(ob)}d_{e_kg_i}^{(ob)}\rho_{e_je_k}.
\end{equation}
To include the effects of the thermal motion of the atoms, we perform Riemann integration over the velocity distribution by solving Eqs. (\ref{eq:zc}) and evaluating (\ref{eq:fluorescence}) for each atomic velocity group.
To fit the theoretical and experimental results we estimate and fine tune the following parameters: transit relaxation rate $\gamma$, reduced Rabi frequency $\Omega_R$, and spectral width of the laser radiation $\Delta\omega$.
The estimation of the transit relaxation rate is straightforward:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:gamma}
\gamma = \frac{v_{th}}{d},
\end{equation}
where $v_{th}$ is the mean thermal velocity of the atoms projected on to the plane perpendicular to the laser beam and $d$ is the laser beam diameter, which in the theoretical model is assumed to be cylindrical in shape with uniform power density.
For $d = 1900~\mu$m
and $T = 293$~K we obtain $\gamma = 2 \pi \cdot (0.018$~MHz$)$.
The Rabi frequency can be estimated theoretically as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Rabi}
\Omega_R = k_{R}\frac{\vert\vert d\vert\vert\cdot\vert\varepsilon\vert}{\hbar} = k_{R}\frac{\vert\vert d\vert\vert}{\hbar}\sqrt{\frac{2I}{c}},
\end{equation}
where $k_R$ is some fitting parameter of order unity,
$\vert\vert d\vert\vert$ is the reduced dipole matrix element that remains unchanged
for all transitions within the $D_2$ line~\cite{Auzinsh:2009b},
$I$ is the laser power density (directly related to the amplitude of the electric field $\vert\varepsilon\vert$),
and $c$ is the speed of light.
In practice, the estimation is not straightforward as the power density $I$ is not constant across the laser beam, but in
the theoretical model only a constant average value is used in place of the actual power distribution.
Theoretical and experimental evidence suggests \cite{Fescenko:2012, Auzinsh:2015} that $\Omega_R$ cannot be related to the square root of the laser power density $I$ by a simple constant $k_R$ for all values of the laser power density if one merely
assumes that the power density distribution within the beam is Gaussian.
This fact has a simple explanation. Our experiment was performed in the
regime of nonlinear absorption, which implies that for large laser intensities the ground state population is strongly depleted. When one starts to gradually increase laser intensity, initially the ground-state population is only slightly changed even at the center of the beam, where the light is most intense. When the intensity is increased still more, the ground-state population at the center of the beam starts to be depleted significantly. When the intensity is increased further, there is little ground-state population left in the beam center, and the region of population depletion expands to the ``wings'' of the Gaussian laser power density distribution, which can extend a significant distance from the laser beam's center.
As a consequence, although the theoretical proportionality of $\Omega_R$ to the square root of laser power density holds, for weaker laser radiation the main contribution to the signal comes from the central parts of the laser beam where we have the strongest power density. In contrast, for stronger laser radiation the role of the peripheral parts of the laser beam, where the radiation power density is smaller, starts to play a larger role in the absorption process, because only there the ground-state population is still significant. In each of these cases the radiation power density in different parts of the beam plays a dominant role in the absorption process and should be related to value of the Rabi frequency that appears in the rate equations for the density matrix. Thus we vary the value of coefficient $k_R$ in order to account for this effect and to achieve better correspondence between experiment and theory.
A value of $\Delta\omega = 2\pi\cdot(1$~MHz$)$ was found to be an appropriate estimate for the spectral width of the laser and is close to the value given by the manufacturer of the laser.
\section{\label{sec:level4}Results and discussion}
Before the experiments were carried out, some preliminary theoretical calculations were performed in order to deduce which
hyperfine transition would yield the most noticeable signals related to the AOC phenomenon in both rubidium isotopes.
A good measure of the strength of the AOC effect is the degree of circularity of the laser induced fluorescence, defined as
($I_{\sigma^+}$ -- $I_{\sigma^-}$)/($I_{\sigma^+}$ + $I_{\sigma^-}$).
The theoretical calculations predicted that the largest circularity signal (4$\%$) would be observed for $^{85}$Rb when excited from the second ground-state hyperfine level $F_g=2$ to the second excited-state hyperfine level $F_e=2$.
\begin{figure*}[p]
\includegraphics[width=0.3297\textwidth]{Rb85_Fg2_Fe1_P=161uW_starp}
\includegraphics[width=0.3297\textwidth]{Rb85_Fg2_Fe2_P=161uW_starp}
\includegraphics[width=0.3297\textwidth]{Rb85_Fg2_Fe3_P=161uW_starp}
\caption{\label{fig:im10}(Color online) Signal dependence on the excited-state hyperfine level $F_e$ to which the laser is tuned when excited from the ground-state hyperfine level $F_g=2$ of $^{85}$Rb.
The left-most plot shows the difference between the two oppositely circularly polarized components ($I_{\sigma^+}-I_{\sigma^-}$) for the $F_g=2 \longrightarrow F_e=1$ transition, the center plot shows the difference ($I_{\sigma^+}-I_{\sigma^-}$) for the $F_g=2 \longrightarrow F_e=2$ transition, and the third plot (right-most) corresponds to the $F_g=2 \longrightarrow F_e=3$ transition.}
\end{figure*}
As seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:im10}, because of Doppler broadening, the signal did not depend significantly on which excited-state hyperfine level was excited when the excitation took place from the ground-state hyperfine level with $F_g=2$.
The observable circularity for the other transitions was
predicted to be 1\% or less.
For the case of $^{87}$Rb, the $F_g=1\longrightarrow F_e=1$ transition was selected, because the predicted circularity degree was 1$\%$, whereas for excitation from the other ground-state hyperfine level $F_g=2$, the circularity degree was predicted to be less than 1$\%$. Therefore we concentrated our experimental efforts on the $F_g=2\longrightarrow F_e=2$ transition of $^{85}$Rb and the $F_g=1\longrightarrow F_e=1$ transition of $^{87}$Rb.\\
\begin{figure*}[t]
\includegraphics[page=1,width=\linewidth]{Rb85_Fg2_Fe2_P=4_5uW_4x4}
\caption{\label{fig:im9}(Color online) Relative intensities of the two oppositely circularly polarized fluorescence componentes
(a) and (b), their difference (c), and the circularity value (d) for the $F_g=2 \longrightarrow F_e=2$ transition of $^{85}$Rb
(80 scans averaged).
Arrows denote the positions of peaks and maximum (or minimum) values of broader structures.}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Rb85-splits-zoom}
\caption{\label{fig:im4}(Color online) Energy shifts of the magnetic sublevels $m_F$ as a function of magnetic
field for $^{85}$Rb in the magnetic field range $0\ \text{G} < B < 10\ \text{G}$. The $m_F$ values are written next to the curves. Squares denote $\Delta m_F=1$ crossings and circles denote $\Delta m_F=2$ crossings.}
\end{figure}
\indent Figure \ref{fig:im9} shows a typical result for the $F_g=2 \longrightarrow F_e=2$ transition of $^{85}$Rb.
Figure~\ref{fig:im9}(a) and Fig. \ref{fig:im9}(b) depict the two orthogonally circularly polarized fluorescence components.
When the magnetic field value is zero, all magnetic sublevels $m_F$ that belong to the same $F$ level in the excited and ground states are degenerate,
giving a typical dark resonance for the
$F_g=2 \longrightarrow F_e=2$ transition of $^{85}$Rb~\cite{Auzinsh:2009}.
As the magnetic field magnitude increases, these sublevels shift according to the nonlinear Zeeman effect
(Fig.~\ref{fig:im3}), thereby destroying the aligned state and allowing more laser light to be absorbed,
which causes a rapid rise in the fluorescence signal.
After that the overall signal tendency is to diminish as the magnetic field strength increases,
apart from two small peaks at about 23 G and 44 G.
These two small peaks can be attributed to $\Delta m_F=2$ coherences.
The 23 G peak appears because the $m_F=-1$ sublevel of the $F_e=2$
hyperfine level crosses the $m_F=-3$ sublevel of the \textit{F$_e$}=3 hyperfine level
(see Fig.~\ref{fig:im3}), thus creating a $\Delta m_F=2$ coherence.
The other small peak at 44 G can be attributed to the crossing of $m_F=-1$ sublevel of the $F_e=3$ and the
$m_F=-3$ sublevel of $F_e=4$.
Note that these peaks are invisible both in the difference signal [Fig.~\ref{fig:im9}(c)]
as well as in the circularity signal [Fig.~\ref{fig:im9}(d)] since they cancel each other when the difference is taken.
Besides these two small peaks in the component graphs, there are two peaks at 7 G and 74 G in the difference and circularity graphs [Fig.~\ref{fig:im9}(c) and (d)] corresponding to the two broader structures in the component graphs [Fig.~\ref{fig:im9}(a) and (b)]: one around 6--10~G, and another, barely visible one around 70--74~G.
These peaks can be
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[page=1,width=\textwidth]{Rb85_Fg2_Fe2_Power_1x3}
\includegraphics[page=2,width=\textwidth]{Rb85_Fg2_Fe2_Power_1x3}
\includegraphics[page=3,width=\textwidth]{Rb85_Fg2_Fe2_Power_1x3}
\caption{\label{fig:im11}(Color online) Signal dependence on laser power density for excitation of the
$F_g=2 \longrightarrow F_e=2$ transition of the $D_2$ line of $^{85}$Rb.
The plots are organized in columns: relative intensities of the two oppositely circularly polarized fluorescence components are shown in the left and center columns and their difference in the right-most column.}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[page=1,width=\textwidth]{Rb87_Fg1_Fe1_Power_1x3}
\includegraphics[page=2,width=\textwidth]{Rb87_Fg1_Fe1_Power_1x3}
\includegraphics[page=3,width=\textwidth]{Rb87_Fg1_Fe1_Power_1x3}
\includegraphics[page=4,width=\textwidth]{Rb87_Fg1_Fe1_Power_1x3}
\caption{\label{fig:im12}(Color online) Signal dependence on laser power density for excitation of the
$F_g=1 \longrightarrow F_e=1$ transition of the $D_2$ line of $^{87}$Rb.
The plots are organized in columns: relative intensities of the two oppositely circularly polarized fluorescence components are shown in the left and center columns and their difference in the right-most column. Arrows denote the positions of peaks and maximum values of broader structures.}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{Rb87-zoom}
\caption{\label{fig:im6}(Color online) Energy shifts of the magnetic sublevels $m_F$ as a function of magnetic field for $^{87}$Rb
in the magnetic field range $0\ \text{G} < B < 40\ \text{G}$. The $m_F$ values are written next to the curves. The square denotes a $\Delta m_F=1$ crossing.}
\end{figure}
attributed to $\Delta m_F=1$ coherences. The 7 G peak appears as an increase in the signal in one component
[Fig.~\ref{fig:im9}(a)] and a decrease in the other [Fig.~\ref{fig:im9}(b)]. Note that their corresponding
maximum and minimum values are relatively shifted, giving values of 6 G [Fig.~\ref{fig:im9}(a)] and 9 G
[Fig.~\ref{fig:im9}(b)], respectively, in the component graphs. The relative shift of these values can be
explained by the fact that this peak is related to three $\Delta m_F=1$ and two $\Delta m_F=2$ coherences in the range
from 0 to 10 G (see Fig.~\ref{fig:im4}). As we take the difference between the two oppositely circularly
polarized components, we can eliminate the $\Delta m_F=2$ coherences from the signal and thus see the peaks that
correspond only to the $\Delta m_F=1$ crossings. The 74 G peak in Fig.~\ref{fig:im9}(c) can be explained
in a similar way. A barely visible structure in the component graphs appears as a broad peak
in the difference graph. This peak is related to a single $\Delta m_F=1$ crossing of the $m_F=-1$
sublevel of $F_e=3$ and the $m_F=-2$ sublevel of $F_e=4$, and as a result its amplitude is smaller.
The peak is broad because the $m_F=-1$ and $m_F=-2$ sublevels that cross are energetically close
to each other ($\Delta{E} \le 20$ MHz ) all the way from 60 G to 90 G, as can be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:im3}.
Figure~\ref{fig:im11} shows the signal dependence on laser power for the $F_g=2 \longrightarrow F_e=2$ transition.
One can see in the figure that as the laser power is increased, the broad structures, attributed to $\Delta m_F=1$ coherences in the component graphs, become less and less pronounced.
However, they are still visible in the difference graphs (Fig.~\ref{fig:im11}, right column),
although the amplitude slightly decreases, and the sign of the difference signal becomes negative
for the $\Omega_R=4.50$~MHz (19.6~mW/cm$^2$) case (bottom right in Fig.~\ref{fig:im11}).
Figure~\ref{fig:im12} shows the signal dependence on laser power for the $F_g=1 \longrightarrow F_e=1$
transition of the $D_2$ line of $^{87}$Rb. As the magnetic field is increased, after the initial increase of the signal
due to the dark resonance at 0~G, the signal gradually diminishes.
However, two small peaks around 45 G and 57 G
and a broad structure between 7 and 26 G are visible in the component graphs (Fig.~\ref{fig:im12}, left and center columns).
The structures visible in the graph of the difference signal (Fig.~\ref{fig:im12}, right column)
must be related to $\Delta m_F=1$ coherences.
Indeed, the magnetic sublevels $m_F=0$ and $m_F=+1$ of $F_e=1$ cross at 21 G, giving rise to
the broad structure from 7 to 26 G (see Fig.~\ref{fig:im6}).\\
\indent The small peak at 57 G is caused by the crossing of $m_F=0$ of $F_e=1$ and
$m_F=-2$ of $F_e=3$ (see Fig.~\ref{fig:im5}), which allows $\Delta m_F=2$ coherences to be created.
As a result, one can observe a small rise in the component LIF signals.
This peak should vanish as the difference of the components is taken, since it is related to a $\Delta m_F=2$ coherence. In the calculated curve it indeed vanishes, but remains in the measured curve. Possible explanations could be higher-order non-linear effects not treated by the model or even small experimental imperfections.
The small peak at 45 G in the component graphs cannot be attributed to any crossing in the excited or the ground states.
The fact that it is visible in the difference graphs might suggest that it is connected to a $\Delta m_F=1$ coherence.
However, theoretical calculations show that when the Zeeman coherences in the density matrix are ``turned off'' this peak remains, which suggests that it is not connected to any coherences.
While the precise origin of the peak remains unknown, the appearance of this peak in both theory and experiment explicitly shows two things: (i) how nonlinear these signals are and (ii) how well the theoretical model works in describing them.
For each value of the laser power density,
the theoretical curve which best described the results of the experiment was selected.
Figure~\ref{fig:im13} shows that the choices made to achieve the best agreement were not arbitrary, but resulted in values that obey the expected relationship between laser power density and Rabi frequency. The laser power density is plotted against the square of the Rabi frequency for which the best fit of the calculated curve to experimental measurements was obtained.
The points should lie on a straight line, and indeed, they all fall close to the best-fit line. We may conclude that, at least up to these intensity values, the reduced Rabi frequency $\Omega_R$ is proportional to the square root of the intensity $I$.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[page=1,width=\linewidth]{RabivsI_merged}
\caption{\label{fig:im13}(Color online) Dependence of the squared Rabi frequency $\Omega_R^2$ on the laser power density $I$
together with a linear fit for the transition $F_g=2 \longrightarrow F_e=2$ in $^{85}$Rb
and the transition $F_g=1 \longrightarrow F_e=1$ in $^{87}$Rb.}
\end{figure}
\section{\label{sec:level5}Conclusion}
We have carried out experiments with laser power densities that fulfill the nonlinear absorption conditions and developed a theoretical model that describes AOC in these conditions.
The increased magnetic fields and the detection of individual circularly polarized light components in the experiments let us see the structure of the signal in more detail than before~\cite{Alnis:2001}.
With one small exception in Fig.~\ref{fig:im12}, all details, even very small ones, predicted by the theory were reproduced by the experiment
and were shown to be related to features of the level-crossing diagrams.
Their positions and relative amplitudes match satisfactorily.
The signal dependence on laser power density shows that as the laser power increases the structures associated with
$\Delta m_F=1$ become less pronounced in the individual component signals and the difference signal.
The signals do not show any visible dependence on the the precise hyperfine transition that is excited from a single ground-state
hyperfine level.
If the Zeeman splitting of an unknown atom or molecule are of interest, then the measurements of the circularity degree will clearly show whether the splitting is linear or nonlinear, because the circularity degree is nonzero only when the magnetic splitting of Zeeman sublevels is nonlinear, and peaks in this signal will correspond to the crossings of magnetic sublevels.
The level crossings are determined by the magnetic field value and two constants: magnetic moment and the hyperfine splitting constant. The analysis of level-crossing signals can help to determine these two constants for unknown atomic or molecular systems.
\begin{acknowledgments}
We thank the Latvian State Research Programme (VPP) project IMIS$^2$ and the NATO Science for Peace and Security Programme project SfP983932 ``Novel magnetic sensors and techniques for security applications'' for financial support.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\subsection{Two-user Erasure IC with local delayed CSIT of View V.7}
Consider the two-user erasure IC with local delayed CSIT according to View V.7. We have
\begin{align}
&\mathcal{S}_{{\sf Tx}_1} = \{ \left( 1, 1 \right), \left( 2, 1 \right), \left( 2, 2 \right) \} \quad \text{and} \nonumber \\
& \mathcal{S}_{{\sf Tx}_2} = \{ \left( 1, 1 \right), \left( 1, 2 \right), \left( 2, 2 \right) \}.
\end{align}
Thus writing the marginal distribution at receiver ${\sf Rx}_1$, we get
\begin{align}
\label{eq:MarginalView7Rx1}
& \Pr \left( Y_1^n, G^n | X_1^n, X_2^n \right) \nonumber \\
& = \left[ \frac{\Pr \left( G_{11}^n, G_{12}^n, G_{21}^n, G_{22}^n \right)}{\Pr \left( X_1^n,X_1^n \right)} \right] \nonumber \\
& \times \Pr \left( X_1^n | G_{11}^n, G_{21}^n, G_{22}^n \right) \Pr \left( X_2^n | G_{11}^n, G_{12}^n , G_{22}^n \right) \nonumber \\
& \mathbf{1}_{\left\{ Y_1^n = G_{11}^n X_1^n \oplus G_{21}^n X_2^n \right\}}.
\end{align}
Here, note that we can no longer use our trick in Section~\ref{Section:NoGain}. For instance, if we set
\begin{align}
\tilde{G}_{11}[t] = \tilde{G}_{12}[t],
\end{align}
then, we have changed the channel from ${\sf Tx}_2$'s point of view and thus, the marginal distributions cannot be preserved.
On the other hand, as discussed in Section~\ref{Section:FullGain}, delayed knowledge of $G_{i\bar{i}}$ has an important role on the future decisions taken by ${\sf Tx}_i$, $i=1,2$. In fact, we cannot distinguish $Q_{i,1}$ from $Q_{i,2}$ without delayed knowledge of $G_{i\bar{i}}$, and thus, our achievability strategy cannot be utilized with local delayed CSIT of View V.7.
In the absence of an achievability that goes beyond the capacity region with no CSIT, or a converse that matches that of no CSIT, the capacity region with local delayed CSIT of View V.7 remains open.
\subsection{$k$-user Erasure IC with delayed CSIT}
Here, we take the results and intuitions obtained for the two-user erasure IC and try to understand the implications in broader settings. We consider the capacity region of the $k$-user erasure IC (see Fig.~\ref{Fig:KUser}) and the degrees of freedom (DoF) region of the $k$-user Gaussian IC with Delayed CSIT. We denote the DoF region of the $k$-user Gaussian IC with global delayed CSIT by $\mathcal{D}_{k}$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[height = 6cm]{FiguresPDF/KUser-IC.pdf}
\caption{\it $k$-user Erasure Interference Channel. The capacity region with global delayed CSIT is open.\label{Fig:KUser}}
\end{figure}
The intuition for the two-user erasure IC was that it is the responsibility of the transmitter who creates interference to resolve it. Characterizing $\mathcal{D}_{k}$ or the capacity region of the $k$-user erasure IC with global delayed CSIT are still open. However, there are several results that try to exploit the delayed knowledge of the channel state information for the achievability purposes in the context of $k$-user Gaussian IC (\emph{e.g.}, see~\cite{Jafar_Retrospective,abdoli2011degrees} and references therein). In~\cite{ghasemi2011interference}, authors have shown that such gains can be also obtained if each transmitter is only aware of the channel gains of the outgoing links from itself with delay. This result matches our intuition for the two-user erasure IC. However, in the lack of a tight outer-bound, a firm conclusion cannot be made.
\subsection{Techniques and Coding Opportunities}
\label{Section:Opportunities}
In this subsection, we describe the coding opportunities that arise from the delayed knowledge of the channel state information. We first assume that nodes have global delayed CSIT to clearly describe the opportunities. Then we discuss the challenges that stem from the locality of the channel state information at the transmitters. Next, we demonstrate how to overcome these challenges. Finally in the following subsection, we describe the transmission strategy in detail. We categorize the opportunities into three groups as follows.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[height = 3 cm]{FiguresPDF/Opp1a.pdf}}
\hspace{0.1 in}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[height = 3 cm]{FiguresPDF/Opp1b.pdf}}
\caption{\it Providing $a_1 \oplus a_2$ available at ${\sf Tx}_1$ and $b_1 \oplus b_2$ available at ${\sf Tx}_2$ to both receivers is sufficient to decode the bits.\label{Fig:Opp1}}
\end{figure}
[{Pairing Across Realizations Type-I}] Suppose at a time instant, each one of the transmitters simultaneously sends one data bit. The bits of ${\sf Tx}_1$ and ${\sf Tx}_2$ are denoted by $a_1$ and $b_1$ respectively. Assume that the channel realization was according to Fig.~\ref{Fig:Opp1}(a). In another time instant, each one of the transmitters sends one data bit, say $a_2$ and $b_2$ respectively. Assume that the channel realization was according to Fig.~\ref{Fig:Opp1}(b). Now, we observe that providing $a_1 \oplus a_2$ and $b_1 \oplus b_2$ to both receivers is sufficient to decode the bits. For instance if ${\sf Rx}_1$ is provided with $a_1 \oplus a_2$ and $b_1 \oplus b_2$, then it will use $b_2$ to decode $b_1$, from which it can obtain $a_1$, and finally using $a_1$ and $a_1 \oplus a_2$, it can decode $a_2$. The linear combinations $a_1 \oplus a_2$ and $b_1 \oplus b_2$ that are available at transmitters one and two respectively, can be thought of as bits of ``common interest.''
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[height = 3 cm]{FiguresPDF/Opp2a.pdf}}
\hspace{0.1 in}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[height = 3 cm]{FiguresPDF/Opp2b.pdf}}
\caption{\it The combination $a_3 \oplus a_4$ available at ${\sf Tx}_1$ is of interest of both receivers.\label{Fig:Opp2}}
\end{figure}
[{Pairing Across Realizations Type-II}] Suppose the scenario depicted in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Opp2} is realized. Now, we observe that providing $a_3 \oplus a_4$ available at transmitter ${\sf Tx}_1$ to both receivers is useful. For instance if ${\sf Rx}_2$ is provided with $a_3 \oplus a_4$, it will use $a_4$ to decode $a_3$, from which it can obtain $b_3$. It is easy to visualize the similar opportunity for transmitter ${\sf Tx}_2$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[height = 3 cm]{FiguresPDF/Opp3a.pdf}}
\hspace{0.1 in}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[height = 3 cm]{FiguresPDF/Opp3b.pdf}}
\caption{\it In each of the channel realizations, one bit $a_5$ becomes of interest of both receivers. In (a) bit $a_5$ is a useful bit for both receivers, while in (b) bit $b_6$ is a useful bit for both receivers.\label{Fig:Opp3}}
\end{figure}
[{Pairing Across Realizations Type-III}] Suppose the scenario depicted in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Opp3}(a) has occurred. It is easy to see that bit $a_5$ is a useful bit for {\it both} receivers after this point. A similar situation is depicted in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Opp3}(b) where bit $b_6$ at transmitter ${\sf Tx}_2$ becomes a bit of common interest.
\begin{table*}[t]
\caption{The four possible configurations that can be identified by transmitter ${\sf Tx}_1$. The bit transmitted by ${\sf Tx}_1$ is denoted ``$a$.'' Depending on the identified configuration, the status of the transmitted bit is updated to a queue defined in Section~\ref{Section:TStrategy}.}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{| c | c | c | c | c | c |}
\hline
case ID & channel realization & state transition & case ID & channel realization & state transition \\
& at time instant $n$ & & & at time instant $n$ & \\ [0.5ex]
\hline
\raisebox{30pt}{$1$} & \includegraphics[height = 2.5cm]{FiguresPDF/ICB.pdf} & \raisebox{30pt}{$a \rightarrow Q_{1,1}$} & \raisebox{18pt}{$3$} & \includegraphics[height = 2.5cm]{FiguresPDF/ICA.pdf} & \raisebox{18pt}{$a \rightarrow Q_{1 \rightarrow F}$} \\
\hline
\raisebox{30pt}{$2$} & \includegraphics[height = 2.5cm]{FiguresPDF/ICC.pdf} & \raisebox{30pt}{$a \rightarrow Q_{1,2}$} & \raisebox{18pt}{$4$} & \includegraphics[height = 2.5cm]{FiguresPDF/ICD.pdf} & \raisebox{18pt}{$a \rightarrow Q_{1 \rightarrow 1 }$} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{Table:View2}
\end{table*}
{\bf Challenges with local delayed CSIT:} Given local delayed CSIT of View V.2, each transmitter can identify a total of $4$ possible configurations as summarized in Table~\ref{Table:View2} for ${\sf Tx}_1$ (the configurations known to ${\sf Tx}_2$ are simply derived by interchanging user IDs). With the limited knowledge available at each transmitter, the aforementioned opportunities may not be detected properly. For instance consider the scenario depicted in Fig.~\ref{Fig:OppBad}. From transmitter ${\sf Tx}_1$'s point of view, this scenario is identical to the one depicted in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Opp1} and Fig.~\ref{Fig:Opp2}. However, providing $a_5 \oplus a_6$ to ${\sf Rx}_2$ is not useful anymore. The proposed scheme of~\cite{AlirezaBFICDelayed} cannot overcome this challenge and fails with local knowledge as a result. Therefore, one must be careful on how to identify the opportunities and how to exploit them for future communications.
\begin{remark}
It is important to keep in mind that while transmitters have only local knowledge of the CSI, receivers have global knowledge. This enables receivers to figure out future actions taken by the transmitters based on their past observations of the channel realizations.
\end{remark}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[height = 3 cm]{FiguresPDF/OppBada.pdf}}
\hspace{0.1 in}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[height = 3 cm]{FiguresPDF/OppBadb.pdf}}
\caption{\it From transmitter ${\sf Tx}_1$'s point of view, this scenario is identical to the one depicted in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Opp1} and Fig.~\ref{Fig:Opp2}. However, $a_7 \oplus a_8$ is no longer useful for ${\sf Rx}_2$.\label{Fig:OppBad}}
\end{figure}
{\bf Overcoming the challenges with local delayed CSIT:} Consider the example demonstrated in Fig.~\ref{Fig:OppBad}. Transmitter ${\sf Tx}_1$ can overcome the challenge described above by relying on the fact that statistically a fraction $q$ of the bits that at the time of transmission faced $G_{12}[t] = 1$, are already known to ${\sf Rx}_2$ (since with probability $q$ we have $G_{22}[t] = 0$). Keeping this fact in mind, transmitter ${\sf Tx}_1$ will create enough linearly independent combinations of the bits such that receiver ${\sf Rx}_2$ can recover the required bits. The global knowledge at the receivers is essential for them to know which bits are going to be retransmitted and in what order. This technique is described in more detail in the following subsection.
We also note that out of the four configurations in Table~\ref{Table:View2}, in configurations 3 and 4 the future task of ${\sf Tx}_1$ is easy. Suppose at time $t$, transmitter ${\sf Tx}_1$ sends one data bit. Later, using local delayed CSIT, ${\sf Tx}_1$ figures out that $G_{11}[t] = 1$ and $G_{12}[t] = 0$. In this case, we say that the bit is delivered and if interference was created at ${\sf Rx}_1$ then it would be the responsibility of ${\sf Tx}_2$ to resolve it in future. If $G_{11}[t]$ and $G_{12}[t]$ were both equal to $0$, then the bit must be retransmitted.
We show that with only local delayed CSIT of View V.2, we can achieve $\mathcal{C}\left( \text{V.}8 \right)$.
\subsection{Transmission Strategy}
\label{Section:TStrategy}
In this Section, we focus on the achievability strategy for $p = 0.5$. This would simplify the transmission strategy and allows us to focus on the key issue of local delayed CSIT.
We have again depicted the capacity region with global delayed CSIT $\mathcal{C}\left( \text{V.}8 \right)$ in Fig.~\ref{Fig:RegionFull} for $p = 0.5$. We show that with only local delayed CSIT of View V.2, we can achieve $\mathcal{C}\left( \text{V.}8 \right)$. To do so, it suffices to prove achievability for the corner points $\left( 0.45, 0.45 \right)$ and $\left( 0.375, 0.5 \right)$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[height = 4.5cm]{FiguresPDF/Region-Global.pdf}
\caption{\it To show that with only local delayed CSIT of View V.2, we can achieve $\mathcal{C}\left( \text{V.}8 \right)$, it suffices to prove the achievability for corner points $\left( 0.45, 0.45 \right)$ and $\left( 0.375, 0.5 \right)$.\label{Fig:RegionFull}}
\end{figure}
We focus on the corner point $\left( R_1, R_2 \right) = \left( 0.45, 0.45 \right)$. The achievability strategy for the other corner points is presented in Appendix~\ref{Appendix:Corner}. Then in Appendix~\ref{Appendix:GeneralP}, we describe the changes needed in the transmission strategy when considering $0 \leq p \leq 1$.
Suppose each transmitter wishes to communicate $m$ bits to its intended receiver. We show that this task can be accomplished (with vanishing error probability as $m \rightarrow \infty$) in
\begin{align}
\frac{20}{9} m + \frac{35}{3} m^{\frac{2}{3}}
\end{align}
time instants. This immediately implies the achievability for the corner point $\left( R_1, R_2 \right) = \left( 0.45, 0.45 \right)$. Our transmission strategy comprises two phases as described below.
\noindent {\bf Phase 1}: At the beginning of the communication block, we assume that the $m$ bits at ${\sf Tx}_i$ are in queue $Q_{i \rightarrow i}$ (the initial state of the bits), $i=1,2$. At each time instant $t$, ${\sf Tx}_i$ sends out a bit from $Q_{i \rightarrow i}$, and this bit will either stay in the initial queue or transition to one of the queues listed in Table~\ref{Table:View2}. If at time instant $t$, $Q_{i \rightarrow i}$ is empty, then ${\sf Tx}_i$, $i=1,2$, remains silent until the end of Phase 1.
\begin{enumerate}
\item [(A)] $Q_{i \rightarrow F}$: The bits for which no retransmission is required and thus we consider delivered;
\item [(B)] $Q_{i, 1}$: The bits for which at the time of communication, all channel gains known to ${\sf Tx}_i$ with unit delay were equal to $1$;
\item [(C)] $Q_{i, 2}$: The bits for which at the time of communication, we have $G_{ii}[t] = 0$ and $G_{i\bar{i}}[t] = 1$.
\end{enumerate}
Each transmitter can identify a total of $4$ possible configurations as summarized in Table~\ref{Table:View2} for ${\sf Tx}_1$. Phase~$1$ continues for
\begin{align}
\frac{4}{3} m + m^{\frac{2}{3}}
\end{align}
time instants, and if at the end of this phase, either of the queues $Q_{i \rightarrow i}$ is not empty, we declare error type-I and halt the transmission (we assume $m$ is chosen such that $m^{\frac{2}{3}} \in \mathbb{Z}$). We assume that the queues are column vectors and bits are placed according to the order they join the queue.
Assuming that the transmission is not halted, let $N_{i,1}$ and $N_{i, 2}$ denote the number of bits in queues $Q_{i,1}$ and $Q_{i,2}$ respectively at the end of the transitions, $i=1,2$. The transmission strategy will be halted and error type-II occurs, if any of the following events happens.
\begin{align}
\label{eq:errortypeII}
& N_{i,1} > \mathbb{E}[N_{i,1}] + 2 m^{\frac{2}{3}} \overset{\triangle}= n_{i,1}, \quad i=1,2; \nonumber \\
& N_{i,2} > \mathbb{E}[N_{i,2}] + 2 m^{\frac{2}{3}} \overset{\triangle}= n_{i,2}, \quad i=1,2.
\end{align}
From basic probability, we have
\begin{align}
\label{eq:expectedvalues}
\mathbb{E}[N_{i,1}] = \mathbb{E}[N_{i,2}] = \frac{m}{3},
\end{align}
thus we get
\begin{align}
n_{i,1} = n_{i,2} = \frac{m}{3} + 2 m^{\frac{2}{3}}.
\end{align}
At the end of Phase $1$, we add $0$'s (if necessary) in order to make queues $Q_{i,1}$ and $Q_{i,2}$ of size equal to $n_{i,1}$ and $n_{i,2}$ respectively as given above, $i=1,2$.
Moreover since channel gains are distributed independently, statistically half of the bits in $Q_{i,1}$ and half of the bits in $Q_{i,2}$ are known to ${\sf Rx}_{\bar{i}}$, $i=1,2$. Denote the number of bits in $Q_{i,j}$ known to ${\sf Rx}_{\bar{i}}$ by
\begin{align}
N_{i,j|{\sf Rx}_{\bar{i}}}, \qquad i,j \in \{ 1, 2 \}.
\end{align}
At the end of communication, if we have
\begin{align}
\label{Eq:KnownBits}
N_{i,j|{\sf Rx}_{\bar{i}}} < \frac{1}{2} n_{i,j} - m^{\frac{2}{3}}, \qquad i,j \in \{ 1, 2 \},
\end{align}
we declare error type-III. Note that transmitters cannot detect error type-III, but receivers have sufficient information to do so.
Furthermore using the Bernstein inequality, we can show that the probability of errors of types I, II, and III decreases exponentially with $m$. For the rest of this subsection, we assume that Phase~1 is completed and no error has occurred.
Transmitter ${\sf Tx}_i$ creates two matrices $\mathbf{C}_{i,1}$ and $\mathbf{C}_{i,2}$, $i=1,2$, of size $\left( \frac{m}{3} + 4 m^{\frac{2}{3}} \right) \times \left( \frac{m}{3} + 2 m^{\frac{2}{3}} \right)$ each, where entries to each matrix are drawn from i.i.d. $\mathcal{B}(0.5)$ distribution. We assume that these matrices are generated prior to communication and are shared with receivers. Transmitter ${\sf Tx}_i$ does not need to know $\mathbf{C}_{\bar{i},1}$ or $\mathbf{C}_{\bar{i},2}$, $i=1,2$. Note that as $m \rightarrow \infty$, these matrices have full column-rank with probability $1$. We refer the reader for a detailed discussion on the rank of randomly generated matrices in a finite field to~\cite{bourgain2010singularity}.
\noindent {\bf Phase 2} [transmitting random linear combinations]: In this phase, transmitter ${\sf Tx}_i$ combines the bits in $Q_{i,1}$ and $Q_{i,2}$ to create $\tilde{Q}_i$ using the following equation.
\begin{align}
\tilde{Q}_i \overset{\triangle}= \mathbf{C}_{i,1} Q_{i,1} \oplus \mathbf{C}_{i,2} Q_{i,2}, \qquad i=1,2.
\end{align}
Then the goal is to provide the bits in $\tilde{Q}_1$ and $\tilde{Q}_2$ to \emph{both} receivers. The problem resembles a network with two transmitters and two receivers where each transmitter ${\sf Tx}_i$ wishes to communicate an independent message $\hbox{W}_i$ to {\it both} receivers as depicted in Fig.~\ref{fig:two-multicast}, $i=1,2$. The channel gain model is the same as described in Section~\ref{Section:Problem}. We refer to this problem as the two-multicast problem. It is a straightforward exercise to show that for this problem, a rate-tuple of $\left( R_1, R_2 \right) = \left( \frac{3}{8}, \frac{3}{8} \right)$ is achievable. In other words, for fixed $\epsilon,\delta >0$, rate-tuple $\left( R_1, R_2 \right) = \left( \frac{3}{8}-\frac{\delta}{2} , \frac{3}{8}-\frac{\delta}{2} \right)$ is achievable with error less than or equal to $\epsilon$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[height = 3.5 cm]{FiguresPDF/TwoMultiCast.pdf}
\caption{Two-multicast network. Transmitter ${\sf Tx}_i$ wishes to reliably communicate message $\hbox{W}_i$ to both receivers, $i=1,2$. The capacity region with no or delayed CSIT is the same.\label{fig:two-multicast}}
\end{figure}
Fix $\epsilon,\delta >0$. Then, transmitters encode and communicate the bits in $\tilde{Q}_1$ and $\tilde{Q}_2$ using the achievability strategy of the two-multicast problem during Phase~2. This phase lasts for
\begin{align}
\frac{\frac{2m}{3} + 8 m^{\frac{2}{3}}}{\frac{3}{4}-\delta}
\end{align}
time instants. We assume $\tilde{Q}_1$ and $\tilde{Q}_2$ are decoded successfully at both receivers and no error has occurred.
\noindent {\bf Decoding}: At the end of Phase~2, receiver ${\sf Rx}_i$ removes the known bits from $Q_{\bar{i},1}$ and $Q_{\bar{i},2}$ (from (\ref{Eq:KnownBits}), we know that ${\sf Rx}_i$ has knowledge of at least $\frac{m}{3}$ bits).
Thus after removing the known bits, receiver ${\sf Rx}_i$ has access to $\frac{m}{3} + 4 m^{\frac{2}{3}}$ random linear combinations of (at most) $\frac{m}{3} + 4 m^{\frac{2}{3}}$ unknown bits. Consequently, ${\sf Rx}_i$ can reconstruct all the bits in $Q_{\bar{i},1}$ and $Q_{\bar{i},2}$ with probability $1$ as $m \rightarrow \infty$. Then, receiver ${\sf Rx}_i$ uses the bits in $Q_{\bar{i},1}$ and $Q_{\bar{i},2}$ to remove the interference. Upon successfully removing interfering bits, the bits intended for ${\sf Rx}_i$ can be reconstructed from the available linear combinations. The reconstructing of the intended bits can be carried out error free with probability $1$ as $m \rightarrow \infty$.
The total communication time is then equal to the length of Phase~1 plus the length of Phase~2. Thus when $\epsilon,\delta \rightarrow 0$, the total communication time is
\begin{align}
\frac{4}{3} m + m^{\frac{2}{3}} + \frac{4}{3} \left( \frac{2m}{3} + 8 m^{\frac{2}{3}} \right) = \frac{20}{9} m + \frac{35}{3} m^{\frac{2}{3}}.
\end{align}
Hence, if we let $m \rightarrow \infty$, the decoding error probability at each phase of delivering the bits goes to zero exponentially, and we achieve a symmetric sum-rate of
\begin{align}
R_1 = R_2 = \lim_{m \rightarrow \infty}{\frac{m}{\frac{20}{9} m + \frac{35}{3} m^{\frac{2}{3}}}} = 0.45 \raisebox{2pt}{.}
\end{align}
This completes the achievability proof for the corner point $\left( R_1, R_2 \right) = \left( 0.45, 0.45 \right)$.
\section{Introduction}
\label{Section:Introduction}
\input{Introduction.tex}
\section{Problem Setting}
\label{Section:Problem}
\input{Problem.tex}
\section{Statement of the Main Results}
\label{Section:Main}
\input{Main.tex}
\section{Proof of Theorem~\ref{THM:NoGain}: Choosing Spatial Correlations}
\label{Section:NoGain}
\input{NoGain.tex}
\section{Proof of Theorem~\ref{THM:FullGain}: Opportunistic Retransmissions Based on Local Delayed CSIT}
\label{Section:FullGain}
\input{FullGain.tex}
\section{Discussion}
\label{Section:Discussion}
\input{Discussion.tex}
\section{Conclusion and Future Directions}
\label{Section:Conclusion}
\input{Conclusion.tex}
\appendices
\section{More Discussion on Theorem~\ref{THM:NoGain}}
\label{Appendix:NewAppendix}
\input{NewAppendix.tex}
\section{Transmission Strategy for the Corner Point $\left( 0.375, 0.5 \right)$}
\label{Appendix:Corner}
\input{CornerPoint.tex}
\section{Transmission Strategy for $0 \leq p \leq 1$}
\label{Appendix:GeneralP}
\input{GeneralP.tex}
\bibliographystyle{ieeetr}
\subsection{Benchmarks}
Our base-line is the no CSIT scenario. In other words, the only available knowledge at the transmitters is the distribution from which the channel gains are drawn. In this case, it is easy to see that for any input distribution, the two received signals are \emph{statistically} the same. Therefore, the capacity region in this case is the same as the intersection of the capacity regions of the multiple-access channels (MACs) formed at the two receivers. Thus, $\mathcal{C}\left( \text{V.}0 \right)$, is the set of all rate-tuples $\left( R_1, R_2 \right)$ satisfying
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:RegionNoCSIT}
\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
\vspace{1mm} 0 \leq R_i \leq p, & i = 1,2, \\
R_1 + R_2 \leq 1-q^2. &
\end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
The other extreme point is the global delayed CSIT model. From~\cite{AlirezaBFICDelayed}, we know that the capacity region of the two-user Binary Fading IC with global delayed CSIT, $\mathcal{C}\left( \text{V.}8 \right)$, is the set of all rate-tuples $\left( R_1, R_2 \right)$ satisfying
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:DelayedCSIregion}
\left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
\vspace{1mm} 0 \leq R_i \leq p, & i = 1,2, \\
R_i + \left( 1 + q \right) R_{\bar{i}} \leq p \left( 1 + q \right)^2, & i = 1,2.
\end{array} \right.
\end{equation}
These benchmarks are depicted in Fig.~\ref{Fig:NovsGlobal} for $p = 0.5$. We note that $\mathcal{C}\left( \text{V.}0 \right)$ is a strict subset of $\mathcal{C}\left( \text{V.}8 \right)$, and we are interested in understanding the impact of local delayed CSIT on the capacity region.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[height = 4.5cm]{FiguresPDF/Region-No-vs-Global.pdf}
\caption{\it Capacity Region of the Two-user Binary Fading Interference Channel with no and global delayed CSIT and $p = 0.5$.\label{Fig:NovsGlobal}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Main Results}
Theorem~\ref{THM:NoGain} highlights the cases where no performance gain over the no CSIT assumption is feasible. Then in Theorem~\ref{THM:FullGain}, we show that the performance gain of global delayed CSIT (View V.8) can be obtained with Views V.2, V.5, and V.6. Note that the achievable region for View V.2 is a subset of Views V.5 and V.6 due to the hierarchical structure shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig:Hierarchy}.
\begin{theorem}
\label{THM:NoGain}
For the two-user binary fading interference channel with local delayed CSIT of Views V.1, V.3, and V.4, the capacity region coincides with the capacity region of no CSIT (View V.0), \emph{i.e.}
\begin{align}
\mathcal{C}\left( \text{V.}j \right) \subseteq \mathcal{C}\left( \text{V.}0 \right) \text{~for~} \qquad j=1,3,4.
\end{align}
\end{theorem}
The key in proving Theorem~\ref{THM:NoGain} is to derive an outer-bound the matches that of the no CSIT assumption. In doing that, we use the intuition given by Sato~\cite{sato1977two}: the capacity region of all interference channels that have the same marginal distributions is the same. We take this intuition and impose a certain spatial correlation among channel gains such that the marginal distributions remain unchanged. Then we provide an outer-bound on the capacity region of the channel with correlation and we show that it can be achieved with no CSIT.
\begin{remark}
In this paper, we only focus on the impact of local {\it delayed} CSIT on the capacity region of the two-user erasure ICs. Interestingly, the proof of Theorem~\ref{THM:NoGain} holds even when channels are learned instantaneously.
\end{remark}
\begin{theorem}
\label{THM:FullGain}
For the two-user binary fading interference channel with local delayed CSIT of Views V.2, V.5, and V.6, the capacity region coincides with the capacity region of global delayed CSIT (V.8), \emph{i.e.}
\begin{align}
\mathcal{C}\left( \text{V.}8 \right) \subseteq \mathcal{C}\left( \text{V.}j \right) \text{~for~} \qquad j=2,5,6.
\end{align}
\end{theorem}
For View V.2, we need to provide an achievability strategy that achieves the same performance as V.8. Then the result for View V.5 and V.6 follows. The capacity region $\mathcal{C}\left( \text{V.}8 \right)$ was established in~\cite{AlirezaBFICDelayed} and a novel transmission strategy was introduced. The strategy in~\cite{AlirezaBFICDelayed} is carried on over several phases. Each channel realization creates multiple coding opportunities which can be exploited in the following phases. To achieve the capacity region, an efficient arrangement of combination, concatenation, and merging of the opportunities is needed. Our result for View V.2 provides a better intuition and a deeper understanding of such opportunities and reveals redundancies in the prior work.
\begin{remark}
The capacity region under View V.7 remains open. While it seems the coding opportunities cannot be detected with such channel state information, the lack of an outer-bound does not allow us to solve the problem for this case. In a sense, each transmitter has ``too much'' knowledge eliminating the choices for correlation that were needed to obtain the result in Theorem~\ref{THM:NoGain}. We discuss this case in more details in Section~\ref{Section:Discussion}.
\end{remark}
In the remaining of the paper, we provide the proof of Theorem~\ref{THM:NoGain} and Theorem~\ref{THM:FullGain}. In Section~\ref{Section:Discussion}, we discuss the challenges for View V.7 and provide some connections to the $k$-user setting ($k > 2$).
\subsection{Proof for View V.4}
We know that the error probabilities are solely a function of marginal distributions at the receivers. Thus, as long as the marginal distributions remain the same, the capacity region remains the same. Consider the two-user erasure IC with local delayed CSIT according to View V.4. We have
\begin{align}
\mathcal{S}_{{\sf Tx}_1} = \{ \left( 1, 1 \right), \left( 2, 1 \right) \} \quad \text{and} \quad \mathcal{S}_{{\sf Tx}_2} = \{ \left( 1, 2 \right), \left( 2, 2 \right) \}.
\end{align}
Thus writing the marginal distribution at receiver ${\sf Rx}_1$, we get
\begin{align}
\label{eq:MarginalView4Rx1}
\Pr & \left( Y_1^n, G^n | X_1^n, X_2^n \right) \nonumber \\
& \overset{(a)}= \Pr \left( G^n | X_1^n, X_2^n \right) \Pr \left( Y_1^n | X_1^n, X_2^n, G^n \right) \nonumber \\
& = \frac{\Pr \left( G^n, X_1^n, X_2^n \right)}{\Pr \left( X_1^n, X_2^n \right)} \Pr \left( Y_1^n | X_1^n, X_2^n, G^n \right) \nonumber \\
& \overset{(b)}= \frac{\Pr \left( G^n \right) \Pr \left( X_1^n | G^n \right) \Pr \left( X_2^n | G^n \right)}{\Pr \left( X_1^n \right) \Pr \left( X_2^n \right)} \Pr \left( Y_1^n | X_1^n, X_2^n, G^n \right) \nonumber \\
& \overset{(c)}= \frac{\Pr \left( G^n \right) \Pr \left( X_1^n | G_{11}^n, G_{21}^n \right) \Pr \left( X_2^n | G_{12}^n, G_{22}^n \right)}{\Pr \left( X_1^n \right) \Pr \left( X_2^n \right)} \nonumber \\
& ~\times \Pr \left( Y_1^n | X_1^n, X_2^n, G^n \right) \nonumber \\
& = \left[ \frac{\Pr \left( G_{11}^n, G_{21}^n \right) \Pr \left( X_1^n | G_{11}^n, G_{21}^n \right)}{\Pr \left( X_1^n \right)} \right] \nonumber \\
& ~\times \left[ \frac{\Pr \left( G_{12}^n, G_{22}^n \right) \Pr \left( X_2^n | G_{12}^n, G_{22}^n \right)}{\Pr \left( X_2^n \right)} \right] \nonumber \\
& ~\times \mathbf{1}_{\left\{ Y_1^n = G_{11}^n X_1^n \oplus G_{21}^n X_2^n \right\}},
\end{align}
where $(a)$ follows from the chain rule; $(b)$ follows from the chain rule and the fact that $X_1^n$ and $X_2^n$ are independent in View V.4 as given in (\ref{eq:Independence}); and $(c)$ holds since $X_i^n$ is independent of $G_{i\bar{i}}^n$ and $G_{\bar{i}\bar{i}}^n$, $i=1,2$. Similarly, we can write the marginal distribution at receiver ${\sf Rx}_2$.
\begin{align}
\label{eq:MarginalView4Rx2}
& \Pr\left( Y_2^n, G^n | X_1^n, X_2^n \right) = \left[ \frac{\Pr \left( G_{11}^n, G_{21}^n \right) \Pr \left( X_1^n | G_{11}^n, G_{21}^n \right)}{\Pr \left( X_1^n \right)} \right] \nonumber \\
& \times \left[ \frac{\Pr \left( G_{12}^n, G_{22}^n \right) \Pr \left( X_2^n | G_{12}^n, G_{22}^n \right)}{\Pr \left( X_2^n \right)} \right] \mathbf{1}_{\left\{ Y_2^n = G_{12}^n X_1^n \oplus G_{22}^n X_2^n \right\}}.
\end{align}
We conclude that as long as the joint distributions
\begin{align}
\Pr \left( G_{11}^n, G_{21}^n \right) \quad \text{and} \quad \Pr \left( G_{12}^n, G_{22}^n \right)
\end{align}
remain the same, the marginal distributions remain unchanged. This immediately implies that the capacity region $\mathcal{C}\left( \text{V.}4 \right)$ coincides with the capacity region of any channel that has same marginal distributions $\Pr \left( G_{11}^n, G_{21}^n \right)$ and $\Pr \left( G_{12}^n, G_{22}^n \right)$. We use this result to create a channel with a specific correlation that helps us deriving the desired result.
Consider a binary fading interference channel similar to the channel described in Section~\ref{Section:Problem}, but where channel gains have certain spatial correlation. We distinguish the RVs in this channel using $\left( \tilde{.} \right)$ notation (\emph{e.g.}, $\tilde{X}_1[t]$). The input-output relation of this channel at time instant $t$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{Eq:modifiedView4}
\tilde{Y}_i[t] = \tilde{G}_{ii}[t] \tilde{X}_i[t] \oplus \tilde{G}_{\bar{i}i}[t] \tilde{X}_{\bar{i}}[t], \quad i = 1, 2.
\end{equation}
We assume that the channel gains are distributed independently over time. However, we have
\begin{align}
\label{eq:constraint}
\tilde{G}_{ii}[t] = \tilde{G}_{i\bar{i}}[t] \quad i=1,2.
\end{align}
In other words, the channel gains corresponding to incoming links at each receiver are still independent but the outgoing links at each transmitter are correlated. We know that the capacity region of this channel coincides with $\mathcal{C}\left( \text{V.}4 \right)$. We have included a more detailed discussion in Appendix~\ref{Appendix:NewAppendix}.
Suppose rate-tuple $\left( \tilde{R}_1, \tilde{R}_2 \right)$ is achievable. The derivation of individual bounds for this channel
\begin{align}
\label{eq:individualbound}
\tilde{R}_i \leq p, \qquad i=1,2,
\end{align}
is a straight forward exercise and omitted here. For the sum-rate bound, we have
\begin{align}
n & \left( \tilde{R}_1 + \tilde{R}_2 - \epsilon_n \right) \overset{(a)}\leq I\left( \tilde{W}_1; \tilde{Y}_1^n | \tilde{W}_2, \tilde{G}^n \right) + I\left( \tilde{W}_2; \tilde{Y}_2^n | \tilde{G}^n \right) \nonumber \\
& = H\left( \tilde{Y}_1^n | \tilde{W}_2, \tilde{G}^n \right) - \underbrace{H\left( \tilde{Y}_1^n | \tilde{W}_1, \tilde{W}_2, \tilde{G}^n \right)}_{=~0}\nonumber \\
&~+ H\left( \tilde{Y}_2^n | \tilde{G}^n \right) - H\left( \tilde{Y}_2^n | \tilde{W}_2, \tilde{G}^n \right) \nonumber \\
& = H\left( \tilde{Y}_2^n | \tilde{G}^n \right) + H\left( \tilde{G}_{11}^n \tilde{X}_1^n | \tilde{X}_2^n, \tilde{W}_2, \tilde{G}^n \right) \nonumber \\
& ~- H\left( \tilde{G}_{12}^n \tilde{X}_1^n | \tilde{X}_2^n, \tilde{W}_2, \tilde{G}^n \right) \nonumber \\
& = H\left( \tilde{Y}_2^n | \tilde{G}^n \right) + H\left( \tilde{G}_{11}^n \tilde{X}_1^n | \tilde{G}^n \right) - H\left( \tilde{G}_{12}^n \tilde{X}_1^n | \tilde{G}^n \right) \nonumber \\
& \overset{(b)}= H\left( \tilde{Y}_2^n | \tilde{G}^n \right) \leq \left( 1 - q^2 \right)n,
\end{align}
where $\epsilon_n \rightarrow 0$ as $n \rightarrow \infty$; $(a)$ follows from Fano's inequality and the fact that messages and channel gains are mutually independent; $(b)$ holds since according to (\ref{Eq:modifiedView4}), we have
\begin{align}
H\left( \tilde{G}_{11}^n \tilde{X}_1^n | \tilde{G}^n \right) = H\left( \tilde{G}_{12}^n \tilde{X}_1^n | \tilde{G}^n \right).
\end{align}
Dividing both sides by $n$ and letting $n \rightarrow \infty$, we obtain
\begin{align}
\label{eq:sumratebound}
\tilde{R}_1 + \tilde{R}_2 \leq 1-q^2.
\end{align}
Note that the region described by (\ref{eq:individualbound}) and (\ref{eq:sumratebound}) matches the no CSIT region of (\ref{eq:RegionNoCSIT}). This completes the converse proof for View V.4 since $\mathcal{C}\left( \text{V.}4 \right)$ is included in the region described by (\ref{eq:individualbound}) and (\ref{eq:sumratebound}).
\begin{remark}
The proof does not rely on fact that the CSI is obtained with delay. In fact, if we assume instantaneous local CSIT, the proof still holds. However in this paper, we only focus on local {\it delayed} CSIT for which we present achievability strategy as well.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Proof for View V.3}
The proof is very similar to that of View V.4. Under local delayed CSIT of View V.3, we have
\begin{align}
\mathcal{S}_{{\sf Tx}_1} = \{ \left( 1, 1 \right), \left( 2, 2 \right) \} \quad \text{and} \quad \mathcal{S}_{{\sf Tx}_2} = \{ \left( 1, 1 \right), \left( 2, 2 \right) \}.
\end{align}
Thus writing the marginal distribution for receiver ${\sf Rx}_1$, we get
\begin{align}
\label{eq:MarginalView3Rx1}
& \Pr \left( Y_1^n, G^n | X_1^n, X_2^n \right) \nonumber \\
& = \Pr \left( X_1^n,X_1^n \right)^{-1}\left[ \Pr \left( G_{12}^n, G_{21}^n \right) \Pr \left( X_1^n | G_{11}^n, G_{22}^n \right) \right] \nonumber \\
& \times \left[ \Pr \left( G_{11}^n, G_{22}^n \right) \Pr \left( X_2^n | G_{11}^n, G_{22}^n \right) \right] \mathbf{1}_{\left\{ Y_1^n = G_{11}^n X_1^n \oplus G_{21}^n X_2^n \right\}},
\end{align}
Similarly, we can write the marginal distribution for receiver ${\sf Rx}_2$.
\begin{align}
\label{eq:MarginalView3Rx2}
& \Pr \left( Y_2^n, G^n | X_1^n, X_2^n \right) \nonumber \\
& = \Pr \left( X_1^n,X_1^n \right)^{-1} \left[ \Pr \left( G_{12}^n, G_{21}^n \right) \Pr \left( X_1^n | G_{11}^n, G_{22}^n \right) \right] \nonumber \\
& \times \left[ \Pr \left( G_{11}^n, G_{22}^n \right) \Pr \left( X_2^n | G_{11}^n, G_{22}^n \right) \right] \mathbf{1}_{\left\{ Y_2^n = G_{12}^n X_1^n \oplus G_{22}^n X_2^n \right\}}.
\end{align}
We conclude that as long as the joint distributions
\begin{align}
\Pr \left( G_{11}^n, G_{21}^n \right), \quad \Pr \left( G_{12}^n, G_{22}^n \right), \quad \text{and} \quad \Pr \left( G_{11}^n, G_{22}^n \right),
\end{align}
remain the same, the capacity region remains the same. We note that the same correlation introduced in (\ref{Eq:modifiedView4}) can be applied here. Thus, the rest of the proof is identical to the previous subsection.
\subsection{An Extremal Entropy Inequality}
Consider a broadcast setting in which a single-antenna transmitter is connected to two single-antenna receivers through binary fading channels as in Fig.~\ref{Fig:BCDelayed}. For this network, suppose $G_1[t]$ and $G_2[t]$ are distributed as i.i.d. Bernoulli RVs (\emph{i.e.} $G_i[t] \overset{d}\sim \mathcal{B}(0.5)$), $i=1,2$. Then the observed signals are given as
\begin{align}
Y_i[t] = G_i[t] X[t], \qquad i = 1,2,
\end{align}
where $X[t]$ is the transmit signal at time $t$. We assume that at time $t$, the transmitter has access to $\left( G_1[\ell], G_2[\ell] \right)_{\ell=1}^{t-1}$ (delayed CSIT).
The goal is to find the minimum value of $\beta$ in this channel that satisfies
\begin{align}
\label{Eq:Extremal}
H\left( Y_2^n | G^n \right) \geq \beta H\left( Y_1^n | G^n \right).
\end{align}
In a sense, the goal is to quantify how much the transmitter can favor receiver one over receiver two in terms of the available entropy.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[height = 3.5cm]{FiguresPDF/Portion.pdf}
\caption{A transmitter connected to two receivers through binary fading channels..\label{Fig:BCDelayed}}
\end{figure}
\begin{lemma}[Entropy Leakage~\cite{AlirezaBFICDelayed}]
\label{Lemma:Leakage}
For the channel described above with delayed CSIT and for \emph{any} input distribution, the minimum value of $\beta$ satisfying (\ref{Eq:Extremal}) is $\frac{2}{3}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{remark}
The lower-bound $\beta = \frac{2}{3}$ is in fact achievable using a simple transmission strategy and thus, the bound is tight in the Entropy Leakage Lemma. Furthermore, to achieve this lower-bound, the transmitter only needs to have access to delayed knowledge of {\it one} of the channel gains {\it not} both.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Deriving the Outer-Bound and Remarks}
Here, for completeness, we provide the proof of
\begin{align}
R_1 + \frac{3}{2} R_2 \leq \frac{9}{8},
\end{align}
as given in~\cite{AlirezaBFICDelayed} for the two-user BFIC with global delayed CSIT. Suppose the rate tuple $\left( R_1, R_2 \right)$ is achievable. Then we have
\begin{align}
n &\left( R_1 + \beta^{-1} R_2 \right) = H(W_1|W_2, G^n) + \beta H(W_2|G^n) \nonumber \\
& \overset{(\mathrm{Fano})}\leq I(W_1;Y_1^n|W_2,G^n) + \beta I(W_2;Y_2^n|G^n) + n \epsilon_n \nonumber \\
& = H(Y_1^n|W_2,G^n) - \underbrace{H(Y_1^n|W_1,W_2,G^n)}_{=~0} \nonumber \\
& \quad + \beta^{-1} H(Y_2^n|G^n) - \beta^{-1} H(Y_2^n|W_2,G^n) + n \epsilon_n \nonumber \\
& = \beta^{-1} H(Y_2^n|G^n) + H(Y_1^n|W_2,X_2^n,G^n) - \beta^{-1} H(Y_2^n|W_2,X_2^n,G^n) + n \epsilon_n \nonumber \\
& = \beta^{-1} H(Y_2^n|G^n) + H(G_{11}^nX_1^n|W_2,X_2^n,G^n) - \beta^{-1} H(G_{12}^nX_1^n|W_2,X_2^n,G^n) + n \epsilon_n \nonumber \\
& \overset{(a)}= \beta^{-1} H(Y_2^n|G^n) + H(G_{11}^nX_1^n|W_2,G^n) - \beta^{-1} H(G_{12}^nX_1^n|W_2,G^n) + n \epsilon_n \nonumber \\
& \overset{(b)}= \beta^{-1} H(Y_2^n|G^n) + H(G_{11}^nX_1^n|G^n) - \beta^{-1} H(G_{12}^nX_1^n|G^n) + n \epsilon_n \nonumber \\
& \overset{\textrm{Lemma}~\ref{Lemma:Leakage}}\leq \beta^{-1} H(Y_2^n|G^n) + n \epsilon_n \leq \frac{9}{8}n + n \epsilon_n.
\end{align}
where $(a)$ holds since $X_2^n$ is a deterministic function of $W_2$ and $G^n$; $(b)$ follows from
\begin{align}
\label{eq:addX2}
& 0 \leq H(G_{11}^nX_1^n|G^n) - H(G_{11}^nX_1^n|W_2,G^n) = I\left( G_{11}^nX_1^n; W_2|G^n\right) \nonumber \\
& \quad \leq I\left( W_1,G_{11}^nX_1^n; W_2|G^n\right) = \underbrace{I\left( W_1 ; W_2|G^n\right)}_{=~0 \mathrm{~since~W_1 \perp W_2 \perp G^n}} + \underbrace{I\left( G_{11}^nX_1^n; W_2| W_1, G^n\right)}_{=~0 \mathrm{~since~X_1^n=f_1(W_1,~G^n)}} = 0,
\end{align}
which implies $H(G_{11}^nX_1^n|G^n) = H(G_{11}^nX_1^n|W_2,G^n)$, and similarly $H(G_{12}^nX_1^n|G^n) = H(G_{12}^nX_1^n|W_2,G^n)$. Dividing both sides by $n$ and let $n \rightarrow \infty$, we get
\begin{align}
R_1 + \frac{3}{2} R_2 \leq \frac{9}{8}.
\end{align}
\begin{remark}
As stated above, in order to achieve the lower-bound $\beta = \frac{2}{3}$, a transmitter only needs to have access to delayed knowledge of one of the channel gains {\it not} both. In local delayed CSIT of Views V.1, V.3, and V.4, transmitter ${\sf Tx}_i$ can in fact achieve favor receiver $i$ over receiver $\bar{i}$ in terms of the available entropy by the value given in the Entropy Leakage Lemma ($\beta = \frac{2}{3}$). Thus, to obtain a tight outer-bound, we had to create a spatial correlation among channel gains such that: $(1)$ the capacity region is preserved; and $(2)$ in the new channel with correlated links, a transmitter can no longer favor a receiver to the other. This goal was achieved by setting
\begin{align}
\tilde{G}_{ii}[t] = \tilde{G}_{i\bar{i}}[t] \quad i=1,2.
\end{align}
Then, we were able to show that under such spatial correlation, the capacity region coincides with that of no CSIT (View V.0).
\end{remark} |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.